Superbugs Require Super Drugs

In the fifty or so years since Alexander Fleming developed Penicillin, bacterial infections have become a mere nuisance. Almost everyone, at one time or another, has been prescribed some sort of antibiotic. Diseases and infections that used to be fatal are now very treatable, all thanks to the single mistake of a biologist. Antibiotics are the miracle drug.

Imagine, though, that one day you get a bacterial infection, and the antibiotics don’t work. You take more, and different, and combinations, and there is absolutely nothing your doctor can give you to combat this infection. Say hello to superbugs.

These sorts of infections are out there; MRSA, C. difficile, even certain strains of TB. Over time, bacteria have grown resistant to the antibiotics we used to treat them, rendering the miracle drug null and void. And the problem is only growing. The CDC recently announced that deaths from MRSA, a resistant strain of a fairly common staph infection, have officially reached 19,000+ per year, killing more people than AIDS. And C. difficile, a less known infection of the colon, kills three times as many people per year as MRSA.

Youtube Video: CNN report. MRSA - the New AIDS.

But scientists are fighting back. According to an article in Science Daily early this year, a group of scientists at the University of Paris Descartes have discovered a new enzyme, Acetyltransferase, which allows bacteria to gain resistance to multiple antibiotics by changing the shape of the active site. The active site is the place on the enzyme that allows it to bind to the antibiotic and break it down; each antibiotic requires a differently shaped active site to connect. Nearly all the strains of bacteria currently defined as superbugs have this enzyme, which accounts for their ability to break down multiple antibiotics.

Now that they’ve found it, what to do with it? Antibiotics are, from the perspective of a pharmaceutical company, a waste of money – they’re expensive to make, and have a much lower profit margin than most drugs. Needless to say, these companies aren’t working to replace the antibiotics that are no longer effective against infection. However, enzyme inhibitors – chemicals that would disrupt the bacteria’s ability to produce Acetyltransferase, would be much less expensive to manufacture and distribute. In it’s ideal form, the enzyme would be delivered as a supplement pill or syrup with the antibiotic, letting drugs that have become ineffective once again battle infection. Scientists are currently working on creating this inhibitor. Keep a look out!

For more information, see the Science Daily Article, and How Stuff Works.

Darwin Revelation: Natural Selection and Video Games

My study of Darwin, evolution, and more specifically natural selection has lead me to a new understanding of my current field of study, video games. While reading Darwin’s Origin of Species and related works for the explanation of how species come about, an epiphany occurred. Natural selection is an emerging theme in video games that has taken precedence due to its competitive nature.

Natural selection is “differential success” (Appleman 377). A species’ existence will go through many generations, amongst which traits are passed through offspring via genes. Every time members of a species copulate and combine traits, a genetic mutation may occur based on mere probability. If the crossing of traits creates a new trait in the offspring, that creature may become different from other members of the species. Most of the time these differences are negative and spell the doom of the creature’s life, such as a weak immune system or improper organ formation. However, every so often a positive mutation will occur in the offspring that provides a beneficial effect. “Beneficial” is a subjective term, in this case referring to an organism’s increased chance of reproducing. This may take the form of an extra joint that allows the animal to escape predators or catch prey more efficiently, or it could be as simple as a modification to a beak that allows birds to crack a certain type of nut better. Regardless, the increased chance of the mutated organism to reproduce means that over time, more members of the species will share a beneficial trait that distinguishes those who have it. The mutation eventually becomes prevalent to the point where a significant portion of a species is genetically different from the rest and adapted a different lifestyle. New species are formed “when persistent selection over many generations changes a population so much that its members will no longer breed with individuals from a related population” (Appleman 378). Thus, natural selection is the process of probability-based positive traits being passed on from generation to generation in a species until the group experiencing the effect become large enough to be deemed a separate species.

The basis for all video games is conflict; some form of struggle must exist for the player to immerse themselves in a game and derive entertainment from it. Natural selection is Darwin’s explanation for why evolution exists because it drives competition between species by propagating genetic advantages to have some creatures of a species perform better than others. Those who interact with video games derive pleasure from the internal conflict the game presents, such as fighting the villain to save the princess or beating an opponent in a race. Including natural selection in games is an easy way to introduce conflict that stems from the player’s avatar competing with similar characters for glory and supremacy. It also quickly feeds new information to players to keep their interest, a necessity in today’s fast-paced driven world where people tend to lose focus on any single activity. For instance, in Nicholas Carr’s article Is Google Making Us Stupid, he talks about how his mind “expects to take in information the way the Net distributes it: in a swiftly moving stream of particles”. The advent of technology in games has lead to complex artificial intelligence that allows game designers to incorporate natural selection amongst characters of the same species – humans, monsters, aliens – as a means for driving the game’s conflict and keeping the player’s interest.



This You Tube video beautifully displays a modern game that takes full advantage of evolution and natural selection in its gameplay. Spore was released a few months ago and sparked a national phenomenon amongst players and game designers. Its entire premise is based on evolution and natural selection, a concept that has been tinkered with in video games but never fully explored. The player’s character starts out as a single-cell organism and evolves into more complex organisms via evolution. As the creature becomes more powerful through adaptation to environment, he is forced to interact with members of the same species and combat them for survival. The primary method of becoming the best of your species is adopting a unique trait that allows you to do something better than other members of the species, such as fighting or reproducing. The game is pretty much an ode to all that Darwin stands for because every aspect of its gameplay revolves around evolution and natural selection. Spore is an excellent illustration of the modern trend video games are taking to include themes of natural selection and evolution to promote conflict in gameplay.

Sources:

Appleman, Philip, ed. Darwin. 3rd ed. New York: W.W.Norton, 2001.

Grant, Peter. Natural Selection and Darwin’s Finches. Darwin. 3rd ed. New York: W.W.Norton, 2001.

Carr, Nicholas. "Is Google Making Us Stupid?" The Atlantic. 2007. http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200807/google

Spore. Spore E308 Trailer. July 14, 2008. You Tube. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVH9Q8M8eaQ

Darwinism or Creationism, who do you trust?

The battle between Darwinism and Creationism has been for some time now. Creationism is the belief of God. Darwinism is the belief of evolution developed by Charles Darwin to contradict Creationism. Darwinism or evolution theory is based on the survival of the fittest. Meaning the species that’s best suited to its environment will have a higher survival rate. The one’s that not best equipped will die preventing overpopulation of the earth.

As Darwin states about evolution is that all species including humans came from other species. Evolution is determined by natural selection. Natural selection is the process that enables some organisms to live and reproduce while others do not survive. Darwin says: “Natural selection, on the principle of qualities being inherited at corresponding ages, can modify the egg, seed, or young, as easily as the adult.”(Darwin 134) For example, in my scientific revolution class we talked about how certain individuals within a population might possess a genetic trait that provides resistance to a local disease. As a result, those individuals tend to survive longer and produce more offspring than the other members of the population.

Another good example is birds and their beaks. Some are long and slim beaks that are used for the small seeds; others have short, large and powerful beaks used for crushing the bigger seeds. From this evidence Darwin concluded that all of birds had a common ancestor that evolved into the different species we see today. So, this simple structure proves how species evolve over time.

Even though, today science still can say nothing about the supernatural. This debate will continue forever until somebody can prove that Darwinism is true with scientific evidence or even prove that Creationism is true with scientific evidence. But until that time comes, people should be given a choose which they want to accept.

Works Cited

"Creation Vs. Evolution-A Feasibility Study." All About Philosophy. 2008

http://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/creation-vs-evolution.htm

Darwin, Charles. Darwin. Ed. Philip Appleman. New York: Norton Paperbacks, 2000. 134-34

Darwin Revelation- Stephen Richards

            Through out my life, ever since I can remember, I have always been a naturally competitive person. I am competitive with my friends in games and sports.  But, the person I am most competitive with which I always push to exceed my expectations is myself.  This characteristic about myself I see as a positive one in the way that I am constantly pushing myself to be the best.  As a negative characteristic it would be in the way that I am not always accepting who I am as a person.

            While entering college I knew that I wanted to study in the field of business. Knowing that I am a natural competitive person I felt that business not only fit my personality but also was what I wanted to do.  After learning about Darwin’s theory of natural selection I found it easier to make connections in and out of the classroom, such as in the field of business.

 People in business are always competing for one thing, which is to make as much money as possible, in an ethical manner, as well as to be successful in the strategic management of the business goals.  In order to do so some people in business but adapt to the market and the consumer.  Businesses adapt to the situation using what ever means necessary for strategic survival.  One example of strategic survival in the 21^st century is many businesses have relied on technology.  Technology can give a large advantage over other business for efficiency and profitability.  A business can’t be a follower but must be ahead of the curve in its adaptation.  For example as stated in “Darwin” “Progress in science consists of the development of better explanations for the causes of natural phenomena.  Scientists never can be sure that a given explanation is complete and final.  Some of the hypotheses advanced by scientists turn out to be incorrect (289).  A business can’t wait for a given strategy to be proven for success but must strategize correctly and implement for an adjustment to the consumer satisfaction.  It can be risky, but if done correctly before the competition, the reward is great.

In today’s market many people are struggling to find jobs.  Employees are going back to school to become better skilled and more qualified for competitive jobs.  People are adapting to their means and competing with other job seekers in order to pay bills, and buy food, which is a matter of survival.

The video I chose that best demonstrates the relation between Darwin’s natural selection and business is a clip from the movie “Fun with Dick and Jane.” This clip shows people physically racing for a job interview due to the competition.  In this situation the fastest and best skilled interviewee will receive the job. 

Resources:

Appleman, Philip.  Darwin. Darwin and the Shaping of  Modern Science. p289

Darwin Revelations: Evolution

Michael Harron

COR 210-05

Cyndi Brandenburg

    This semester I have learned a lot about the theory of evolution and natural selection and I find it very interesting. Living organisms must evolve through out time in order to stay alive. Living organisms are at a constant war with one another to stay a live.            Every living organism must evolve to stay alive. “De Candolle, in an eloquent passage, has declared that all nature is at war, one organism with another, or with external nature.” (Darwin, 82) The way the human body has formed over time is a perfect example of an organism that evolved to stay alive. Viruses and germs are deadly towards the human body. Our body must adapt to defend from sicknesses. It takes time for this to happen however. There have been many incidents where the body has no been exposed too and never had the chance to build up to defend its self from a virus. A perfect example is small pox. Native Americans around the 1500’s never have had any physical contact with foreigners. People from Europe came over to the New World not knowing about how deadly viruses are. Since the Native Americans never have been exposed to this disease, they had no way to defend themselves. Many people died as a result of small pox. Humanity has advanced so much in science that we have come up with ways to build out bodies up against viruses without being exposed to them in our life times. Vaccinations such as the flu shot are a perfect example of how humans used technology to protect themselves. The flu could wipe out humanity, but we have the technology to inject ourselves with a small dose of it, small enough for out bodies to build up immunity against it. Basically we have sped up the process of evolution. Rather than waiting 100 years to build up immunity, we have reduced it to a couple of weeks to build immunity.

            Animals can evolve to the point where they can go from feet to fins. Like in this video, after a lot of research and discoveries, they have come to the conclusion that whales were once land animals. They have found bones from millions of year ago of whales with legs and the skull was more shaped like a wolf’s skull. They do not know the reason for why this is, but they have adapted to become water animals for a reason. “In these work he upholds the doctrine that all species, including man, are descended from other species.” (Darwin 87) Darwin tells us that every organism has descended from an animal completely different. Throughout millions of years, animals have changed so much physically that it is tough to see what species we have descended from. Us as humans have good evidence we descended from the ape because of how similar the body structures are and how intelligent they are.

            Evolution is a huge factor on how organisms survive. I have learned a lot this year about how we have adapted to our environment through evolution. Whether it be skin color or from legs to fins, evolution has had a huge impact on how all living organisms survive today. 

Sources 

Course Readings here

Appleman, Philip. "On the Tendency of Species to Form Varieties, and On the Perpetuation of Varieties and Species by Natural Means of Selection (1858)." Darwin. Third ed. New York London: W. W. Norton. 2-87.

Appleman, Phillip. "An Historical Sketch of the Progress of Opinion on the Origin of Species, previously to the Publication of this Work." Darwin. Third ed. New York London: W W Norton. 87-94.

Revolutionary Cycle, Darwin Revelation

    Throughout this semester in Scientific Revolutions, we have studied many different works that display a similar message. This message reveals that almost everything in life has some kind of revolutionary cycle. Everything starts somewhere and ends somewhere else. Through life we see things change for good and for worse. Sometimes these things change for the better and turn out worse in the end. Through all the close analysis and thought provoking assignments I have come realized that sometimes good things can turn around and come back to haunt us later.
    We first see this in Nicholas Carr's, “Is Google Making us Stupid?” In this article we see that Google has turned the average reader into a reader looking for just the main point to a message. Google and the internet has made everything so easy and presents the information in a way that we can read it quickly and easily. In time we tend to start looking at other readings in the same way. Our perception on reading has evolved to want to read just a short segment instead of the entire piece. This ties into what I have learned because it is a good example of how sometime good came about and turned to something not so good. Google and the internet have made things very easy; however, things have become so easy people cant seem to spare the time to sit and read or take time to complete a task, instead it has to be done very quickly. One example in this reading is from Scott Karp who writes for a blog about online media. He used to read books all the time and now does not at all. He states, “What if I do all my reading on the web not so much because the way I read has changed, i.e. I'm just seeking convenience, but because the way I THINK has changed?” (Carr, 2). Here Karp is saying how he used to read books all the time and after reading on the web he not only believes that the way he reads has changed but also the way he thinks and tackles thinks intellectually has changed. For some this could be a major issue.
    Something else that is similar is the Gutenberg printing press. This device introduced in the 15th century, was feared at first. This would be the first part of a cycle of mass production of the press. In the end it became a good thing and a great wealth of knowledge to many. However, at first many people of the time were frightened of the idea.
    Different cycles take different paths. Paths such as the one Google other technologies are on, seem to be going up and down and will eventually lead to a point where drastic change is needed. Other paths are available as well. One of which is the path of life. We start out small and need caring for, move into a place where we provide for ourselves and younger, and later in life we are cared for by those who are younger than us. This is almost the evolution of life. We start out small evolve into something that can accomplish and survive and then evolve back. The image at the right shows the traditional evolutionary chain Darwin spoke of, but this one includes modern factual implications. This is similar to our lifespans path of how we start out small and in need of assistance, we then move to where we are assisted and then move back downwards.
    Darwin's theory of Natural Selection states that through evolution what works is kept in existence and what is injurious or bad is prevented. This is clearly stated in The Origin of Species by Charles Darwin. This is found in our book Darwin edited by Phillip Appleman. Darwin states, “This prevention of favourable variations and the rejection of injurious variations, I call Natural Selection.” (Darwin, 112). This states that everything that gives someone else an advantage such as a super strength or another natural abilities will be prevented as well as rejection of extreme injurious factors to the human body.
    

    This video explanation of how technology has made things so easy for us we are starting to abuse them and become more lazy in effect to them. Instead of using physical strength to do something we now find the easiest way to do it without having to actually complete the task. A couple of good examples came up in the video. When it was time for dinner the Mother would call her children via cellphone to notify them it was time for dinner. Also, in order to talk the dog the car was used so walking was not a factor in the task. Both these examples and more help me come to the revelations that we as humans are watching technology as well as other cycles go from good to bad and allowing it because we don't know what else to do.

Works cited

Carr, Nicholas. "Is Google Making Us Stupid?" The Atlantic. 2007. http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200807/google 2.

Darwin, Charles. The Origin of Species. Appleman, Philip, ed. Darwin. 3rd ed. New York: W.W.Norton, 2001. 112.

Justine Stafford. “The Evolution Of Laziness With Technology”. Youtube.com. 2008. December 13th, 2008.

Popularity, or High School Never Ends

Twilight.

You can’t get away from it. The book, and the three others completing the saga, are all over the book store – Box sets make great Christmas gifts! It’s in commercials, the movie theater, the news. The screaming fan girls are deafening.

Naturally, I resisted. I’m a grown woman, first and foremost, and second the sorts of novels I read are the written equivalent of independent art films. But it got hard to ignore; everyone I knew was reading it. There were copies of it in my dorm room, my house back home; people were calling me and asking what page I was on. It got to be like MySpace – it was easier for me to just get it over with than to constantly defend my choice not to read it. So I read it. I swallowed twelve dollars and thirty-five cents for the first book, borrowed the rest. I finished the (at the time) trilogy in about three weeks.

I was mildly horrified.

These, these were the books people couldn’t stop talking about? This was the book that had won the New York Times Editor’s Choice Award, Publishers Weekly’s Best Book of the Year? This was the trio that had spent a combined 143 weeks on the New York Times best seller’s list?

I was befuddled.

Don’t get me wrong, they’re not terrible books. The plot is fairly intriguing, the characters aren’t entirely flat, the action moves well enough. But I wouldn’t say they were great, I would never have used half the words people threw at me – fantastic, amazing, addictive! I’d expected to, if not enjoy them, at least understand the fanatical following the series had gained once I’d read the books. Instead, I was decidedly more confused.

Sadly, this is an experience I’m having more and more often. Books that are camping out on the NYT best seller’s list are increasingly less well-written, less developed, less complex. The quality of titles making it to the top is steadily declining. It’s a numbers game; these lists have nothing to do with critically evaluating literature, with analyzing the style of writing or the character development or the rise and climax of a storyline. The bestseller list is exactly that, what’s selling the most copies; it’s what people are reading most. To sell well and be famous, to be acclaimed no longer requires an exceptional grasp of the English language, or talent, or study; the landscape of literature has, disturbingly enough, become high school. It’s a popularity contest.

It got me thinking about evolution. Darwin believed that evolution “brings about change and adaptation, but it does not necessarily lead to progress, and it never leads to perfection” (Appleman 23). Mating, especially in humans, is a popularity contest; the smartest and the strongest can easily be outstripped by the most charismatic, the most attractive. For example, the most intelligent members of the human species, a trait that should be exceptionally desirable, considering the state of civilization, are often ridiculed, accosted, and deemed some of the least desirable mates available.

If evolution was truly selecting for the best, the brightest, the most capable, wouldn’t nerds be pretty high up there?

Civilization has only recently, in terms of evolution, advanced to a point that no longer requires strong specimens with quick reflexes, ready to kill. Without open warfare and exposure to environmental dangers, the weakest and least intelligent of the species are no longer being picked off by natural selection; instead, they’re mating and procreating just as often as the strongest, and in many cases more often than the least intelligent. And despite the relatively short period, the fall of intelligence is already becoming apparent.

I wonder what Darwin would have to say about evolution in an environment that does not physically challenge and eliminate the weak elements. The theory of Natural Selection, as proposed by Darwin in The Origin of Species, is a process that leads to “preservation of favorable variations and the rejection of injurious variations,” but with what I perceive, at least, to assume that nature is given power enough to decided upon and reject certain variations (Appleman 112). In terms of evolution, we’ve entered a new era, one in which nature is no longer given room to select, to remove weak elements.

Clip from the film “Idiocracy”. Released 1 Sept 2006. Twentieth Century Fox.

The above clip, from the film Idiocracy, is a rather humorous representation of how the Theory of Natural Selection may apply in the future, and with what results. Despite the comedy, the idea that Natural Selection will now benefit those who reproduce most often, instead of the strongest, fastest, etc. is not without logic. If unfit breeders and their offspring are not eliminated by the elements, then those who procreate most often will have the most impact on the continued evolution of the species.

--

Works Cited.

Mayr, Ernst. “Who Is Darwin?” Darwin. Ed. Philip Appleman. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2001. 23.

Darwin, Charles. “The Origin of Species.” Darwin. Ed. Philip Appleman. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2001. 112.