PDA

View Full Version : In The News This Week



TheUnholyNightbringer
06-15-2005, 06:52 AM
Right, this is a new thread I want to try out. Once a week, I post a story from the news, and we all have a nice, friendly, mature discussion about it. Let's see. This weeks news:

Hospitals alerted over 'superbug' (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4094624.stm)

The thing that occured to me while reading this, is that.. is there really any point to continuing to try and fight bacterial infections? I mean, bacteria evolves hella quick. Meaning every time we find a way to destroy a bacteria (bacterium?), it evolves a way past the antibiotics. This process won't ever stop, because bacteria will continue to evolve - eventually evolving past out science.

What do you think? Should antibiotics continue or is there no point?

RXP
06-15-2005, 07:41 AM
wtf dude that argument is a bit silly. Let the bacteria run riot? There's many ways of fighting bacteria including using virus'. Acne is such an example, it's caused by p-Acne's (bacteria we all have on our skin) and some virus can actually kill them.

I haven't read that article cause I don't have time right now but will. I still think my opinin will be the same because saying give up the fight against bacteria is kinda stupid.

Also good idea for a thread.

nieh
06-15-2005, 08:01 AM
Yes, antibiotic treatment should continue but not to the extent that it's used now. Hell, over here if you have a cough and it "might be Strep Throat", they put you on antibiotics until the test comes back.

Kerr
06-15-2005, 08:10 AM
Yes, they should keep fighting bacteria. But not to the extortionate measures practised nowadays.

wheelchairman
06-15-2005, 08:13 AM
omg it's cuz of teh bible (Superbug threatens Bible's place in hospitals)

Superbug sounds like media hype.

Mota Boy
06-15-2005, 09:26 AM
Agreed.

We should show restraint with proscribing antibiotics, but modern medicine has existed for decades now - that's millions upon millions of generations of bacteria - without any "superbug" emerging. Hell, we've even developed a cocktail to curtail AIDS, the superest of bugs. I think it's probably an issue, but definately nothing approaching apochalyptic in scale.

TheUnholyNightbringer
06-15-2005, 12:40 PM
But will it become one? Bacteria will keep evolving - will we always have the antibiotical prowess to stop it?

punkangel
06-15-2005, 12:41 PM
But will it become one? Bacteria will keep evolving - will we always have the antibiotical prowess to stop it?


But if we finally find some antibiotic to stop it, the bacteria will evolve to resist that antibiotic

TheUnholyNightbringer
06-15-2005, 12:42 PM
Dude, that's EXACTLY what I said.

punkangel
06-15-2005, 12:43 PM
oh, whoops..oh, well I just woke up.

But AIDS is doing that too

Kerr
06-15-2005, 12:43 PM
Surely, wouldn't humans eventually evolve to become more resistant to most types of bacteria?

TheUnholyNightbringer
06-15-2005, 12:44 PM
Yes, over a certain amount of time. But bacteria evolves faster than humans.

Endymion
06-15-2005, 12:48 PM
between bacteria having a finite genetic length and the fact that lengthening their genetic length much is detrimental (slower reproduction, less optimization, greater threat to harmful mutation, etc), bacteria can not evolve to a point where they are beyond the ability to fight against.

Kerr
06-15-2005, 12:48 PM
Yes, over a certain amount of time. But bacteria evolves faster than humans.
True. And once that happens, it would be a battle bewteen the strongest of immune systems to survive hence evolve. But yes, bacteria evolve fucking fast, and if certain types do that, it could be fucking bad. Scientists claim it is impossible that humans could be totally wiped out by quickly reproducing bacteria alone (not that I am saying that that was what you were implying), though; I don't know why, they just say so, possibly because stronger humans can develop a resistance.


between bacteria having a finite genetic length and the fact that lengthening their genetic length much is detrimental (slower reproduction, less optimization, greater threat to harmful mutation, etc), bacteria can not evolve to a point where they are beyond the ability to fight against.
Yes, precisely.

TheUnholyNightbringer
06-15-2005, 12:49 PM
between bacteria having a finite genetic length and the fact that lengthening their genetic length much is detrimental (slower reproduction, less optimization, greater threat to harmful mutation, etc), bacteria can not evolve to a point where they are beyond the ability to fight against.

Heh, the scientist kills my argument dead. =P

Alright, next week I'll find a better story.

Mota Boy
06-15-2005, 12:55 PM
Bacteria will continue evolving with or without our prodding. These "supergerms" aren't more powerful than previous incarnations, just resistant to the traditional methods we've used to fight them. We're not going to turn some benign bacteria into a fatal flu epidemic just because we spray it with Lysol - worst case scenario we'll just be back to the same place we were before we discovered antibiodics. Ceasing their use entirely will just cause needless deaths.

Edit - This is what I get for starting a response then leaving the computer for an extended period of time.

Endymion
06-15-2005, 01:01 PM
what mota said.

bacteria are evolving against our immune systems at the same rate they always have been (and vice versa), the thing people are afraid of is that they're fairly quickly evolving against our static external means of fighting them.

also, check out the symptoms of various bacterial infections verses how old they are (how long they've been a part of human history). old, well adapted bacteria DO NOT KILL. what good would it do an organism to destroy its environment? bacteria strive toward coexisting with their environment peacefully, as that would be the equilibrium state.

ruroken
07-14-2005, 05:13 PM
But will it become one? Bacteria will keep evolving - will we always have the antibiotical prowess to stop it?
It doesn't matter because we will all die eventually anyway.

Noodles is gay
07-14-2005, 05:25 PM
It doesn't matter because we will all die eventually anyway.

But we'll die sooner rather than later, which does matter.

ruroken
07-14-2005, 05:27 PM
You don't know when we'll die.

Noodles is gay
07-14-2005, 05:29 PM
Well of course not, but I felt that it was fairly obvious I meant human life expectancy.

ruroken
07-14-2005, 05:41 PM
Estimations like that are just plain idiotic.

Endymion
07-14-2005, 05:43 PM
i don't follow, ruroken. it's not an estimation, it's an average.

Jebus
07-14-2005, 05:45 PM
It doesn't matter because we will all die eventually anyway.
Ruroken is emo now?

ruroken
07-14-2005, 05:46 PM
I was just saying.

What? I'm talking about our whole species' death. If there were to be a 'superbug' or whatever, surely our species would die much sooner.

Endymion
07-14-2005, 05:48 PM
ah, you're speaking of the race in general. well, given our current rate of space expansion, we should have permanent extraterra bases within 100 years.

ruroken
07-14-2005, 05:50 PM
What the fuck?

Noodles is gay
07-14-2005, 05:54 PM
ah, you're speaking of the race in general. well, given our current rate of space expansion, we should have permanent extraterra bases within 100 years.

Really? Cool....although I doubt it because we'll probably manage to blow ourselves up before then or destroy the world somehow.

ruroken
07-14-2005, 05:55 PM
Really? Cool....although I doubt it because we'll probably manage to blow ourselves up before then or destroy the world somehow.
Yeah, but, what the fuck is he talking about? 'extraterra'? The hell is that?

Endymion
07-14-2005, 05:56 PM
not on earth.

Noodles is gay
07-14-2005, 05:59 PM
Yeah, but, what the fuck is he talking about? 'extraterra'? The hell is that?

we'll have little colonies on the moon.

late

Endymion
07-14-2005, 06:00 PM
we'll have little colonies on the moon.

late

or the lagrange points.

ruroken
07-14-2005, 06:00 PM
How the fuck would we get a fucking extraterra base in 100 years? PEOPLE CAN LIVE THAT LONG. There's no fucking way, and what of the new diseases those planets may bring?

[Warning] Nimrod In Town
07-14-2005, 06:02 PM
I'll still be living. I'll be the first man on the sun.

Noodles is gay
07-14-2005, 06:02 PM
^ you really just don't understand...


or the lagrange points.

What about Mars? (In your opinion, seeing as you're the physicist)

ruroken
07-14-2005, 06:03 PM
Nimrod In Town']I'll still be living. I'll be the first man on the sun.
Sigged . :cool:

[Warning] Nimrod In Town
07-14-2005, 06:03 PM
^ you really just don't understand...


i Know, it's not of subject. It makes no sense.

Endymion
07-14-2005, 06:04 PM
it takes a few days to get to the moon, the problem is building a permanent structure and supplying it--these sort of things will be worked out within 100 years.

also, there are no diseases on other planets/outer space/moons.

Noodles is gay
07-14-2005, 06:04 PM
^ couldn't there be like microbes under the surface that harm could humans?


Nimrod In Town']i Know, it's not of subject. It makes no sense.

I was talking to Ruroken actually.

[Warning] Nimrod In Town
07-14-2005, 06:05 PM
Sigged . :cool:

I'll make my own sitcom...

"Living on the sUN!!"
It'll be awesome. It will have the highest ratings of history.

[Warning] Nimrod In Town
07-14-2005, 06:06 PM
I was talking to Ruroken actually.

Then congratulations jerk idiot,

You were late like an idiot jerk.

Endymion
07-14-2005, 06:06 PM
What about Mars? (In your opinion, seeing as you're the physicist)

i doubt it... the moon and a few of the lagrange points are good because they're not all that far from earth and don't get any farther away. mars, however, is only near the earth for a few months at a time... it orbits slower so rather often it's on the other side of the sun from us, and when it's not the elliptical nature of the orbits still means it's not all that close.

ruroken
07-14-2005, 06:06 PM
also, there are no diseases on other planets/outer space/moons.
Yes there are, the germs are simply in a crytallized state. Not only that, but what of the one's we bring with us? What do you think will happen to them?

Noodles is gay
07-14-2005, 06:07 PM
oh right, cheers Endymion.


Nimrod In Town']Then congratulations jerk idiot,

You were late like an idiot jerk.

no, I was at the same time - if you look at the times

[Warning] Nimrod In Town
07-14-2005, 06:08 PM
no, I was at the same time - if you look at the times

AH! You're right! You were still late though.

Endymion
07-14-2005, 06:09 PM
Yes there are, the germs are simply in a crytallized state. Not only that, but what of the one's we bring with us? What do you think will happen to them?

no there are not. any germs/viruses/bacteria we take with us will adapt to their new environment, which (as we'd be living there) wouldn't be all that much different so things would likely remain the same.

ruroken
07-14-2005, 06:12 PM
I should remove myself from this, right?

coke_a_holic
07-14-2005, 06:20 PM
Befo' y'all break yoself!

ruroken
07-14-2005, 06:22 PM
Check yourself before you wreck yourself.

...and I'm off! *runs away*

Jebus
07-14-2005, 06:27 PM
Yes there are, the germs are simply in a crytallized state.
Is any one else wondering who taught him this?


What? I'm talking about our whole species' death. If there were to be a 'superbug' or whatever, surely our species would die much sooner.
Oh, I thought you meant as an individual.

Noodles is gay
07-14-2005, 06:28 PM
Is any one else wondering who taught him this?

Oh, I thought you mean as an individual.

My thoughts exactly...incredible.

ruroken
07-14-2005, 06:29 PM
It was in a book...
I read it last year though, so I probably have my 'facts' messed up.