0
   

Bacterial resistance to antibiotics: No argument for evoluti

 
 
Reply Thu 30 Mar, 2006 07:26 am
http://www.trueorigin.org/images/bacteria01fig01.jpg

Figure 1. Mechanism of ciprofloxacin resistance.

(A) Ciprofloxacin interacts with gyrase, inhibiting its enzymatic activity. (B) A mutation in either of the genes, gyrA or gyrB, can change the conformational structure of gyrase, and reduce the binding affinity of the enzyme for ciprofloxacin. This results in an inability of the antibiotic to inhibit the gyrase, and the cell becomes resistant to the antibiotic.

Resistance to streptomycin can also result from spontaneous bacterial mutations. In this case, streptomycin blocks bacterial protein synthesis apparently by binding to the 16S rRNA segment of the ribosome and interfering with ribosome activity (Carter et al., 2000; Leclerc et al., 1991). Resistance to the antibiotic can occur by mutations in the 16S rRNA gene, which reduces the affinity of streptomycin for the 16S molecule (Springer et al., 2001). Reduction of specific oligopeptide transport activities also leads to spontaneous resistance of several antibiotics, including streptomycin (Kashiwagi et al., 1998). In these examples, resistance occurred as a result of the loss of a functional component/activity.

Loss of enzymatic activity can result in metronidazole resistance. Interacellular metronidazole must be enzymatically activated before it can serve as an antimicrobial agent. This activation is achieved by the enzyme, NADPH nitroreductase (Figure 2). If the metronidazole is not activated it has no inhibitory effect on the bacterium. Thus, if NADPH nitroreductase activity is absent in the cell metronidazole remains inactive. Loss of the reductase activity can occur by nonsense or deletion mutations in rdxA (Debets-Ossenkopp et al., 1999; Goodwin et al., 1998; Tankovic et al., 2000). In addition, NADPH nitroreductase activity can be severely reduced by a single missense mutation (a single amino acid change), which reduces its ability to activate metronidazole (Paul et al., 2001). All these mutations result in loss of the enzyme activity necessary for the drug to be effective in the cell, hence the cell becomes resistant to metronidazole. But, loss of enzymatic activity does not provide a genetic example of how that enzyme originally "evolved." Hence, mutations that provide resistance to metronidazole cannot be offered as true examples of "evolution in a Petri dish."

Several bacteria, including Escherichia coli, construct a mulitiple-antibiotic-resistance (MAR) efflux pump that provides the bacterium with resistance to multiple types of antibiotics, including erythromycin, tetracycline, ampicillin, and nalidixic acid. This pump expels the antibiotic from the cell's cytoplasm, helping to maintain the intracellular levels below a lethal concentration (Grkovic et al., 2002; Okusu et al., 1996) (Figure 3). The MAR pump is composed of the proteins MarA and MarB, whose synthesis is inhibited by the regulatory protein, MarR (Alekshun and Levy, 1999; Poole, 2000) (Figure 3). Mutations that reduce or eliminate the repression control of MarR result in over-production of the MarAB efflux pump, which enables the cell to expel higher concentrations of antibiotics or other antibacterial agents (Oethinger et al., 1998; Poole, 2000; Zarantonelli et al., 1999).

http://www.trueorigin.org/images/bacteria01fig02.jpg

Figure 2. Activation of the antimicrobial agent, metronidazole.

After being transported into the cell, metronidazole requires structural modification to obtain its active, antimicrobial form. This activation is achieved by the enzyme, NADPH nitroreductase, which is a product of the rdxA gene. Mutations in rdxA can prevent synthesis of a functional NADPH nitroreductase activity, which prevents metronidazole from becoming activated.

The protein MarA also acts as a positive regulator by stimulating increased production of both MarA and MarB proteins (Alekshun and Levy, 1999) (Figure 3). In addition, the MarA protein indirectly inhibits the production of the porin, OmpF, a channel in the membrane that allows entry of some antibiotics into the cell (Cohen et al., 1988). Therefore, increased expression of MarA increases the efflux of antibiotics out of the cell, and reduces the transport of some antibiotics into the cell (Figure 3). Mutations of marR that reduce expression or activity of the MarR protein will thus enable over-expression of the MarAB efflux pump (Linde et al., 2000; Okusu et al., 1996), and provide an increased resistance of the bacterium to various antibiotics (Eaves et al., 2004; Hans-Jorg et al., 2000; Notka et al., 2002) (Figure 3). MarR defective mutants also possess increased bacterial tolerance to some organic chemical agents, such as cyclohexane (Aono et al., 1998).


http://www.trueorigin.org/images/bacteria01fig03.jpg
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 2,991 • Replies: 43
No top replies

 
Wolf ODonnell
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Mar, 2006 07:31 am
It's official. Evolution can't be true. If it was, someone like Gungasnake wouldn't exist. Gungasnake is the ultimate proof that evolution is a lie.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Mar, 2006 07:32 am
I'll say it again: Evo-loserism is a latter-day religion for yuppies. Nobody defends any sort of a science theory the way evolution is defended, i.e. at all costs, to the last man, and the truth be damned. Only lifestyles and religions are defended like that. If evolution were in fact any sort of a science theory it would have been abandoned 70 years ago for lack of evidence.

The big question for the evo-losers is this: which part or parts of this fabulous lifestyle which supposedly justifies all the lies and bad science, do you anticipate being allowed to take with you?
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Mar, 2006 07:41 am
Which assumes, of course, that there is anywhere anyone is "going," to which they could or could not "take it with them." So, are you goin' to an Orthodox heaven to party with your Serb brothers, SWolf?

You wish . . .

Though I've belted you and flayed you,
By the livin' Gawd that made you,
You're a bigger goof than I am, Gunga Din!
0 Replies
 
Wolf ODonnell
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Mar, 2006 07:42 am
gungasnake wrote:
I'll say it again: Evo-loserism is a latter-day religion for yuppies.


No, it's a latter-day anti-religion for Christian morons and when I state Christian morons, I mean morons who just happen to be Christian out of some pure coincidence.

Quote:
Nobody defends any sort of a science theory the way evolution is defended, i.e. at all costs, to the last man, and the truth be damned.


The only reason I can't successfully argue against you, is because it requires knowledge in antibiotics that I'm not familiar with. It's all so easy for an idiot to say something isn't true, because he doesn't understand it.

Quote:
Only lifestyles and religions are defended like that.


That and what happens to be true!

Quote:
If evolution were in fact any sort of a science theory it would have been abandoned 70 years ago for lack of evidence.


Therefore, Evolution must be a scientific theory, because it has not been abandoned 70 years ago for lack of evidence.

The biggest questions are:

If we were to ignore you (because frankly, we're sick and tired of having to respond to your rubbish and prove you wrong, over and over again) would your delusional mind insist that you had won the argument?

I'm sure you take my burst of anger at you as a sign that you are in the right, but it is actually a sign that I'm absolutely angry that in order to prove you wrong I need to recruit some help from people who have knowledge in this field of science and that your ignorance will make you see it as a hole in Evolutionary Theory.

To successfully argue against your ridiculous article, will take time and research, by which time you will have abandoned this topic, as you have always done with possibly the delusional idea that you have somehow scored a point for Creationism.

Well, I'd better get started doing the research to shoot this article out of the sky, though I wonder why I bother. Perhaps its because I fear some impressionable mind will come along and see your nonsense propaganda and believe your lies to be true.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Mar, 2006 08:12 am
It's a false argument.

Hypthosis - If a bacterium mutates and loses some higher level cell functions than it isn't evolving.
Correlary -
Birds are a more highly evolved life form than fish so if a bird became a fish it couln't be evolution.

That is nothing but BS.

There is no requirement that evolution move in a certain direction. The author completely misrepresents what evolution is. Would it be evolution if a bird becomes a fish? Yes. But the author is trying to argue that evolution requires more complexity in order to be evolution. There is no such requirement.

Evolution's only requirement is that the organism change to fit its environment and survive. The idea that an organism would become less complex if the environment is too harsh is exactly what evolution would predict.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Mar, 2006 08:13 am
The source for this pathetic rant is "True.origins-dot-org," which is one of the archives of "Talk.origins." There is no longer a "Talk.origins" website, because they intend to operate sub rosa as much as possible. The purpose is to provide talking points and goofy articles such as this to those who promote creationism, young-earth creationism, old-earth creationism and "intelligent design." Mr. Brett Vickers created the archives for such articles as this in 1994, so that the material would be available at an anonymous FTP site, thereby making it impossible to find an "about us" link which would provide useful information about the origins of the material.

Mr. Mark Horten opened the talk.origins discussion board with a message posted on Friday, September 5, 1986. It contains no information, it simply reads: "starter message for talk.origins." It is now impossible to find a direct link to that discussion board. Such boards as "talk.religion" (older than talk.origins, the talk.origins messages were heavily edited and combined with posts at talk.religion) and "true.origins" have been dodges which the creationists have used to keep the board moving, as a moving target is harder to identify.

For information on the talk.origins archive, from which this article was linked to true.origins, see this Wikipedia article. Biographical information about Mr. Vickers is very hard to find--he is described at "the University of Ediacara" as: Brett J. (Chris) Vickers, Professor of Evolutionary Archivology (i sh!t you not!). An individual calling himself Paul Keck describes "the University of Ediacra" as follows:

Quote:
The University of Ediacara is a virtual university not located on any map (you can't pin us down that easily!), loosely based around the newsgroup talk.origins. Many of the regulars there have specialties in the ongoing discussion of the origins of life/the universe/whatever, and so have adopted titles and faculty positions. I, for example, am the Professer (sic) of Media Representation, because I often end my postings with a tagline such as "I'm not a doctor, but I play one on TV."


Readers here are advised that the materials presented here, and so often in Gunga Din's "evolution" threads, are screeds abstracted from an archive of creationist and "intelligent design" articles, and for which the sources are intentionally being hid. These people don't want what they're doing exposed to the light of day. The talk.origins site and it's many successors and related sites have changed hands more than once, and the process of providing a blind archive for the materials to which creationist and "intelligent design" sites may link is now in the hands of the TalkOrigins Foundation. Again, the Wikipedia article:

Quote:
In 2004, Kenneth Fair incorporated the TalkOrigins Foundation as a Texas 501(3)(c) non-profit organization. The Foundation's purposes include funding and maintaining the TalkOrigins Archive and holding copyrights to Archive articles, thereby simplifying the process of reprinting and updating those articles. The copyright issue has posed a particular problem since the FAQs started off as a small collection with little thought given to copyright but have since mushroomed. In 2005, the Foundation was granted tax-exempt status by the IRS.


This is definitely one of those cases in which you get what you pay for. For this article, and the literally thousands of others which float through this network of blind sites, you will pay exactly nothing. That happens to be precisely what the material is worth, too.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Mar, 2006 08:14 am
The Wikipedia article about kurgans:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurgan

The Russian word "kurgan" signifies a little hill or something like that out on the Eurasian steppe containing the body of some ancient tribal chief and all the stuff he thought he was taking with him.

The whole world now knows you can't take material possessions with you.

Unfortunately for evo-losers, the idea of taking any sort of a lifestyle thing with you is just about as laughable.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Mar, 2006 08:16 am
By the by, one can sign up for e-mail updates from these jokers, which i strongly suspect is the reason Gunga Din uses a scattergun approach to his witless assaults on a theory of evolution. He just posts them as soon as the link for them hits his e-mail box.
0 Replies
 
Wolf ODonnell
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Mar, 2006 08:19 am
Talkorigins? I thought that was a pro-Evolution site.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Mar, 2006 08:20 am
Setanta wrote:
The source for this pathetic rant is "True.origins-dot-org," which is one of the archives of "Talk.origins." There is no longer a "Talk.origins" website, because they intend to operate sub rosa as much as possible. .


True origins dot org is its own website.:

http://trueorigin.org/

and if talkorigins.com has ceased to exist it's probably because the people in question were becoming too embarassed to have their names associated with the bullshit that site purveyed.
0 Replies
 
Wolf ODonnell
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Mar, 2006 08:22 am
No, talkorigins still exists.

http://www.talkorigins.org/
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Mar, 2006 08:25 am
gungasnake wrote:
The Wikipedia article about kurgans:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurgan

The Russian word "kurgan" signifies a little hill or something like that out on the Eurasian steppe containing the body of some ancient tribal chief and all the stuff he thought he was taking with him.

The whole world now knows you can't take material possessions with you.

Unfortunately for evo-losers, the idea of taking any sort of a lifestyle thing with you is just about as laughable.


Typical Gunga Din drivel--kurgans can be quite impressive mounds, much larger and more imposing than merely "little hills." The most famous example is the Mamaev Kurgan on the left center of the German line at Stalingrad (from the German perspective)--an imposing elevation, it dominated the entire battlefield, and was a hotly contested piece of real estate, for which many thousands of members of the German and Soviet armies died fighting.

That, of course, has nothing to do with the subject at hand--which exactly describes Gunga Din's "lifestyle" comments.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Mar, 2006 08:27 am
Yes, Wolf, it does--but the original discussion board of the "newsgroup" can no longer be accessed, which is the point. These jokers cover their tracks as much as possible, and certainly don't want sophomoric discussions of the agenda to be easily found.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Mar, 2006 08:29 am
gungasnake wrote:
and if talkorigins.com has ceased to exist it's probably because the people in question were becoming too embarassed to have their names associated with the bullshit that site purveyed. (emphasis added)


I never thought i'd see the day that i'd reply thus to a Gunga Din post, but truer words were never written.

The point i made, of course, and which Gunga ignores, is that "True.Origins" relies upon material from the talk.origins archives.
0 Replies
 
Wolf ODonnell
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Mar, 2006 08:36 am
I'm confused. I thought talk.origins was pro-Evolution. It certainly seems to have a large number of articles that dispel the myths concerning Evolution.
0 Replies
 
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Mar, 2006 08:37 am
Quote:
...Kevin Anderson, Ph.D.
© 2005 by Creation Research Society. All rights reserved. Used by permission.
This article first appeared in Vol. 41, No. 4 of the Creation Research Society Quarterly,
a peer-reviewed journal published by the Creation Research Society


Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing

Hmmm, wonder what their agenda might be...

Better yet, how does one do "Creation Research?" Creation is simply faith that a creator made everything. How can that be researched?
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Mar, 2006 08:39 am
Wolf, you are absolutely correct, i was wrong and you were right. Talk.origins is the pro-evolution site, and "True.origins" and "talk.religion" are the scam sites.

My apologies to you for my error.
0 Replies
 
Wolf ODonnell
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Mar, 2006 08:40 am
Setanta wrote:
Wolf, you are absolutely correct, i was wrong and you were right. Talk.origins is the pro-evolution site, and "True.origins" and "talk.religion" are the scam sites.

My apologies to you for my error.


My suspicions were further aroused when I suddenly realised you were agreeing with Gungasnake. Thankfully, it wasn't a case of pigs flying.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Mar, 2006 08:41 am
No, thankfully, no pork in the treetops.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Evolution 101 - Discussion by gungasnake
Typing Equations on a PC - Discussion by Brandon9000
The Future of Artificial Intelligence - Discussion by Brandon9000
The well known Mind vs Brain. - Discussion by crayon851
Scientists Offer Proof of 'Dark Matter' - Discussion by oralloy
Blue Saturn - Discussion by oralloy
Bald Eagle-DDT Myth Still Flying High - Discussion by gungasnake
DDT: A Weapon of Mass Survival - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Bacterial resistance to antibiotics: No argument for evoluti
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/17/2021 at 11:35:45