4 ms·
I think what they are saging is that something that kills perfectly, every time does not generate selective pressure. The virus would have to lose the signature
by DubiousPusher 4y ago
I think what they are saging is that something that kills perfectly, every time does not generate selective pressure. The virus would have to lose the signature completely randomly.
Whereas antibiotic resistance is something that could develop because antibiotics could be under doses so individuals survived partial exposure or perhaps they worked by a mechanisms which already had some resistance in the population.
It's like, you can breed high lung capacity mammals by having them live in water but you would just kill the species if you jumped straight into holding them underwater for 20 minutes.
Something has to be survivable to genetate selective pressure.
- CrendKing 4y agoIn that case, shouldn't we never give vaccine to people with poor immunity system or with immunocompromised condition, and rather just let them be or even die? If this is true (even though difficult to actually implement in the society due to humane consideration), what happens to the vaccines of viruses like HIV? The patients already have weak immune system.
- DubiousPusher 4y agoI guews if you were blindly trying to breed the most durable individual specimems. But humams have major adaptatioms aside from immunity. We have cooperation and the ability to help each other. Is it worth it to let the town butcher or carpenter keel over to secure a small increase in generarional immunity? Native Americams had no choice but to go the route of inherited immunity when they began contracting Eurasian diseases. Was it worth living through a literal apocalypse to gain immunity?