Are the flu, malaria, and AIDS viruses evolving to adapt to their enviornment, or did God invent them periodic
466368
Makes sense, right? God created AIDs to kill 38 million people, and most of them being Christians?\n\nAdaptation - otherwise, there would be very little malaria, flu, and other illnesses in the world. Viruses especially are hard to cure.\n\nTo respond to the girl below: being on top of the food chain has nothing to do with diseases. All animals suffer from diseases. \n\nWhy are our best minds not able to eliminate all diseases? I would like for preachers and evangelists to come up with cures, please.\n\nSure, God created "S-E-X", but what about children who got AIDs from their parents? Sure, it's their parents' fault but not their own, so why should they suffer?
555256
The virus mutated when it reached humans, so it is in a different form.
373830
We die because we sexually reproduce: if we did not die then we would die from overpopulation and overcompetition. If we did not sexually reproduce, then there would be no variation, and thus evolution could not occur and we would all die out if environmental conditions.\n\nWe age because time passes. We senesce (that is, become old) because our body becomes less capable of maintaining homeostasis.\n\nWe are not immune to viruses because they constantly change all the time. There are hundreds of strains of the cold virus because they are evolving all the time as well. Sickness is an immune response to a pathogen in an attempt to get it out of the system. If we did not get "sick" (high fever, etc.), the virus would proliferate in our system and we would eventually die anyway.\n\nHope that helped a little.
950194
click here:http://www.bestandworst.com/r/?id=4429\nhttp://www.gibbsmagazine.com/Where%20AIDS%20Came%20From.htm\nhttp://www.alldeaf.com/topic-debates/25274-where-did-aids-come.html\nhttp://beatnikboy.tripod.com/aids.htm\nhttp://www.natap.org/2002/9retro/day0.htm\n\n\nThe origin of AIDS and HIV has puzzled scientists ever since the illness first came to light in the early 1980s. For over twenty years it has been the subject of fierce debate and the cause of countless arguments, with everything from a promiscuous flight attendant to a suspect vaccine programme being blamed. So what it the truth? Just where did AIDS come from?\n\nThe first recognised cases of AIDS occurred in the USA in the early 1980s (more about this period can be found on our history page). A number of gay men in New York and San Francisco suddenly began to develop rare opportunistic infections and cancers that seemed stubbornly resistant to any treatment. At this time, AIDS did not yet have a name, but it quickly became obvious that all the men were suffering from a common syndrome. The discovery of HIV, the Human Immunodeficiency Virus that causes AIDS was made soon after. While some were initially resistant to the connection (and indeed remain so today), there is now clear evidence to prove that HIV does cause AIDS. So, in order to find the source of AIDS, it is necessary to look for the origin of HIV, and find out How, When and Where HIV first began to cause disease in humans.
217729
I think both also.\nI have to say though that there is a very real possibility that over the next few years this virus will mutate so that it can be spread from person to person.\nViruses generally adapt to their hosts and mutate as neede but this process takes time. Right now it is only spread from infected bird to human, if it mutates so that the person infected by the bird can also spread it to other humans we will have a huge problem. There is no cure right now and its fatality rate is quite high.
257820
Evolution is almost a proven fact.  In fact it's one of the basic concept of biological science. In fact humans have been tinkering with evolution for thousands of years.  Why do you think we have so many breeds of dogs? If you take selective breeding far enough you could "create" a totally new species. Germs and viruses are constantly evolving. Do you think the AIDS virus was spontaneously created by God?? It evolved from closely related chimpanzee virus that we can no longer be infected with. But the AIDS virus evolved from this virus that we can no longer be infected with. \n\nEvolution is obvious when you look at rapidly reproducing living things such as germs and viruses.  It is not as obvious for a longer living things as process is so slow that it takes millions of years. But fossil evidence is overwhelming that evolution is how we came to be human beings. \n\nWe did not evolve from apes!  Apes are our distant cousins that branched off millions of years ago. We are related to chimps and gorillas, but think of it as very very distant cousins. I don't know the exact percentage, but humans and chimps share over 99% of the genes. It's that one percent that makes us human.  \n\nI don't belive in god, but existance in a supernatural beings does not mean evolution is wrong. I don't think belief in god and evolution has to be mutually exclusive. If god created life, then he/she/it also must have created evolution to go with it.
617690
God uses evolution as part of His plan.
464944
NONE.  All things were created!  Things adapt to changing environments, but they never turn into something entirely new.
1010591
Mosquitoes can transmit blood born illnesses like yellow fever, so it is wise to be careful but from the government aids fact sheet:  http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/pubs/facts/transmission.htm\n\nSome people fear that HIV might be transmitted in other ways; however, no scientific evidence to support any of these fears has been found. If HIV were being transmitted through other routes (such as through air, water, or insects), the pattern of reported AIDS cases would be much different from what has been observed. For example, if mosquitoes could transmit HIV infection, many more young children and preadolescents would have been diagnosed with AIDS.
635614
This is a pet topic of mine...\n\nThe origin of AIDS and HIV has puzzled scientists ever since the illness first came to light in the early 1980s. For over twenty years it has been the subject of fierce debate and the cause of countless arguments, with everything from a promiscuous flight attendant to a suspect vaccine program being blamed. So what it the truth? Just where did AIDS come from?\n\nThe first 'officially recognized' cases of "AIDS" occurred in the USA in the early 1980s (the real origin was later recognized to be Africa and a lot earlier than 1980). A number of gay men in New York and San Francisco suddenly began to develop rare opportunistic infections and cancers that seemed stubbornly resistant to any treatment. At this time, AIDS did not yet have a name, but it quickly became obvious that all the men were suffering from a common syndrome. The discovery of HIV, the Human Immunodeficiency Virus that causes AIDS was made soon after. While some were initially resistant to the connection (and indeed remain so today), there is now clear evidence to prove that HIV does cause AIDS. So, in order to find the source of AIDS, it is necessary to look for the origin of HIV, and find out How, When and Where HIV first began to cause disease in humans.\n\nOne theory of the origin of AIDS is that it developed in the Belgian Congo from contaminated vaccines used in the world's first mass immunization for polio. There are a number of reasons why this theory is plausible enough to be worthy of further investigation.\n\n1. The location coincides dramatically. The earliest known cases of AIDS occurred in central Africa, in the same regions where Koprowski's polio vaccine was given to over a million people in 1957-1960.\n\n2. The timing coincides. There is no documented case of HIV infection or AIDS before 1959. Centuries of the slave trade and European exploitation of Africa exposed Africans and others to all other diseases then known; it is implausible that HIV could have been present and spreading in Africa without being recognized.\n\n3. Polio vaccines are grown (cultured) on monkey kidneys which could have been contaminated by SIVs. Polio vaccines could not be screened for SIV contamination before 1985.\n\n4. Another monkey virus, SV-40, is known to have been passed to humans through polio vaccines. A specific pool of Koprowski's vaccine was later shown to have been contaminated by an unknown virus.\n\n5. In order for a virus to infect a different species, it is helpful to reduce the resistance of the new host's immune system. Koprowski's polio vaccine was given to many children less than one month old, before their immune systems were fully developed. Indeed, in one trial, infants were given 15 times the standard dose in order to ensure effective immunization.\n\nIf this theory is correct, it has serious ethical, health and policy implications. In particular, it points to the danger of interspecies transfer of material through vaccinations, organ transplants, etc., which could lead to new variants of AIDS as well as other new diseases. As well, studying the theory may lead to insights about responding to AIDS and preventing new diseases.\n\nHowever, there has been no sustained attempt to test the theory. This could be done, for example, by testing stocks of polio vaccine for the presence of SIV. An offer to undertake tests was made as early as 1991; only in 2000 were some samples tested, and then only US-made vaccine. Another possibility would be to test stored blood samples in Africa from before 1950. If HIV is found, this would undermine the theory.\n\nAlthough the theory has not been properly examined, many people seem to believe it has been refuted. Hilary Koprowski published a letter in Science in 1992 attacking the theory. In 1993, Rolling Stone, which had published a widely publicized article by Tom Curtis about the theory, published an "update", interpreted by Science as a
89359
i'm going to say no. dna has evolved in organisms over millions of millions of years on this planet to be just the way it is today. viruses are random strands of this dna or rna (viruses are not alive). the chances that a similar genetic material has developed elsewhere in this universe is extremely thin, and on top of that, there would be a slim chance of it somehow reaching our earth.
1004545
it all started when God created the heavens and the earth.  He didnt want people to have sex between species so he made the aids virus.  well some genius in africa thought it would be fun to have sex with a monkey.  he got aids, then he went and spread it to others. now it is a Pandemic
293644
It is possible that viruses may have been among the original forms of life on this planet, however that is hotly contested.  It is even contested as to whether or not viruses are actually living.\n\nVirology is an entire field of it's own.  Their development, and how they mutate is quite a complicated subject.  I would recommend getting started with a basic biology text book and reading the sections on molecular biology, and viruses.  I think it would help you quite a lot in understanding what viruses are, and how it is that they function... and that not all are bad.  In fact there is evidence that some viruses have actually inserted themselves in the human genome and now serve a functional role in our development.
1124393
Start by reading the texts.  We did not descend from chimps.  We evolved from a common ancestor.\n\nWe share more DNA with Bonobo Chimps than we do with Neanderthal.\n\nLooking for predictions is interesting but not likely to be helpful.  First the rate of genetic mutation in DNA is known. \n\nSecond, there is no telling what evolutionary pressures will cause an expression of a gene to reflect a mutation ahead of the event.\n\nThird, given all of the mutagenic chemicals used in so many facets of production and general living, it is hard to make the prediction you ask for.\n\nConsider these: \n\nIn fewer than 70 years our ability to use penicillin and many of the early antibiotics is severely diminished.  in fact there are strains of bacteria that are completely resistant to some antibiotics (i.e: vancomycin resistant enterococus = VRE). As people improperly use antibiotics, new and hardier strains of bacteria emerge.\n\nThe thre most devistating epidemics in human history were variation of the inlfuenza.  The first is the Spanish Flu of 1918 which killed more people in 18 months than WWI, or (24 years of AIDS).  Here is what the WHO says about all three (Spanish Flu, Asian Flu, and Hong Kong Flu).\n\nPandemic influenza\n\nThree times in the last century, the influenza A viruses have undergone major genetic changes mainly in their H-component, resulting in global pandemics and large tolls in terms of both disease and deaths. The most infamous pandemic was “Spanish Flu” which affected large parts of the world population and is thought to have killed at least 40 million people in 1918-1919. More recently, two other influenza A pandemics occurred in 1957 (“Asian influenza”) and 1968 (“Hong Kong influenza”) and caused significant morbidity and mortality globally. In contrast to current influenza epidemics, these pandemics were associated with severe outcomes also among healthy younger persons, albeit not on such a dramatic scale as the “Spanish flu” where the death rate was highest among healthy young adults.\n\nMost recently, limited outbreaks of a new influenza subtype A(H5N1) directly transmitted from birds to humans have occurred in Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China in 1997 and 2003.
423447
The probably multiple origins of viruses are lost in a sea of conjecture and speculation, which results mostly from their nature: no-one has ever detected a fossil virus as a particle; they are too small and probably too fragile to have withstood the kinds of processes that led to fossilisation, or even to preservation of short stretches of nucleic acid sequences in leaf tissues or insects in amber. \n\nAs a result, we are limited to studying viruses that are isolated in the present, or from material that is at most a few decades old. The new science (or art) of virus molecular systematics is, however, shedding a great deal of light on the distant relationships of, and in some cases on the presumed origins of, many important groups of viruses.  This is as a result of the sequencing of all or part of the genomes of representatives of many of the known varieties of viruses, including the largest (pox- and herpesviruses) and the smallest (gemini- and other ssDNA viruses).  If viral genomes are compared with each other and with cellular sequences, presumed patterns of evolution / divergence of the genomes can be reconstructed.\n\nGeminiviridae, for example, are a diverse group of viruses - with different genera having different numbers of genes and genome components - that presumably have a common origin - and one that may be traceable back to beyond 200 Myr BP, if one takes into account geographical diversity, and genetic divergence of vectors and of plant hosts (see Rybicki, 1994).   Divergence of these viruses is illustrated here.\n\nPotyviridae are also a putatively ancient family of viruses, with genera that have different numbers of genome components and whose gene pool is not shared by all members: a representative coat protein tree is shown here.  Bymoviruses have two genome components and are fungus-transmitted; all the rest have a single genome component.  Potyviruses are aphid-transmitted; rymo- and triticiviruses are mite-transmitted, and ipomoviruses are whitefly-transmitted.  They are supposed to descend from a fungal virus, probably over 200 Myr ago (AJ Gibbs, pers. comm.).\n\nIf one were to go far back into evolutionary time, a case could be made for descent from a single ancestor of at least the replicase-associated functions of all viruses with positive-sense and negative-sense single-strand RNA genomes; likewise, large DNA viruses like pox- and herpesviruses and Phycodnaviridae could be presumed to have "degenerated" (if one believes viruses to be degenerate organisms, which I for one do not...) from cellular organisms, given that their enzymes share more sequence similarity with sequences from cells than with other viruses or anything else. \n\nRetroviruses, pararetroviruses, retrotransposons and retroposons all probably share a common origin of the reverse transcription function, which in turn may be a living relic of the enzyme that enabled the switch from a presumably RNA-based genetics to DNA-based heredity. \n\nThe main message to come from "deep" phylogenetic studies is that early virus evolution was almost certainly modular: that is, that certain "core modules" that proved to be successful - like the retrovirus pol gene, and the picornavirus-like protease-Vpg-polymerase module - appear in a number of different contexts.   Thus, certain animal viruses - like picornaviruses and alphaviruses - have relatives among plant viruses which do not necessarily share the same morphology, number of genome components, or even genome organisation or number of genes. \n\nFor example, small spherical picornaviruses (ssRNA, 1 component, infect animals) are related to comoviruses (small spherical, 2 component, plant) and Potyviridae (filamentous, 1 or two genome components, plant), as part of a "Picorna-like Supergroup". Similarly, Sindbis (ssRNA, enveloped spherical, single RNA, animals) virus is related to Bromoviridae (naked spherical, 3 component, plant) and Tobamoviruses (naked
423897
Science pretty much backs up the theory that HIV evolved from SIV (Simian Immunodeficiency virus.)  SIV has been present in the ape population for probably thousands or millions of years.  \n\nSomeone may have become infected through a blood transfer - either by a bite, or by preparing a chimp for food.\n\nThe virus probably hung around in the human population for several years to maybe hundreds of years until it mutated into what we now know as HIV.  A virus is a great mutater and evolver.\n\nImmunodefiecency viruses are common in animals - there is FIV (feline), Bovine (cows,) etc.  None of them are transmittable to humans and HIV is not transferrable to them.  Because humans and apes are so similar, it makes sense that a virus that affects them would eventually be able to mutate into something that could infect us.\n\nThe idea that it was transferred by people having sex with chimps is ridiculous.
787902
The influenza (flu virus) vaccine needs to change EVERY FLU SEASON.  This is because of "antigenic drift and shift", meaning the antigens on the virions change (especially hemagglutinin and neuraminidase antigens).  This is variation and survival of the fittest, the ones with the old hemagglutinin and neuraminidase antigens were destroyed by immune systems that recognized them.