Evolution/Super bugs

>lost the information that creates the enzyme targeted by our antibiotic
not necessarily, it depends on the mechanism of the antibiotic

sometimes antibiotic resistance is as simple as a slight change in the protein conformation of a ribosome so that drugs no longer can block the exit site of the elongating protein

>>8559346

"Evolution" doesn't mean "improvement." There's no such thing as "devolution." A new environmental pressure killing off one kind of bacteria so another will survive, reproduce, and expand to fill the niche in its place is in fact evolution. Just because you consider not having an enzyme somehow "worse" doesn't make it not evolution. Also, it's not "the power of natural selection at work." That's the opposite of natural selection since they're introducing the environmental pressure themselves.

evolution is all around you!
look at bacteria !
>bacteria losing genetic information and not gaining new genes

i believe in evolution btw

>>8559346
This whole comic is one whole bait. I don't even know what it's trying to say. Super germs are a lie? Evolution is a lie? Newspapers suck?
Literally everything glasses guy says is fucking retarded

>weak, sickly bacteria
euh... what?

>They wouldn't survive if we weren't killing the normal strain
Sadly this isn't always the case. If only people were responsible with antibiotics. Oh wait, they aren't.

>Devolution
This proves the author does not understand evolution at a fundamental level.
Evolution truly is random. Selection however is not.

>>8559346
It's retarded because it's touting the fitness cost of this adaptation as some horrible oversight on behalf of biologists when actually we all know, and have known for decades, that every adaptation carries some sort of fitness cost. Antibiotic resistance is just one example but really when you look at any adaptation there is always some sort of cost. For example, having less body hair helps humans dissipate heat better but also leaves us vulnerable to sunburns. The comic author is treating it like some sort of "gotcha" discovery when this is actually just an accepted fact about evolution. There's no such thing as "universal fitness," because fitness by definition depends on the environment.

>>8559379
+1, upvote, shared, liked, etc.