No mutations outside the lab
April 11, 2014 | James Kohl
Excerpt 1): ” …the “bird flu” virus has yet to evolve a means of spreading easily among people.”
Excerpt 2): “While the new study suggests the mutations needed are relatively few, it remains unclear whether they’re likely to happen outside the laboratory.”
My comment: Nutrient-dependent amino acid substitutions underlie change in the virulence of H1N1 . When the substitutions are reported in H5N1 as if they were mutations: ‘…we examine pairwise relationships between viruses and observe a correlation between amino acid mutations and antigenic distance…” biologically-based cause and effect is eliminated from any further consideration.
No mutations outside the lab occur, but laboratory researchers proceed to determine how to cause mutations. This leads to development of ineffective treatments with serious side effects.
This brings the ever-present role of evolutionary theory into the picture of molecular medicine, which requires that research proceed based on biological facts. If no mutations outside the lab occur, evolutionary theory should not be brought into the lab. Only wasted efforts from money better spent elsewhere will result from theoretical nonsense.
Excerpt: “It also claimed that the drug had a number of side-effects, including nausea, headaches, psychiatric events, kidney problems and hyperglycaemia.”
My comment: Amy Adamson and Hinissan Kohio showed that flu infection is linked to glucose metabolism in mammalian cells. That fact suggests that the side-effects of Tamiflu may be linked to altered glucose metabolism by the virus. Thus, nutritional epigenetics probably holds more promise than does evolutionary theory in the context of effective treatments with fewer reported instances of side effects.