It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

bacteria grown in space becomes more deadly

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 24 2007 @ 09:11 PM
link   
I just found this to be interesting...

Bacteria were cultivated on a shuttle and injected in mice upon landing. It was a lot more ferocious then the earth bound strains.
Apparently being in space can alter the makeup of microbes making them a lot deadlier then on earth.

Granted, this was only one study.

www.npr.org...

What does this mean? well as the article says, astronauts face a 'double threat' of sickness in space.

My question is that what affect could this have on future endeavors, say we actually reach a place with microbial life? Will it knock us off more easily?Would we have to worry about cross contamination upon return to earth? just some thoughts....




posted on Sep, 24 2007 @ 09:14 PM
link   
I JUST watched the episode of Evolution called "The Evolutionary Arms Race," last night.

It was explained that bacteria evolve to be more or less toxic depending on conditions having to do with how easy it is to be transmitted between people.

The cold is very easy to transmit, so it (the various rhinoviruses) is a relatively mild disease.

Cholera has to be transmitted either through the water or by sick people handling food. so it has to be more toxic.

The bacteria must have somehow "known" that they would have an extremely hard time infecting people from the conditions they evolved in, so they became even more toxic yet.

That's very interesting. Thanks for the info.



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 08:49 AM
link   
Yeah, I'm thinking the same thing.

Remove an entity from that which it is supposed to infect for long enough, and it will simply step up it's efforts to infect again.

It's a survival thing, I don't think it really has much to do with space itself.

If I am wrong though, then it means we're going to have to make sure air purifiers are in good working order in the future.


An aside thought.

If you look back through history, the more we advance, the weaker we are in comparison to bacteria, and the more we have to sanitize ourselves to stay safe.

Could it be that one day, you will find yourself living under a black light, constantly disinfecting yourself through out the day?



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 09:06 AM
link   
No, we evolve, the germs evolve, we evolve again. The evolutionary Arms Race -- it's elegant and suits the situation.

the problem is we are making everything TOO CLEAN. All these antibacterial products are making the matter worse, as well as over use and misuse of antibiotics.

A study was done (can't remember the reference right now, but it wasn't too long ago) and it was found that exposure to a common soil bacteria when young helps boost our immune systems, and due to our germophobia children aren't getting access to that bacteria anymore, at least in urban, non-farming environments.

It has also been found that children raised on farms have better immunities and few, if no, allergies, due to being in the barn with the animals from young ages -- the younger the better. Something about very early exposure to the common animal-associated microbes primes the immune system for health for life.

We're our own worst enemy, and we're making our microbial predators stronger through our own actions.



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 09:17 AM
link   
I wonder if the germs at the rate it traveled getting into and from space had anything to do with it getting stronger? I mean alot of things could make germs stronger. I also wonder if it makes other things stronger or weaker like our defence system? Does going into space change our genes? In the article it said that "The researchers found 167 genes had changed in the salmonella that went to space." So maybe our genes could change too.... just a tought.



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 09:39 AM
link   
Their genes changed because they evolved. Our genes can only change through damage at the moment -- they're set.

Under optimal conditions, salmonella can double its population every 20 minutes. So that was a LOT of generations that passed during the experiment, plenty of time to evolve new toxin levels.



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 10:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by MajorMalfunction
Their genes changed because they evolved. Our genes can only change through damage at the moment -- they're set.



What about pregnancies in space? Will that mutate the foetus?



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 10:08 AM
link   
That is the subject of some awfully long studies they need to make.

Unfortunately, they don't usually allow women who are pregnant or plan to become pregnant to participate in new drug trials because of possible harm to the fetus, and I suspect that this will also be a factor in space travel.

There was a book by Alfred Bester I read years ago, called The Computer Connection. It covered this topic somewhat (and somewhat frighteningly, too).



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 11:43 AM
link   
Great posts MajorMalfunction. Just to add a few things to the discussion and to explain how bacteria can evolve in such conditions...

Most standard evolutionary models show that very small changes occur over a long amount of time. This does hold true for most Eukaryotic organisms because of certain features of the cellular structure. However, because bacteria are prokaryotic and do not have a cell nucleus or organelles that are bound to the phospholipid bilayer it is imperative that their genetic structure be acquired from other bacteria. Most bacteria divide and replicate through the process of binary fission and have a very high mutation rate, which when taken in conjunction with the fact that they can drop entire genes from one organism to the next, we can easily see why they could adapt to live in space. Bacteria are able to easily transfer their genetic material between cells even if they are not directly related to one another through bacterial taxonomy. The significance of this is that when they react to negative stimuli there defense mechansims can swap DNA produced by genetic recombination between organisms to create a sort of immediate "evolutionary jump".

To shed a little light on the question about a baby being born in space, I would add a few things to this as well. As I mentioned before, Prokaryotic organisms go through high rates of mutation due to their cellular structure and the way they divide and replicate. Eukaryotic cells, such as in all mammals, divide using Mitosis and Meiosis...a completely different process when compared to binary fission. Also, because Eukaryotes store much of their DNA in the cell nucleus they cannot easily exchange this from one cell to another, which makes the mutation rate and evolutionary rate decrease significantly. Based on this evidence I do not believe there would be any noticeable genetic variances for many generations between a baby born in space and a baby born on Earth.

[edit on 25-9-2007 by Jazzerman]



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 12:22 PM
link   
Maybe you're onto something here. Not to change the ship's course but, human gestation period is 280 days, verses bovine gestation of 285 days is noteworthy. The part that is important is in respect to the strange occurrences with documented cattle mutilations. These events, alongside the alleged medical procedures on humans by EBEs gives rise to the potential DNA agenda.

Then on the other hand, microbial technology, as well as DNA science, IS at the "tip of the spear," so to speak, when it comes to space tech. NASA really seems to be loading things up in those areas of work.

Just my tangent on the matter. Good ideas I've heard thus far...



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 12:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by DREAMING MAN
Maybe you're onto something here. Not to change the ship's course but, human gestation period is 280 days, verses bovine gestation of 285 days is noteworthy. The part that is important is in respect to the strange occurrences with documented cattle mutilations. These events, alongside the alleged medical procedures on humans by EBEs gives rise to the potential DNA agenda.


I was actually thinking of that possibility when I posed the first question. Just didn't what to float it out in the open, preferring it to be "stumbled-upon", lest the Major shoot me for creative thinking


Sorry MajorM



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 12:46 PM
link   
I won't shoot you. Not for that.


I hate to say it for fear I'LL be the one shot, but there is no evidence that "cattle mutilations" are anything other than natural processes:


And it is certainly pointless to describe the experiment done by the Washington County (Arkansas) Sheriff's Department. They placed a dead cow in a field and had observers watch what happened over the next 48 hours. When they reported that bloating led to incision-like tears in the skin and that blowflies and maggots had cleaned out the soft tissue so that the carcass looked exactly like those that had been attributed to aliens or satanic cultists, they were generally ignored by the community of true believers.


for the entire article, see: skepdic.com...



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 01:22 PM
link   
"I've seen that movie too," & it was quite compelling if I may say. Very well done, Research was excellent. However, there are still a number of ranchers & such that are not exactly convinced on the issue. It remains a most provocative flash point among those in the cattle business.

I'll take another bullet for you Beachcoma, since I am the "fall guy." I feel as if I were "set up..."



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 01:34 PM
link   
reply to post by DREAMING MAN
 




Sorry! I didn't think you would've put all my thoughts in that single post. The plan was to slowly manoeuvre the conversation towards that possibility, kind of like how the moderator of a focus group does it



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 03:47 PM
link   
All right you two! ROFL.

Even if that argument against cattle mutilation didn't convince me, logic precludes aliens doing it.

Why, you ask? Because, if these technologically advanced races come here looking for prime beef, why would they go after nasy, American, antibiotic and prion infested specimens, when they could have Kobe beef?

Seriously. Why have American beef when you can go mutilate the higher-quality Japanese version?



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 04:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by MajorMalfunction
Seriously. Why have American beef when you can go mutilate the higher-quality Japanese version?


Perhaps the reaction from American ranchers are funnier than their Japanese counterparts? But then again how do you know there aren't any cases of Japanese cow mutilations?


Anyway, it's still an interesting coincidence. On topic, doesn't this seem to lend credence to the idea that severe pandemics that appear as mysteriously as they disappeared could have possibly come from outer space as in comet trails?



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 04:33 PM
link   
While it's entirely possible things could come in on comet tails, I think our earthly bacteria can do a wonderful job all by themselves creating pandemics.

This video in six parts really answered the question of this thread for me.



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 08:09 PM
link   
reply to post by MajorMalfunction
 


A lot of parents are starting to figure out that being too clean isn't good and have let down their gaurd.
A lot (not all) parents have relaxed.

I have a 21 month old who I let get into everything. within reason of course. Just so he can have a stronger immunity.

A friend of my mothers studies pathogens. And has confirmed that all the anti-bacterial stuff is creating super bacteria. And has also pointed out that also as a result, there has been a huge increase in MRSA.

That even the tiniest bug bite is now leaving us prone to MRSA infections.

Pediatricians are also getting more conservative about issuing anti-bacterial medicines. So children don't build up as much as a tolerance for it.

Now, if only we could solve the problem of them pumping anti-bacterials into our meat. Which probably doesn't go away and collects in the water.



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 08:56 PM
link   
The Evolution video was talking about antibiotics in the environment. it runs off in the animal waste, I don't doubt.

People look at me like I'm a murderer when I let my kid pick up something he's dropped on the floor and put it back in his mouth (like food or his pacifier). I just tell them he is growing an immune system, so it's OK.

Everything in moderation; even cleanliness.



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 09:09 PM
link   
It really makes sense that any bacteria taken into space would change rapidly. They are after all very short lived life forms and easily affected by the extra radiation and all in space.



new topics




 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join