The Instigator
Solomon_Grim
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
StevenDixon
Con (against)
Winning
12 Points

Good mutations in evolution do not exist?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
StevenDixon
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/24/2013 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,084 times Debate No: 32900
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (11)
Votes (3)

 

Solomon_Grim

Pro

I believe that there are no good mutations in evolution. Who ever accepts this can go ahead and use the first round as presenting his/her first debate due to the fact that I have to have something to debate against.

Good mutations- a mutation that causes just a good benefit of adds information.
StevenDixon

Con

Pro is claiming that there are no beneficial mutations, all I must do is provide one beneficial mutation in order to win. I will start with three. Let's make it clear, that sometimes beneficial outcomes require several mutations, these are still "beneficial mutations". I would also like to illustrate that beneficial means it more so aids in the survival of a group than is detrimental.

Methicillin resistance in strain of staphylococcus aura bacterium. Staph previously to 2006 was treatable by methicillin, now a strain referred to as MRSA is immune due to a beneficial mutations.

Sickle Cell is a beneficial mutation that propagated a large amount of people from Africa or people of African descent due to there being high levels of Malaria which Sickle Cell gives immunity to. Now, you may say "WHAT LOL, SICKLE CELL GIVES PEOPLE SICKLE CELL ANEMIA!!! THAT'S NOT BENEFICIAL" but it doesn't give every person that carries the gene sickle cell anemia and it's still beneficial because it allows people to atleast get to the age to reproduce, rather than dying as a child of malaria.

Mutations in the CCR5 gene that allow people to be virtually immune to HIV.
Debate Round No. 1
Solomon_Grim

Pro

Thanks for accepting.

1. Methicillin-
There are many ways to become resistant to antibiotics. One way is to switch information around from bacteria to bacteria until they become resistant. At the time of discovery, mrsa was resistant to some drugs, but you can't conclude where the resistance came from. In the year after, more resistance came. Isn't it odd that at the right place, at the right time, the bacteria got a mutation to save itself. That is unlikely at best. And this happened several times over with different drugs? No.
http://science.howstuffworks.com...
http://runews.rockefeller.edu...

2. Sickle cell-
You are right about the fact that not everyone gets sickle cell, but those with sickle cell traits is perfectly normal. No added resistance.
http://sickle.bwh.harvard.edu...
http://www.creationbc.org...

3. Ccr5-
Although it helps with HIV, this is because of a bad thing. Ccr5 cause increased chances of getting West Nile virus and increased brain inflammation. Because of the lack of ccr5, brain infection can happen more often to the person, usually being fatal.
http://www.creationbc.org...
StevenDixon

Con

As stated in comment section I misread the definition of a good mutation so my first post was a misrepresentation of the debate at hand. Still, because the argument is that good mutations do not exist, all I must do is provide one in order to win this debate.

A specific mutation in the lrp5 gene has been isolated, this mutation increases bone density in humans decreasing the rate of broken bones to 0 within the family it's been traced to. There are no negative side effects.

http://www.nejm.org...
Debate Round No. 2
Solomon_Grim

Pro

Although it has the potential of helping, it doesn't.

Lrp5 mutation usually causes one of two things:
1. Fragile bones very easily broken or
2. High bone density diseases.

High bone density causes problems in the shapes of the bones and makes it painful to move about. The lack of the chemical also causes a higher chance to get cancer.

http://www.biomedcentral.com...
http://atlasgeneticsoncology.org...
StevenDixon

Con

Those are different mutations within the same receptor.

Different mutations within the same strands will cause different effects. This SPECIFIC mutation does not cause those problems, it only increases bone density without any negative effects.

"We examined the coding sequence of LRP5 for DNA-sequence variants and identified one variant in all the affected subjects (Figure 3B). This variant introduced a single base substitution that resulted in a missense mutation, with valine substituted for glycine at residue 171 (LRP5V171) (Figure 3C). The residue lies in the fourth blade of the first propeller, two amino acids beyond the aspartate residue of the YWTD sequence (Figure 3A and Figure 3D)."

http://www.nejm.org...

Different mutations within the same strands will cause different effects,
Debate Round No. 3
Solomon_Grim

Pro

Solomon_Grim forfeited this round.
StevenDixon

Con

A fish native to the hudson river developed a mutation that gives it immunity to PCB which is toxic. No negative effects.

"Dr. Wirgin and scientists at NOAA Fisheries Service in New Jersey and the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts spent four years capturing tomcod from contaminated and relatively clean areas of the Hudson River during the winter months, when tomcod spawn in the river. The fish were screened for genetic variants in a gene encoding a protein known to regulate the toxic effects of PCBs, which is called the aryl hydrocarbon receptor2, or AHR2. This gene also is involved in mediating the effects of other halogenated hydrocarbon compounds, a group that includes PCBs.

Slight alterations"the deletion of only six base pairs in DNA of the AHR2 gene"appear to protect tomcod from PCBs, according to the study. Normally, when unaltered AHR2 binds to PCBs, it triggers a cascade of reactions that transmit the toxic effects of the compound. However, the study found that PCBs bind poorly to the variant AHRs, which apparently blunts the chemicals' effects."

http://esciencenews.com...
Debate Round No. 4
Solomon_Grim

Pro

Solomon_Grim forfeited this round.
StevenDixon

Con

I have posted several good mutations that my opponent has not disputed due to forfeit. I would ask that everyone votes Con.
Debate Round No. 5
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by StevenDixon 4 years ago
StevenDixon
"Gaining an immunity to malaria gives the ability for people in that area to grow old enough to reproduce which OUTWEIGHS the sickle cell it gives which is evident by the fact it not only passed on but did so in a large segment."

"Same with CCr5 which arose due to the black plague"

I'm arguing that a "good mutation" as you defined it isn't something biologists recognize as a category and it's one you arbitrarily created nor is your foot analogy an example of a mutation that would be beneficial while these mutations are more so beneficial than a detriment.
Posted by Solomon_Grim 4 years ago
Solomon_Grim
Plus, the increased brain inflammation is much more likely than getting hiv
Posted by Solomon_Grim 4 years ago
Solomon_Grim
Sickle cell causes extreme pain and bad oxygenated blood as it does not carry oxygen well.
Posted by StevenDixon 4 years ago
StevenDixon
Gaining an immunity to malaria gives the ability for people in that area to grow old enough to reproduce which OUTWEIGHS the sickle cell it gives which is evident by the fact it not only passed on but did so in a large segment.

Same with CCr5 which arose due to the black plague which was a selective pressure that obviously outweighs that of west nile virus(which is pretty damn rare in that region) as well as the brain inflammation that could occur. The fact it exists in a concentrated area is evidence of that.

Trust me, the benefits of losing a foot don't outweigh that of losing it, definitely when we still had major selective pressures.
Posted by Solomon_Grim 4 years ago
Solomon_Grim
But it is important. There are beneficial side effects to losing a foot, but that doesn't make it good.
Posted by StevenDixon 4 years ago
StevenDixon
To be fair bladerunner, it wasn't beneficial mutations but "good" mutations which is a standard and category that Solomon_Grim made up arbitrarily.
Posted by StevenDixon 4 years ago
StevenDixon
I don't mind.
Posted by Solomon_Grim 4 years ago
Solomon_Grim
Sorry I missed the rest of the debate.
Posted by StevenDixon 4 years ago
StevenDixon
Not native to the hudson river, that was a mistake, still....THAT MUTATION IS GOOD AS $*%^
Posted by StevenDixon 4 years ago
StevenDixon
So I didn't catch

"Good mutations- a mutation that causes just a good benefit of adds information."

This is a term I've never seen before as most people don't split hairs in this manner and was arguing for beneficial mutations. I'm still perfectly willing to continue the debate, just giving an admission that my first post may not be specifically addressing that contention.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by bladerunner060 4 years ago
bladerunner060
Solomon_GrimStevenDixonTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct to Con for Pro's forfeited rounds. Arguments to Con for showing beneficial mutations.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 4 years ago
Ragnar
Solomon_GrimStevenDixonTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: There are many cases where pro is right, but he bit off more than he could chew. All con had to do was show a mutation with no known drawbacks; which he did and was not countered. conduct for forfeit.
Vote Placed by MassiveDump 4 years ago
MassiveDump
Solomon_GrimStevenDixonTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: He done forfeited.