I think this is an interesting topic, and one that’s still being discussed in scientific circles. This paper by Simmonds looks at the genetic diversity and evolution of the virus. It’s a bit lengthy, but pretty much on task for your question:
Dopey mammoths, hahaha :o)!
I haven't read Bill's link yet so maybe this in that paper but I read that it's thought that it was spread from primitive up close and personal fighting between tribes, etc.
I was looking this up the other day myself and this is part of a text I came across.
It is impossible to really know the origins of hepatitis C
since there are no stored blood samples to test for the
virus that are older than 50 years. However, given the
nature of the evolution of all viruses, hepatitis C has
probably been around for hundreds of thousands of
years or more before evolving into the current strains.
Some experts speculate that since HGV/GBV-C, a close
relative of HCV, originated in Old and New World primates,
the beginnings of HCV might be traced back to
35 million years ago. However, this is just speculation
and it is impossible to corroborate these theories at the
I don't think it has evolved.There may be mutated and changed versions, but I'm pretty sure the original virus still exists as it always has, and is going to outlive the variations of it. I am not convinced that anything improves by mutating. From my admittedly limited observation, it is hard to improve, in the long run, on any of the species of life that exist today, including all the bacteria and viruses. I would put my money on it starting out just as it is today, and doubt it will be any worse in ten million years time.
HCV was intelligently designed by the Evil Mastermind who controls the Lizard People.
Actually, they did have stored blood samples from military members from 1948:
I dunno, Murariji—I’m pretty sure some of those pills I took in the late sixties caused *me* to mutate.
On the other hand, you’re probably right… I’m pretty sure that I haven’t improved from that either….
HCV does mutate (Evolves) this is the reason our bodies will not ever be immune to any Gen. Type. We will always carry the anti-bodies of the one killed . If you had G1 you can contract it again if you are in the situation to contact it again. This is because the anti-bodies you have are for the Mutated (Evolved) Virus not any G1
My understanding may be wrong, but I think of mutations and mutants in general as being an inferior, defective or at the very best a similar version, (maybe a different color?) of the original, and that for something to truly evolve it has to improve, and become a superior version. If this is happening, with HCV for example, we can look forward to harder and longer processes and periods of treatment as the virus becomes more and more evolved in the art of survival. Not a happy prospect.
My vet said dogs carry hep (not a b or c ) and they pass it thru saliva, fecal and blood, and they have a vacine for it..and have for a long time. Hope you are doing well
Canine hep shot is included in the 5 way (3 or 4) series of puppy shots and the one year and every 3 years after. DHLPP
2) Hepatitis--•Infectious Canine Hepatitis, or Canine Adenovirus Type 1, is primarily a disease of the liver transmitted through the bodily fluids of infected animals. The corneas of infected animals may appear cloudy or bluish, leading to the expression "hepatitis blue-eye" used to describe the unfortunate dog. Although there is no treatment for an infected dog, the disease can be prevented though routine DHLPP vaccinations.
I hope everyone even country folks at least
This is kind of OT but in a way related.......I think they've known about gonorrhea a long time and now they just are saying it poaches Human DNA......I'm sure there is much we dont have a clue about regarding HCV.
And GSD is correct dogs dont get human hep - thank God.
Gonorrhea Is Poaching Human DNA
Huffington Post - 19 hours ago
We're used to the (rather unpleasant) idea that Gonorrhea, the sexually-transmitted disease, can glom onto us, causing painful urination, rash or fever.
Found Inside the Gonorrhea Bacteria: Human DNA Discover Magazine (blog) Gonorrhea Evolved by Looting Human DNA, Scientist Says Fox News
Space aliens and their experiments on abducted humans.
don't think it was wooley mammoths, pretty sure all the war, bloodshed and covenant cutting is what did it. Used to be to make peace you had to cut covenant, and that required some version of the blood brother ritual.
Dr. Schweitzer cut covenant with so many african tribes that his arms looked like edward sizzorhands had his way with him...all those mixings of other bloods...who knows, but it probably had a lot to do with it.
in any case the trouble with mutations is you don't always get something weaker.
the whole of gentic engineering is based on that. Why do we have corn and wheat and hundreds of other crops that are 2-10 times bigger than their predesessors is because we have breed for the mutations that were stronger, larger, sweeter, whatever, in our food supply.
so a stronger virus is a real possibility. when they first discovered retrovirus I remember reading that they were observed mutating (changing their rna/dna coding as often as every 20 minutes in the lab) and not only that but I think that the AZT had things mutating at a 12 or 13 fold increase...meaning that antiviral drug was producing some phenominal rates of mutation...
given that all it would take it one ot two stronger mutation (which is how we tripled our bushels per acre on corn) it's not hard to see why docs are concerned
were hcv to mutate to the extent of say becoming more present in the saliva and mucosa, it could then become airborne, and that would infect the whole planet. So no one likes to see the virus mutate, even though yes, most mutants will be weaker...(at least those who mutate in a toxic/chemo envirionment anyway) but most, isn't all.
"There may be mutated and changed versions, but I'm pretty sure the original virus still exists as it always has, and is going to outlive the variations of it. I am not convinced that anything improves by mutating."
"Mutation" has become a word that has negative connotations, but from a scientific standpoint, it simply reflects a *change*, a variation. Though the core RNA may be identifiable and perhaps close to *original* in form, the existence of different genotypes reinforces the theory of mutation: different genotypes can be considered mutations of the same virus.
"Improvement" is highly subjective, but there are certainly examples of mutation resulting in positive return. Case in point, one common 'mutation' in the human genome is the sickle cell gene, a variation considered a 'mutation,' yet singularly not disease causing, but able to confer immunity to malaria not exhibited by those without the mutation. ~eureka
if things cannoy improve with mutation then how did we get from ordinary staff to MERSA or other flesh eating bacterium?? How we get to drug resistant clap or other STD's?
The truth is that the drugs we've used to treat disease have killed it in most cases the disease, while giving rise to much more virulant strains of the few surviving microbes so saying mutaion cannot improve a species, any species regardless of size, is to ignor the evidence, lots of evidence, to the contrary.
The evidence suggests that a more virulent strain of hcv than ever seen could be caused by repeated treatments or given just the right circumstances.
One current concern is that given the right viscosity hcv has been observed crossing the cell membrane, something thought prior to not be possible, as an example. Why that matters is it means the viron is adapting to the toxic blood by trying to remain in the liver and never entering the bloodstream to breed. If they become that much more adapt it will mean viral loads could exceed anything formerly seen and the treatment landscape would be that much harder.
This virus changes so many things about our systems to help it survive. It down regulates and upregulates dozens of substances and drastically alters many key chemical processes in our bodies just to keep it's environment "friendly" for it's purposes, it hides itself in plain sight in our lipids, it even farms our lipids...waiting for them to mature before putting them on to go out in the rain (our blood) so that the immune system won't recognize them.
I remember when I saw ants farming aphids for thier life juices and thinking how smart they were...figuring out how to survive and prosper by manipulating all things around them....then when you see virons a million times smaller doing much the same, and more than can really be fathomed, you begin to see that our definition of intelligent life may need to be readdressed.
To Eureka and merryBe
As Bill said it is an interesting topic, and I admit I am in way over my head in matters related to virus and bacteria 'changes', never having studied it.
My comment stemmed from an unwillingness to accept a popular belief that one species can evolve into another superior species, which, although widely accepted, has never to my knowledge, been witnessed or proved.
I guess the HCVirus would have to evolve into an HJVirus (for example) to meet my criteria of evolution. Human beings can and do adapt and change in many ways, without evolving into another species, particularly in times of difficulty.
Without a succinct definition of what constitutes a HepC virion it is hard to define what would be an adaption/mutation as opposed to an evolution.
The fact that some survive a course of drugs is not necessarily proof of evolution. In every trillion viruses some may be that much tougher that they don't die. They may also be able to take advantage of differences in their host body in order to survive. No two constitutions are the same, and no two people eat exactly the same.
In any species of life subjected to gradually increasing adverse conditions, some will die before others, and some may survive. They haven't evolved, they were just better suited to survive in the first place.
It is hard to think of trillions of virions having as many varied traits and characteristics as humans have, especially those at MedHelp :), but they can't all be exactly the same.........can they?
"They haven't evolved, they were just better suited to survive in the first place."
My point was that mutation is simply change; it certainly has the potential to make progeny superior or inferior to the parent, but having a mutation doesn't necessarily make it so, nor does it necessarily mean "evolution" has taken place. However, if being better suited to survive allows an organism to flourish rather than perish, that divergence and the persistence of the qualities that make a it more suited for survival becomes the possible springboard for evolution (whatever that might mean to you).
We certainly each have individual interpretations of *evolution* (or the lack thereof) as well, and whether one encorporates adaptation, response, or actual genetic change as part of that equation is a topic in and of itself. I tend to view evolution on a smaller scale; I believe beings and organisms do *evolve* and that it can happen without necessarily translating into a change in species.
"It is hard to think of trillions of virions having as many varied traits and characteristics as humans have, especially those at MedHelp :), but they can't all be exactly the same.........can they?"
:) Just as they say no two snowflakes are the same, nonetheless they do all melt at a given temperature: having varied traits does not necessarily translate into better survival -- but the ability to exhibit and exercise individual characteristics and perpetuate them is the basis of survival in any species. ~eureka
It all started when homely neanderthals discovered a flock of good looking sheep.
I discovered to my surprise that 'evolution' is used in at least three different contexts to explain different phenomena, some observable some not.With that kind of leeway discussion is heavy going, as at some level nearly everyone is right.
"the ability to exhibit and exercise individual characteristics and perpetuate them is the basis of survival in any species."
That is a fair enough statement since it leaves open what the mechanism that exercises and perpetuates the individual characteristics is.
Snowflakes obviously can't. (I always wondered how they researched the finding that no two are the same.)
But now the depressing possibility that sheep dip may one day have to be incorporated into soc outweighs my curiosity. :)