You're viewing a single thread.
Don't they usually mutate to less deadly forms? Killing their host isn't exactly a successful strategy.
yes, killing the host is considered a jerk move in the microbial community, but some still take the suicidal path, it's a bacterial insanity issue
Totally 💯
Airborne respiratory viruses in humans tend to decrease in lethality. This doesn't really transfer anywhere else. The decrease in severity in is due to selection pressure from human quarantine behavior.
Killing the host is normal in single celled organisms. The most common method viruses leave the cell I by causing it to burst open.
Killing the host is also common in the plant world.
I see my mistake. I was overly focused on airborne data. Malaria hasn't really changed for the better has it. Thank you.
Cancer is a prime example of op message
Also viruses started somewhere. A lot had to mutate to get them to be so deadly to begin with for deadly ones.
Uh... Cancer is not an organism with its own genes. Cancer is you baby, you're just just getting out of control. Viruses sometimes start deadly but they almost always get less deadly over time.
Not true. As the other commenter noted, bacteriophages (which are viruses) are released from the infected bacterium through the lysis of the bacterium in question. The death of the "host" is literally essential to their multiplication.
I stand corrected. Let me adjust my comment. Most viruses, the vast majority, are not deadly to humans. Those that are tend to mutate to become less deadly to humans over time.