Posted: Dec 20, 2014 1:54 pm
BooBoo wrote:Shrunk wrote:BooBoo wrote:Shrunk wrote:
And Summers' paper confirms that. So they were right.
No, the paper does not state that at all. It confirms that two mutations are necessary and, crucially, that "the mutations be added in a specific order to avoid decreases in chloroquine transport." The paper also admits that there would be "significant transient reductions in CQ transport activity before the full complement of Dd2 mutations is attained. The authors, however, speculate that a compensatory change could allow deleterious changes to be masked/buffered: "one or more compensatory changes (e.g., perhaps R371I and/or M74I) could arise at an early stage to maintain the normal physiological function of the protein while it develops the ability to transport CQ."
So...?
So we have confirmation that chloroquine resistance requires a lot of things to happen in the right way for it to happen at all. PZ Myers even admits this: http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007 ... on-part-i/If you demand a very specific pair of amino acid changes in specific places in a specific protein, I agree, the odds are going to be very long on theoretical considerations alone, and the empirical evidence supports the claim of improbability for that specific combination.
So...?