Medical What Motivates Germs to Infect Our Bodies?

  • Thread starter Thread starter mktsgm
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Infection
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the motivations behind bacteria and viruses invading the human body. It emphasizes that these microorganisms do not have motives or intentions; rather, they evolve randomly under natural selection pressures. Their survival depends on their ability to replicate without killing their host too quickly, as an overly virulent infection can lead to extinction. The conversation highlights the presence of beneficial bacteria in the human body, suggesting that not all germs are harmful. It also notes that environmental conditions can influence the virulence of pathogens, such as how improved sanitation can lead to less harmful strains of cholera. The idea of "motive" in evolution is critiqued as a misunderstanding, as there is no conscious goal driving these organisms. Instead, the relationship between humans and bacteria is largely opportunistic, with humans often seeking to harness beneficial bacteria for their advantage.
mktsgm
Messages
151
Reaction score
22
I wonder what could be the motive for a bacteria or a virus to invade our body. If it finds food in us, what serves as food?

What would have happened to that particular germ, had it not infected someone?
 
Biology news on Phys.org
There is no motive. Bacteria and virus evolve randomly, under natural selection pressures. Whatever allows a bacterium or a virus to replicate will stick.

There is also a limit to infection. If an infection is too strong and kills its host before it can replicate and infect someone else, it will go extinct.
 
  • Like
Likes BillTre
Humans have large number of friendly bacteria on the skin and in the gut. So not all germs are bad. Dr Claude's explanation is right on. You can google 'host parasite' and 'symbiosis' see what all of this is about.
 
DrClaude said:
There is no motive. Bacteria and virus evolve randomly, under natural selection pressures. Whatever allows a bacterium or a virus to replicate will stick.

There is also a limit to infection. If an infection is too strong and kills its host before it can replicate and infect someone else, it will go extinct.
This wikipedia post elaborates a bit on this.

It is also interesting that by controlling environmental conditions, virulency (how nasty diseases are) of pathogens can be changed via evolution.
For example, Cholera can be influenced to evolve toward less virulent forms when water sanitation is improved (see question #5).

Using "motive" as a quick term for a direction evolution takes is a common, but incorrect, interpretation of what is going on.
There is, of course, no mind with a goal and no plan to do something before it happens.
 
That viruses and bacteria can affect humans, for better or worse, is really a chance outcome. We can only utilize or be invaded by less than 1% of known viruses and bacteria. Bacteria are essential to human life, we are the ones most motivated to use them to our advantage. There are many species of both but very few in comparison are actually pathogenic.

What happens to them depends upon all sorts of conditions.
 
Thanks to all who have taken pains to answer my question.

A lion preys on a deer for it is its food. Similarly I would like to know when a bacteria invades a human body, is it seeking its food?

If so what exactly is its food in our body/cells?

This is my question.
 
Deadly cattle screwworm parasite found in US patient. What to know. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2025/08/25/new-world-screwworm-human-case/85813010007/ Exclusive: U.S. confirms nation's first travel-associated human screwworm case connected to Central American outbreak https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/us-confirms-nations-first-travel-associated-human-screwworm-case-connected-2025-08-25/...
Chagas disease, long considered only a threat abroad, is established in California and the Southern U.S. According to articles in the Los Angeles Times, "Chagas disease, long considered only a threat abroad, is established in California and the Southern U.S.", and "Kissing bugs bring deadly disease to California". LA Times requires a subscription. Related article -...
I am reading Nicholas Wade's book A Troublesome Inheritance. Please let's not make this thread a critique about the merits or demerits of the book. This thread is my attempt to understanding the evidence that Natural Selection in the human genome was recent and regional. On Page 103 of A Troublesome Inheritance, Wade writes the following: "The regional nature of selection was first made evident in a genomewide scan undertaken by Jonathan Pritchard, a population geneticist at the...
Back
Top