TED2007
Paul Ewald: Can we domesticate germs?
Filmed:
Readability: 4.7
583,626 views
Evolutionary biologist Paul Ewald drags us into the sewer to discuss germs. Why are some more harmful than others? How could we make the harmful ones benign? Searching for answers, he examines a disgusting, fascinating case: diarrhea.
Paul Ewald - Evolutionary biologist
After years of studying illness from the germs' point of view, microbiologist Paul Ewald believes that Big Pharma is wrong about some very big issues. What's right? The leader in evolutionary medicine posits radical new approaches. Full bio
After years of studying illness from the germs' point of view, microbiologist Paul Ewald believes that Big Pharma is wrong about some very big issues. What's right? The leader in evolutionary medicine posits radical new approaches. Full bio
Double-click the English transcript below to play the video.
00:18
What I'd like to do is just drag us all down into the gutter,
0
0
3000
00:21
and actually all the way down into the sewer
1
3000
2000
00:23
because I want to talk about diarrhea.
2
5000
2000
00:25
And in particular, I want to talk about
3
7000
4000
00:29
the design of diarrhea.
4
11000
2000
00:31
And when evolutionary biologists talk about design,
5
13000
2000
00:33
they really mean design by natural selection.
6
15000
4000
00:37
And that brings me to the title of the talk,
7
19000
2000
00:39
"Using Evolution to Design Disease Organisms Intelligently."
8
21000
4000
00:43
And I also have a little bit of a sort of smartass subtitle to this.
9
25000
4000
00:47
But I'm not just doing this to be cute.
10
29000
2000
00:49
I really think that this subtitle explains
11
31000
3000
00:52
what somebody like me, who's sort of a Darwin wannabe,
12
34000
3000
00:55
how they actually look at one's role in
13
37000
3000
00:58
sort of coming into this field of health sciences and medicine.
14
40000
4000
01:02
It's really not a very friendly field for evolutionary biologists.
15
44000
3000
01:05
You actually see a great potential,
16
47000
2000
01:07
but you see a lot of people who are sort of defending their turf,
17
49000
3000
01:10
and may actually be very resistant, when one tries
18
52000
4000
01:14
to introduce ideas.
19
56000
2000
01:16
So, all of the talk today is going to deal with two general questions.
20
58000
5000
01:21
One is that, why are some disease organisms more harmful?
21
63000
3000
01:24
And a very closely related question, which is,
22
66000
2000
01:26
how can we take control of this situation once we understand
23
68000
4000
01:30
the answer to the first question?
24
72000
1000
01:31
How can we make the harmful organisms more mild?
25
73000
2000
01:34
And I'm going to be talking, to begin with, as I said,
26
76000
2000
01:36
about diarrheal disease organisms.
27
78000
2000
01:38
And the focus when I'm talking about the diarrheal organisms,
28
80000
3000
01:41
as well as the focus when I'm talking about any organisms
29
83000
3000
01:44
that cause acute infectious disease,
30
86000
2000
01:46
is to think about the problem from a germ's point of view,
31
88000
3000
01:49
germ's-eye view.
32
91000
2000
01:51
And in particular, to think about a fundamental idea
33
93000
4000
01:55
which I think makes sense out of a tremendous amount of variation
34
97000
3000
01:58
in the harmfulness of disease organisms.
35
100000
3000
02:01
And that idea is that from the germ's-eye point of view,
36
103000
4000
02:05
disease organisms have to get from one host to another,
37
107000
3000
02:08
and often they have to rely on the well-being of the host
38
110000
4000
02:12
to move them to another host.
39
114000
2000
02:14
But not always.
40
116000
2000
02:16
Sometimes, you get disease organisms
41
118000
2000
02:18
that don't rely on host mobility at all for transmission.
42
120000
2000
02:20
And when you have that, then evolutionary theory tells us
43
122000
3000
02:23
that natural selection will favor the more exploitative,
44
125000
4000
02:27
more predator-like organisms.
45
129000
2000
02:29
So, natural selection will favor organisms
46
131000
2000
02:31
that are more likely to cause damage.
47
133000
2000
02:33
If instead transmission to another host requires host mobility,
48
135000
4000
02:37
then we expect that the winners of the competition
49
139000
3000
02:40
will be the milder organisms.
50
142000
2000
02:42
So, if the pathogen doesn't need the host to be healthy and active,
51
144000
3000
02:45
and actual selection favors pathogens
52
147000
3000
02:48
that take advantage of those hosts,
53
150000
2000
02:50
the winners in the competition are those that exploit the hosts
54
152000
2000
02:52
for their own reproductive success.
55
154000
2000
02:54
But if the host needs to be mobile in order to transmit the pathogen,
56
156000
5000
02:59
then it's the benign ones that tend to be the winners.
57
161000
2000
03:01
So, I'm going to begin by applying this idea to diarrheal diseases.
58
163000
4000
03:05
Diarrheal disease organisms get transmitted in basically three ways.
59
167000
3000
03:08
They can be transmitted from person-to-person contact,
60
170000
3000
03:11
person-to-food-then-to-person contact,
61
173000
2000
03:13
when somebody eats contaminated food,
62
175000
2000
03:15
or they can be transmitted through the water.
63
177000
2000
03:17
And when they're transmitted through the water,
64
179000
2000
03:19
unlike the first two modes of transmission,
65
181000
2000
03:21
these pathogens don't rely on a healthy host for transmission.
66
183000
4000
03:25
A person can be sick in bed and still infect tens, even hundreds
67
187000
2000
03:27
of other individuals.
68
189000
1000
03:29
To sort of illustrate that, this diagram emphasizes that
69
191000
3000
03:32
if you've got a sick person in bed,
70
194000
2000
03:34
somebody's going to be taking out the contaminated materials.
71
196000
3000
03:37
They're going to wash those contaminated materials,
72
199000
1000
03:38
and then the water may move into sources of drinking water.
73
200000
4000
03:42
People will come in to those places where you've got
74
204000
3000
03:45
contaminated drinking water,
75
207000
1000
03:46
bring things back to the family,
76
208000
1000
03:47
may drink right at that point.
77
209000
1000
03:48
The whole point is that a person who can't move
78
210000
3000
03:51
can still infect many other individuals.
79
213000
2000
03:53
And so, the theory tells us that
80
215000
3000
03:56
when diarrheal disease organisms are transported by water,
81
218000
5000
04:01
we expect them to be more predator-like, more harmful.
82
223000
2000
04:03
And you can test these ideas.
83
225000
2000
04:05
So, one way you can test is just look at all diarrheal bacteria,
84
227000
2000
04:07
and see whether or not the ones that tend to be
85
229000
2000
04:09
more transmitted by water, tend to be more harmful.
86
231000
2000
04:11
And the answer is -- yep, they are.
87
233000
2000
04:13
Now I put those names in there just for the bacteria buffs,
88
235000
3000
04:16
but the main point here is that --
89
238000
3000
04:19
(Laughter)
90
241000
1000
04:20
there's a lot of them here, I can tell --
91
242000
1000
04:21
the main point here is that those data points
92
243000
4000
04:25
all show a very strong, positive association between
93
247000
2000
04:27
the degree to which a disease organism is transmitted by water,
94
249000
4000
04:31
and how harmful they are,
95
253000
1000
04:32
how much death they cause per untreated infection.
96
254000
3000
04:35
So this suggests we're on the right track.
97
257000
2000
04:37
But this, to me, suggests that we really need
98
259000
5000
04:42
to ask some additional questions.
99
264000
1000
04:43
Remember the second question that I raised at the outset was,
100
265000
3000
04:46
how can we use this knowledge
101
268000
2000
04:48
to make disease organisms evolve to be mild?
102
270000
3000
04:51
Now, this suggests that if you could just block waterborne transmission,
103
273000
2000
04:53
you could cause disease organisms to shift from
104
275000
3000
04:56
the right-hand side of that graph to the left-hand side of the graph.
105
278000
3000
04:59
But it doesn't tell you how long.
106
281000
2000
05:01
I mean, if this would require thousands of years,
107
283000
2000
05:03
then it's worthless in terms of controlling of these pathogens.
108
285000
2000
05:05
But if it could occur in just a few years,
109
287000
2000
05:07
then it might be a very important way to control
110
289000
4000
05:11
some of the nasty problems that we haven't been able to control.
111
293000
3000
05:14
In other words, this suggests that we could
112
296000
2000
05:16
domesticate these organisms.
113
298000
2000
05:18
We could make them evolve to be not so harmful to us.
114
300000
3000
05:21
And so, as I was thinking about this, I focused on this organism,
115
303000
3000
05:24
which is the El Tor biotype of the organism called Vibrio cholerae.
116
306000
4000
05:28
And that is the species of organism that is responsible
117
310000
4000
05:32
for causing cholera.
118
314000
2000
05:34
And the reason I thought this is a really great organism to look at
119
316000
2000
05:36
is that we understand why it's so harmful.
120
318000
3000
05:39
It's harmful because it produces a toxin,
121
321000
3000
05:42
and that toxin is released when the organism
122
324000
2000
05:44
gets into our intestinal tract.
123
326000
1000
05:45
It causes fluid to flow from the cells that line our intestine
124
327000
4000
05:49
into the lumen, the internal chamber of our intestine,
125
331000
3000
05:52
and then that fluid goes the only way it can, which is out the other end.
126
334000
3000
05:55
And it flushes out thousands of different other competitors
127
337000
3000
05:58
that would otherwise make life difficult for the Vibrios.
128
340000
3000
06:01
So what happens, if you've got an organism,
129
343000
2000
06:03
it produces a lot of toxin.
130
345000
1000
06:04
After a few days of infection you end up having --
131
346000
3000
06:07
the fecal material really isn't so disgusting as we might imagine.
132
349000
2000
06:09
It's sort of cloudy water.
133
351000
2000
06:11
And if you took a drop of that water,
134
353000
2000
06:13
you might find a million diarrheal organisms.
135
355000
3000
06:16
If the organism produced a lot of toxin,
136
358000
2000
06:18
you might find 10 million, or 100 million.
137
360000
2000
06:20
If it didn't produce a lot of this toxin,
138
362000
2000
06:22
then you might find a smaller number.
139
364000
2000
06:24
So the task is to try to figure out
140
366000
4000
06:28
how to determine whether or not you could get an organism like this
141
370000
4000
06:32
to evolve towards mildness by blocking waterborne transmission,
142
374000
3000
06:35
thereby allowing the organism only to be transmitted
143
377000
2000
06:37
by person-to-person contact,
144
379000
3000
06:40
or person-food-person contact --
145
382000
1000
06:41
both of which would really require that people be
146
383000
2000
06:43
mobile and fairly healthy for transmission.
147
385000
2000
06:45
Now, I can think of some possible experiments.
148
387000
3000
06:48
One would be to take a lot of different strains of this organism --
149
390000
3000
06:51
some that produce a lot of toxins, some that produce a little --
150
393000
2000
06:53
and take those strains and spew them out in different countries.
151
395000
5000
06:58
Some countries that might have clean water supplies,
152
400000
3000
07:01
so that you can't get waterborne transmission:
153
403000
1000
07:02
you expect the organism to evolve to mildness there.
154
404000
3000
07:05
Other countries, in which you've got a lot of waterborne transmission,
155
407000
3000
07:08
there you expect these organisms to evolve
156
410000
2000
07:10
towards a high level of harmfulness, right?
157
412000
4000
07:14
There's a little ethical problem in this experiment.
158
416000
2000
07:16
I was hoping to hear a few gasps at least.
159
418000
3000
07:19
That makes me worry a little bit.
160
421000
2000
07:21
(Laughter)
161
423000
1000
07:22
But anyhow, the laughter makes me feel a little bit better.
162
424000
3000
07:25
And this ethical problem's a big problem.
163
427000
3000
07:28
Just to emphasize this, this is what we're really talking about.
164
430000
3000
07:31
Here's a girl who's almost dead.
165
433000
2000
07:33
She got rehydration therapy, she perked up,
166
435000
2000
07:35
within a few days she was looking like a completely different person.
167
437000
3000
07:38
So, we don't want to run an experiment like that.
168
440000
2000
07:40
But interestingly, just that thing happened in 1991.
169
442000
4000
07:44
In 1991, this cholera organism got into Lima, Peru,
170
446000
4000
07:48
and within two months it had spread to the neighboring areas.
171
450000
3000
07:51
Now, I don't know how that happened,
172
453000
3000
07:54
and I didn't have anything to do with it, I promise you.
173
456000
4000
07:58
I don't think anybody knows,
174
460000
2000
08:00
but I'm not averse to, once that's happened,
175
462000
3000
08:03
to see whether or not the prediction that we would make,
176
465000
2000
08:05
that I did make before, actually holds up.
177
467000
3000
08:08
Did the organism evolve to mildness in a place like Chile,
178
470000
3000
08:11
which has some of the most well protected water supplies
179
473000
3000
08:14
in Latin America?
180
476000
1000
08:15
And did it evolve to be more harmful in a place like Ecuador,
181
477000
4000
08:19
which has some of the least well protected?
182
481000
2000
08:21
And Peru's got something sort of in between.
183
483000
2000
08:23
And so, with funding from the Bosack-Kruger Foundation,
184
485000
4000
08:27
I got a lot of strains from these different countries
185
489000
3000
08:30
and we measured their toxin production in the lab.
186
492000
2000
08:33
And we found that in Chile -- within two months of the invasion of Peru
187
495000
4000
08:37
you had strains entering Chile --
188
499000
2000
08:39
and when you look at those strains,
189
501000
2000
08:41
in the very far left-hand side of this graph,
190
503000
2000
08:43
you see a lot of variation in the toxin production.
191
505000
3000
08:46
Each dot corresponds to an islet from a different person --
192
508000
3000
08:49
a lot of variation on which natural selection can act.
193
511000
2000
08:51
But the interesting point is, if you look over the 1990s,
194
513000
3000
08:54
within a few years the organisms evolved to be more mild.
195
516000
4000
08:58
They evolved to produce less toxin.
196
520000
1000
09:00
And to just give you a sense of how important this might be,
197
522000
2000
09:02
if we look in 1995, we find that there's only one case of cholera,
198
524000
5000
09:07
on average, reported from Chile every two years.
199
529000
2000
09:09
So, it's controlled.
200
531000
2000
09:11
That's how much we have in America,
201
533000
2000
09:13
cholera that's acquired endemically,
202
535000
2000
09:15
and we don't think we've got a problem here.
203
537000
2000
09:17
They didn't -- they solved the problem in Chile.
204
539000
2000
09:19
But, before we get too confident, we'd better look at some of those other countries,
205
541000
3000
09:22
and make sure that this organism doesn't just always evolve toward mildness.
206
544000
3000
09:25
Well, in Peru it didn't.
207
547000
2000
09:27
And in Ecuador -- remember, this is the place where it has
208
549000
3000
09:30
the highest potential waterborne transmission --
209
552000
2000
09:32
it looked like it got more harmful.
210
554000
1000
09:33
In every case there's a lot of variation,
211
555000
2000
09:35
but something about the environment the people are living in,
212
557000
3000
09:38
and I think the only realistic explanation is that it's
213
560000
3000
09:41
the degree of waterborne transmission,
214
563000
2000
09:43
favored the harmful strains in one place, and mild strains in another.
215
565000
4000
09:47
So, this is very encouraging,
216
569000
2000
09:49
it suggests that something that we might want to do anyhow,
217
571000
2000
09:51
if we had enough money, could actually give us a much bigger bang for the buck.
218
573000
3000
09:54
It would make these organisms evolve to mildness,
219
576000
2000
09:56
so that even though people might be getting infected,
220
578000
2000
09:58
they'd be infected with mild strains.
221
580000
2000
10:00
It wouldn't be causing severe disease.
222
582000
2000
10:02
But there's another really interesting aspect of this,
223
584000
2000
10:04
and this is that if you could control the evolution of virulence,
224
586000
3000
10:07
evolution of harmfulness,
225
589000
2000
10:09
then you should be able to control antibiotic resistance.
226
591000
2000
10:11
And the idea is very simple.
227
593000
1000
10:12
If you've got a harmful organism,
228
594000
2000
10:14
a high proportion of the people are going to be symptomatic,
229
596000
2000
10:16
a high proportion of the people are going to be going to get antibiotics.
230
598000
2000
10:18
You've got a lot of pressure favoring antibiotic resistance,
231
600000
3000
10:21
so you get increased virulence leading to
232
603000
2000
10:23
the evolution of increased antibiotic resistance.
233
605000
2000
10:25
And once you get increased antibiotic resistance,
234
607000
3000
10:28
the antibiotics aren't knocking out the harmful strains anymore.
235
610000
2000
10:30
So, you've got a higher level of virulence.
236
612000
2000
10:32
So, you get this vicious cycle.
237
614000
2000
10:34
The goal is to turn this around.
238
616000
2000
10:36
If you could cause an evolutionary decrease in virulence
239
618000
2000
10:38
by cleaning up the water supply,
240
620000
2000
10:40
you should be able to get an evolutionary decrease
241
622000
2000
10:42
in antibiotic resistance.
242
624000
2000
10:44
So, we can go to the same countries and look and see.
243
626000
2000
10:46
Did Chile avoid the problem of antibiotic resistance,
244
628000
3000
10:49
whereas did Ecuador actually have the beginnings of the problem?
245
631000
3000
10:52
If we look in the beginning of the 1990s,
246
634000
2000
10:54
we see, again, a lot of variation.
247
636000
2000
10:56
In this case, on the Y-axis, we've just got a measure of antibiotic sensitivity --
248
638000
4000
11:00
and I won't go into that.
249
642000
2000
11:02
But we've got a lot of variation in antibiotic sensitivity in Chile,
250
644000
3000
11:05
Peru and Ecuador, and no trend across the years.
251
647000
2000
11:07
But if we look at the end of the 1990s, just half a decade later,
252
649000
4000
11:11
we see that in Ecuador they started having a resistance problem.
253
653000
3000
11:14
Antibiotic sensitivity was going down.
254
656000
2000
11:16
And in Chile, you still had antibiotic sensitivity.
255
658000
3000
11:19
So, it looks like Chile dodged two bullets.
256
661000
2000
11:21
They got the organism to evolve to mildness,
257
663000
2000
11:23
and they got no development of antibiotic resistance.
258
665000
3000
11:26
Now, these ideas should apply across the board,
259
668000
3000
11:29
as long as you can figure out why some organisms evolved to virulence.
260
671000
3000
11:32
And I want to give you just one more example,
261
674000
2000
11:34
because we've talked a little bit about malaria.
262
676000
2000
11:36
And the example I want to deal with is,
263
678000
2000
11:38
or the idea I want to deal with, the question is,
264
680000
4000
11:42
what can we do to try to get the malarial organism to evolve to mildness?
265
684000
3000
11:45
Now, malaria's transmitted by a mosquito,
266
687000
2000
11:47
and normally if you're infected with malaria, and you're feeling sick,
267
689000
4000
11:51
it makes it even easier for the mosquito to bite you.
268
693000
2000
11:53
And you can show, just by looking at data from literature,
269
695000
3000
11:56
that vector-borne diseases are more harmful
270
698000
2000
11:58
than non-vector-borne diseases.
271
700000
2000
12:01
But I think there's a really fascinating example
272
703000
3000
12:04
of what one can do experimentally to try to actually demonstrate this.
273
706000
4000
12:08
In the case of waterborne transmission,
274
710000
2000
12:10
we'd like to clean up the water supplies,
275
712000
2000
12:12
see whether or not we can get those organisms to evolve towards mildness.
276
714000
3000
12:15
In the case of malaria, what we'd like to do is mosquito-proof houses.
277
717000
5000
12:20
And the logic's a little more subtle here.
278
722000
2000
12:22
If you mosquito-proof houses,
279
724000
2000
12:24
when people get sick, they're sitting in bed --
280
726000
2000
12:26
or in mosquito-proof hospitals, they're sitting in a hospital bed --
281
728000
2000
12:28
and the mosquitoes can't get to them.
282
730000
2000
12:30
So, if you're a harmful variant
283
732000
2000
12:32
in a place where you've got mosquito-proof housing, then you're a loser.
284
734000
4000
12:36
The only pathogens that get transmitted
285
738000
3000
12:39
are the ones that are infecting people that feel healthy enough
286
741000
2000
12:41
to walk outside and get mosquito bites.
287
743000
3000
12:44
So, if you were to mosquito proof houses,
288
746000
2000
12:46
you should be able to get these organisms to evolve to mildness.
289
748000
2000
12:48
And there's a really wonderful experiment that was done
290
750000
3000
12:51
that suggests that we really should go ahead and do this.
291
753000
3000
12:54
And that experiment was done in Northern Alabama.
292
756000
3000
12:57
Just to give you a little perspective on this,
293
759000
2000
12:59
I've given you a star at the intellectual center of the United States,
294
761000
4000
13:03
which is right there in Louisville, Kentucky.
295
765000
3000
13:07
And this really cool experiment was done
296
769000
2000
13:09
about 200 miles south of there, in Northern Alabama,
297
771000
3000
13:12
by the Tennessee Valley Authority.
298
774000
1000
13:13
They had dammed up the Tennessee River.
299
775000
3000
13:16
They'd caused the water to back up,
300
778000
2000
13:18
they needed electric, hydroelectric power.
301
780000
3000
13:21
And when you get stagnant water, you get mosquitoes.
302
783000
2000
13:23
They found in the late '30s -- 10 years after they'd made these dams --
303
785000
4000
13:27
that the people in Northern Alabama were infected with malaria,
304
789000
6000
13:33
about a third to half of them were infected with malaria.
305
795000
3000
13:36
This shows you the positions of some of these dams.
306
798000
3000
13:39
OK, so the Tennessee Valley Authority was in a little bit of a bind.
307
801000
4000
13:43
There wasn't DDT, there wasn't chloroquines: what do they do?
308
805000
4000
13:47
Well, they decided to mosquito proof every house in Northern Alabama.
309
809000
3000
13:50
So they did. They divided Northern Alabama into 11 zones,
310
812000
3000
13:53
and within three years, about 100 dollars per house,
311
815000
2000
13:55
they mosquito proofed every house.
312
817000
2000
13:57
And these are the data.
313
819000
2000
13:59
Every row across here represents one of those 11 zones.
314
821000
4000
14:03
And the asterisks represent the time at which
315
825000
2000
14:05
the mosquito proofing was complete.
316
827000
2000
14:07
And so what you can see is that
317
829000
2000
14:09
just the mosquito-proofed housing, and nothing else,
318
831000
3000
14:12
caused the eradication of malaria.
319
834000
2000
14:14
And this was, incidentally, published in 1949,
320
836000
2000
14:16
in the leading textbook of malaria, called "Boyd's Malariology."
321
838000
3000
14:19
But almost no malaria experts even know it exists.
322
841000
3000
14:22
This is important,
323
844000
2000
14:24
because it tells us that if you have moderate biting densities,
324
846000
2000
14:26
you can eradicate malaria by mosquito proofing houses.
325
848000
2000
14:28
Now, I would suggest that you could do this in a lot of places.
326
850000
3000
14:31
Like, you know, just as you get into the malaria zone,
327
853000
4000
14:35
sub-Saharan Africa.
328
857000
2000
14:37
But as you move to really intense biting rate areas, like Nigeria,
329
859000
3000
14:40
you're certainly not going to eradicate.
330
862000
2000
14:42
But that's when you should be favoring evolution towards mildness.
331
864000
4000
14:46
So to me, it's an experiment that's waiting to happen,
332
868000
3000
14:49
and if it confirms the prediction, then
333
871000
2000
14:51
we should have a very powerful tool.
334
873000
2000
14:53
In a way, much more powerful than the kind of tools we're looking at,
335
875000
3000
14:56
because most of what's being done today is
336
878000
2000
14:58
to rely on things like anti-malarial drugs.
337
880000
2000
15:00
And we know that, although it's great to make those
338
882000
3000
15:03
anti-malarial drugs available at really low cost and high frequency,
339
885000
5000
15:08
we know that when you make them highly available
340
890000
3000
15:11
you're going to get resistance to those drugs.
341
893000
2000
15:13
And so it's a short-term solution.
342
895000
2000
15:15
This is a long-term solution.
343
897000
2000
15:17
What I'm suggesting here is that we could get evolution
344
899000
2000
15:19
working in the direction we want it to go,
345
901000
2000
15:21
rather than always having to battle evolution as a problem
346
903000
3000
15:24
that stymies our efforts to control the pathogen,
347
906000
3000
15:27
for example with anti-malarial drugs.
348
909000
2000
15:29
So, this table I've given just to emphasize
349
911000
3000
15:32
that I've only talked about two examples.
350
914000
3000
15:35
But as I said earlier, this kind of logic applies across the board
351
917000
3000
15:38
for infectious diseases, and it ought to.
352
920000
2000
15:40
Because when we're dealing with infectious diseases, we're dealing with living systems.
353
922000
4000
15:44
We're dealing with living systems;
354
926000
2000
15:46
we're dealing with systems that evolve.
355
928000
2000
15:48
And so if you do something with those systems,
356
930000
2000
15:50
they're going to evolve one way or another.
357
932000
2000
15:52
And all I'm saying is that we need to figure out how they'll evolve,
358
934000
3000
15:55
so that -- we need to adjust our interventions
359
937000
2000
15:57
to get the most bang for the intervention buck,
360
939000
3000
16:00
so that we can get these organisms to evolve in the direction we want them to go.
361
942000
3000
16:03
So, I don't really have time to talk about those things,
362
945000
2000
16:05
but I did want to put them up there,
363
947000
2000
16:07
just to give you a sense that there really are solutions
364
949000
3000
16:10
to controlling the evolution of harmfulness
365
952000
3000
16:13
of some of the nasty pathogens that we're confronted with.
366
955000
4000
16:19
And this links up with a lot of the other ideas that have been talked about.
367
961000
4000
16:23
So, for example, earlier today there was discussion of,
368
965000
5000
16:28
how do you really lower sexual transmission of HIV?
369
970000
6000
16:34
What this emphasizes is that we need to figure out how it will work.
370
976000
3000
16:37
Will it maybe get lowered if we alter the economy of the area?
371
979000
3000
16:40
It may get lowered if we intervene in ways that
372
982000
2000
16:42
encourage people to stay more faithful to partners, and so on.
373
984000
4000
16:46
But the key thing is to figure out how to lower it,
374
988000
2000
16:48
because if we lower it, we'll get an evolutionary change in the virus.
375
990000
3000
16:51
And the data really do support this:
376
993000
2000
16:53
that you actually do get the virus evolving towards mildness.
377
995000
3000
16:56
And that will just add to the effectiveness of our control efforts.
378
998000
5000
17:01
So the other thing I really like about this,
379
1003000
2000
17:03
besides the fact that it brings a whole new dimension
380
1005000
2000
17:05
into the study of control of disease,
381
1007000
4000
17:09
is that often the kinds of interventions that you want,
382
1011000
3000
17:12
that it indicates should be done,
383
1014000
2000
17:14
are the kinds of interventions that people want anyhow.
384
1016000
2000
17:16
But people just haven't been able to justify the cost.
385
1018000
3000
17:19
So, this is the kind of thing I'm talking about.
386
1021000
3000
17:22
If we know that we're going to get extra bang for the buck from providing clean water,
387
1024000
3000
17:25
then I think that we can say,
388
1027000
2000
17:27
let's push the effort into that aspect of the control,
389
1029000
4000
17:31
so that we can actually solve the problem,
390
1033000
3000
17:34
even though, if you just look at the frequency of infection,
391
1036000
3000
17:37
you would suggest that you can't solve the problem well enough
392
1039000
4000
17:41
just by cleaning up water supply.
393
1043000
2000
17:43
Anyhow, I'll end that there, and thank you very much.
394
1045000
2000
17:45
(Applause)
395
1047000
2000
ABOUT THE SPEAKER
Paul Ewald - Evolutionary biologistAfter years of studying illness from the germs' point of view, microbiologist Paul Ewald believes that Big Pharma is wrong about some very big issues. What's right? The leader in evolutionary medicine posits radical new approaches.
Why you should listen
Paul Ewald has a problem with modern medicine: It ignores the fact that many diseases of unknown origin can be linked to slow-growing infections caused by viruses, bacteria and other microorganisms.
Ewald -- whose theory stems from both a formal education in biological sciences, ecology, and evolution, and a personal bout with diarrhea in the 1970s -- aims to change this thinking. To that end, he has written popular news articles, academic papers, and two books (Evolution of Infectious Disease and Plague Time) that explain and expand his idea. Ewald is regarded as the leading expert in the emerging field of evolutionary medicine. He directs the evolutionary medicine program in the Biology department at the University of Louisville, Kentucky, and lectures worldwide.
Among other honors, Ewald was the first recipient of the Smithsonian Institution's George E. Burch Fellowship in Theoretic Medicine and Affiliated Sciences, which was established to foster pioneering work in health sciences.
Paul Ewald | Speaker | TED.com