Because the mycobacteria have lost numerous coding and non-coding regions in its genome, it is hard to retrace the genetic differences that would tell us of the origins, relationships, and movement of the disease causing pathogen.But through analyzing relatively modern human skeletal remains (I’m talking thousands of years modern) from Egypt and Peru, we know that tuberculosis was taking a big toll on humans relatively recently in our evolutionary history.but at 500,000 years ago it is hard to correlate a date to what organisms were around at the time.The problem with that is the faunal composition of Turkey during the Pleistocene isn’t well known.Sure, the late Miocene is, and that’s cause there are a lot of Miocene sites…Of course, I really don’t know enough about the tuberculosis evidence in this individual to make a solid judgment… Speaking of which, paper should be out anytime soon in the decides to give the green light and publish the paper.
If this really did have tuberculosis, then that means he probably, and other hominids, got sick because his body produced less vitamin D due to darker skin and had a less vigilant immune system, hundreds of thousands of years ago.From what’s reported in the press release, I don’t buy it. I think it is over analyzed and sensationalized science to make big headlines. Apparently the fossil, a fragment of skull bone, shows lesions that the individual had tuberculosis.Tuberculosis is a deadly infectious disease caused by multiple strains of mycobacteria.
The first thing they are curious about is the date.We speculate that dating was established using faunal evidence.