It is not
known yet whether Darwin himself or any of the classical theorists recognized
and ever discussed the opposite process by which living organisms lose both
form and function in the passage of time. The orthodox doctrine of biological
evolution projects a progressive course, in the sense that organisms develop
finer forms and functions to survive within hostile environments around them as
time passes. The changing environment makes it imperative for living organisms
to develop adaptive characteristics in order to survive, and organisms that are
unable to adapt to a changing environment in accordance with this natural law
are exterminated from existence. An inherent presumption in the classical
theory of biological evolution is that living organisms progressively become
better in both form and function in respect to the external environment within
which they live.
The
opposite process whereby living organisms lose form and function, that which in
this piece is described as contra-Darwinian evolution or devolution theory,
perhaps, has evaded general attention. At least this latter process is not as
so much discussed as classical evolutionary theory. However, it will be a
mistake of immense proportion to assume that extinction of biological species
consequent in Darwinian evolution always occur spontaneously through
catastrophic causes. Although natural catastrophes are not excluded from the
possible mechanisms of natural selection, of greater importance is the subtle
process of devolution (deterioration) through which living organisms are
stripped of vital characteristics which deprive them of the capacity to survive
within their environments. The devolution of living organisms, which by reason
of its occurrence at the cellular level is imperceptible to the observer,
mostly accounts for the periodic changes in form and function that affect all
living organisms.
Therefore,
not only do biological species evolve in the passage of time. They also
devolve. The opposite biological processes of evolution and devolution are in
constant parity, and together regulate form and function in the biosphere. Both
processes are ever occurring at the subcellular and cellular levels in opposite
directions, in response to ever changing environmental conditions, and
culminate in periodic changes in the structure and functions of biological
species.
The
devolution theory has practical significance a sketch of which is discussed in
the following sections.
Origin of unicellular species
Unicellular
species are relics of multicellular organisms and emerge in the process of
devolution of higher living organisms. Each individual cell of multicellular
organisms are self-sustaining to some extent and can survive for a limited
period independently of other cells in the tissues in which they co-occur. In
the cellular economy of multicellular tissues each cell is constantly exposed
to threats from both the extracellular and external environments, albeit in
various degrees, which makes them susceptible to devolution. The cells that are
impinged the hardest tend to lose some of their original functions and
structure. If during this process the essential structures which enable the
affected cell to attach to other cells to participate in the cellular economy
are lost, that cell is sloughed from within the tissue. This does not mean
instant cell death. Subsequently the sloughed cell can continue to live
independently for a time, the length of which time depends on the prevailing
environmental conditions. Apart from unicellular species emerging from this
endogenous route from living higher organisms, the decay of dead multicellular
organisms is another important mechanism which adds to the pool of unicellular
species.
The fate
of cells after detachment from source tissues may be any of the following;
firstly, instant cell death can occur. Secondly, other intervening conditions
within the environment drive further the process of devolution. The cell
continues to lose essential organelles and vital structures and in the process
changes to completely new cellular species. In the terminal stage the unicellular
species that finally emerge will be very dissimilar to cells of the source
tissue. Or thirdly, the process of devolution halts and, if the surrounding
environment is favourable for it, the entrant species begins to replicate more
of its kind. The gist of this discussion is that unicellular species emerge
from multicellular organisms through the process of devolution and not in the
reverse direction as is posited in classical evolutionary theory.
Medical significance
The
theory of biological devolution may be applied in the fields of medical
microbiology, oncology and rheumatology. The search for effective treatment
options for the medical conditions which occur in these three fields should be
pursued bearing in mind their pathological convergence in the devolution of the
human body and physiology. In medical microbiology recognition to endogenous
infection states is necessary, apart from the already known fact that
infectious agents may also intrude the human body from the external
environment. Thus, an infectious agent may devolve internally from normal cells
of the human body and not always have to invade from outside the body. The
common feature in both cases is that the infectious agent has reserved ability
to attach to normal cells of the body.
Oncological
and rheumatic lesions similarly arise from normal cells in the process of
devolution of the human body, with degeneration in rheumatic diseases advanced
to such an extent that cellular debris produced during devolution contribute
substantially to disease development. The deductive proposition in this
discussion is that any therapeutic option which works for medical conditions in
one of these fields may equally be effective for conditions occurring in the
other two fields.
