Despite its success, however, no Darwinian believes that all features of all organisms are adaptations. Selection is not the only evolutionary force at work shaping organisms. Chance, historicity, and constraints combine with natural selection to shape organisms. The result is that while all organisms are incredibly well-adapted in some respects, in others they represent "trade-offs" and compromises, jury-rigged contraptions that succeed despite, rather than because of, the way they are constructed.

http://myweb.lmu.edu/tshanahan/DarMed.html

Are medical doctors evolutionary biologists?

 Human body adapts to stimuli posed by environment and evolve. So, our present and modern generation.

@Subhash. Is it adapt (e.g. reflected in between generation changes) or adjust (e.g. reflected in individuals responding mechanistically to an environmental stimulus)?

Adjustments might be the outcome of past selection pressures?

Dear @Marcel, here is the fine article about the Darwin's Medicine, applications ...! How is Darwinian medicine useful? "Evolution by natural selection has been biology's organizing principle for more than a century, but only in the last few decades has it been applied to the social sciences and medicine. Its application to medicine, known as evolutionary or Darwinian medicine, uses an evolutionary perspective to understand why the body is not better designed and why, therefore, diseases exist at all.This article outlines some basic principles of Darwinian medicine, summarizes the usefulness of evolutionary principles for medicine, and provides some examples from key literature sources."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1071402/

Of course I am not having such background. But, still I am interacting as management professor.

Adjust - immediate and temporary

Adapt - slow and permanent till new stimuli comes

Thanks

Despite its success, however, no Darwinian believes that all features of all organisms are adaptations. Selection is not the only evolutionary force at work shaping organisms. Chance, historicity, and constraints combine with natural selection to shape organisms. The result is that while all organisms are incredibly well-adapted in some respects, in others they represent "trade-offs" and compromises, jury-rigged contraptions that succeed despite, rather than because of, the way they are constructed.

http://myweb.lmu.edu/tshanahan/DarMed.html

Universities evolve, looking to Darwin for new medical insights!

http://www.nature.com/nm/journal/v16/n12/full/nm1210-1346a.html

I think that most/all medical institutes/universities would currently accept that micro-organism resistance towards antibiotics result from micro-evolutionary processes (Darwinian based), right? 

I think so or I hope so

Evolution is always speculation, even when there is extensive supporting evidence (humans developed bigger brains, because ... ,humans began to walk upright, because ...). Explaining why Type I diabetes occurs could lead to testing to prevent pregnancies that will lead to Type I diabetes. I would like to see good preventive measures to eliminate disease, but fear that speculation without definitive proof could lead to another round of eugenics. Darwinian investigations should continue in medical issues, but calling it medicine may be premature.

How can vertebrate-microorganisms interactions be adequately studied in an evolutionary framework when you accept that there are billions on a single vertebrate body and the dynamics/exchange of micro-organisms within versus across vertebrate bodies is huge? For instance, how can micro-evolution of micro-organisms in natural conditions be conducted in a unbiased manner?

Our article published in peer-reviewed Journal "Communicative & Integrative Biology". A few major points discussed in the paper:

(1) Brain is not the source of consciousness.

(2) Consciousness is ubiquitous in all living organisms, starting from bacteria to human beings.

(3) The individual cells in the multicellular organisms are also individually cognitive entities.

(4) Proposals like “artificial life”, “artificial intelligence”, “sentient machines” and so on are only fairytales because no designer can produce an artifact with the properties like internal teleology (Naturzweck) and formative force (bildende Kraft).

(5) The material origin of life and objective evolution are only misconceptions that biologists must overcome.

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138