[Closed] Antibiotic resistant bacteria

errm, it's not you who become resistant it's the bugs.

if you acquire resistant bugs then you're in the same position as anyone else.

Yep it's the bugs not you, but by not taking antibiotics for those pesky antibiotic resistant viruses that are going round you are helping.

So no benefits, darn it.

EDIT: I am a helper! Think I deserve a beer. You're all welcome.

Not really helping, just not making the problem worse.

Having had an antibiotic resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae infection, it's not nice, GP tried about 5 different antibiotics until one worked....

Not making the problem worse, hmmm, is that beer worthy? Yes, yes it is.

You should get a t-shirt;

"Not making the problem worse since NNNN"

Where NNNN is the year you last took an antibiotic 🙂

Does the article mention the antibacterial handwash that we flush down the sink, making sure the only bacteria left are the ones we can't fight?

Frightening really.

Vancomycin used to be the H-bomb of antibiotics., Now it is used quite routinely.

Don't eat meat then as crop animals are regularly dosed with antibiotics to help fatten them up.
There's a whole world of old illnesses just waiting to return and destroy our comfortable lives. The wholesale use of antibiotics over the last 50 years for non-necessary reasons is nothing short of criminal.

Does the article mention the antibacterial handwash that we flush down the sink, making sure the only bacteria left are the ones we can't fight

Worjked in the nhs about 20 years ago and the infection control manager came round, she went ballistic when she saw bleach in the kitchen, a sbleach kills most germs and she was affraid of the infection mutating and not being able to be killed by common bleach.

Also a major welsh hospital had to have all its plumbing removed from one ward after an infection was found in the waste pipes.

Hospital based infections are nasty, so try and lay off the antibiotics some day they may save your life, and we are running out of new antibiotics strong enmough to kill the newinfections.

Googlre MRSA for some insight,horrible thing it is.

There is hope - use a phage - virus that kills bacteria

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phage

Sadly we lost some of them during the civil war in Georgia.
no electricity to keep the specimens alive.

[i]we are running out of new antibiotics strong enmough to kill the newinfections[/i]

biggest problem is that pharma won't invest because there's a small market for this type of antibiotic and governments don't see it as their job to develop new drugs.

Most of the Russian 'phage originally came from the environment I believe? Should be able to collect them again with any luck (and money).

Fungal diseases are on the up too, not just for the immunocomprimised. And they're [i]really[/i] hard to kill off.

Natures way of restoring a balance between resources and population....

I think the benefit of having not taken antibiotics is that your personal bacteria population is less resistant than mine. So if you have wound infected by your own bacteria they are more likely to respond to antibiotics

But you have no benefit if you catch a bacterial infection from an outside source of bacteria

but by not taking antibiotics for those pesky antibiotic resistant viruses that are going round you are helping.

Therein lies the misconception that plays a major part in antibiotic misuse. Many people take/are prescribed antibiotics when they are in fact suffering from viral infections that the antibiotics won't combat. Antibiotics don't help if you catch a cold virus.

Anti-viral drugs for a virus
Antibiotics for bacteria

more about phages http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-21799534

wwaswas:

biggest problem is that pharma won't invest because there's a small market for this type of antibiotic and governments don't see it as their job to develop new drugs.

Bolleaux.
There is an excellent market for these drugs, it's just that they take lots of research and many years to develop. And research is difficult. Yes, current antibiotics are cheap but that's because they've been around for years.
Here's a press release from a small Liverpool-based biotech, RedX:

Redx is a good example of the role these organisations can play in tackling this issue. Later this year, we will open a new £10.8 million research and development centre focused on anti-viral and anti-bacterial drugs. One of our key focus areas will be developing drugs to combat resistance to antibiotics. Importantly, this work is supported by the Government through a grant from the Regional Growth Fund of £4.7 million.

Several of the big pharma companies are also working on novel antibiotics, because they see a future need and future profit. The typical cost of getting a new drug to market these days, including the cost of the failed programmes, is somewhere north of £3 billion.

Phages, nanomedicine and more vaccines are they way to combat anti-bacterial resistance.

not taking antibiotics for those pesky antibiotic resistant viruses that are going round you are helping.

not taking antibiotics for those pesky antibiotic resistant viruses that are going round you are helping.

GCSE science fail

Se my post, Scaredypants.

Edukator, I know the science quite well

viruses ARE antibiotic-resistant and quite pesky and by not taking antibiotics you are indeed helping

Something is resistant when the effectiveness of a drug is reduced. Antibiotics do not affect viruses so they cannot become resistant.

scaredypants, I think viruses are also exorcism resistant, we should be researching stronger religions as well.

You're arguing about semantics, not science.
Viruses are naturally resistant to antibiotics because they're not biotic. It depends on your implied meaning of "resistant"

I think some people are misunderstanding mikewsmith's point. It was fairly clear to me that he knows that viruses can't be treated by antibiotics, that's precisely the point he was making, imo.

You're arguing about semantics, not science.
Viruses are naturally resistant to antibiotics because they're not biotic. I

So are you and your wrong.

I think some people are misunderstanding mikewsmith's point. It was fairly clear to me that he knows that viruses can't be treated by antibiotics, that's precisely the point he was making, imo.

You might be right!

a_a, that's the basis of mws's point - they don't respond to antibiotics (ie are resistant to their effects), so don't try to use them

(intrinsic resistance to antibiotics among bacteria too - it doesn't make those organisms not bacteria though)

If viruses are resistant to exorcism, we may as well give up 🙁

So people can write something that's completely wrong but if they happen to be your "mate" on the forum they obviously didn't mean it that way, Ernie. Sometimes this place... .

I didn't think that mikewsmith was my "mate" Edukator 😀

I read his post differently to the way you did. I took his use of the term "pesky" as further proof that he was being frivolous.

Don't be so grumpy. And you can be my "mate" if you want 😉

I didn't think that mikewsmith was my "mate" Edukator

Yes the post had a little sarcasm in it and was aimed at the people who ask for antibiotics for a cold and pester the doc until they get something. I'd have replied but it was overnight.

aP - Member
Don't eat meat then as crop animals are regularly dosed with antibiotics to help fatten them up.

I'm in the fragrance industry, which is closely related to pharmaceuticals and it's common knowledge now that there are no interesting new aroma molecules coming into the market. Even Astra Zeneca were complaining about this in the news recently. Simply put, every possible molecule has now been synthesised and (mostly) rejected. A guy I know who works for a pharma company told me: "The era of traditional drugs is about to end and bio-engineering is what it's all about now. Quite soon, when you get a bacterial infection, we will give the bacterium a virus, which will kill it."

Quite soon, when you get a bacterial infection, we will give the bacterium a virus, which will kill it.

GlobalTi - are you based in Ashford or the Wirral?

Simply put, every possible molecule has now been synthesised and (mostly) rejected.

However for protection against A/B resistant bacteria, new vaccines and (possibly) bacteriophage treatments as well as new small molecule drugs will be needed. People have been trying to develop phage treatments for 40 years though, with no real results yet.

Ashford or The Wirral? Ptew [i]*spits*[/i] no, Radcliffe, Manchester.

I had to go and look up bacteriophage. It sounds as if you know your onions!

What you say may be true in the pharmaceutical industry but in the fragrance industry it's the accepted wisdom that the big guns like IFF, Givaudan (formerly owned by Hoffmann-La Roche), Symrise and others are running out of new ideas. The increasing paranoia about safety is certainly not helping them at all.

I didn't know that there was a fragrance company based in Manchester. I'll look you up.

I suspect that the reason your industry is running short of ideas is that scent molecules have to be small enough to be volatile, with low-ish molecular weights. That does limit the variety. In addition, they have to get to the nose, so there are only so many molecular receptor shapes available.
In the pharma industry, drugs can be injected or implanted or eaten, so a larger variety of molecular sizes and shapes can be used.
You're right about safety concerns too.

This thread has moved on. Can anyone tell me why some people appear to have built up an immunity to the smell of their own cheap aftershave ?

Tolerance. Lynx becomes the new norm.
The same reason that some women use a plastering trowel to put make-up on, turning their faces into corpse-like masks.

The same reason that some women use a plastering trowel to put make-up on, turning their faces into corpse-like masks.

Ah yes, but I am reliably informed that UV from sunbeds is extremely effective at dealing with skin colonisation by resistant strains, which is why Essex folk will have the last laugh on you grimy northerners.

Nah, UV resistance is common in bacteria too (and Archea and Fungi for that matter) 🙂
In fact, radiation resistance, chemical resistance, any kind of resistance you can think of, all occur naturally. If they start conjugating with antibiotic-resistant pathogens we might have a problem...

UV resistance is common in bacteria too (and Archea and Fungi for that matter)

Not at Essex levels. It's like sitting inside the core at Bradwell Power Station.

On a serious note, the answer is that many fragrance molecules are fatiguing to the nose so after a while your sense of smell becomes dull, which is called temporary anosmia. The worst mistake you can make is to go and reapply the fragrance during the evening because you interfere with the evolution of topnote-middle-backnote and you overwhelm your fellow diners.

Some people are even anosmic to certain molecules in the same way that some people are colour-blind.

In addition, they have to get to the nose, so there are only so many molecular receptor shapes available.

I recommend you read The Emperor of Scent by Chandler Burr. It's about the maverick perfumer Luca Turin who believes we actually perceive odour molecules not by their shape but by their atomic vibration. In another later book Turin proves his theory, claiming that he knows how to make a non-discolouring vanilla molecule (the holy grail of the industry) but so far nobody has been sufficiently convinced to want to build a pilot plant and make the molecule.

I'd heard about the atomic vibration theory, and don't disbelieve. I'm not convinced about the cost of a pilot plant putting people off a new vanillin synthesis, because the potential upside is so huge.

a non-discolouring vanilla molecule (the holy grail of the industry)

😆