He Who Saves His Country Does Not...
Society & Culture1 min ago
A Bit Scary - Isn't It ?
http://
//Prof Davies said: "It is clear that we might not ever see global warming, the apocalyptic scenario is that when I need a new hip in 20 years I'll die from a routine infection because we've run out of antibiotics." //
//Prof Pennington said the drugs companies had run out of options too as all the easy drugs had been made.
We have to be aware that we aren't going to have new wonder drugs coming along because there just aren't any.//
Answers
1 to 20 of 20
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Bazile. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Well a rather unfortunate reference to global warming because it will detract from what is a very real problem.
However before WWII there were no anti-biotics in general use and yes a lot of people died then who would not die now but it wasn't the colapse of civilisation.
It is very scary and action needs to be taken but I'm not sure that words like appocalypse are well advised
However before WWII there were no anti-biotics in general use and yes a lot of people died then who would not die now but it wasn't the colapse of civilisation.
It is very scary and action needs to be taken but I'm not sure that words like appocalypse are well advised
"lot of people died then who would not die now but it wasn't the colapse of civilisation. "
Yeah, but the problem is not only that (thanks to the indiscriminate abuse of antibiotics) there are resistant strains of bacteria, it's also that (thanks to the obsession of spraying everything in sight with chemicals that "kill 99% of all known germs") people today are less resistant to ordinary bacteria.
Yeah, but the problem is not only that (thanks to the indiscriminate abuse of antibiotics) there are resistant strains of bacteria, it's also that (thanks to the obsession of spraying everything in sight with chemicals that "kill 99% of all known germs") people today are less resistant to ordinary bacteria.
Well, this was the cry 60 years ago and the situation hasn't deteriorated in my opinion........the pharmacologists will always be one step ahead of the pathogenic organisms.
What has changed is hospital antisepsis which has deteriorated markedly in my opinion. Deterioration in cleanliness in hospitals is the main cause of antibiotic resistance.
What has changed is hospital antisepsis which has deteriorated markedly in my opinion. Deterioration in cleanliness in hospitals is the main cause of antibiotic resistance.
Again - any evidence for that?
I wouldn't argue that it could accelerate it but to cite it as a main cause seems unlikely - Darwinian evolution is the main cause!
Remember MRSA was first identified in the early 80s so if you're citing it as the *cause* the decline in hospital sterrilisation would have to be prior to that
I wouldn't argue that it could accelerate it but to cite it as a main cause seems unlikely - Darwinian evolution is the main cause!
Remember MRSA was first identified in the early 80s so if you're citing it as the *cause* the decline in hospital sterrilisation would have to be prior to that
Interesting 'prequel' article from July last year:
http://
http://
jake-the Peg
\\\Remember MRSA was first identified in the early 80s so if you're citing it as the *cause* the decline in hospital sterrilisation would have to be prior to that\\\
No, no, much earlier than that....in the late 50's.
There has always been antibiotic resistance to drugs since 1949 when Streptomycin was introduced. When very rarely saw drug resistance at the scale that we have until the 80's and there has then been a sudden acceleration.
I am not suggesting that poor hygiene is the only cause, as transference was well known in the 60's, but no, the sudden acceleration of resistance has coincided with the adulteration in hospital standards.
Links, statistics can be misleading as what happens in vitro does not necessarily happen in vivo and before you ask for "evidence"I am relying on memory and experience with all the reservations that go with them.
\\\Remember MRSA was first identified in the early 80s so if you're citing it as the *cause* the decline in hospital sterrilisation would have to be prior to that\\\
No, no, much earlier than that....in the late 50's.
There has always been antibiotic resistance to drugs since 1949 when Streptomycin was introduced. When very rarely saw drug resistance at the scale that we have until the 80's and there has then been a sudden acceleration.
I am not suggesting that poor hygiene is the only cause, as transference was well known in the 60's, but no, the sudden acceleration of resistance has coincided with the adulteration in hospital standards.
Links, statistics can be misleading as what happens in vitro does not necessarily happen in vivo and before you ask for "evidence"I am relying on memory and experience with all the reservations that go with them.
I think Prof. Pennington has a point. We are at a rather dangerous point right now with respect to the treatment of bacterial infections, and there are few if any new antibiotics being developed by the pharmaceutical companies right now.
Not sure that I would categorise the risk as a civilisation ending, but it is definitely cause for concern.
Not sure that I would categorise the risk as a civilisation ending, but it is definitely cause for concern.
Meant to add this link to a 2 year old article in the daily beast. Quite balanced and informative, I think.
http://
http://
rojash //chemicals that "kill 99% of all known germs" //
Exactly. What becomes of the other one percent?
It isn't about lowering resistance of people to ordinary bacteria but the resistance developed to antibiotics by species of organism that reproduce every few minutes.
It also turns out that sample of bacteria gathered from the pre-antibiotic era already had the resistance. The advent of antibiotics simple made them more prevalent.
The other aspect is that led to global resistance is the global connectedness of human populations who can spread every variant of a disease across the planet in a few weeks.
As some famous scientist said, we live in the age of microorganisms, it always has been and always will be.
Exactly. What becomes of the other one percent?
It isn't about lowering resistance of people to ordinary bacteria but the resistance developed to antibiotics by species of organism that reproduce every few minutes.
It also turns out that sample of bacteria gathered from the pre-antibiotic era already had the resistance. The advent of antibiotics simple made them more prevalent.
The other aspect is that led to global resistance is the global connectedness of human populations who can spread every variant of a disease across the planet in a few weeks.
As some famous scientist said, we live in the age of microorganisms, it always has been and always will be.
Prof Davies ought to be aware that folk can already see global warming affects.
As for antibiotics, well that issue has been known for a while. Either science comes up with a breakthrough, and Lord knows we seem to be progressing fast these days, or we temporarily fall back to where we were before we had that advantage, and have to wait for the breakthrough to occur. Computer simulation and distributed computing should allow complicated drugs to be discovered. Sad news on an individual basis but not a major hit for the species as a whole, I'd bet.
As for antibiotics, well that issue has been known for a while. Either science comes up with a breakthrough, and Lord knows we seem to be progressing fast these days, or we temporarily fall back to where we were before we had that advantage, and have to wait for the breakthrough to occur. Computer simulation and distributed computing should allow complicated drugs to be discovered. Sad news on an individual basis but not a major hit for the species as a whole, I'd bet.
I do not think it will necessarily be a species threatening event, but make no mistake it is serious. The CDC in the US state that more people die from antibiotic resistant infections than die from breast and prostate cancer combined - around 90,000 per year.
http://
And whilst it is true that we are developing new drug discovery techniques etc, it is also true to say that all the major classes of antibiotics have been derived from bacteria themselves - and now we are pretty much down to one class of antibiotic, the carbapenems, to treat infections refractory to all the others. Even here there is some anecdotal evidence to suggest that some bacteria are beginning to develop resistance.
Pharma companies tend to focus their research efforts into the more profitable areas, and antibiotics are not considered profitable. The future antibiotic pipeline is pretty dry right now. There was a golden period of antibiotic development in the immediate aftermath of WW2 and up to around the mid 60s, but then no new antibiotics were introduced until around 2000 or so.
When you look back at the pre-antibiotic age, some of the leading causes of death were infectious diseases - cholera, TB and the like. Now, sanitation, clean water and hygiene will help in that fight, but antibiotics played a very big part indeed.
http://
And whilst it is true that we are developing new drug discovery techniques etc, it is also true to say that all the major classes of antibiotics have been derived from bacteria themselves - and now we are pretty much down to one class of antibiotic, the carbapenems, to treat infections refractory to all the others. Even here there is some anecdotal evidence to suggest that some bacteria are beginning to develop resistance.
Pharma companies tend to focus their research efforts into the more profitable areas, and antibiotics are not considered profitable. The future antibiotic pipeline is pretty dry right now. There was a golden period of antibiotic development in the immediate aftermath of WW2 and up to around the mid 60s, but then no new antibiotics were introduced until around 2000 or so.
When you look back at the pre-antibiotic age, some of the leading causes of death were infectious diseases - cholera, TB and the like. Now, sanitation, clean water and hygiene will help in that fight, but antibiotics played a very big part indeed.
Sounds all the more reason for government to fund research rather than let commercial firms chase profits and ignore public needs that show little promise of high profit.
Surely there has to be a limit as to how much protection can be included in a simple organism. As a non-expert it seems to me if evolution keeps adding defences either the organism is forced to cope with more complexity or it loses some existing defences it rarely uses. At any point there ought to be something vulnerable to attack.
Surely there has to be a limit as to how much protection can be included in a simple organism. As a non-expert it seems to me if evolution keeps adding defences either the organism is forced to cope with more complexity or it loses some existing defences it rarely uses. At any point there ought to be something vulnerable to attack.
@OG You are right wrt Governments funding research into antibiotics. In the US and UK you will find government initiatives in terms of tax breaks and financial inducements to encourage companies to spend more developing new antibiotics, and in the medium term that might produce some results.
It is that period in-between where we might struggle.
As far as organisms retaining their cumulative immunity- I am not sufficiently expert myself. It might, hypothetically speaking, be possible to withdraw the use of one class of antibiotics for a decade or so. In that time, the bacteria that are currently resistant to that specific class of antibiotic might be weakened by having contributors who have had no need to have that resistance - but I am not sure it works that way :)
Its a question I think of better and more targeted use of antibiotics, looking again at the use of antibiotics in livestock, and educating the public better on what antibiotics are good for. Then cross our fingers and hope :)
It is that period in-between where we might struggle.
As far as organisms retaining their cumulative immunity- I am not sufficiently expert myself. It might, hypothetically speaking, be possible to withdraw the use of one class of antibiotics for a decade or so. In that time, the bacteria that are currently resistant to that specific class of antibiotic might be weakened by having contributors who have had no need to have that resistance - but I am not sure it works that way :)
Its a question I think of better and more targeted use of antibiotics, looking again at the use of antibiotics in livestock, and educating the public better on what antibiotics are good for. Then cross our fingers and hope :)
It all comes down to the question: Do you want to live forever? You may not be able to do much toward your life now, except make it more purposeful, better and happier, while entertaining a hope for the future. But you can choose now how long you want to live in ‘the life that is to come.’ (1 Tim. 4:8)
1 to 20 of 20
Latest Posts
Why Are Labour Trying To Shield The...
News2 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles4 mins ago
ChatterBank7 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles7 mins ago