Antibiotic resistance: World on cusp of 'post-antibiotic era'

This doesn't sound good.

The world is on the cusp of a "post-antibiotic era", scientists have warned after finding bacteria resistant to drugs used when all other treatments have failed.

Bacteria becoming completely resistant to treatment - also known as the antibiotic apocalypse - could plunge medicine back into the dark ages.

A commentary in the Lancet concluded the "implications [of this study] are enormous" and unless something significant changes, doctors would "face increasing numbers of patients for whom we will need to say, 'Sorry, there is nothing I can do to cure your infection.'"

www.bbc.com...

I hope they fix this problem. A world without Antibiotics would be a tough one indeed.

a reply to: neoholographic

The first step is raising awareness and educating people on when and how to take antibiotics. Restricting use, avoiding "blanket antibiotics" as much as possible (antibiotics that are prescribed when you aren't sure what you're dealing with, in the hope that it will work, or at least inform you on what the infection is (or is not).

There is/was research on HIV that suggested viruses will revert back to susceptible ("wild") strains when no longer exposed to drugs. However, bacteria acquire new traits such as resistance in a different way that makes it harder to wipe out any given trait. Managing the issue of antibiotic resistance may be the best we can hope for, rather than a full fix. But scientists have done amazing things before, so who knows.

a reply to: neoholographic

This doesn't sound good.

Well, use that quantum power of consciousness to create the world you're always going on about, and put a stop to it.

a reply to: neoholographic

it is not all gloom and doom. Currently 36 new antibiotics are under investigation. Of the 36 antibiotics in development, eight were in phase 1 clinical trials, 20 in phase 2, and eight in phase 3. At least two antibiotics in early development attack bacteria in an entirely new way by sidestepping the resistance of some bacteria to available antibiotics. At least 16 of the antibiotics, if approved, could address infections caused by pathogens considered an “urgent threat” to public health by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. These include drug-resistant gonorrhea, Clostridium difficile infections, and carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteria.

some links:
link1

link2

originally posted by: Alexithymia
a reply to: neoholographic

The first step is raising awareness and educating people on when and how to take antibiotics. Restricting use, avoiding "blanket antibiotics" as much as possible (antibiotics that are prescribed when you aren't sure what you're dealing with, in the hope that it will work, or at least inform you on what the infection is (or is not).

There is/was research on HIV that suggested viruses will revert back to susceptible ("wild") strains when no longer exposed to drugs. However, bacteria acquire new traits such as resistance in a different way that makes it harder to wipe out any given trait. Managing the issue of antibiotic resistance may be the best we can hope for, rather than a full fix. But scientists have done amazing things before, so who knows.

No the first step is banning the use of antibiotics on farm animals. For instance the recent bacterial resistance to colistin has only been found on Chinese pig farms.
www.wired.com...

Because colistin was so toxic, China never approved it for use in humans. So who used it? Pig farmers. Feeding pigs low doses of antibiotics fattens them—a practice common throughout the world, though usually with different antibiotics. China, the world’s largest pig producer, was the biggest consumer of the 12,000 tons of colistin used in framing each year.

The thing about bacterial resistance to antibiotics is that it accelerates when bacteria can easily be transmitted from one host to another - it lets the different varieties of bacteria easily interact with each other and share new mutations. This is why you will see new resistance quicker in farm animals who are kept in mass communities in filthy living conditions than you will in humans who can chose to stay home when they get sick and isolate themselves form others, and also (usually) have much better hygiene than farm animals.

Banning the use of antibiotics in farm animals would be far, far more effective at maintaining the effectiveness of antibiotics than rationing their use for humans which would have a relatively negligible impact. However this would put the agricultural industry in an uproar so they make scapegoats out of consumers.

It's all about money. Your well-being doesn't matter as long as big industry can continue to line it's pockets by selling you bacon and ham.

Well..that's not entirely true. What you will find, is that the pharmaceutical industry isn't interested in anything they cant make billions of dollars off of, because each new drug cost a billion dollars to pass FDA approval and promotion.

There so happens to be a Non Drug, that is probably safer than any current antibiotic, that kills All Pathogens, with little or no adverse affect to the patient...Tetrasilver Tetroxide (AG4O4) www.google.com...

It is literally an electric silver compound, that as it passes through the blood, electrocutes pathogens as they are drawn to it, like a magnet. Because each micron particle of the AG4O4 carries a 6 volt charge.

To simplify what the compound is, its literally the same compound that's in Silver Oxide watch batteries and smart cards, invented by the same man in Israel..Dr. Marvin S. Antelman.

Ive used the stuff, but it must be introduced into the blood for it to work.

Alexander the Greats Medicine men used to burn silver and mix it with a white Volcanic clay, and it would quickly heal up serious battle wounds...So, for Science to say they have nothing to combat the most horrific infections..its Ludicrous

Stop giving them to cows and anther animals ! ! !
yes thats what they do...
even when they are not sick!
!

a reply to: peskyhumans

That is a fair point and would fall under restricting use, which is one of the things I said. Restricting use doesn't have to mean just what doctors prescribe and pharmacies sell to people. It includes things like antibacterial soaps and the use of antibiotics in farm feed. As a vegetarian (born and raised such), I don't contribute to the meat industry anyway. You certainly did your research, which is fantastic.

originally posted by: Alexithymia
a reply to: neoholographic

The first step is raising awareness and educating people on when and how to take antibiotics. Restricting use, avoiding "blanket antibiotics" as much as possible (antibiotics that are prescribed when you aren't sure what you're dealing with, in the hope that it will work, or at least inform you on what the infection is (or is not).

There is/was research on HIV that suggested viruses will revert back to susceptible ("wild") strains when no longer exposed to drugs. However, bacteria acquire new traits such as resistance in a different way that makes it harder to wipe out any given trait. Managing the issue of antibiotic resistance may be the best we can hope for, rather than a full fix. But scientists have done amazing things before, so who knows.

From what little I know of the subject, most of the issue of resistance actually comes from us pumping them into our food on a mass scale. Taking them for an infection has little to no impact on how fast they're adapting to medicine.

That said, a couple months ago I was extremely sick. It took 5 rounds of antibiotics to cure me over 6 weeks, and the first two were completely ineffective. This is a problem that's going to get worse as time goes on.

Evolution is a b*.

Edit: Reading the rest of the thread, someone else said the same thing as me. Oh well.