Doctors Panic as Anti-Biotic resistant diseases pose 'apocalyptic' threat - Polidicks

[quote] Britain's most senior medical adviser has warned MPs that the rise in drug-resistant diseases could trigger a national emergency comparable to a catastrophic terrorist attack, pandemic flu or major coastal flooding. Dame Sally Davies, the chief medical officer, said the threat from infections that are resistant to frontline anti biotics was so serious that the issue should be added to the government's national risk register of civil emergencies. she described what she called an "apocalyptic scenario" where people going for simple operations in 20 years' time die of routine infections "because we have run out of antibiotics". The register was established in 2008 to advise the public and businesses on national emergencies that Britain could face in the next five years. The highest priority risks on the latest register include a deadly flu outbreak, catastrophic terrorist attacks, and major flooding on the scale of 1953, the last occasion on which a national emergency was declared in the UK.[/quote] [B]More in source[/B] [URL]http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/jan/23/antibiotic-resistant-diseases-apocalyptic-threat[/URL] No surprise really, I can't wait to see the look on peoples faces who don't care if they have chlamydia and it can't be treated. I recommend this documentary as well, its hard to find though [url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01ms5c6[/url]

forgot the source? [url]http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/jan/23/antibiotic-resistant-diseases-apocalyptic-threat[/url] [editline]24th January 2013[/editline] oh fuck you changed it

that's one hell of a sensationalist title honestly, it makes a lot of sense for this to be considered a national emergency, considering how reliant we are on them

Should really implement phage therapy. It is more targeted and difficult to produce than antibiotics, but much harder to defend against. A bacteriophage is a virus that finds a certain type of cell and then injects its own code into the cell. It is hard, if not flat out impossible, for a bacteria to evolve to defend against it because it relies on simple brute force to accomplish its objective. The fun thing about them is that you can alter what cells they target and even alter what code they inject. So they can cruise around and basically pump only the cells you want them to with bad DNA and either disable them completely or remove their ability to reproduce. A few cancer treatments in testing currently use this method. The downside is that you have to first figure out specifically what bacteria is the problem. Then you have to culture the phage. The upside is obviously that it is nearly impossible for the target bacteria to resist and there are no side effects, regardless of dosage. The phage has almost no interaction with your body with the exception of destroying the intended cells. Good stuff.

[QUOTE=GunFox;39344984]Should really implement phage therapy. It is more targeted and difficult to produce than antibiotics, but much harder to defend against. A bacteriophage is a virus that finds a certain type of cell and then injects its own code into the cell. It is hard, if not flat out impossible, for a bacteria to evolve to defend against it because it relies on simple brute force to accomplish its objective. The fun thing about them is that you can alter what cells they target and even alter what code they inject. So they can cruise around and basically pump only the cells you want them to with bad DNA and either disable them completely or remove their ability to reproduce. A few cancer treatments in testing currently use this method. The downside is that you have to first figure out specifically what bacteria is the problem. Then you have to culture the phage. The upside is obviously that it is nearly impossible for the target bacteria to resist and there are no side effects, regardless of dosage. The phage has almost no interaction with your body with the exception of destroying the intended cells. Good stuff.[/QUOTE] Viral engineering doesn't have the best of PR, unfortunately.

[QUOTE=Rents;39345389]Viral engineering doesn't have the best of PR, unfortunately.[/QUOTE] Hey, they managed to use it in some experimental leukemia treatment recently didn't they? IIRC they had of all things modified HIV rewire someone's white blood cells to attack the cancerous cells.

[QUOTE=GunFox;39344984]Should really implement phage therapy. It is more targeted and difficult to produce than antibiotics, but much harder to defend against. A bacteriophage is a virus that finds a certain type of cell and then injects its own code into the cell. It is hard, if not flat out impossible, for a bacteria to evolve to defend against it because it relies on simple brute force to accomplish its objective. The fun thing about them is that you can alter what cells they target and even alter what code they inject. So they can cruise around and basically pump only the cells you want them to with bad DNA and either disable them completely or remove their ability to reproduce. A few cancer treatments in testing currently use this method. The downside is that you have to first figure out specifically what bacteria is the problem. Then you have to culture the phage. The upside is obviously that it is nearly impossible for the target bacteria to resist and there are no side effects, regardless of dosage. The phage has almost no interaction with your body with the exception of destroying the intended cells. Good stuff.[/QUOTE] So the virus doesn't reproduce or die?

[QUOTE=luck_or_loss;39345581]So the virus doesn't reproduce or die?[/QUOTE] I assume the virus would use the targeted bacterial cells for replications without touching the host, as bacteriophages are specifically designed to target prokaryotic cells and I don't think any are capable of infecting eukaryotic cells. After the bacterial infection has been exhausted, I assume the viruses would simply become inert and eventually be passed or broken down by the body.

Drug-resistant bugs are a huge problem these days. Makes me wonder how much of it is because of prescribed antibiotics and how much of it is a result of people spazzing the fuck out and reaching for hand sanitizer every time they touch a door knob. Also, flu epidemics are anything but. I've never seen a flu that can take out healthy individuals, and as I look back into the past, there hasn't been one capable of such things in decades. Modern flu epidemics are an absolute farce, I wish the media would stop mentioning them entirely.

I don't trust any kind of phage after what those lizards did to us, Shepard.

[url=http://www.crazymonkeygames.com/Pandemic-2.html]After practicing for countless hours, I have finally succeeded![/url]

[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;39349814][url=http://www.crazymonkeygames.com/Pandemic-2.html]After practicing for countless hours, I have finally succeeded![/url][/QUOTE] Sorry, Madagascar cut itself off too soon. Good try, though.

This is important, people. If we don't take steps to improve our understanding of the importance of antibiotics, then in ten years time we'll have to replace them with fecal transplants. See: [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fecal_transplant[/url] They're very effective against even antibiotic-resistant infections, but do you really want to walk around with someone else's crap inside you? Think about it for a little.

Yes, i do. If it saves your life you shouldn't care how "disgusting" it is.

[QUOTE=Rents;39345389]Viral engineering doesn't have the best of PR, unfortunately.[/QUOTE] [URL="http://www.ted.com/talks/ellen_jorgensen_biohacking_you_can_do_it_too.html"]TED talk on the present public view and recent developments in public access to viral engineering.[/URL]

[QUOTE=GunFox;39344984]Should really implement phage therapy. It is more targeted and difficult to produce than antibiotics, but much harder to defend against. A bacteriophage is a virus that finds a certain type of cell and then injects its own code into the cell. It is hard, if not flat out impossible, for a bacteria to evolve to defend against it because it relies on simple brute force to accomplish its objective. The fun thing about them is that you can alter what cells they target and even alter what code they inject. So they can cruise around and basically pump only the cells you want them to with bad DNA and either disable them completely or remove their ability to reproduce. A few cancer treatments in testing currently use this method. The downside is that you have to first figure out specifically what bacteria is the problem. Then you have to culture the phage. The upside is obviously that it is nearly impossible for the target bacteria to resist and there are no side effects, regardless of dosage. The phage has almost no interaction with your body with the exception of destroying the intended cells. Good stuff.[/QUOTE] The real question is: Can we develop and refine those methods to replace penicillin in time?

[QUOTE=Im Crimson;39352481]The real question is: Can we develop and refine those methods to replace penicillin in time?[/QUOTE] Only if we can convince our politicians to force big pharmaceutical companies into the research and development of the technology. In the event of a global pandemic risk, it would be understandable for the government to require responsibility and support from the biggest beneficiaries of the medical 'industry'.

[QUOTE=TestECull;39346409]Drug-resistant bugs are a huge problem these days. Makes me wonder how much of it is because of prescribed antibiotics and how much of it is a result of people spazzing the fuck out and reaching for hand sanitizer every time they touch a door knob.[/QUOTE] The main problem is that antibiotics are treated as a "miracle medicine" and gets used constantly even when it has no effect. This happens in many cultures across the world. It's gonna take a massive effort to convince people in India that penicillin doesn't help against a regular virus-induced cold.

Well I guess it's time to never leave the house again. :tinfoil:

[QUOTE=tharmas;39351383]This is important, people. If we don't take steps to improve our understanding of the importance of antibiotics, then in ten years time we'll have to replace them with fecal transplants. See: [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fecal_transplant[/url] They're very effective against even antibiotic-resistant infections, but do you really want to walk around with someone else's crap inside you? Think about it for a little.[/QUOTE] Couldn't you technically just store your own healthy poop in case you get infected with poop disease and then put in back in there? i am not a doctor

Thankfully there are still some new antibiotics out there, and we can also use some old antibiotics, though they have the downside of worse side effects, so we have breathing space at the moment.

[QUOTE=TestECull;39346409]Drug-resistant bugs are a huge problem these days. Makes me wonder how much of it is because of prescribed antibiotics and how much of it is a result of people spazzing the fuck out and reaching for hand sanitizer every time they touch a door knob. Also, flu epidemics are anything but. I've never seen a flu that can take out healthy individuals, and as I look back into the past, there hasn't been one capable of such things in decades. Modern flu epidemics are an absolute farce, I wish the media would stop mentioning them entirely.[/QUOTE] it's more likely the idiots who start taking antibiotics then stop when they "feel fine" or even worse, people who take other people's antibiotics because they feel unwell it's like the first thing you learn in biology GCSE, and yet half the people you ask wouldn't have a clue

Make a formula for permanent immunity then,you are rich

[QUOTE=TestECull;39346409] Also, flu epidemics are anything but. I've never seen a flu that can take out healthy individuals, and as I look back into the past, there hasn't been one capable of such things in decades. Modern flu epidemics are an absolute farce, I wish the media would stop mentioning them entirely.[/QUOTE] That's what we're worried about though; antibiotics-resistant diseases are threatening mainly those who are not healthy. Elderly, surgery patients and people with immune-suppressing illnesses/medication are the ones who will be in trouble when "super-bacteria" lands them with things like pneumonia and blood-poisoning and there are no antibiotics around to save them. The common bacteria developing resistance is the most immediate problem caused by incessant use of antibiotics. In other words grandma dies from an otherwise trivial disease because someone was popping penicillin to get rid of a sore throat.

Dat sensationalist title