Film, Media & TV1 min ago
Antibiotics Resistance
I heard numerous times on the news today that it is a huge risk when all infections become resistant to antibiotics. This is obviously a major issue that needs to be addressed.
Are there already people working on finding a new antibiotic?
What would the implications be if no new antibiotics where produced?
How long on average does it take to produce such a drug?
Is there a way to still combat the strains of infection with the current antibiotics?
Thanks
Are there already people working on finding a new antibiotic?
What would the implications be if no new antibiotics where produced?
How long on average does it take to produce such a drug?
Is there a way to still combat the strains of infection with the current antibiotics?
Thanks
Answers
1 to 13 of 13
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by bobo101. 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.
There are people working on new antibiotics, both in the sense of totally new antibiotic classes,and in synthetically tweaking existing ones. Not enough people working on them though, and not enough pharmaceutical companies.
New drugs on average take anywhere between around 10-20 years from laboratory proof of efficacy through to being available on prescription.
The implications for medical treatments would be profound, ranging from serious infections of routine surgery cases through to decreased efficiency in treating cancers and other such neoplasms, since such aggressive treatment needs antibiotic support for the immune suppression such treatment causes.
STDs could also run rampant again - there are now antibiotic resistant strains of gonorrhea, for instance.
So cleanliness, isolation wards all become much, much more important.
Can we combat strains of infection with the current antibiotics? Yes, but more and more of the common infectious agents are developing strains which are resistant to antibiotics.
We are still relatively fortunate in that those bacteria that have developed antibiotic resistant strains are usually only resistant to 1 or 2 of the different classes of antibiotics, so we can usually find an alternative treatment - but the nightmare scenario would be a strain of gram-negative bacteria multiply -resistant to all the major classes of antibiotics, including the current class of last resort, the carbapenems.
Casual use of antibiotics in agriculture, the over-prescription of antibiotics by medical professionals, and the publics desire to receive a pill to cure what are usually transient infections that will clear up of their own accord within a few days to a week, regardless of the fact that antibiotics can be of no use whatsoever in treating viral illnesses, such as flu, for instance.....
Pharmaceutical companies require encouragement from governments to move the provision of new antibiotics much higher up the development agenda as a matter of urgency, otherwise we will find ourselves back in a medical health situation similar to our ancestors around the turn of the century...
New drugs on average take anywhere between around 10-20 years from laboratory proof of efficacy through to being available on prescription.
The implications for medical treatments would be profound, ranging from serious infections of routine surgery cases through to decreased efficiency in treating cancers and other such neoplasms, since such aggressive treatment needs antibiotic support for the immune suppression such treatment causes.
STDs could also run rampant again - there are now antibiotic resistant strains of gonorrhea, for instance.
So cleanliness, isolation wards all become much, much more important.
Can we combat strains of infection with the current antibiotics? Yes, but more and more of the common infectious agents are developing strains which are resistant to antibiotics.
We are still relatively fortunate in that those bacteria that have developed antibiotic resistant strains are usually only resistant to 1 or 2 of the different classes of antibiotics, so we can usually find an alternative treatment - but the nightmare scenario would be a strain of gram-negative bacteria multiply -resistant to all the major classes of antibiotics, including the current class of last resort, the carbapenems.
Casual use of antibiotics in agriculture, the over-prescription of antibiotics by medical professionals, and the publics desire to receive a pill to cure what are usually transient infections that will clear up of their own accord within a few days to a week, regardless of the fact that antibiotics can be of no use whatsoever in treating viral illnesses, such as flu, for instance.....
Pharmaceutical companies require encouragement from governments to move the provision of new antibiotics much higher up the development agenda as a matter of urgency, otherwise we will find ourselves back in a medical health situation similar to our ancestors around the turn of the century...
Put it this way. It will be like going back to 1900's if you pricked yourself with a rose gardening you could end up dying. There would be no treatment and it would only be chance if you lived. The woman would probably die during child birth due to infections. It would be like an apocalypse.
Pharmaceutical companies are not interested in making new antiiotics because there is not as much money in it as something like high blood pressure tablets that you take every day for the rest of your life.
Its the same as motor neurone disease there are no treatments because the treatment would not be profitable.
They are only interested in their own profits and do not give a monkey about humanity. The only way something will happen is if the Government tax more and pay for it. But all the governments are drowning in debt to a privatised bank.
Nothing will happen until it is too late. Its a terrible thing to say but it would be a good way of keeping the human population under control. On a personal level though it would be devastating and really dark times.
Pharmaceutical companies are not interested in making new antiiotics because there is not as much money in it as something like high blood pressure tablets that you take every day for the rest of your life.
Its the same as motor neurone disease there are no treatments because the treatment would not be profitable.
They are only interested in their own profits and do not give a monkey about humanity. The only way something will happen is if the Government tax more and pay for it. But all the governments are drowning in debt to a privatised bank.
Nothing will happen until it is too late. Its a terrible thing to say but it would be a good way of keeping the human population under control. On a personal level though it would be devastating and really dark times.
Think about this: everyone on antibiotics flushes their waste water into the drainage system, like everyone else. If this water is cleaned up and returned to the water supply ( as it is frequently in major cities, etc) the flushed-away antibiotics are not removed. Every time the water is cleaned and returned for re-use, the amount of antibiotics increases. By the way, so do female hormones, which possibly account for the recent drastic drop in sperm counts.
Perhaps the water companies should research for ways of removing pharmaceuticals from the water supply.
Perhaps the water companies should research for ways of removing pharmaceuticals from the water supply.
I think honeydip might be going a bit too doom and gloom, but in essence I agree with that post. Pharmaceuticals haven't really devoted nearly as much effort into new antibiotics as they should have, primarily for financial reasons.
In the long run we may be heading for danger but it's a way off because it's not just down to antibiotics that we are healthier. General medical practice has improved so, so much in the last century, cleanliness and so on, so that should be enough to keep in check and major health disasters for a while.
Even so the problem will get more and more acute so action is needed soon. Here's hoping that someone pays attention to this fact and gets cracking on a new antibiotic.
In the long run we may be heading for danger but it's a way off because it's not just down to antibiotics that we are healthier. General medical practice has improved so, so much in the last century, cleanliness and so on, so that should be enough to keep in check and major health disasters for a while.
Even so the problem will get more and more acute so action is needed soon. Here's hoping that someone pays attention to this fact and gets cracking on a new antibiotic.
This resistance build up has been known for a long time. Where there is money to be made you can be sure the pharmaceuticals are working towards being the one who profits. But progress takes it's own sweet time. And then there is the testing/approval stage.
Current antibiotics are already being used to fight infection, obviously, but the issue is that they are getting less effective. Without antibiotics, or a replacement breakthrough, we will find ourselves back many decades in terms of greater risk of infection, including during surgery.
Current antibiotics are already being used to fight infection, obviously, but the issue is that they are getting less effective. Without antibiotics, or a replacement breakthrough, we will find ourselves back many decades in terms of greater risk of infection, including during surgery.
Patents are protected, but a patented drug can cost the earth, because the company which develops it can charge anything they like, as they have the monopoly. There has to be a balance between letting the drug companies recoup their development costs, and letting the patients/NHS afford them. Fifteen years - probably about right.
Now that we are able to translate the genetic code of any organism in a very short space of time the tools are there to tackle the bacterium. It is not as though we are dealing with a completely new bacterium but with one that has mutated from the original. We just need to be aware of these mutations and take the necessary actions.
1 to 13 of 13
