Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Antibiotic Drugs Infiltrate Public Waterways

Posted by timothy on from the that-doesn't-sound-good dept.

foobsr writes "ScienceDaily in an article points to research conducted at Colorado State University which produces evidence that antibiotics used for animal growth stimulation are making their way into the environment, among them three ionophore antibiotics exclusively used in agricultural applications."

5 of 38 comments (clear)

  1. Might this cause super-bacterium? by ezraekman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    A few years ago, there was a concern/rumor making the rounds that anti-bacterial soap would cause super-strains of bacteria to appear, having built up resistances to the soaps we use. A roommate asked me once if I thought this meant he should stop using the stuff. At the time, I answered by asking him if he should leave his doors unlocked, to prevent thieves from becoming smarter. However, now that antibiotics have made it out into the environment in a much larger scope, I'm forced to re-think my answer. Any thoughts?

    1. Re:Might this cause super-bacterium? by Dr.+Cody · · Score: 4, Interesting

      No antibiotic soaps, no antibiotic growth-enhancers, and if you are prescribed antibiotics, don't stop taking them just because you got better.

      Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't "anti-bacterial," in the context of soap, just as much bullshit as "pH balanced" or "...for women"? (that is to say, purely a marketing term) From what I understand, soap is a rather nasty thing for all household bacteria, and a label such as "anti-bacterial" could be applied at will.

      Add to that, as long as I've lived, I have never recognized an antibiotic's name on a bar of soap's ingredients list.

    2. Re:Might this cause super-bacterium? by ctr2sprt · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Just because some bacteria mutates to become immune to our existing drugs doesn't mean we can't find a new drug. After a hundred years of not using any of 2004's best antibiotics, the new bacteria might just be vulnerable to the stuff we've got now, too, even if it's become immune to the next generation of drugs we develop. And as we understand more about the biology of the situation, in particular how bacteria react in the human body and such, it's possible we can develop "contrasting" drugs. So you first treat an infection with Drug A. This drug is designed to force the bacteria to evolve in a particular way, which makes it vulnerable to Drug B. Drug B does the same but for Drug C. And so on until you remove the bacteria's ability to resist Drug A and you start over again. I'm not sure how plausible or near-term that is, but I can imagine it, so it's not a complete load!

      I should probably shut up, as I'm obviously no biologist. But I have faith that, for the time being at least, medical science is capable of keeping up with this sort of problem.

  2. Re:Disclaimer: by dunkelfalke · · Score: 4, Interesting

    no, you got it wrong.

    antibiothics are often broadband so they not only kill bacteria which cause the illness but also the bacteria human body needs (like the ones in the digestive tract).

    bacteriophages on the other hand kill only special bacteria strains. so we can cure the illness but leave the good bacteries safe.

    --
    Conservatism: The fear that somewhere, somehow, someone you think is your inferior is being treated as your equal.
  3. Don't forget the Prozac in our water supply... by nano2nd · · Score: 5, Interesting

    From the UK newspaper The Observer back in the summer..

    Stay Calm Everyone!

    Prozac, albeit tiny amounts, now exists in our rivers and groundwater.

    --
    G4 Hackintosh