Slashdot Mirror


Nobel Prize Awarded for Stomach Ulcer Discovery

gollum123 writes to tell us the BBC is reporting that the Nobel prize for medicine has been awarded to two Australian scientists for their work with ulcers. Their research has shown that the majority of ulcers are caused by bacteria and can be cured with a short-term course of drugs and antibiotics. From the article: "Dr Marshall proved that H. pylori caused gastic inflammation by deliberately infecting himself with the bacterium. The Nobel citation praises the doctors for their tenacity, and willingness to challenge prevailing dogmas."

64 of 291 comments (clear)

  1. 1982! by Stile+65 · · Score: 5, Informative

    The Nobel Prize committee is almost as slow as Slashdot. The actual discovery, per TFA, was made in 1982.

    --
    I claim first use of "Error No. 0B" - or "No. 0B error." It'll be the new ID 10T!
    1. Re:1982! by Sad+Loser · · Score: 5, Interesting

      This is cool becasue Barry Marshall was a junior doctor who saw something he couldn't explain and decided to investigate and test it, in classic geeky fashion. He even tested the theory by drinking H.Pylori and got the mother of all stomach aches afterwards.
      This proves that it is still possible to do great medical research in the mould (sorry) of Fleming and Penicillin, and you don't need a $100m research budget.

      He suffered a lot of problems getting the medical establishment to believe him, and it took at least 20 years, but once it did, the Nobel was bound to happen sooner or later.

      Good on you Bazza

      --
      Humorous signatures are over-rated.
    2. Re:1982! by slavemowgli · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Don't be silly. The Nobel prize is pretty much the highest award you can receive in the fields where it is awarded - so it's certainly understandable that the committee wants to make sure that those who receive the prize really *have* made a ground-breaking discovery that deserves the prize. And waiting for some time to see what influence a discovery will have is pretty much the only way to find out.

      That being said, yes, the discovery was made in 1982, but it wasn't even *confirmed* until 1987, so it's not just the Nobel prize committee, either.

      --
      quidquid latine dictum sit altum videtur.
    3. Re:1982! by mrogers · · Score: 5, Funny

      Stop bellyaching. It's a long journey from the first the germ of an idea to publishing a tract on the subject, digesting the feedback, ruminating on the implications, eliminating any remaining doubts and finally putting your theory to the acid test. Not everyone has the stomach for it.

    4. Re:1982! by Phreakiture · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The Nobel Prize committee is almost as slow as Slashdot. The actual discovery, per TFA, was made in 1982.

      Similar to what I was going to post. I have known this since 1996 or so, when I heard a presentation by a Dr. Barach. He was saying that the cure for ulcers is tetracycline (antibiotic) and bismuth. In short, antibiotics with a shot of Pepto-Bismol should do it.

      The trouble with Dr. Barach knowing this is that, being a veterinarian, he was forbidden to use this knowledge on people. We have this taboo, which is sometimes codified into law (as it was where he practiced) that one person cannot be licenced as both a DVM and an MD.

      --
      www.wavefront-av.com
    5. Re:1982! by VagaStorm · · Score: 4, Funny

      You know, if it takes 20 years to get the nobel and they dont give it post mortem.... well.... this might qualify you for a darwin rather than a nobel :p

    6. Re:1982! by dirtfox · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Perhaps another reason for delay in acceptance of these findings, was that up until the early 90's the * worlds biggest selling drug * was one that inhibits stomach acid production and under patent - unlike cheap as beans & generic broad spectrum antibiotics.

      Rather chilling when you consider one of the body's mechanisms of protection against bacteria is stomach acidity. Hence why European versions of this drug include the ancient antibiotic bismuth (also found in a famous pink stomach medicine)

      So treating a symptom and possibly making it worse in the long run; good business plan - almost as graceful as nicotine enlarging airways and easing breathing: early adverts recommended cigarettes as a cure for bronchitis!

    7. Re:1982! by Wannabe+Code+Monkey · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is cool becasue Barry Marshall was a junior doctor who saw something he couldn't explain and decided to investigate and test it, in classic geeky fashion.

      This is what religious fundamentalists/people who push intelligent design will never understand. From the article: The Nobel citation praises the doctors for their tenacity, and willingness to challenge prevailing dogmas. That's the beauty of true science, it's a quest for truth regardless of what was previously "known". If you discover something that conflicts with earlier thinking, not only are you recognized, but you're celebrated. This is because truth, not of centuries of tradition, is the motivating factor behind science.

      I mean, just think about what faith is... No matter how much evidence goes against what you believe, you will still believe it anyway. Simply because it was told to you by your parents and your local wizard. It must be pretty amazing that out of the hundreds of religions all over the face of the Earth you happened to be born into the one "right" religion. Science doesn't care where you come from, or who your parents are, it's all the same search for truth. Science is much more unifying than religion.

      --
      We always knew Comcast was corrupt, here's the proof: http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1909890&cid=34545432
    8. Re:1982! by kzinti · · Score: 2, Funny

      The Nobel Prize committee is almost as slow as Slashdot. The actual discovery, per TFA, was made in 1982.

      Yeah, but I bet the Nobel Committee only gives them the prize once.

    9. Re:1982! by DrHanser · · Score: 2, Informative

      What the fuck are you on about? H. pylori is treated with a combination of two drugs at a time. Usually amoxicillin and clarithromycin (Biaxin) or Amox + metronidazole (Flagyl). These aren't new or drugs specifically designed to target H. pylori. They're broad-spectrum antibiotics used for many things.

      --
      What is humor if not pain tempered by time?
    10. Re:1982! by cluckshot · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Remember this when you hear all the talk about cholestrol and the drugs to treat it.... (Just a hint)

      --
      Never Politically Correct ~ I prefer the facts If you don't like what I say, get a life, or comment yourself.
    11. Re:1982! by emh203 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In your statement above, replace intelligent design with macro evolution and religious fundamentalist with mainstream scientist and see how it reads. The guys fought against OTHERS IN THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY for YEARS trying to show that they were right. Religious fundamentalists arent the only ones to exhibit such closed minded properties. As I have stated in other posts, scientists have funding that are dependent on 'success'. I work at a research lab in academia. People aren't always after the truth. They are after way to make the funding keep coming in. I am not saying everyone is like this, but a scientific view that goes against the mainstream tends to loose funding. Your view of science of this happy place where everyone accepts new ideas no matter your background is somewhat naive.

    12. Re:1982! by Toutatis · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It does have its dupes too.

    13. Re:1982! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, you can do two things to have proper cholesterol and blood pressure.

      OPTION 1. Excersise. Muscle fat will cause more BP problems than fat on outside. Salt buildup is the major cause of high BP. Aerobic excercise for a few hours every week (you have to sweat :) will get rid off the salt builtup.

      For proper cholesterol, well, stop eating *#$#$#* crap fats. Cholesterol is made by your liver based on the type of fat you eat.

      Polyunsaturated fat - lowers total cholesterol levels
      Unsaturated fat - increases good cholesterol
      Saturated fat - increases bad cholesteros
      Transfat - liquid plastic that'll make sure you get a quad bypass.

      So excercise and eat good fats (poly/unsat to sat ratios matter. Good is olive oil. Bad is pig lard or coconat oil) instead of crap and your cholestorol and BP will be good.

      My BP used to be 160/90. Now excercising for two years and it is 110/70. Still have to watch the salt intake and if I eat too much I'll have to go "excrete" it, but whatever.Salt retention in the evolutionary time scale was a good thing because you need it to prevent dehydration hence most people's bodies tend to store too much of it. And now they eat too much of it and you have the results we have.

      OPTION 2. Get pills and pills for pills. You will need statins that can screw you liver. These will set you back a few hundred $$$ a year. Then you will need some high BP medication. That will set you back a little too. Now the problem remains with extra fat causing all sorts of problems including cancers. You will probably need drungs for that...

      Now you are old, fat on all sorts of drugs. Probably can't move around very well. Well, you will probably get some drugs so you can stare out the window.

      But whatever. Most people WILL chose the 2nd option because it *seems* easier. It is, in the short term. Very short term.

      A human body is a machine that will break if you DO NOT use it!

    14. Re:1982! by BigDukeSix · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Whilst I agree that drug companies (like all companies) are money-driven, the reasons for the lengthy acceptance time for this particular discovery are complex and rooted in the medicine:

      1) H. pylori is very common in the general population (not just people with ulcers). If it's a causative agent, why do comparatively few people with H. pylori get ulcers?

      2) The inflammation that makes un ulcer hurt also destroys H. pylori. Ergo, no bacteria in the ulcer under a microscope, and no bacteria on cultures.

      The drugs you mention were so successful because they, along with the work recognized by the Nobel committee, have largely eliminated the need for ulcer surgery, which used to be among the most common operations performed. In retrospect it seems obvious to look for an infectious etiology, but that's why they've been awarded the prize, I guess.

    15. Re:1982! by yorkpaddy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why do I need anyone to "approve" a drug for me. The FDA has no business telling me what I can and cannot put into my body. If I thought the guy had a point, why should the government tell me I can't take his medicine. Oh, thats right, I need a perscription, so someone else (a doctor) can tell me what I can and cannot put into my body. You people are quick to blame the big bad drug companies, but look at the FDA too. Big drug companies are the only ones that have the money to wade through the approval process, it is impossible for a small guy to get a drug approved and marketed on his own.

      --
      "brxref .k.p ,.by xprt. gbe.p.oycmaycbi yd. cby.nci.bj. ru yd. am.pcjab lgxlcj" don'
    16. Re:1982! by Fishead · · Score: 2, Funny

      This shbazjinkens is brilliant, he comes from out of nowhere, with no record of any education, and publishes AMAZING papers in various fields. He is a true genius. The only thing I don't understand, is why all of his research papers are sub-titled "First post! 1 R teh 3133 h4x0r5!!11!1eleven!!one!".

    17. Re:1982! by n6kuy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Hmmm..
      I'll bet what you need to make you feel better is some of Professor Smith's Patented Emulsified Snake Oil (cures all manner of discomfort and sickness, you know).

      Here, have a swig...

      --
      If you disagree with me on social issues, then it's pretty clear that you are a narrow-minded bigot.
    18. Re:1982! by matfud · · Score: 2, Interesting

      A ground-breaking discovery usually confers little to no "benefit to humanity" in the year it is made. Sometimes it does take decades for humanity to benefit from the discovery (and more importantly prove the discovery is valid).

      If the awards were given out in the manner you recommend then the two new Lauriates would never have received thier prizes. Thier discovery was not recognised in the year they made it. Just because it takes a long time to convince the medical comunity that your discovery is valid should not mean that you are inelegible for a prize.

      Wouldn't it be irritating if two amazing, world changing discoveries, were made in the same field in the same year (a cure for cancer and a vaccine for AIDS perhaps). Who would you pick? The way they currently allocate the awards they have a degree of flexibility

  2. Ughhh..... by segedunum · · Score: 2, Funny

    .....that's giving me indigestion.

  3. I'm surprised he didn't end up dead by SpacePunk · · Score: 4, Insightful

    He actually found a cause, and proposed a cure. Most modern barbers are happy to continually treat symptoms since that's what brings in the big bucks.

  4. Inflammation by iamplupp · · Score: 2, Informative

    This was one of the first discovieries but today we know that inflammation is the cause, or at least plays an important role, in lots if other diseases. Heart disease, rheumatism, diabetes, etc.

    1. Re:Inflammation by chinodelosmuertos · · Score: 2, Informative

      Inflammation isn't really the CAUSE, per se. Peptic ulcer is due to a hypersecretion of stomach acid. H. pylori attacks the D cells in the stomach that normally turn off acid secretion in the parietal cells. It probably directly affects ECL cells (they release histamine, a potent mediator for the release of acid) and also directly stimulates the HCl producing parietal cells as well. The acid doesn't really cause inflammation, it erodes the mucous protective layer in the stomach, which can either perforate through into your abdominal cavity, penetrate your intestines and create a fistula, or erode your stomach wall causing bleeding. The only way you'd really get inflammation is if you get irritation of your abdominal cavity, but then it's not just an ulcer, it's peritonitis due to your ulcer. So the problem with the ulcer per se isn't the inflammation. It's the erosion of the gastric lining leading to perforation or penetration.

      As for inflammation being involved in heart disease, rheumatoid and diabetes... Yes. Sorta. Heart disease slightly, depending on what heart disease you mean. Rheumatoid for sure. Type 1 diabetes is caused by an autoimmune attack on your pancreatic beta cells. Might cause a little inflammation but the attack is specific to the beta cells. (inflammation is a non-specific response to a foreign antigen) Type 2 diabetes... the kind fat people get.... not inflammatory at all. It's due to your peripheral body no longer responding to insulin (look up GLUT4 receptors if you want)

      Hope that cleared things up.
  5. Best way to find a cure... by Capt+James+McCarthy · · Score: 5, Funny

    Infect the researchers.

    --
    There are no loopholes. It's either legal or it's not.
  6. Obvious by simong_oz · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Possibly the best quote from a scientist ever (my emphasis):

    From another BBC article

    Mr Warren said he was a "little overcome" by the award.

    "It is nice to be officially recognised and it gives some sort of a stamp of approval, but we believed it within a few months because it was so bloody obvious," he told reporters.

    --
    "Because it's there." - George Mallory, when asked why he wanted to climb Mt Everest, March 18, 1923 (New York Times)
  7. Re:Now that's my kinda medicine by AKAImBatman · · Score: 4, Informative

    How stringent are the doctors in testing if you have an ulcer or not before handing out the drugs?

    They're usually not too bad on testing for the ulcer itself. Unfortuately, they are quite happy to hand out powerful drugs for anything that appears to be gastritis.

    The upshot is that the drugs they will give you (primarily antibiotics) are for short term use, and aren't that different from what they tend to give people "just in case". Though I have to wonder if some of the stomach damage isn't caused by reckless use of antibiotics. The human stomach is inteded to have a variety of bacteria to aid in digestion. Using antibiotics tends to nail ALL bacteria, including the stuff you want to keep.

    Yogurt with live cultures is a good way of replacing Acidophilus, but if you've recently had antibiotics, you might want to think about a bottle of bacterial supplements. These can be had in pill form, but you *must* keep it cold and pay attention to the expiration date.

  8. Re:Infected himself? by MichaelSmith · · Score: 4, Funny
    One of the doctors is from my home town of Adelaide, so I suspect another motive for the self infection...

    Boredom?

  9. About time! by ashridah · · Score: 4, Insightful

    About time this happened.

    My mother was the unfortunate sufferer of a stomach ulcer for almost 30 years of her life.

    One day, her doctor finds out she has it (after all, who keeps trying to fix a 30 year old condition that hasn't killed you yet?), and gives her the newly recognised course of broad-spectrum anti-biotics & neutralisers (since the stomach is kinda hard to treat, acidic n all, tends to destroy the anti-biotics before they have an effect ;) ), and a month later, she's fine!

    It's scary how long it took for the standard opinion to get torn down, and how simple the final answer really was! In hindsight, the original theory sounds decidedly suspicious. Stress, indeed.

    ashridah

    1. Re:About time! by TGK · · Score: 2, Interesting

      After his work in .au, the good doctor came to work at the University of Virginia (just up the road from me) where he treated, among other people, a fair chunk of my wife's family. It seems the bacteria in question is rampant throughout the ground water system in Natural Bridge VA.

      Re-infection can be a serious problem for people in areas like that. Apparently much of his work at UVA dealt with susceptibility studies and clustering. Fascinating guy.

      --
      Killfile(TGK)
      No trees were killed in the creation of this post. However, many electrons were inconvenienced.
  10. Ouch by Seoulstriker · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's too bad that the Nobel Prize was created to reward promising new scientists and to give them enough funding to continue pursuing their research unabated. I know that the society deviates from its original purpose, but the fact still remains that the Nobel Prize selection procedure is about 10-20 years too late to make the impact it was designed for.

    --
    I am defenseless. Use your button. Mod me down with all of your hatred.
    1. Re:Ouch by IWannaBeAnAC · · Score: 5, Interesting
      That is completely wrong. Perhaps you are thinking of the Fields Medal in mathematics? That is sometimes described as the 'mathematics equivalent of the Nobel prize', but the selection criteria is quite different; it recognizes both existsing work and future potential, and you have to be aged 40 or under to receive it.

      The Nobel prize, on the other hand, is awarded purely for groundbreaking research, usually on the basis of a single seminal piece of research but sometimes something more like a 'lifetime acheivement' award. In almost all cases, it is awarded long after the original research, when the impact can be properly judged in the historical context. For many Nobel lauriates, the work they received the prize for was an exception in an otherwise ordinary career. And in some cases, (the physics prize for the 3K microwave cosmic background comes to mind) the recipents were not actually scientists, but just stumbled upon the discovery by accident.

    2. Re:Ouch by reverseengineer · · Score: 2, Informative
      From Alfred Nobel's will:
      "The whole of my remaining realizable estate shall be dealt with in the following way: the capital, invested in safe securities by my executors, shall constitute a fund, the interest on which shall be annually distributed in the form of prizes to those who, during the preceding year, shall have conferred the greatest benefit on mankind. The said interest shall be divided into five equal parts, which shall be apportioned as follows: one part to the person who shall have made the most important discovery or invention within the field of physics; one part to the person who shall have made the most important chemical discovery or improvement; one part to the person who shall have made the most important discovery within the domain of physiology or medicine; one part to the person who shall have produced in the field of literature the most outstanding work in an ideal direction; and one part to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses. The prizes for physics and chemistry shall be awarded by the Swedish Academy of Sciences; that for physiology or medical works by the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm; that for literature by the Academy in Stockholm, and that for champions of peace by a committee of five persons to be elected by the Norwegian Storting. It is my express wish that in awarding the prizes no consideration be given to the nationality of the candidates, but that the most worthy shall receive the prize, whether he be Scandinavian or not."
      (Emphasis mine) Now, according to Nobel's will, it would appear that his original intention was for prizes to be given for discoveries made, works published, or actions taken in the previous year, more of an "MVP" award than a "Hall of Fame." Looking at the first few laureates in each category, however, it is clear that the prize foundation more or less ignored this idea and gave prizes for work that was relatively recent, but not necessarily from the previous year. Several of the earliest physics prizes, awarded at the turn of last century, for example, were awarded for discoveries made in the late 1890s. However, it's difficult to argue that Roentgen, the Curies, etc., were not deserving recipients. And delaying the prize for a few years is basically necessary if you want to award it for theoretical research of any sort- Albert Einstein won a Physics Nobel in 1921 for work he did in 1905- the committee wouldn't want to give it to him in 1906 and then find out in 1907 that his paper explaining the photoelectric effect was deeply flawed.

      For some of the other prizes, the award has been used to honor both recent and lifetime achievement. The literature prize, for example, has been given both for an outstanding career of work and largely on the strength of a single work. The peace prize is probably the one most often given within a couple years of the action worthy of honor (something that occasionally turns sour for the committee, as when a celebrated peace accord crumbles a few years later), but the peace prize has often also been given to the founders of various philanthropic and peace-promoting agencies, whose benefit to the world may only become apparent after years or decades of service.

      The parent is absolutely correct in that the work leading to a Nobel is not always representative of a laureate's entire career- an extreme example of this is the share of the 1994 Economics Nobel for John Nash, who of course was 1. not a career economist and 2. sidelined by mental illness for several decades. Sometimes a single paper is all it takes to win a Nobel, rather than some comprehensive program of research lasting years.

      --
      "FDA staff reviewers expressed concern about the number of patients who were left out of the study because they died."
  11. Dr Marshall is my Hero by Herbst · · Score: 5, Funny
    "Dr Marshall proved that H. pylori caused gastic inflammation by deliberately infecting himself with the bacterium."

    Smart thinking. You either get a Nobel Prize or a Darwin Award. A win-win situation.

  12. Well... by Seoulstriker · · Score: 2, Informative

    They are actually indeed caused by stress. When your immune system's function is severely inhibited during long-term stress, your body's ability to fight bacterial infection is weakened to the point that H. pylori can easily reside in your stomach and cause the ulcer.

    So, stress is involved, albeit indirectly.

    --
    I am defenseless. Use your button. Mod me down with all of your hatred.
  13. Bacteria?!? by Talisman · · Score: 3, Funny

    And all this time I thought it was the pizza, beer, nachos and salsa I cram into my face daily. Now that I know it's bacteria, I have to make a call for some anti-biotics...and another double pepperoni!

    --

    "Study your math, kids. Key to the universe." -The Archangel Gabriel
  14. Re:willingness to challenge prevailing dogmas by top_down · · Score: 2, Informative

    Willingness is not the problem. Disproving evolution would make you famous and rich. The problem is the enormous amount evidence against you:

    http://talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-mustread.html

    --
    Anyone who generalizes about slashdotters is a typical slashdotter.
  15. Dr. Marshall in Perth by zaguar · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Dr. Marshall worked for my dad while he was in Perth. My father said that he was not especially brilliant, although competent - but he was extremely hard-working. Perhaps this is why he did get the Nobel Prize.

    --
    "Sure there's porn and piracy on the Web but there's probably a downside too."
  16. Re:My kingom for... by aug24 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Peppermint oil.

    Seriously - been on them for a week, no symptoms. Not a cure, but a hell of a better life.

    J.

    --
    You're only jealous cos the little penguins are talking to me.
  17. Bleeding ulcers, anyone? by HBI · · Score: 2, Informative

    Ever heard of a bleeding ulcer, vomiting blood and all? Yes, people have died from this.

    The only reason you don't hear about this anymore is the cause is known now. It was a very serious problem when I was a kid.

    --
    HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
  18. Nobel Prize in Physics Awarded Also... by warmgun · · Score: 2, Informative
    The Nobel prize in Physics has been awarded also: http://nobelprize.org/

    According to the schedule on the website, chemistry gets awarded tomorrow and peace on Friday.

  19. Re:So Ulcers.. by Phreakiture · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So Ulcers . . . Are not caused by stress?

    Peeve alert: starting sentences in the subject line and finishing them in the body is annoying. Just so you know.

    Anyway, what I really am posting about, though, is that stress weakens the immune system, giving the bacteria the ability to take hold. There are other, similarly-behaved things, such as eczema (a skin affliction), which is viral, but will mostly only manifest when you are stressed badly.

    --
    www.wavefront-av.com
  20. Diagnosing "Conditions", not finding Causes by Wills · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Years before this discovery was made, stomach ulcers like so many other health problems always used to be labelled by the doctors as a "stress" or "lifestyle" related condition, without any proof that anything more definite than that was really directly responsible. Even to this day, it is amazing that medicine still has literally thousands of loosely-defined medical "conditions" and "syndromes" which have no known specific cause but which are nonetheless given proper names for doctors to use as convenient diagnostic labels. Doctors are still trained to diagnose these "conditions", rather than to think harder about possible underlying cause(s). The two scientists in this story were brave enough to challenge the conventional wisdom of their peers that stress and lifestyle factors cause stomach ulcers. It's interesting to wonder how many other "conditions" are actually caused by undetected bacteria or viruses which are waiting to be discovered by scientists prepared to challenge the prevailing dogma.

    1. Re:Diagnosing "Conditions", not finding Causes by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Mod parent up.

      This is a very insightful view of what is a real problem with the current practice of medicine . There are many 'syndromes' that are considered to be triggered by lifestyle when actually there are deeper root causes. All too much of medicine is based on statistical studies that show correlations - and correlations do not in any way provide causality.

      The real breakthrough in the discovery of a bacterial cause of ulcers is the spotlight it places on the worth of really finding the root cause of a problem rather than just hand waving and correlative studies. Hopefully the medical profession and medical research takes this lesson seriously because it provides a path to real progress in treatment of many debilitating serious chronic diseases. We spend too much time treating symptoms rather than auses and it drives the cost of medical care sky high.

  21. I thought... by AgentPhunk · · Score: 5, Funny

    He infected /himself/? I thought that was what TA's and Post-grads were for.

  22. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  23. Diagnosis and treatment by DarkFencer · · Score: 2, Informative

    Fortunately, this is a very easy thing to diagnose and treat. I'd never had a problem with heartburn, but in the past several months it has become unbearable. The doctor gave me a blood test for H. Pylori, which came with very high levels of the bacteria

    I'm actually currently taking a treatment for it. One of the common ones is a combination of three drugs. Two antibiotics (for me Amoxicillin and Clarithromycin), and a PPI (Proton Pump Inhibitor - like Nexium, Protonix, or a few others - I'm taking Prevacid).

    The only draw back to the treatment is its a LONG 14 days of strong medicine. Makes your stomach feel horrible to say the least.

    But the point is, I'd rather a couple weeks like this, then years of popping antacids. My thanks go out to these pioneers.

  24. Interesting book on experiments by elgatozorbas · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Be coincidence I read about this research a week ago in a book called "Das Buch der verrückten Experimente" ('The book of weird experiments'). When looking for a gift for a geek or if want to have an interesting read yourself, look no further. About ALL weird experiments you have ever heard ebout, and many more are described in there (Milgram experiment, prisoner/guard experiment, rat race, spiders on drugs, biological warfare, chances of having sex with complete strangers,...).

    I am not sure if there is an English translation, but the web site has some excerpts.

  25. It sounds like 19th century medicine by deuterium · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "We propose that this condition is not precipitated by an agitated state of humors, but by tiny microbes". The stress model of disease has always been a bit too subjective and artificial for me. Stress is still generically cited as being responsible for heart disease and depression. It's not even so much that stress is blamed, but the assumed endpoint of a personal reaction. Stress is supposedly something we can control... a reaction to the events of our day. Treating as it presently is, it's almost like a supernatural power. Stress may be associated with events and feelings, but it's also a cascade of chemical messengers that are amenable to study. Why not dig deeper into what reactions and dynamics the release of glucocorticoids and norepinephrine induce? There is a medical prejudice against things brain related. If diabetes was primarily associated with a mood disorder, would it have been researched as well? I guess the special case argument for the ignorance of microbes in ulcers has to do with the assumption that bacteria don't grow well in the environment of the stomach, but still. Any identifiable condition that is currently written off as an intangible artifact of one's personality type seems ripe for rediscovery, and there are still plenty, especially in gastroenterology and physchiatry. It's no surprise to me that this discovery was in the GI field. It's this lack of basic research that keeps open a market for herbalists, homeopaths, and their ilk.

  26. Re:Nobel awarded on merit of utility or tenacity?? by chinodelosmuertos · · Score: 5, Informative
    Hmm. You sorta opened a can of worms here. A couple of issues here.

    First: Does H. pylori eradication lead to increased incidence of Barrett's esophagitis and esophageal cancer? Maybe. The jury is still out. The Japanese have just published a pretty comprehensive review (Japanese Journal of Clinical Medicine. 63(8):1383-6, 2005 Aug)on the subject. The increase in one may be more common with the eradication of the other. Fine. Are they casually related? That's a more complex question that I think the research is sorta investigating. I dont think Scientific American really has the answer.

    But that's not the major issue. Stomach ulcer is a condition that PRIOR to the triple treatment (bismuth + antibiotics + acid inhibitors) would take months to years to heal. Some anecdotal stories as long as 6 years. More. Sometimes never. Leading to serious, serious complications that have even worse prognoses. You see what I'm getting at here. Quality of life years lost are huge, affecting huge chunks of the population. Known risk of causing stomach cancer, perforation of your guts (think your guts spilling into your abdominal cavity) and iron deficiency due to chronic bleeding just for a start. Now we're saying... OK. It MAY result in reflux, eosophageal cancer and Barrett's (cells in your eosophagus changing morphology).

    Hardly the "eliminating H. pylori is worse than the symptoms created by too much of it." If anything, what this might suggest is that there might be some unwanted complications to altering the internal milieu of the stomach, and they should be addressed. Full stop. Sky's not falling yet, pal.

  27. So much for the "purple pill" by csoto · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Drug companies don't like this kind of science (i.e.. that actually gets to the science behind the illness). Antibiotics are a few bucks for an entire course. They want you on chronic meds, not "cured."

    --
    There exists no way of exchanging information without making judgments. --Bene Gesserit Axiom
  28. Re:Nobel awarded on merit of utility or tenacity?? by ethics13 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Excellent points... however... I had an H. Pylori infection and no ulcer. Doc gave me strong AB's and after the regiment, my stomach WAS worse off. The key here is to add PRO-Biotics because the regiment of AB's kills ALL bacteria (bad: H. Pylori as well as good: L. Acidophilus, L.Rhamnosus,L. Plantarum, B. Longum and B. Bifidum,,etc...). After I returned and told my doc that I feel even worse than before, he just told me to get some Pro-bio's. The key here is to take the AB's alongside with PB's and you will be fine.

  29. Faith vs. Dogma by Stu+Charlton · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I mean, just think about what faith is... No matter how much evidence goes against what you believe, you will still believe it anyway.

    Faith is an essential means to remain optimistic in an uncertain world. Faith is belief in the face of doubt / the absurd. Faith is arguably very important to scientific discovery, lest one doubt their hypotheses.

    On the other hand, blind believe in the face of evidence strikes me more as dogmatism. And there certainly has been a lot of that in the history of science.

    --
    -Stu
    1. Re:Faith vs. Dogma by eraserewind · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, certainly there is dogmatism in science. Scientists are human after all, and have concious and unconcious biases. The thing about science though is that it is able to overcome these human flaws (even if it might often take longer than one would hope). The dogma in this case was overturned after all, in spite of (m|b)millions of dollars worth of antacid industry and established scientific wisdom saying it shouldn't be.

    2. Re:Faith vs. Dogma by @madeus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Faith is an essential means to remain optimistic in an uncertain world. Faith is belief in the face of doubt / the absurd. Faith is arguably very important to scientific discovery, lest one doubt their hypotheses.

      Faith however, is not essential and I would argue it's not particularly desirable. I prefer to practice realism (to the best of my ability) than delude myself with a reality distortion field built on expectations that are by definition unrealistic and founded on false premises.

      You can still be a kind, generous, altruistic and forgiving person and not have faith, but because you believe it's an appropriate way to behave and has net benefits (in that it can be beneficial to you, and to society as a whole because it encourages reciprocal behaviour, as indeed it does).

      Those pushing religion tend not to be keen on that idea though, they prefer to push the notion that you need to latch on to a specific 'faith' system to support you lest you fall of the wagon. I believe that approach is misguided and potentially dangerous.

      'Faith' as a solution is at best a kludge and at worst a red herring, that can lead down a dark path with disastrous repercussions on a global scale. Addressing root causes such as inequality, injustice, and persecution are more effective approaches at dealing with the things that drive people to 'faith' based groups in the first place.

      I do not believe the world can ever be 'a perfect place' - history and logical deduction seem to suggests otherwise, as any social environment that relies on co-operation also leaves open the opportunity for another to profit by shafting others in the group, meaning there will always be an incentive not to co-operate (The Scorpion and the Frog) - and that's to say nothing of human nature, chemical imbalances and behaviour in exception circumstances.

      There is clearly room for significant improvement in the way we interact with each other, particularly on a global scale however I do not believe faith based systems are an effective means of progression to that point. The acceptance of an unfavourable circumstance and a logical extrapolation of the most effective way to resolve an issue are more helpful than any system based on sheer optimism.

      With specific regard to:

      Faith is arguably very important to scientific discovery, lest one doubt their hypotheses

      I think if you don't have any doubt about your hypotheses there is something seriously wrong with your approach. Even if your right you ought to have doubts about it and set out to prove yourself wrong until you are certain you are right, that's how hypotheses progress to being regarded as 'proven'.

  30. mitochondria by smazzle · · Score: 5, Informative

    It's similar to Lynn Margulis' discovery that the mitochondria were originally their own organism and have since been integrated into our cells. She first made that claim in the 1980's, and only now has it started to become accepted dogma. It takes time to change minds, and she's still working on it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynn_Margulis

    1. Re:mitochondria by Phae · · Score: 3, Funny

      Wait, we've known all that about Midichlorians since the 80's, and we still don't have any real Jedi?

  31. This is great! by WormholeFiend · · Score: 2, Funny

    But can someone tell me which drugs and antibiotics I should give to my PHB in order to cure my ulcers?

  32. Re:COLD FUSION research will be awarded with Nobel by shis-ka-bob · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Cold fusion is far from real, at least the Pons and Fleischmann style of fusion in duterium doped palladium. If you are going to produce a meaasureable amount of heat from nuclear fusion, you are going to produce a measureable amount of neutrons. I used to work for the DOE and we spend months carefully trying to reproduce P&F's work. We noted an excess of counts in the neutron detectors only once, and that was during a thunderstorm when the electronics could be expected to be exposed to electrical noise. The BF3 detectors can produce spurious counts and they are very sensitive to changes in the discriminator threshhold, so this wasn't a surprise. We found no excess of neutrons within the limits of our detectors.

    Concerning an excess of heat. Don't forget that putting interstitial hydrogen into a metal is an exothermic process. We could generate heat, in fact we scared the h*ll out of ourselves with one of the 'deuterium gas in titanium' experiments. It generated so much heat that we were afraid about the strenght of the container. Pure hydrogen exploding into air could really ruin your day. This also produced counts in a neutron detector, but these were consistent with the known temperature sensitivity of the detectors. So, we did see heat, but only heat that could be understood in terms of basic chemistry.

    I will state that I was rather skeptical of the whole topic, but I did work for the DOE and I would have been happy to be proven wrong. Free, clean energy is worth more than my pride. So, even if the odds were a million to one against success, the DOE is justified in studying this topic. There just were not results that could be reproduced. As Fermi noted, 'Anything worth doing once is worth doing twice.' If you can't do it twice, it isn't science.

    Please, prove that this works. But extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence. Finding a way to overcome nuclear forces (potential barriers of millions of electron volts) with electrostatic forces at THERMAL energies (tens of milli electron-Volts)is an extraordinary. Perhaps something like sonoluminescence can produce very high localised temperatures in a jar of water, but this produces light with a few electron volts. The probability of particles tunneling across a barrier varies as exp( -E/kT) as long as E is millions of electron volts and kT is around 60 meV, you have a number like exp(-10^7). These basic considerations make CF an extraordinary claim. Where is the extraordinary evidence?

    --
    Think global, act loco
  33. are heart disease and cancer infections too? by peter303 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This Nobel-winning research open up some people's minds that other chronic diseases might be due to infectious agents also. Some people have suggested that artery plaques and inflamation- the precursors of heart attacks and strokes- might be caused by germs such as a variant of the clymadia bacteria. Some people suspect a role in cancer too. Only a couple of cancers are known for sure such as Karposis and Hep-C liver cancer, but others are suspected. Considering that decades of low-level research havent firmly resolved the issue one way or the other, its still somewhatof an open question. Should the answer be "yes, some", then other kinds of phrophlactic treatments could be suggested.

  34. Short term course of antibiotics by MythoBeast · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I think that this label is a little misleading. If memory serves, the "short term" course of drugs and antibiotics involves four different antibiotics used in pairs over several months. Heliobacter are some truly resilient critters. You have to use them in pairs partially because the heliobacter become resistant, and partially to avoid completely ruining your intenstinal ecology.

    Admittedly, this is short term compared to the years of antibiotics that some people wind up using, and it's better than living with an ulcer for the rest of your life.

    --
    Wake up - the future is arriving faster than you think.
    1. Re:Short term course of antibiotics by wk633 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There are several that they can use, but it was only two weeks with one antibiotic for my wife. It was a strong antibiotic to be sure, and in some rare cases you have to do a second treatement, but normally one works. They also give prevacid or something similar at the same time, but that's just for the symptoms.

  35. Great science on the cheap by euthman · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well, it took two decades, but Robin Warren and Barry Marshall are finally being honored for making sense of something we pathologists had all seen right in front of our noses but ignored.

    What I really love about their work is that it was done with the conventional clinical tools that had been available to pathologists and gastroenterologists for decades, even in non-academic venues. Their example illustrates that great work can still be done without employing multimillion-dollar labs, big grants, and multi-institutional cooperative groups.

    --
    Ed Uthman, MD
    Pathologist, Houston/Richmond, TX, USA
  36. Fat Science trumps Fat PROPAGANDA! by nido · · Score: 3, Informative
    ... I was looking for comments to spend my mod points on, but they'll have to wait.

    For proper cholesterol, well, stop eating *#$#$#* crap fats. Cholesterol is made by your liver based on the type of fat you eat.

    Polyunsaturated fat - lowers total cholesterol levels
    Unsaturated fat - increases good cholesterol
    Saturated fat - increases bad cholesteros
    Transfat - liquid plastic that'll make sure you get a quad bypass.


    Much more important is to stop eating ALL polyunsaturated oils (hydrogenated oils/transfats are usually made from polyunsaturated oils), and replace them with saturated oils.

    Fats that are less-than-fully-saturated quickly go rancid when exposed to oxygen.

    The saturated fat in beef has been slandered in recent years as being unhealthy. It's not that the beef itself is unhealthy, but that most beef cattle are raised with an unatural diet that includes a great deal of polyunsaturated fats, in the form of grains/soybeans in feedlot animal feed.

    Coconut Oil and its Virtues
    The Cholesterol Myths: Exposing the Fallacy That Saturated Fat and Cholesterol Cause Heart Disease. (intro chapter in PDF form)
    The Tragic Legacy of CSPI (Center for Science in the Public Interest - instigated the anti-saturated fat campaign of the 1980's)
    Also see the rest of the articles on fat at the Weston A. Price foundation site.
    One reason the polyunsaturates cause so many health problems is that they tend to become oxidized or rancid when subjected to heat, oxygen and moisture as in cooking and processing. Rancid oils are characterized by free radicals--that is, single atoms or clusters with an unpaired electron in an outer orbit. These compounds are extremely reactive chemically. They have been characterized as "marauders" in the body for they attack cell membranes and red blood cells and cause damage in DNA/RNA strands, thus triggering mutations in tissue, blood vessels and skin. Free radical damage to the skin causes wrinkles and premature aging; free radical damage to the tissues and organs sets the stage for tumors; free radical damage in the blood vessels initiates the buildup of plaque. Is it any wonder that tests and studies have repeatedly shown a high correlation between cancer and heart disease with the consumption of polyunsaturates New evidence links exposure to free radicals with premature aging, with autoimmune diseases such as arthritis and with Parkinson's disease, Lou Gehrig's disease, Alzheimer's and cataracts.
    -The Skinny on Fats
    --
    Learn the rules so you know how to break them properly.
    www.teslabox.com
  37. worthless doctors by nido · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's kind of funny - I've just be going along, living my life.. Then a couple years ago I "develop" a typing injury. Bump from one incompetent M.D. to another. I didn't think they were incompetent at the time, they just didn't know how to help me.

    Finally I end up going to an Doctor of Osteopathy who specializes in Osteopathic Manipulation. He's like, "yeah, you're fucked up. I can fix you, no problem." And he does his ten-fingered medicine, and I slowly but magically start to feel better. Neat.

    And over the course of the treatments, I realize that my being "fucked up" didn't start with the typing injury, or the head injury which preceded it by a year. My mom reminded me constantly last fall of what a "difficult baby" I was, as I was always crying for not provocation. Especially compared to my younger brother, who "would just coo...". I was crying because I hurt - "mom, please help". Mom takes me to my M.D. pediatrician, "nothing's wrong with him, he'll grow out of it." It's kind of weird to realize that I've been "fucked up" for my entire life - I have no idea what it means to be normal.

    While it's true that some osteopaths go to D.O. school because they're somewhat easier to get into, more and more students are CHOOSING D.O. colleges because they believe in the philosophy. My Osteopath discovered the benefits of Osteopathy when a D.O. took away back pains that he'd had since injuring his back in a martial arts class 7 years earlier. 3 visits. Now he has the occasional patient who's been dealing with a health problem for TEN YEARS, and he's able to fix them in a single visit.

    My D.O. isn't cheap. Unless you consider what I would go through with an M.D. - expensive tests, expensive drugs, expensive surgery. So, when I look at how I could be throwing money at not getting any better (at worthless tests, worthless drugs, and worthless surgery), I'm perfectly happy with his payment policy (cash or check, $175/20 minute visit, bill your own insurance).

    --
    Learn the rules so you know how to break them properly.
    www.teslabox.com