Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microbe Found In Grassy Field Contains Powerful Antibiotic

Posted by samzenpus on from the backyard-cure dept.

sciencehabit writes For much of the last decade, a team of researchers in Boston has eagerly exhumed and reburied dirt. It's part of a strategy to access an untapped source of new antibiotics—the estimated 99% of microbes in the environment that refuse to grow in laboratories. Now, their technique has yielded a promising lead: a previously unknown bacterium that makes a compound with infection-killing abilities. What's more, the team claims in a report out today, the compound is unlikely to fall prey to the problem of antibiotic resistance. That suggestion has its skeptics, but if the drug makes it through clinical trials, it would be a much needed weapon against several increasingly hard-to-treat infections.

84 comments

  1. Will it treat the "Allahu akbar!" infection? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    One can only hope.

    1. Re:Will it treat the "Allahu akbar!" infection? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      The cure for that would also fix "Jesus is Lord" infection too.

    2. Re:Will it treat the "Allahu akbar!" infection? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The cure for that would also fix "Jesus is Lord" infection too.

      And how many people were murdered over Piss Christ?

      That would be ZERO.

    3. Re:Will it treat the "Allahu akbar!" infection? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades

    4. Re:Will it treat the "Allahu akbar!" infection? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And how many people were murdered over Piss Christ?

      How many die in Africa from sexually transmitted disease that is preventable through prophylactic use of condoms?

      Your mistake was assuming that the things that upset Muslims to irrational behavior and violence would also have a parallel in Christianity. Huge cultural difference between the people of those two religions, but both are harmful to society and quite insane.

    5. Re:Will it treat the "Allahu akbar!" infection? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades

      Pathetic loser attempts to use events of a thousand fucking years ago to justify and excuse Islam-inspired mass murder just a few hours ago.

      Dude, you have a Thalidomide brain.

    6. Re:Will it treat the "Allahu akbar!" infection? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Additionally, all those unvoluntarily concieved children the church always wanted but doesn't feed, resulting in them dying of hunger.

    7. Re: Will it treat the "Allahu akbar!" infection? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not? The microbe in the grassy knoll was the real Kennedy shooter.

    8. Re:Will it treat the "Allahu akbar!" infection? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Every sperm is sacred.
      Every sperm is great.
      If a sperm is wasted,
      God gets quite irate.

    9. Re:Will it treat the "Allahu akbar!" infection? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How many die in Africa from sexually transmitted disease that is preventable through prophylactic use of condoms?

      Religion is not really the problem. The real problem is ancient tribal culture that says real men have lots of children, a cultural belief that predates the adoption of christianity.

    10. Re:Will it treat the "Allahu akbar!" infection? by hey! · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Pathetic loser attempts to use events of a thousand fucking years ago to justify and excuse Islam-inspired mass murder just a few hours ago.

      Dude, you have a Thalidomide brain.

      Well then, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Norway_attacks.

      5% of the general population are sociopaths; 1% are psychopaths. So in any sufficiently large group you you will find plenty of individuals acting in deplorable ways -- even horrifically deplorable. Christians, Muslims, rural Southerners, lesbian golfers, people who like avocados -- any group is bound to have it's share of monsters.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    11. Re:Will it treat the "Allahu akbar!" infection? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Africa has more Catholics than all of Europe. Religion, and specifically Christianity is a factor here.
      And the Church's stance on the issue of anything that can function as a contraceptive is well known.

      I'm not sure why you are trying to apologize for the Catholic Church with misleading statements about tribal customs that are nearly universal among cultures, including that of the vast majority of Christianity. All you did was argue that all religion and superstitious is a problem, which I suspect was not your intention.

    12. Re:Will it treat the "Allahu akbar!" infection? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pathetic loser attempts to use events of a thousand fucking years ago to justify and excuse Islam-inspired mass murder just a few hours ago.

      Dude, you have a Thalidomide brain.

      Well then, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Norway_attacks.

      5% of the general population are sociopaths; 1% are psychopaths. So in any sufficiently large group you you will find plenty of individuals acting in deplorable ways -- even horrifically deplorable. Christians, Muslims, rural Southerners, lesbian golfers, people who like avocados -- any group is bound to have it's share of monsters.

      Beslan

      9/11

      Madrid

      London

      Mumbai.

      Funny, you mention sociopaths and psychopaths.

      And your one example is a lone killer.

      Got the stones to look at the images resulting from acts ORGANIZED and PLANNED by GROUPS in the name of ISLAM that I found in about 30 seconds?

    13. Re:Will it treat the "Allahu akbar!" infection? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Got the stones to look at the images resulting from acts ORGANIZED and PLANNED by GROUPS in the name of ISLAM that I found in about 30 seconds?

      In every war the US has gone into the president has mentioned God.
      Or does that not count because the government isn't and organized group that planned things?

    14. Re:Will it treat the "Allahu akbar!" infection? by davester666 · · Score: 1

      It totally fixes both. You just stuff the dirt with these microbes into their mouth until it is full. Then they need to snort the remainder of the dirt through their nose. Five minutes after the nose is full, the person is cured.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    15. Re:Will it treat the "Allahu akbar!" infection? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have yet to see anyone explain to me the difference between sociopaths and psychopaths. Two words for the same thing.

    16. Re:Will it treat the "Allahu akbar!" infection? by MrNiceguy_KS · · Score: 1

      IANA psychologist, but here's the armchair difference as I understand it: Sociopathic behavior is driven by some misguided version of self-interest, whereas psychopathic behavior acts without regard to self-interest. For a simple (over)generalization, if you piss off a murderous sociopath, he will stalk you and attempt to kill you at a time and in a manner where he believes he's most likely to get away with it. If you piss off a murderous psychopath, he will likely attempt to kill you immediately with whatever he happens to have at hand, up to and including strangling you with his bare hands in front of a group of law enforcement officers.

      --
      Redundancy is good And also good.
    17. Re:Will it treat the "Allahu akbar!" infection? by eric_harris_76 · · Score: 1

      Especially those who like avocados.

      --
      There's no time like the present. Well, the past used to be.
    18. Re:Will it treat the "Allahu akbar!" infection? by beastofburdon · · Score: 1

      "All you did was argue that all religion and superstitious is a problem, which I suspect was not your intention."

      I don't know if it was their intention, but it damn sure is mine. All religions need to go they way of Zeus and be remembered as nothing more than a fanciful myth.

  2. The hard part is yet to come by Dorianny · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Finding things that kill bacteria is easy. Finding things that kill bacteria and do not significantly harm the host, now that is the hard part.

    1. Re:The hard part is yet to come by beelsebob · · Score: 4, Informative

      That's exactly what they claim to have found (at least so far in tests on mice). They also assert that they think it would be extremely difficult for MRSA to adapt to this drug, as it would require a fundamental change in the structure of it as being a gram positive bacteria.

    2. Re:The hard part is yet to come by Dorianny · · Score: 4, Informative

      Finding things that kill bacteria is easy. Finding things that kill bacteria and do not significantly harm the host, now that is the hard part.

      That's exactly what they claim to have found (at least so far in tests on mice). They also assert that they think it would be extremely difficult for MRSA to adapt to this drug, as it would require a fundamental change in the structure of it as being a gram positive bacteria.

      I should have specified a human host. Biotech is littered with drugs that seems to work great on test animals but have serious side effects on humans.

    3. Re:The hard part is yet to come by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the beauty (well, such as it is) of the rapid evolving and gene sharing of bacteria. They assert it would be difficult for MRSA to adapt to this drug ... until it does in a way that is a one-in-a-trillion shot (in other words, in the world of microbes, extremely likely).

    4. Re:The hard part is yet to come by Shakrai · · Score: 2

      Finding things that kill bacteria is easy.

      Like handguns? :D

      Finding things that kill bacteria and do not significantly harm the host, now that is the hard part.

      Details.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    5. Re:The hard part is yet to come by poetmatt · · Score: 1

      You highlighted the exact real issue:

      "What they claim to have found".

      It will take years to actually even start to identify the damage this new antibiotic may have on the body. From a medical perspective we are still in the process of assessing just how harmful existing antibiotics are on the body for example.

    6. Re:The hard part is yet to come by gbjbaanb · · Score: 2

      I suppose we can feed it to farmed animals in great quantities instead of the usual antibiotics we feed them in great quantities.

      (note there are strict withdrawal periods for all animals coming up to slaughter to ensure the antibiotics used in their feed is not present in the meat)

    7. Re:The hard part is yet to come by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >From a medical perspective we are still in the process of assessing just how harmful existing antibiotics are on the body for example.

      A non-issue. Or are you against, say, high-dosage chemotherapy too?

    8. Re:The hard part is yet to come by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I do suffer from petri dish cancer, you insensitive clod!

    9. Re:The hard part is yet to come by pesho · · Score: 5, Informative

      You didn't read the paywalled article, did you?

      The antibiotic blocks the bacterial cell wall synthesis. Animals don't have this particular cellular component, so the drug is essentially inactive against humans. This was shown by doing tests on mice. There is the possibility that the drug may elicit allergic response in humans (penicillin often does), but this will be tested in clinical trials.

      The more exciting part of the work that did not get any mention in the summaries is how they found the antibiotic. They developed an approach to grow on a large scale microorganisms that were previously impossible to culture in lab conditions. They capture the microorganisms on a chip and then put the chip back into the environment from which the samples was isolated. This means that they did not need to guess what kind of nutrients each microorganism will need (they tested ~10,000 different microbes). The approach allowed them to grow 50 fold more microorganisms compared to what was possible using the current state of the art. To me this is the big news, because antibiotic discovery has been limited by our ability to grow microorganisms in the lab.

    10. Re:The hard part is yet to come by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      That's exactly what they're claiming. From TFA:

      Moreover, these pathogens failed to develop resistance to the compound: There were no surviving individuals that had evolved to withstand its attack. (Resistance usually develops when a small percentage of microbes escape an antibiotic because of a mutation and then those bacteria multiply.) Lewis initially took this total devastation as a discouraging sign—the mark of “another boring detergent.” (Bleach, after all, is a strong antibiotic, but it’s a little too effective at killing any surrounding cells.) However, it turned out that the new compound, which the group named teixobactin, was not toxic to human cells in a dish.

      Yes there haven't been human trials yet, but that's very promising.

    11. Re:The hard part is yet to come by dpilot · · Score: 1

      I thought I read that they tested it against cultured human cells in a petri dish, without bad side-effects. That's not whole-animal testing, but it's better than no human testing at all.

      --
      The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
    12. Re: The hard part is yet to come by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MRSA hasn't evolved to resist 60% ethanol solutions. What makes you think bacterial genetics would lead to easy resistance for fundamental targets like protein denaturation?

    13. Re:The hard part is yet to come by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Finding things that kill bacteria is easy. Finding things that kill bacteria and do not significantly harm the host, now that is the hard part.

      I think a much harder part is getting people to stop taking antibiotics for every stupid little illness under the sun. I know people that run to the doctor for a prescription when they get a bad cold.

      Word to the wise for those "hooked" on taking anitbiotics so foolishly: "Grow up...and grow a pair while you are at it."

      Now, if we can only control the unlimited introduction of antibiotics into our food supply through animal feeds. Yes, I know that is a "first world problem", but how much food produced in "first world countries" is also exported to less fortunate countries?

    14. Re:The hard part is yet to come by icebike · · Score: 2

      Finding things that kill bacteria is easy. Finding things that kill bacteria and do not significantly harm the host, now that is the hard part.

      The hardest part might be finding patients willing to spend a year dead and buried in some random field just to cure a case of jick itch.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    15. Re:The hard part is yet to come by ChrisMaple · · Score: 4, Funny

      It will take years to actually even start to identify the damage this new antibiotic may have on the body.

      Are you saying it shouldn't be used to save someone about to die from an otherwise untreatable bacterial infection? If so, you have a future at the FDA!

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    16. Re: The hard part is yet to come by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Humans require bacteria to survive.

      If you wipe out all bacteria with no survivors that leads to a c. Diff like situation as your body tries to readjust.

        Maybe you don't die from pneumonia or MERSA, but if you end up dying by painful dehydrating shits, that's not an improvement.

      There's three treatments for c. Diff. More antibiotics, surgery, or poop transplant.

    17. Re:The hard part is yet to come by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The human body is host to quite a few more bacteria, required for our survival, then mice or other animals. So anti-biotic resarch says very little until it's actually tested..

    18. Re:The hard part is yet to come by michelcolman · · Score: 1

      What about all the good bacteria in our body? Quite a lot of our bodily functions need bacteria to work properly.

    19. Re:The hard part is yet to come by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn our fantastic human form.

    20. Re:The hard part is yet to come by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You're describing a well understood problem associated with a large number of commonly prescribed antibiotics. It appears you have failed to consider the fact that cessation of all bodily functions due to death from infection is a significantly worse outcome than complications resulting from suppression of beneficial bacteria.

      (philip.paradis posting AC at the moment)

    21. Re: The hard part is yet to come by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So in theory some drugs that does not work great on animals might work great on humans

    22. Re: The hard part is yet to come by Electricity+Likes+Me · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Exactly - evolution isn't "random". Mutations are random - but the development of specific traits requires an actual path from A to B that doesn't weaken a generation of organism too much, while still enabling them to survive the selective pressure in sufficient quantity.

      That in the paper, by feeding constant low-level non-lethal doses, did not yield resistant mutants, suggests there's no easy way for MRSA to develop a resistance mechanism.

    23. Re:The hard part is yet to come by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about mitochondria?

    24. Re:The hard part is yet to come by shilly · · Score: 1

      From a medical perspective, you're talking out of your backside. We are quite aware of the harms caused by existing antibiotics. Generally, they are significantly outweighed by the benefits of not dying from infections.

    25. Re:The hard part is yet to come by luis_a_espinal · · Score: 1

      >From a medical perspective we are still in the process of assessing just how harmful existing antibiotics are on the body for example.

      A non-issue. Or are you against, say, high-dosage chemotherapy too?

      I don't think it is an issue of the OP being against it as much as an issue of not knowing what the blubbery fuck the OP is talking about

    26. Re:The hard part is yet to come by luis_a_espinal · · Score: 1

      What about all the good bacteria in our body? Quite a lot of our bodily functions need bacteria to work properly.

      You will feel like shit when your good bacteria get nuked... but you do not die. You do die, however, with an untreated infection of MRSA, Bacillus anthracis, TMycobacterium tuberculosis, or even plain old Treponema pallidum (Syphilis) or Rickettsia (Typhus)

      What was your point again?

  3. Misleading title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Even by Slashdot's own TL;DR: summary, the title of this is wrong. Its not the new antibiotic in 30+ years that's astonishing, its the technique used in the experiment because it allows scientists to get easier access to those microbes that wouldn't grow in a lab. That hurdle is now a thing of the past.

  4. Muhammad is a Pedophile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Muhammad is a Pedophile and his Muslim followers practice Islam by raping young girls.

    1. Re:Muhammad is a Pedophile by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      They'll rape anything that takes their fancy, they're not picky.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
  5. the best way to treat an infection? by Noah+Haders · · Score: 0

    nuke it from orbit. it's the only way to be sure.

  6. microbes that refuse to grow in labs. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I hate mirobes that refuse to grow in labs. I've had supposed urinary infections that wouldn't grow in the lab, I was surprised when my urologist told me I had many infections refuse to grow in the lab. Lucky, the antibiotics seamed to work!!

  7. Re:Will it treat the by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It needs to treat "BadJoke-itis"

  8. Re:Will it treat the by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Christianity is no joke. It's serious business.

  9. Muhammad is a Pedophile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    No, they circumcise the girls, and rape the boys. Its "tea boy" not tea girl".

  10. Just in time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    The perfunctory use of antibiotics in factory farms is engineering a bacterial plague that will resist all our medicines and will be devastating once it becomes infectious to humans.

    With this new antibiotic in our arsenal, we can merrily continue to pump our livestock full of antibiotics all day, without ever worrying about future harmful consequences.

    We have solved this problem for good. Carry on!

    1. Re:Just in time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not for good and the problem is limited to US and its vassals outside EU at least as long this shitty serfdom treaty is not signed.

  11. Training... by Feral+Nerd · · Score: 1

    Can somebody who knows more about antibiotics and bacterial evolution please explain something to me. If we keep taking natural antibiotics from nature, mass manufacture them, won't we just train the world's bacterial populations to be immune to practically anything we can throw at them? I know if used wisely this would not happen but we all know that profit (or stupidity) driven people will sooner or later use this stuff in ways that will ruin these drugs, doctors will hand them out to anybody who has a mild cold or just prescribe them to any hysterical parent with a new born to get rid of them and sooner or later the Chinese, or the Americans (the practice is banned in the EU) will make these drugs by the barrel and mix them into animal feed or otherwise administer them in huge quantities to livestock like they did with Tamiflu and which ruined that drug.

    1. Re:Training... by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      I heard a brief report on NPR a few minutes ago. Apparently, this antibiotic works by latching onto a part of the bacteria that cannot mutate. So far, it has cured, among other things, staph and tuberculosis in mice.

      It should be noted that the really important part of this story, at the moment, is the new method developed to cultivate this bacteria that could not previously be lab-cultivated - 99% of all bacteria cannot be lab-cultivated at present.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    2. Re:Training... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "Cannot mutate" is probably too strong a statement. "Tends not to mutate" would be more accurate. Plenty of bacteria have evolved multi-step resistance, it's just considerably harder. Bacteria have time. Lots of time.

    3. Re:Training... by pesho · · Score: 5, Informative

      If we keep taking natural antibiotics from nature, mass manufacture them, won't we just train the world's bacterial populations to be immune to practically anything we can throw at them?

      You are making a very good point. Currently antibiotic resistance is a serious problem, mostly because we are very slow in discovering new antibiotics. What is very exciting about this research is that it significantly shifts the odds in our favor by allowing very large scale screens for new antibiotics. It will allow us to outpace the rate of resistance development. The probability that a particular infection will be resistant to multiple different antibiotics drops exponentially with the number of antibiotics you have. If you have a tool chest of 5-6 antibiotics sooner or later you will have pathogens that are resistant to a significant proportion of these antibiotics. Make the tool chest 10 times larger, and you will have a lot less to worry about.

    4. Re:Training... by AK+Marc · · Score: 0

      Depends on your definition of "mutate". A Zebra cannot mutate to a horse. For one, if it did, it would be a horse, not a zebra, for another, the change would be so large that it's impractical (to the point of being impossible) to make such a mutation.

      --
      Learn to love Alaska
    5. Re:Training... by Swarley · · Score: 4, Informative

      As others have suggested this disrupts a part of Gram (+) cell wall synthesis which is difficult for bacteria to alter. Most antibiotics disrupt the protein constituents of the wall. Mutate one gene and the protein changes so it's relatively "easy" for bacteria to develop resistance. This new drug binds lipid constituents of the wall which are produced in a long synthesis pathway rather than a 1 to 1 gene to protein synthesis. Bacteria would need to mutate multiple genes coding multiple parts of the pathway simultaneously and in a complementary way to alter the structure of the target lipid without completely disrupting the pathway. So it's a much "harder" (meaning less likely to happen frequently) mutation to achieve.

    6. Re:Training... by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1

      You are making a very good point. Currently antibiotic resistance is a serious problem, mostly because we are very slow in discovering new antibiotics. What is very exciting about this research is that it significantly shifts the odds in our favor by allowing very large scale screens for new antibiotics. It will allow us to outpace the rate of resistance development. The probability that a particular infection will be resistant to multiple different antibiotics drops exponentially with the number of antibiotics you have. If you have a tool chest of 5-6 antibiotics sooner or later you will have pathogens that are resistant to a significant proportion of these antibiotics. Make the tool chest 10 times larger, and you will have a lot less to worry about.

      Not to mention: antibiotic resistance isn't free. The mutation generally costs something.

      A heavily armored bacterium that can barely move or eat may be highly resistant, but not very infectious ...

    7. Re:Training... by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Each antibiotic resistance that a cell strain evolves is likely to include a burden that makes it harder for that strain to compete in the wild.

      Develop an antibiotic. It works for a while, then bacteria evolve immunity to it. Stop using that antibiotic for 100 years, the bacteria lose immunity. Start using the antibiotic again

      Lather, rinse, repeat.

      I hope.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    8. Re:Training... by michelcolman · · Score: 1

      What do you mean it ruined that drug? The company made a fortune with it! That's the whole point of making drugs, right? And now they (or some other company) can make a fortune with a new drug.

    9. Re:Training... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You make no sense. Zebra surely can mutate into a "horse" over several generations.

    10. Re:Training... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Bacteria would need to mutate multiple genes coding multiple parts of the pathway simultaneously and in a complementary way to alter the structure of the target lipid without completely disrupting the pathway.

      A trillion bacteria with a trillion typewriters will eventually write the complete works of antibiotic resistance.

  12. Oh fine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    beef farms can continue to hold their stock densely. People can continue to eat flesh every day.

    1. Re: Oh fine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah and your point? We are carnivores, eating meat is what we do.

      Don't make others feel guilty for your warped view on what we should eat.

    2. Re:Oh fine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Care to cite some of the efforts you have done to remedy this abominable practice? I doubt you can so save the condescension for your monthly Whole Foods meetup or maybe your Starbucks bitch-of-the-month club meeting.

  13. Dirt by alphabet26 · · Score: 1

    We should all have more dirt in our diets...

    --
    -AlPhAbEt
  14. mod 0P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    For7unately, Linux Raadt's stubborn whether to repeat 'doing something'

  15. How is this different from by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Russians looking for phage in sewers?

    Oh, right, it's Russian therefore it can't be good.

  16. Natural Selection at work .. by lippydude · · Score: 0

    You kill half the bugs, the bugs remaining develop resistance to the antibiotic ..

  17. Labrador by tepples · · Score: 1

    I hate mirobes that refuse to grow in labs.

    Was it a black lab

  18. A new compund? by Dragonslicer · · Score: 2

    Researchers in Boston found a substance that can destroy living things without any possible defense. The rest of us call it the Charles River.

    1. Re:A new compund? by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      The rest of us call it Kennedy.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    2. Re:A new compund? by Ksevio · · Score: 1

      Hey you're allowed to swim in that these days (as long as you don't touch the bottom) without needing to be hospitalized!

  19. Antibiotic resistance by manu0601 · · Score: 1

    If we really want to avoid antibiotic resistance, we should start by banning their preventive use on cattle. Such treated animals have bowels full of resistant bugs.

    1. Re:Antibiotic resistance by raind · · Score: 1

      I would be in favor of that, like most things that are bad for us, it makes someone money.

      --
      Get up!
  20. Lofty claims by chowdahhead · · Score: 1

    Every antibiotic that we've commercially produced has eventually triggered resistance mechanisms in the targeted bacteria. There are no exceptions to this. It's not likely to happen under lab conditions mentioned in the article, but it's certain to happen from widespread utilization in hospitals and clinics because "super bacteria" are naturally selected over many generations of exposure. This reminds me of when daptomycin was approved and first marketed in the US. It also relied on a different mechanism of action from other cell-wall antibiotics and there were similar claims of no known resistance...which was true at the time but that wasn't the case for long. It's still one of our big guns for MRSA and VRE, but treatment failure is possible.

  21. Re:Will it treat the by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That GOD rhetoric looks damn riduculous when viewed from the other side of the atlantic ocean btw. A major reason why you are losing european support I think. Europe has largely abandoned religions. Like it or not. At the very least we have particularly abandoned reasoning our actions by "god said so".

  22. Re:Will it treat the by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

    You forgot Poland *scnr*

    --
    "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
  23. Pomegranate by buck-yar · · Score: 1

    Is it Pomegranate? If not they should look at that took. Pomegranate may be literally perfect. It inhibits bad gut bacteria and promotes beneficial ones like Bifidobacterium

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pm...

    Look at this chart, it is quite possibly the greatest modulator of gut bacteria ever http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pm...