Antibiotic-Resistant E Coli Reaches The US For The First Time (reuters.com)

New submitter maharvey writes: A woman in Pennsylvania has contracted a strain of E Coli that is unaffected by all known legal antibiotics, including the antibiotics of last resort. We have had bacteria that were resistant, but this is the first bacteria that is completely immune. Such bacteria were known in China, but since the woman has not traveled recently it means she contracted it in the wild in the USA. This is a major step toward the terrifying post-antibiotic world.

Comments

the chickens.

[Gravis Zero]

they've come home to roost.

Antibiotic abuse and biodiversity

[Anonymous Coward]

Biodiversity is a good thing, but we're destroying it. We need to allow nature to create new antibiotics and use those as needed.

Also, there are some fucking absurd abuses of antibiotics. Doctors are way too quick to wrote prescriptions when they aren't necessary. We need to stop prescribing antibiotics when they aren't necessary for infections that will be stopped by the body's immune system or as preventive measures.

Furthermore, we shouldn't be wasting antibiotics on animals, especially for cattle. I'm sorry that one of the animals in your herd is sick. There's no fucking reason to put antibiotics in the feed of all of your cattle. That's fucking ridiculous. Don't use antibiotics on cattle.

This is a fucking big deal. People who misuse antibiotics should lose their license to practice medicine. I'd also support prison time for it.

Re:Antibiotic abuse and biodiversity

[yes-but-no]

Why oh why do we need to actually see an antibiotics-resistant bacteria infect somebody before we'll acknowledge the blindingly obvious about to happen?

Because, Sir, we as a species are dumb.

Re:Antibiotic abuse and biodiversity

[silentcoder]

Well... we lack anything at all to stop it from doing so.

How soon people forget... less than a hundred years ago the vast majority of bacterial infections were fatal. Penicillin has saved more lives than we can count, probably at least as many as pasteurization (which we've had for 2 centuries longer). Destroying the efficacy of our most powerful life-saving weapon through overuse remains one of the most monumentally stupid things humanity could ever do and we seem hellbent on doing it.
This is the bacterial equivalent of anti-vaxxers and both are risking not just their own lives but millions, perhaps billions, of others. There have been multiple plagues in history that wiped out 25% or more of the human population, and those were all constrained by geography - a constraint that does not exist today - oh and some of the worst of them were bacterial. The most famous - the black death - was caused by bubonic plague, a bacterial infection. Imagine if a bacterium or virus with the virulence of bubonic plague happened today... we could easily see 75% or more of humanity dead just from direct infection. City streets lined with corpses - the cleanup services long ago overrun so every body lies there for weeks stinking and spreading the disease further. Quarantines become impossible to enforce as there are just not enough healthy people to enforce them. Complete economic collapse as every industry grinds to a standstill. All of which cause more deaths and violence. Some economists have calculated that Africa's negative GDP can be ENTIRELY accounted for by Malaria and, if that was eradicated, it would be a rich continent. And compared to something like plague, malaria is a lightweight since it can't spread anywhere that doesn't have a suitable climate for the one mosquito that can spread it.

Of course those who profit from some blatantly idiotic things as giving antibiotics to factory farmed animals to boost growth would call this alarmist... and conveniently forget that this has happened before, many times. It is not alarmist to say that if we destroy the thing that made it stop happening, that it would happen again.

Re: Antibiotic abuse and biodiversity

[silentcoder]

>Second best. Vaccine's are the best.

No, they belong on different scales as they target different kinds of diseases. Vaccines are a defense against viral infections. Antiobiotics against bacteria. A huge contributor to our current problem was misusing the latter on infections of the former kind - where it has no efficacy whatsoever, but does help grow resistant bacteria.
You can't compare them and say "X" is better than "Y" though, since they are used for different purposes. It's like trying to say that "Pissing from the left side of the bowl is better than having ham sandwiches for lunch".

Perhaps not use antibiotics on animals

[NotInHere]

what about not using antibiotics on living animals? They serve as a feeding ground for antibiotics. The price would be that you have to pay more for products that include flesh, because you would have to isolate the animals better, in order to stop spreading illnesses.

Nice job humanity!

[slacka]

Total Failure of Government and Society and not a good sign for the future of the human race. I personally have been well aware of the risks of Antibiotic-Resistant for over 20 years. This was the text book example of natural selection in my High School Biology class.

Instead of listening to the scientists and public health officals on the risks, we have let the greed and money in big ag run make our laws. We let them dump antibiotics in our livestock food in so we could have cheap meat and now the chickens are coming home to roost.

Welcome back to the pre-antibiotic era where a cut can be deadly and hospitals can kill you. Nice job humanity!

Re:Nice job humanity!

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice job humanity!

The human race has never had a good long game. Immediate comfort is irresistible to all animals.

Re:Nice job humanity!

[mabu]

One minute you blame government, the next you say we should listen to "public health officials." I think you contradict yourself.

Re:Try the original antibiotic

[ttucker]

Until you turn blue.