'Without Action on Antibiotics, Medicine Will Return To the Dark Ages' (theguardian.com)

Four years ago professor Sally Davies, England's chief medical officer, gave the world a sombre warning of the growing threat posed by bacteria evolving resistance to life-saving antibiotics. If this were left unaddressed, she argued, it would lead to the erosion of modern medicine as we know it. Doctors and scientists had long warned of the problem, but few outside medicine were taking real heed. Consumption of antibiotics rose 36% between 2000 and 2010, writes Ed Whiting, director of policy and chief of staff at Wellcome, a biomedical research charity based in London. He notes that much of the progress in the field is yet to be made: We urgently need new antibiotics. No new classes of antibiotics have been approved since the early 1980s. Between 1940 and 1962 about 20 classes were produced, but industry backing has decreased significantly since that golden age. The pipeline of new treatments is all but dry, the void fast exploited by resistant bacteria. A concerning number are now resistant to drugs reserved as the last line of defence, and the most vulnerable are in greatest danger -- the young, old and critically ill. Blood infections caused by drug-resistant microbes kill more than 200,000 newborn babies each year. The reason for the lack of interest from the pharmaceutical industry is simple: the economics don't add up. Developing new antibiotics is scientifically challenging, time-consuming and costly. The medicines we so badly need cannot be allowed to be sold in volume; they must be conserved for real need, with fair access guaranteed. This limits their retail value. Many early-stage projects will fail, making them a risky bet. Even those that are successful will take at least a decade to produce medicines that are safe for human use.

Comments

Re:Let it return to the dark ages

[interkin3tic]

There's a point to be made here. The dark ages bit is hyperbole, the vast majority of what goes into you being healthy is prevention, sanitation, gloves, and not throwing your feces into the street.

A lot of people these days seem okay with returning to the dark ages in terms of science and learning vs religion anyway. And they don't seem very sympathetic to sick people either. Maybe instead remind them that before antibiotics, soldiers died of infections nearly as often as they did of battle. Right wingers still care about soldiers right? At least in terms of their health BEFORE they fight?

Re:Not the END

[HiThere]

True, medicine would only be returned to about its state in 1910, or perhaps 1900. Operations, even minor ones, would be a bad gamble with death...even when the best choice. Anesthetics would continue to be known and effective, but any incision could be fatal. Perhaps UV could substitute for some antibiotic uses, and strong poisons could be used to swab down surfaces, and disposable gloves and clothing could minimize risk. And... But we're already doing most of those things, and bacteria still get through.