ReportWire

Tag: antibiotics

  • The Validity of SIBO Tests  | NutritionFacts.org

    [ad_1]

    Even if we could accurately diagnose small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO), if there is no difference in symptoms between those testing positive and those testing negative, what’s the point?

    Gastrointestinal symptoms like abdominal pain and bloating account for millions of doctor visits every year. One of the conditions that may be considered for such a “nonspecific presentation” of symptoms is SIBO, a concept that “has gained popularity on the internet in addition to certain clinical and research circles.” SIBO is “broadly defined as excessive bacteria in the small intestine” and typically treated with antibiotics, but “dispensing antibiotics to patients with the nonspecific, common symptoms associated with SIBO is not without risks,” such as the fostering of antibiotic resistance, the emergence of side effects, and the elimination of our good bacteria that could set us up for an invasion of bad bugs like C. diff—all for a condition that may not even be real.

    Even alternative medicine journals admit that SIBO is being overdiagnosed, creating “confusion and fear.” SIBO testing “is overused and overly relied upon. Diagnoses are often handed out quickly and without adequate substantiation. Patients can be indoctrinated into thinking SIBO is a chronic condition that can not be cleared and will require lifelong management. This is simply not true for most and is an example of the damage done by overzealousness.” “The ‘monster’ that we now perceive SIBO to be may be no more than a phantom.”

    The traditional method for a diagnosis was a small bowel aspiration, an invasive test where a long tube is snaked down the throat to take a sample and count the bugs down there, as you can see at 2:10 in my video Are Small Intestinal Bacterial Overgrowth (SIBO) Tests Valid?.

    This method has been almost entirely replaced with breath tests. Normally, a sugar called glucose is almost entirely absorbed in the small intestine, so it never makes it down to the colon. So, the presence of bacterial fermentation of that sugar suggests there are bacteria in the small intestine. Fermentation can be detected because the bacteria produce specific gases that get absorbed in our bloodstream before being exhaled from our lungs, which can then be detected with a breathalyzer-type machine.

    Previously, the sugar lactulose was used, but “lactulose breath tests do not reliably detect the overgrowth of bacteria,” so researchers switched to glucose. However, when glucose was finally put to the test, it didn’t work. The bacterial load in the small intestine was similar for those testing positive or negative, so that wasn’t a useful test either. It turns out that glucose can make it down to the colon after all.

    Researchers labeled the glucose dose with a tracer and found that nearly half of the positive results from glucose breath tests were false positives because individuals were just fermenting it down in their colon, where our bacteria are supposed to be. So, “patients who are incorrectly labeled with SIBO may be prescribed multiple courses of antibiotics” for a condition they don’t even have.

    Why do experts continue to recommend breath testing? Could it be because the “experts” were at a conference supported by a breath testing company, and most had personally received funds from SIBO testing or antibiotic companies?

    Even if we could properly diagnose SIBO, does it matter? For those with digestive symptoms, there is a massive range of positivity for SIBO from approximately 4 percent to 84 percent. Researchers “found there to be no difference in overall symptom scores between those testing positive against those testing negative for SIBO…” So, a positive test result could mean anything. Who cares if some people have bacteria growing in their small intestines if it doesn’t correlate with symptoms?

    Now, antibiotics can make people with irritable bowel-type symptoms who have been diagnosed with SIBO feel better. Does that prove SIBO was the cause? No, because antibiotics can make just as many people feel better who are negative for SIBO. Currently, the antibiotic rifaximin is most often used for SIBO, but it is “not currently FDA-approved for use in this indication, and its cost can be prohibitive.” (The FDA is the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.) In fact, no drug has been approved for SIBO in the United States or Europe, so even with good insurance, it may cost as much as $50 a day in out-of-pocket expenses, and the course is typically two weeks.

    What’s more, while antibiotics may help in the short term, they may make matters worse in the long term. Those “who are given a course of antibiotics are more than three times as likely to report more bowel symptoms 4 months later than controls.” So, what can we do for these kinds of symptoms? That’s exactly what I’m going to turn to next.

    [ad_2]

    Michael Greger M.D. FACLM

    Source link

  • Chemical Safety, Cultivated Meat, and Our Health  | NutritionFacts.org

    [ad_1]

    More than 95 percent of human exposure to industrial pollutants like dioxins and PCBs comes from fish, other meat, and dairy.

    By cultivating muscle meat directly, without associated organs like intestines, the incidence of foodborne diseases “could be significantly reduced,” as could exposure to antibiotics, “pesticides, arsenic, dioxins, and hormones associated with conventional meat.” Currently, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has approved seven hormone drugs to bulk up the production of milk and meat. “In the European Union, there exists a total ban on such use,” however. Even without injected hormones, though, animal products naturally have hormones because they come from animals. “Eggs, example given, contribute more to the dietary intake of estradiol [estrogens] than beef, whether the animal is legally treated with hormones or not.” After all, eggs come straight from a hen’s ovaries, so, of course, they’re swimming with hormones. But if you’re directly growing just muscle meat or egg white protein, you don’t need to include reproductive organs, adrenal glands, or any of the associated hormones.

    “Chemical safety is another concern for meat produced under current production systems.” There are chemical toxicants and industrial pollutants that build up in the food chain, such as pesticides, PCBs, heavy metals, and flame retardants, but there is no food chain with cultivated meat. We could produce all the tuna we wanted, with zero mercury.

    When the World Health Organization determined that processed meat was a known human carcinogen and unprocessed meat a probable human carcinogen, it wasn’t even talking about the carcinogenic environmental pollutants. When researchers tested retail meat for the presence of “33 chemicals with calculated carcinogenic potential,” like polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), organochlorine pesticides like DDT, and dioxin-like PCBs, they concluded that, in order to reduce the risk of cancer, we should limit beef, pork, or chicken consumption to a maximum of five servings a month.

    Why cultivate meat at all when you can just buy organic? Surprisingly, “consumption of organic meat does not diminish the carcinogenic potential associated with the intake of persistent organic pollutants (POPs).” A number of studies have recently compared the presence of environmental contaminants in organic meat versus conventional meat, and the researchers found, surprisingly, that organic meat was sometimes more contaminated. Not only organic beef either. Higher levels were also found in pork and poultry.

    If you look at the micropollutants and chemical residues in both organic and conventional meat, several environmental contaminants, including dioxins, PCBs, lead, and arsenic, were measured at significantly higher levels in the organic samples. As you can see below and at 2:56 in my video, The Human Health Effects of Cultivated Meat: Chemical Safety, the green is organic meat, and the blue is conventional. 

    Cooking helps to draw off some of the fat where the PCBs are concentrated, as shown here and at 3:01.

    Seafood seems to be an exception. Steaming, for example, generally increases contaminant levels, increasing contaminant exposure and concentrating mercury levels as much as 47 percent, as you can see here and at 3:15 in my video. Better not to have toxic buildup in the first place.

    More than 95 percent of human exposure to industrial pollutants like dioxins and PCBs comes from foods like meat, including fatty fish, and dairy, but the pollutants don’t appear magically. The only way the chicken, fish, and other meat lead to human exposure is because the animals themselves built up a lifetime of exposure in our polluted world, from incinerators, power plants, sewer sludge, and on and on, as you can see here and at 3:40 in my video.

    Unlike conventional meat production, a slaughter-free harvest would not only mean no more infected animals, but no more contaminated animals either. In terms of pollutants, it would be like taking a time machine back before the Industrial Revolution.

    Doctor’s Note:

    Cultivated meat means less contamination with fecal residues, toxic pollutants, antibiotics, and hormones; up to 99 percent less environmental impact; and zero pandemic risk. Cultivated meat allows people to have their meat and eat it, too, without affecting the rest of us.

    This is the final video in this cultivated meat series. If you missed the first two, check out the videos on Food Safety and Antibiotic Resistance.

    I previously did a video series on plant-based meats; see the related posts below.

    All videos in the plant-based meat series are also available in a digital download from a webinar I did. SeeThe Human Health Implications of Plant-Based and Cultivated Meat for Pandemic Prevention and Climate Mitigation.

    [ad_2]

    Michael Greger M.D. FACLM

    Source link

  • Antibiotic Resistance, Cultivated Meat, and Our Health  | NutritionFacts.org

    [ad_1]

    Medically important antibiotics are being squandered by animal agriculture to compensate for typical factory farming practices.

    Cultivating muscle meat directly from cells instead of raising and slaughtering animals would reduce the risk of foodborne illnesses “due to fecal contamination during slaughtering and evisceration of carcasses” because there would be no feces, no slaughter, and no carcasses to eviscerate. In addition, cultivating meat would also reduce the threat from antibiotic resistance.

    To compensate for overcrowded, stressful, and unhygienic conditions on factory farms, animals are typically dosed en masse with antibiotics. A lot of antibiotics. About 20 million pounds of medically important antibiotics a year, as you can see here and at 0:57 in my video, The Human Health Effects of Cultivated Meat: Antibiotic Resistance

    In the United States, for example, farm animals are given about 2 million pounds of penicillin drugs and 15 million pounds of tetracyclines annually. This is madness. 

    Antibiotic drugs important to human medicine go right into the feed and water of animals like cows, pigs, and chickens, by the ton and by the thousands of tons, as shown below and at 1:02 in my video. And that is all without a prescription.

    Ninety-seven percent of the tens of millions of pounds of antibiotics given to farm animals in the United States are bought over the counter—without a prescription or even an order from a veterinarian, as seen here and a 1:24. To get even a few milligrams of penicillin, we need a doctor’s prescription, because these are miracle wonder drugs that can’t be squandered. Meanwhile, farmers can just back their trucks up to the feedstore. 

    Now, half the Salmonella in retail meat—chicken, turkey, beef, and pork—is resistant to tetracycline, as shown below and at 1:50 in my video. About a quarter of the bugs are now resistant to three or more entire classes of antibiotics, including some resistant to “cephalosporins such as ceftriaxone [which] are critically important drugs we use to treat severe Salmonella infections, especially in children.” 

    Such agricultural applications for antimicrobials are now considered an “urgent threat to human health.” “The link between antibiotic use in animals and antibiotic resistance in humans is unequivocal.”

    As shown here and at 2:20 in my video, it all starts with the poop. 

    Antibiotic-resistant bugs are selected for and then can spread via meat or produce contaminated by poop or they can spread through the wind, the air, or the water, or be carried by insects. There are many pathways by which resistant superbugs can escape. So, even if you don’t eat meat, you can be “put at risk by the pathogens released from stressed, immunocompromised, contaminant-filled livestock” dosed with antibiotics. That’s one of the reasons the American Public Health Association called for a moratorium on factory farms, due in part to all the pollution from concentrated animal feed operations (CAFOs) to the surrounding communities. 

    Every year, more than five tons of animal manure are produced for every man, woman, and child in the United States. Again, it all starts with the poop. But cultivated meat means no guts, no poop, no fecal infections, and no antibiotics necessary. It also means no fecal or antibiotic residues left in “foodstuffs such as milk, egg, and meat” that can potentially cause a variety of side effects beyond just the transfer of antibiotic-resistant bacteria to humans.

    And, as you can see here and at 3:30 in my video, things are getting worse, not better. U.S. animal agriculture is using more antibiotics now than ever.

    This isn’t only because more animals are being raised for food, either. Antibiotic sales in the United States are outpacing meat production. Yes, meat production is going up, but there is a serious rise in antibiotic sales for meat production, as shown below and at 3:46.

    With the combined might of Big Ag and Big Pharma (who profit from selling all the drugs), it’s hard to imagine anything changing on the political side. The only hope may be a change in the production side.

    “The unstoppable rise of super-resistant strains of bacteria is a serious worldwide problem, resulting in 700 000 deaths every year,” and the projections for global antibiotic use in the production of farm animals are “ominous,” estimated to exceed 100,000 tons of antibiotics pumped into animals raised for food by 2030. Quite simply, we may be “on the path to untreatable infections” by using even some of our “last resort antibiotics,” like carbapenems, just to shave a few cents off a pound of meat.

    And it’s not just foodborne bacteria. Mad cow disease, swine flu, and bird flu have the potential to kill millions of people. Skeptical? I’ve got a book for you to read, whose author’s “superb storytelling ability makes every page of the book interesting and fascinating for both specialist and layperson.” (Thanks, Virology Journal, for the wonderful book review and calling my book “a must read.”)

    Given the threat of the chickens coming home to roost, an editorial in the American Journal of Public Health thought that “it is curious, therefore, that changing the way humans treat animals—most basically, ceasing to eat them or, at the very least, radically limiting the quantity of them that are eaten—is largely off the radar as a significant preventative measure. Such a change, if sufficiently adopted or imposed, could still reduce the chances of the much-feared influenza epidemic…Yet humanity does not consider this option.”

    That may be moot, though, because we could cultivate all the chicken we want, without guts or lungs.

    It’s hard to stress the importance of that American Journal of Public Health editorial. As devastating as COVID-19 has been, it may just be a dress rehearsal for an even greater threat waiting in the wings—the wings of chickens.

    According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the leading candidate for the next pandemic is a bird flu virus known as H7N9, which is a hundred times deadlier than COVID-19. Instead of 1 in 250 patients dying, H7N9 has killed 40 percent of the people it infects.

    The last time a bird flu virus jumped directly to humans and caused a pandemic, it triggered the deadliest plague in human history—the 1918 pandemic that killed 50 million people. That had a 2 percent death rate. What if we had a pandemic infecting billions where death was closer to a flip of a coin?

    The good news is that there is something we can do about it. Just as eliminating the exotic animal trade and live animal markets may go a long way toward preventing the next coronavirus pandemic, reforming the way we raise domestic animals for food may help forestall the next killer flu. The bottom line is that it’s not worth risking the lives of millions of people for the sake of cheaper chicken.

    If you missed the previous video, see The Human Health Effects of Cultivated Meat: Food Safety. Up next is The Human Health Effects of Cultivated Meat: Chemical Safety

    [ad_2]

    Michael Greger M.D. FACLM

    Source link

  • Can You Consume Marijuana While On Antibiotics

    Can You Consume Marijuana While On Antibiotics

    [ad_1]

    Being sick is no fun for multiple reasons. No matter what time of year, you feel you are going to miss out on fun things including seeing friends, sleeping well and imbibing.  Often when sick, antibiotics are prescribed. They treat or prevent some types of bacterial infection. Their superpower is killing bacteria or preventing them from reproducing and spreading. They are not effective on viral problems like the flu. But for them to be effective, you have to take them regularly and not do anything to interfere with their work. Alcohol is always a big no no when on antibiotics. Drinking alcohol can lower your energy and slow how fast you get better from illness. So it’s a good idea not to drink alcohol until you finish your antibiotics and are feeling better. But can you consume marijuana while on antibiotics?

    RELATED: Science Says Medical Marijuana Improves Quality Of Life

    There hasn’t been much research on the interactions of cannabis and antibiotics, but commons sense comes into play. Research indicates marijuana use can increase the pain-relieving effects of opioids without increasing the levels of opioids found in plasma. This seems to reduce opioid useThe same research review noted children taking clobazam, an anti-seizure medication, and cannabidiol, experience increased levels of clobazam in their blood. And, those who are taking valproate and using medical marijuana appeared to be at higher risks for abnormalities in liver function. 

    Photo by rawpixel.com

    Unlike alcohol, there is still needed research to be done examining individual medications and how of marijuana use could change how they work in the body. Patients taking medication for chronic health conditions need to talk with their medical professional before using marijuana, but what if you’re on a short treatment using antibiotics? Can you use marijuana while taking antibiotics and kick your infection to the curb without complications of delay? 

    When it comes to taking antibiotics and using marijuana at the same time, currently, there is no research indicating it isn’t a safe practice. Some medical professionals have expressed concerns taking THC with antibiotics could increase the risk of unpleasant side effects of both. If you use while taking antibiotics, it’s best to keep an eye out for increased side effects and to stop using THC if you experience any. Currently, it is not on the list of drug interactions with antibiotics. 

    RELATED: CBD Can Improve Effectiveness of Antibiotic Medication

    Another issue is marijuana impact on the immune system. In taking antibiotics to fight off an infection, the body has to do its part to get well. Early research suggests CBD may aid some antibiotics.  But there is debate about how cannabis affects the immune system. Some research indicates marijuana may suppress the immune system, but there is also conflicting information suggesting it may make your immune system stronger and help it fight illness.

    Ultimately, there don’t appear to be real risks associated with consuming marijuana while on antibiotics. If it a serious issue, always talk to your medical professional and monitor the situation. It is always a good idea to pay close attention to your body, noting adverse reactions and making changes if necessary.

    [ad_2]

    Amy Hansen

    Source link

  • No antibiotics worked, so this woman turned to a natural enemy of bacteria to save her husband's life | CNN

    No antibiotics worked, so this woman turned to a natural enemy of bacteria to save her husband's life | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    In February 2016, infectious disease epidemiologist Steffanie Strathdee was holding her dying husband’s hand, watching him lose an exhausting fight against a deadly superbug infection.

    After months of ups and downs, doctors had just told her that her husband, Tom Patterson, was too racked with bacteria to live.

    “I told him, ‘Honey, we’re running out of time. I need to know if you want to live. I don’t even know if you can hear me, but if you can hear me and you want to live, please squeeze my hand.’

    “All of a sudden, he squeezed really hard. And I thought, ‘Oh, great!’ And then I’m thinking, ‘Oh, crap! What am I going to do?’”

    What she accomplished next could easily be called miraculous. First, Strathdee found an obscure treatment that offered a glimmer of hope — fighting superbugs with phages, viruses created by nature to eat bacteria.

    Then she convinced phage scientists around the country to hunt and peck through molecular haystacks of sewage, bogs, ponds, the bilge of boats and other prime breeding grounds for bacteria and their viral opponents. The impossible goal: quickly find the few, exquisitely unique phages capable of fighting a specific strain of antibiotic-resistant bacteria literally eating her husband alive.

    Next, the US Food and Drug Administration had to greenlight this unproven cocktail of hope, and scientists had to purify the mixture so that it wouldn’t be deadly.

    Yet just three weeks later, Strathdee watched doctors intravenously inject the mixture into her husband’s body — and save his life.

    Their story is one of unrelenting perseverance and unbelievable good fortune. It’s a glowing tribute to the immense kindness of strangers. And it’s a story that just might save countless lives from the growing threat of antibiotic-resistant superbugs — maybe even your own.

    “It’s estimated that by 2050, 10 million people per year — that’s one person every three seconds — is going to be dying from a superbug infection,” Strathdee told an audience at Life Itself, a 2022 health and wellness event presented in partnership with CNN.

    “I’m here to tell you that the enemy of my enemy can be my friend. Viruses can be medicine.”

    sanjay pkg vpx

    How this ‘perfect predator’ saved his life after nine months in the hospital

    During a Thanksgiving cruise on the Nile in 2015, Patterson was suddenly felled by severe stomach cramps. When a clinic in Egypt failed to help his worsening symptoms, Patterson was flown to Germany, where doctors discovered a grapefruit-size abdominal abscess filled with Acinetobacter baumannii, a virulent bacterium resistant to nearly all antibiotics.

    Found in the sands of the Middle East, the bacteria were blown into the wounds of American troops hit by roadside bombs during the Iraq War, earning the pathogen the nickname “Iraqibacter.”

    “Veterans would get shrapnel in their legs and bodies from IED explosions and were medevaced home to convalesce,” Strathdee told CNN, referring to improvised explosive devices. “Unfortunately, they brought their superbug with them. Sadly, many of them survived the bomb blasts but died from this deadly bacterium.”

    Today, Acinetobacter baumannii tops the World Health Organization’s list of dangerous pathogens for which new antibiotics are critically needed.

    “It’s something of a bacterial kleptomaniac. It’s really good at stealing antimicrobial resistance genes from other bacteria,” Strathdee said. “I started to realize that my husband was a lot sicker than I thought and that modern medicine had run out of antibiotics to treat him.”

    With the bacteria growing unchecked inside him, Patterson was soon medevaced to the couple’s hometown of San Diego, where he was a professor of psychiatry and Strathdee was the associate dean of global health sciences at the University of California, San Diego.

    “Tom was on a roller coaster — he’d get better for a few days, and then there would be a deterioration, and he would be very ill,” said Dr. Robert “Chip” Schooley, a leading infectious disease specialist at UC San Diego who was a longtime friend and colleague. As weeks turned into months, “Tom began developing multi-organ failure. He was sick enough that we could lose him any day.”

    Patterson's body was systemically infected with a virulent drug-resistant bacteria that also infected troops in the Iraq War, earning the pathogen the nickname

    After that reassuring hand squeeze from her husband, Strathdee sprang into action. Scouring the internet, she had already stumbled across a study by a Tbilisi, Georgia, researcher on the use of phages for treatment of drug-resistant bacteria.

    A phone call later, Strathdee discovered phage treatment was well established in former Soviet bloc countries but had been discounted long ago as “fringe science” in the West.

    “Phages are everywhere. There’s 10 million trillion trillion — that’s 10 to the power of 31 — phages that are thought to be on the planet,” Strathdee said. “They’re in soil, they’re in water, in our oceans and in our bodies, where they are the gatekeepers that keep our bacterial numbers in check. But you have to find the right phage to kill the bacterium that is causing the trouble.”

    Buoyed by her newfound knowledge, Strathdee began reaching out to scientists who worked with phages: “I wrote cold emails to total strangers, begging them for help,” she said at Life Itself.

    One stranger who quickly answered was Texas A&M University biochemist Ryland Young. He’d been working with phages for over 45 years.

    “You know the word persuasive? There’s nobody as persuasive as Steffanie,” said Young, a professor of biochemistry and biophysics who runs the lab at the university’s Center for Phage Technology. “We just dropped everything. No exaggeration, people were literally working 24/7, screening 100 different environmental samples to find just a couple of new phages.”

    While the Texas lab burned the midnight oil, Schooley tried to obtain FDA approval for the injection of the phage cocktail into Patterson. Because phage therapy has not undergone clinical trials in the United States, each case of “compassionate use” required a good deal of documentation. It’s a process that can consume precious time.

    But the woman who answered the phone at the FDA said, “‘No problem. This is what you need, and we can arrange that,’” Schooley recalled. “And then she tells me she has friends in the Navy that might be able to find some phages for us as well.”

    In fact, the US Naval Medical Research Center had banks of phages gathered from seaports around the world. Scientists there began to hunt for a match, “and it wasn’t long before they found a few phages that appeared to be active against the bacterium,” Strathdee said.

    Dr. Robert

    Back in Texas, Young and his team had also gotten lucky. They found four promising phages that ravaged Patterson’s antibiotic-resistant bacteria in a test tube. Now the hard part began — figuring out how to separate the victorious phages from the soup of bacterial toxins left behind.

    “You put one virus particle into a culture, you go home for lunch, and if you’re lucky, you come back to a big shaking, liquid mess of dead bacteria parts among billions and billions of the virus,” Young said. “You want to inject those virus particles into the human bloodstream, but you’re starting with bacterial goo that’s just horrible. You would not want that injected into your body.”

    Purifying phage to be given intravenously was a process that no one had yet perfected in the US, Schooley said, “but both the Navy and Texas A&M got busy, and using different approaches figured out how to clean the phages to the point they could be given safely.”

    More hurdles: Legal staff at Texas A&M expressed concern about future lawsuits. “I remember the lawyer saying to me, ‘Let me see if I get this straight. You want to send unapproved viruses from this lab to be injected into a person who will probably die.’ And I said, “Yeah, that’s about it,’” Young said.

    “But Stephanie literally had speed dial numbers for the chancellor and all the people involved in human experimentation at UC San Diego. After she calls them, they basically called their counterparts at A&M, and suddenly they all began to work together,” Young added.

    “It was like the parting of the Red Sea — all the paperwork and hesitation disappeared.”

    The purified cocktail from Young’s lab was the first to arrive in San Diego. Strathdee watched as doctors injected the Texas phages into the pus-filled abscesses in Patterson’s abdomen before settling down for the agonizing wait.

    “We started with the abscesses because we didn’t know what would happen, and we didn’t want to kill him,” Schooley said. “We didn’t see any negative side effects; in fact, Tom seemed to be stabilizing a bit, so we continued the therapy every two hours.”

    Two days later, the Navy cocktail arrived. Those phages were injected into Patterson’s bloodstream to tackle the bacteria that had spread to the rest of his body.

    “We believe Tom was the first person to receive intravenous phage therapy to treat a systemic superbug infection in the US,” Strathdee told CNN.

    “And three days later, Tom lifted his head off the pillow out of a deep coma and kissed his daughter’s hand. It was just miraculous.”

    Patterson awoke from a coma after receiving an intravenous dose of phages tailored to his bacteria.

    Today, nearly eight years later, Patterson is happily retired, walking 3 miles a day and gardening. But the long illness took its toll: He was diagnosed with diabetes and is now insulin dependent, with mild heart damage and gastrointestinal issues that affect his diet.

    “He isn’t back surfing again, because he can’t feel the bottoms of his feet, and he did get Covid-19 in April that landed him in the hospital because the bottoms of his lungs are essentially dead,” Strathdee said.

    “As soon as the infection hit his lungs he couldn’t breathe and I had to rush him to the hospital, so that was scary,” she said. “He remains high risk for Covid but we’re not letting that hold us hostage at home. He says, ‘I want to go back to having as normal life as fast as possible.’”

    To prove it, the couple are again traveling the world — they recently returned from a 12-day trip to Argentina.

    “We traveled with a friend who is an infectious disease doctor, which gave me peace of mind to know that if anything went sideways, we’d have an expert at hand,” Strathdee said.

    “I guess I’m a bit of a helicopter wife in that sense. Still, we’ve traveled to Costa Rica a couple of times, we’ve been to Africa, and we’re planning to go to Chile in January.”

    Patterson’s case was published in the journal Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy in 2017, jump-starting new scientific interest in phage therapy.

    “There’s been an explosion of clinical trials that are going on now in phage (science) around the world and there’s phage programs in Canada, the UK, Australia, Belgium, Sweden, Switzerland, India and China has a new one, so it’s really catching on,” Strathdee told CNN.

    Some of the work is focused on the interplay between phages and antibiotics — as bacteria battle phages they often shed their outer shell to keep the enemy from docking and gaining access for the kill. When that happens, the bacteria may be suddenly vulnerable to antibiotics again.

    “We don’t think phages are ever going to entirely replace antibiotics, but they will be a good adjunct to antibiotics. And in fact, they can even make antibiotics work better,” Strathdee said.

    In San Diego, Strathdee and Schooley opened the Center for Innovative Phage Applications and Therapeutics, or IPATH, in 2018, where they treat or counsel patients suffering from multidrug-resistant infections. The center’s success rate is high, with 82% of patients undergoing phage therapy experiencing a clinically successful outcome, according to its website.

    Schooley is running a clinical trial using phages to treat patients with cystic fibrosis who constantly battle Pseudomonas aeruginosa, a drug-resistant bacteria that was also responsible for the recent illness and deaths connected to contaminated eye drops manufactured in India.

    And a memoir the couple published in 2019 — “The Perfect Predator: A Scientist’s Race to Save Her Husband From a Deadly Superbug” — is also spreading the word about these “perfect predators” to what may soon be the next generation of phage hunters.

    VS Phages Sanjay Steffanie

    How naturally occurring viruses could help treat superbug infections

    “I am getting increasingly contacted by students, some as young as 12,” Strathdee said. “There’s a girl in San Francisco who begged her mother to read this book and now she’s doing a science project on phage-antibiotic synergy, and she’s in eighth grade. That thrills me.”

    Strathdee is quick to acknowledge the many people who helped save her husband’s life. But those who were along for the ride told CNN that she and Patterson made the difference.

    “I think it was a historical accident that could have only happened to Steffanie and Tom,” Young said. “They were at UC San Diego, which is one of the premier universities in the country. They worked with a brilliant infectious disease doctor who said, ‘Yes,’ to phage therapy when most physicians would’ve said, ‘Hell, no, I won’t do that.’

    “And then there is Steffanie’s passion and energy — it’s hard to explain until she’s focused it on you. It was like a spiderweb; she was in the middle and pulled on strings,” Young added. “It was just meant to be because of her, I think.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Most National Grocery Chains Fail Antibiotics-in-Meat Test

    Most National Grocery Chains Fail Antibiotics-in-Meat Test

    [ad_1]

    Oct. 12, 2022 — Three-quarters of the largest grocery chains in the U.S. are failing to limit the use of antibiotics in their house-brand fresh meat, thus contributing to the spread of antibiotic resistance. 

    That’s according to a new report, “Superbugs in Stock,” produced by members of a coalition of public health, animal protection, and consumer groups known as Antibiotics Off the Menu. Of the nation’s top food retailers, Target fared the best — but even it only received a C grade.

    About half of the fresh meat sold in this country is purchased in stores. 

    “That means the grocery industry has a potentially major impact on how antibiotics are used in meat production,” says Matthew Wellington, public health campaigns director at U.S. PIRG, a member of the coalition. “This report shows a dire need for more progress in the grocery sector.”


    A Report Card for Supermarkets

    For the past 6 years, the coalition focused on restaurants, with an annual report about the practices of major fast-food and fast-casual chains. In the wake of these reports, several chains announced changes to their policies, though not all have followed through. 

    “We saw there was progress with the restaurant chains, so we wanted to look at the other place people get most of their food,” says Steven Roach of the Food Animal Concerns Trust, lead author of the report. “And coming through the pandemic, where there had been a shift from people eating out to eating at home, we thought it was good time to look at grocery chains.”

    Roach and his co-authors gathered information about the supermarket chains’ policies on antibiotic use in private-label chicken, turkey, pork, and beef through a survey as well as company websites and published materials. They assigned points for various scoring criteria — things like having a meaningful and transparent public policy that links to animal welfare, enforcement of that policy, and using third-party verification.

    Their findings don’t exactly inspire confidence. Of the dozen major grocery retailers in the U.S., eight received an F grade, with 10 points or fewer out of a possible 100. That group includes Kroger, Walmart, and Albertsons, three of the five top-earning grocers in the U.S. While many of the failing companies do carry some house-brand meat labeled “raised without antibiotics,” none have strong policies to cover the entire range of their private-label fresh meat.

    [ad_2]

    Source link