Microblogology

In class we have been discussing antibiotic resistance. From the CDC their fast facts on antibiotic resistance:

Antibiotic resistance has been called one of the world’s most pressing public health problems.

The number of bacteria resistant to antibiotics has increased in the last decade. Many bacterial infections are becoming resistant to the most commonly prescribed antibiotic treatments.

Every time a person takes antibiotics, sensitive bacteria are killed, but resistant germs may be left to grow and multiply. Repeated and improper uses of antibiotics are primary causes of the increase in drug-resistant bacteria.

Misuse of antibiotics jeopardizes the usefulness of essential drugs. Decreasing inappropriate antibiotic use is the best way to control resistance.

Children are of particular concern because they have the highest rates of antibiotic use. They also have one of the highest rates of infections caused by antibiotic-resistant pathogens.

Parent pressure makes a difference. For pediatric care, a study showed that doctors prescribe antibiotics 65% of the time if they perceive parents expect them and 12% of the time if they feel parents do not expect them.

Antibiotic resistance can cause significant danger and suffering for people who have common infections that once were easily treatable with antibiotics. When antibiotics fail to work, the consequences are longer-lasting illnesses, more doctor visits or extended hospital stays, and the need for more expensive and toxic medications. Some resistant infections can even cause death.

Their other points? Most sinus infections are caused by viruses. Most sore throats are caused by viruses. Most cases of bronchitis are caused by viruses. The common coldis caused mainly by viruses. Antibiotics don’t work against viral infections.

The rest of the site covers all aspects of antibiotic resistance and is interesting reading.

Magic bullet for all viruses? Not quite.  A  paper published in PNAS details how a consortium of researchers have discovered a compound that appears to target and inactivate enveloped viruses. Not naked viruses, just enveloped viruses. But the amazing aspect of this compound is it that it appears to inhibit the infectivity of ALL enveloped viruses. All of them.

These includes a few heavy hitters you may have heard of such as the Flu, Hepatitis C virus, yellow fever, Ebola and HIV. But the actual list of viruses the compound currently known as LJ001 can inhibit include entire families of  viruses:  filoviruses, poxviruses, arenaviruses, bunyaviruses, paramyxoviruses, flaviviruses, as well as Influenza A and  HIV-1. All of them.

Currently our arsenal against viral infections is a small array of antiviral drugs that individually may target one virus (such as Tamiflu against the influenza virus) or specific family of viruses (acyclovir for herpesvirus family members). But that is it. A very meager weapons bank.So to have a molecule that can target ALL enveloped viruses is nothing short of breathtaking.

So, how does it work?  Investigators stated that the compound changed the lipid envelope and prevented viral entry into the cell.  But could LJ001 act on human lipid membranes as well? Yes, but according to Dr. Benhur Lee in a  report published in EurekAlert:

At antiviral concentrations, any damage it does to the cell’s membrane can be repaired, while damage done to static viral envelopes, which have no inherent regenerative capacity, is permanent and irreversible.

So, the good news?  If this compound is capable of delivering on its promises, we have just acquired potent new weapon in our fight against viral infections. The bad news? Still nothing to prevent the common cold (a naked virus).

The researchers involved in finding this molecule were from  UCLA, the  University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston, Cornell University, Harvard University as well as the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases.

We have been discussing vaccination in my class lately. Why is it important to vaccinate? Because if you don’t, dread diseases will manifest themselves and people you care about will become sick and possibly die.

Case in point: Outbreak of mumps in Monsey, Spring Valley, NY, where over 100 children have come down with the mumps. The article states is that the outbreak is limited to the religious communities who do not vaccinate their children.

So what is this telling us? Two things:

• The world that does vaccinate is creating something called “herd immunity” and limiting the spread of disease into the rest of the population.
• That these unvaccinated children and their parents are also probably at risk for getting measles and rubella, since the vaccine for mumps is contained in the same shot. Mumps is not likely to kill you, only make you pretty sick. However, the measles can make you very sick and kills 1 to 2 kids in every 1000 that get infected. In another report, 12 of 60 infected children had to be hospitalized.

I was listening to NPR the other day, and a response to why a woman is not vaccinating her children is because she trusts nature to take care of her children. That reminds me of a video I saw on the news of a young deer jumping into the lions den at the National Zoo in Washington, DC. Nature took it’s course there as well.

And so are a large number of people on the Scottish cruise liner, the Marco Polo. Over half of the  passengers on board developed a norovirus infection within a few days of leaving port. Symptoms of a noroviral infection include abdominal cramping and vomiting that will run its course over a couple of days.

Sadly, for those of you who know how infectious noroviruses are and how stable and long-lived they are in the environment:

It has emerged that passengers on the previous voyage of the Marco Polo who disembarked on Saturday were also struck with a sickness bug.

However,  cruise operators are saying that this previous spattering of illness was simple gastroenteritis and had given the ship  a “clean bill of health”. However, four days later, 400 people are sick with norovirus. That is quite a coincidence.

And equally disturbing, in an earlier report by the BBC :

Invergordon councillor Maxine Smith criticised the way the situation had been handled, claiming that potentially infected passengers were allowed to wander through the town after the ship docked there. She said there were reports of some passengers vomiting in the streets.

So…Points to ponder:

1. Is it wrong to keep passengers detained on a ship full of sick individuals until symptoms pass completely?

2.What if they leave while contagious to spread the infection to the port community or their home communities?

3. Why weren’t the cruise operators required to prove that the “gastroenteritis” wasn’t norovirus?

4. Should all cruise ship operators be forced to take their own cruises before allowing an innocent boatload of tourists on board a ship after an outbreak of “gastroenteritis”?

Finally, microbiology tip of the day: Hand sanitizers may or may not be effective against the norovirus. Simple hand washing with running water and soap works best.

Hey Everyone, changed hosting sites and am hoping to get the blog back to normal. Still learning how to do this… still not good but on the way.