If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Nature)   Scientists seek to create bacteria that can not be killed by the body's immune system. What could possibly go wrong?   ( nature.com) divider line
    More: Scary  
•       •       •

18441 clicks; posted to Main » on 03 Nov 2005 at 10:34 AM (12 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

117 Comments     (+0 »)

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

2005-11-03 09:29:22 AM  
Whose scientists? I mean, who's funding this research? Pharmaceutical companies, I presume?

/Today's drugs fund tomorrow's miracles dependence on corporate health vendors
2005-11-03 09:30:18 AM  
i, for one, welcome our new antibiotic resistant microbial overlords.
2005-11-03 09:33:51 AM  
[image from twtd.bluemountains.net.au too old to be available]
2005-11-03 09:41:18 AM  
dammit Booboo23! You're stealing my thoughts again!

*gets out the tinfoil*
2005-11-03 09:42:01 AM  

/Today's drugs fund tomorrow's miracles dependence on corporate health vendors

So then should we just stop researching new drugs?
2005-11-03 09:52:34 AM  

So then should we just stop researching new drugs?

I'd be happy if they wouldn't develeop new viruses!
2005-11-03 10:00:26 AM  
Ah, another case of scientists seeing if they can do something without wondering if they should.

Along the lines of "let's see if we can re-create polio/1918 killer flu/etc."
2005-11-03 10:35:10 AM  
did anyone even RTFA??!?

The article says nothing about "creating bacteria that can not be killed by the body's immune system."

If this gets greenlighted, I will be upset.
2005-11-03 10:37:43 AM  
khonshu: If this gets greenlighted, I will be upset.

Be Upset, Be Very Upset.
2005-11-03 10:37:48 AM  
I'll put this article in layman's terms for you:

Our bodies fight disease.

Our bodies even fight diseases that can overcome antibiotics.

Our bodies fight these superdiseases with special peptides.

Some scientists want to use those peptides to make better medicine.

But it appears that bacteria can, indeed, develop resistance to our own peptides.

So the scientists are going back to the drawing board.

The end.


Ya rly.
2005-11-03 10:38:38 AM  
How else will our Republican overlords continue to control us unless they can actually create the fear?
2005-11-03 10:40:34 AM  
2005-11-03 10:41:16 AM  
"challenged to a scientific duel"

Someone played too much D&D as a kid.
2005-11-03 10:41:16 AM  
Let's see. Create a mutated virus or bacteria, infect Al Qaeda members, let them escape/run back to their comrades, profit!
2005-11-03 10:41:42 AM  
Wanted for questioning:

[image from synergizedsolutions.com too old to be available]
2005-11-03 10:42:23 AM  
Submitter fails it!

/"it" is reading comprehension
2005-11-03 10:42:34 AM  
Hey dumbasses, stop using anti-bacterial soap. You're lowering your immune system's ability to fight off bacteria when it can't keep practicing on the weaker strains.
2005-11-03 10:42:34 AM  
well, most naturally occuring hightly infections bacteria aren't always destroyed by the body's immune system anyway...that's why they are infectious and why we use antibiotics.

all this nature article proves is that bacteria can become resistant to any perceived threat to their well-being...whether it be a naturally occuring human anti-microbial or a synthetic one.

/plays with bacteria all day
2005-11-03 10:43:21 AM  
I hear FEMA dipped those $2000 debit cards in this stuff before they passed them out.
2005-11-03 10:44:04 AM  
khonshu needs to get laid

ya rly
2005-11-03 10:44:39 AM  
2005-11-03 10:45:01 AM  
This is the part of the article that's scary:
"If antibiotic resistance is generated than we are really opening up a big part of our defence system to attack," he says. If such resistant bacteria became widespread, maybe even minor cuts and scrapes would not heal, he says.

Yeah, probably not good to make drugs derived from these peptides, if that's the case.
2005-11-03 10:45:06 AM  
khonshu: STFU and GBTW.

Ya rly.

o rly ?
2005-11-03 10:45:38 AM  
massive amounts of jack daniels will cure all.
2005-11-03 10:45:45 AM  
I'll see you guys in Vegas.

/the big fire
2005-11-03 10:46:12 AM  
Eat more dirt. Your body needs the practice killing bad shiat.
2005-11-03 10:46:35 AM  
Man, what a bunch of farktards. Isolating a single peptide out of a blend of hundreds and then trying to use a lot of it to kill bacteria, you're going to select for resistant strains and then there you go... resistant bacteria.

The immune system is a complex beast with a lot of different tactics to kill pathogens, but different pathogens are more or less susceptible to different offensives by the immune system. Isolating one of those tactical weapons in a tube, out of context, a small population of bacteria will evolve a way around it.

A decent idea to try, from a research perspective, but can't believe they're surprised at the result.

2005-11-03 10:47:16 AM  
massive amounts of jack daniels will cure all.

Truer words have never been spoken.
2005-11-03 10:47:48 AM  
Now it makes sense!
That's why the CIA has all those secret prison camps at such remote locations.
2005-11-03 10:47:59 AM  

i'm not so much worried about the antibacterial soap as i am about what they add to the soap to make it anti-bacterial. one of the most common antibiotics, triclosan, can react with chlorine in drinking/tap water and create formaldehyde, essentially. there was a recent study at Va Tech on this subject.

as long as you only use the antibacterial soap on your hands and not in your body...of course then if you create resistant bacteria on your hands and then ingest them, you now have resistant bacteria in your body...which you then have to kill with stronger antibiotics....ahhhhh, it's a vicious cycle!!!

just use pure isopropyl alcohol on your hands, forget that soap stuff.
2005-11-03 10:48:45 AM  
But, but...these bacteria have evolved resistance to the peptides, and we all know evolution to be a pack of lies invented by Satan.

/obvious troll
2005-11-03 10:49:23 AM  
2005-11-03 10:44:04 AM Eat The Placentakhonshu needs to get laid. ya rly

Indeed, but I have to wait two weeks while my wife and I await the results of our IVF cycle. oh, and, my sex life is none of your business. thanks.

:rolls eyes:
2005-11-03 10:50:01 AM  
"The mad scientist was once only a creature of gothic romance; now he is everywhere, busy torturing atoms and animals in his laboratory."

"Science transcends mere politics. As recent history demonstrates, scientists are as willing to work for a Tojo, a Hitler, or a Stalin as for the free nations of the West."

"Science is the whore of industry and the handmaiden of war."
2005-11-03 10:50:34 AM  
Eat more dirt. Your body needs the practice killing bad shiat.

Nick Nostril wins!
2005-11-03 10:51:35 AM  
The only "anti-bacterial" agent in most "anti-bacterial" soaps is detergent. the term means simply that it kills bacteria...all soap kills bacteria....its marketing. They do not contain "antibiotics" in the way we usually think of them (penicillin etc.)
2005-11-03 10:51:41 AM  

I hadn't thought about that... Save us, Flying Spaghetti Monster! Save us with thy noodly appendage! Smote our bacterial oppressors!


/You know, I work for antibiotic resistant bacteria...
2005-11-03 10:51:48 AM  

Hey, I play with bacteria all day too.

One thing I can definitely say about antibiotics: they have their uses, but they can also cause numerous problems. It'd be more effective for us to use bacteriophage on surface cuts and other things, and only use antibiotics to dislodge, say, bronchitis.

But, antibiotics are big business, so at least in America, they get pushed a lot.
2005-11-03 10:52:27 AM  
If you're not frightened enough I recommend reading "The Killers Within: The Deadly Rise of Drug Resistant Bacteria" by Mark J. Plotkin and Michael Shnayerson.

I particularly like the chapter on using bacteriophages (viruses) as an alternative to antimicrobial drugs.

(What could possibly go wrong?)
2005-11-03 10:52:47 AM  
that's brilliant.

we're all doomed. science is actually going to kill us.
2005-11-03 10:53:38 AM  
I would have much read this article last week, when I didn't have a gross gash on my ring finger.
2005-11-03 10:55:20 AM  
Konshu nails it.
2005-11-03 10:55:42 AM  
This is another very scary concept of science. Evolution (thanks FSM!) gets millions of years to select the best defenses for an organism. We can beat that with an incubator and some LB media over a much shorter amount of time. (Just look at obesity and the industrial revolution; we can develop HFCS items faster than our species can adapt.)

The concept is cool, adaptation is always possible. (These guys should have wagered something fierce.) But what system did these e.coli leverage their peptide defense against; most resistant strains switch one protein for another. The SNP that let these bacteria survive could make them susceptible to something else. It could be pH or simple sugars, something that allows us to still kill them easily.

/It's why we make many flavors of these peptides.
//Pandemics don't come from h5n1, they come from our blindsides; spend 7.1bn exploring them instead, cuz I need the grant money.
2005-11-03 10:56:12 AM  

The only "anti-bacterial" agent in most "anti-bacterial" soaps is detergent.

that's not entirely true. many of the soaps contain a simple topical anti-microbial compound(s). most aren't meant for ingestion like penicillin, vancomycin, etc... but they are antibiotic compounds. although i'm sure some companies do lie and say that their soaps are "anti-biotic soap" when, in fact, they don't have any true anti-microbial additives. look on some labels at home. triclosan/irgasan, like i mentioned above, is a common one. there are several others that i can't think of at the moment.
2005-11-03 10:57:08 AM  
handrail, TheWhaleShark:

What bugs do ya'll work with?

As far as bacteriophage, they're cool - even cooler, the use of purified phage lytic enzymes. More direct, more to the point, easier to synthesize and perhaps more generalizable than trying to work with whole Phage. Fischetti's stuff is the bomb.

/is a rickettsia guy
//love the Fischetti's video of PLEs pwning some punk-ass strept
2005-11-03 10:57:08 AM  
Humans are truely stupid!
2005-11-03 10:58:33 AM  
Considering that the anthrax used in the 2001 attacks almost certainly came from a "secure" US government lab I have every confidence that this will turn out well.
2005-11-03 10:58:35 AM  

This is the part of the article that's scary:

"If antibiotic resistance is generated than we are really opening up a big part of our defence system to attack," he says. If such resistant bacteria became widespread, maybe even minor cuts and scrapes would not heal, he says.

I agree, that part of the article is terrifying! Someone made it to the editorial staff at Nature without knowing the difference between the comparative "than" and the conditional "then"!

The horror...
the horror.
2005-11-03 10:59:01 AM  
science is actually going to kill us.

It's been killing us, at least since we began using rocks/bones/sticks as tools.
2005-11-03 11:00:54 AM  
[image from onfinite.com too old to be available]
2005-11-03 11:00:56 AM  
FloydA, cut him/her a break. S/he is probably British.

/Lucky it didn't mention Big Bruv.
Displayed 50 of 117 comments

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.