Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is bacterial resistance really due to mutation?
christ_fanatic
Inactive Member


Message 16 of 27 (244070)
09-16-2005 7:04 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Martin245
04-12-2005 8:58 AM


Viruses and bacteria.
With your thread, I think it should be pointed out that much the same happens with viruses except that viruses have inherited the resistance to natural drugs, an example being when scientists used penicillin(?) on an 18th or 19th century sample of the flu virus I think. With bacteria, either are resistant or they're not, and they're offspring will very likely have it (and due to the way they reproduce, only a mutation coiuld remove it). The ones that do survive do so because they have inherited the resistance. Many of the experiments done by scientists to show how mutations can add info have been extremely controversial.
This message has been edited by christ_fanatic, 09-16-2005 07:06 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Martin245, posted 04-12-2005 8:58 AM Martin245 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by Wounded King, posted 09-16-2005 7:39 AM christ_fanatic has replied

  
Cal
Inactive Member


Message 17 of 27 (244075)
09-16-2005 7:34 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by christ_fanatic
09-16-2005 7:02 AM


Re: Viruses and bacteria.
christ fanatic:
viruses may have inherited the resistance to natural drugs, such as penicillin
Yes, a virus inherits from its predecessors a resistance to penicillin.
It pretty much goes along with the inherited lack of an important structure which penicillin targets, this being the cell wall. Most bacterial cells have double layers on their outside. The outermost layer -- the "cell wall" -- is similar to the outer layer of plant cells, but is missing in human and animal cells. This wall must grow along with the cell, or the growing cell will eventually become too big for the wall and burst and die. Penicillins kill bacteria by interfering with the wall-building system. Virii don't even have cells, let alone cell walls, so they are resistant to penicillin in much the same sense that snakes are resistant to athelete's foot.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by christ_fanatic, posted 09-16-2005 7:02 AM christ_fanatic has not replied

  
Wounded King
Member
Posts: 4149
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 18 of 27 (244076)
09-16-2005 7:39 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by christ_fanatic
09-16-2005 7:04 AM


Re: Viruses and bacteria.
I'm not sure what you are trying to say, your post seems rather confused.
Penicillin does not have no effect on viruses due to some sort of resistance, it has no effect because it works by blocking the production of the bacterial cell wall, since viruses don't have any such structure they are obviously unaffected.
It is certainly true that viruses can also be shown to develop resistance to antivirals, but I can't work out what you consider the difference to be between the origin of resistanc in bacteria nd viruses. I would suggest that bacteria, having plasmids, are more likely to spread resistance laterally than viruses, but as for the origin and general inheritance, I can't see why these should be any different.
Many of the experiments done by scientists to show how mutations can add info have been extremely controversial.
Would you like to expand on this point, detailing specific experiments and the points of controversy?
TTFN,
WK

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by christ_fanatic, posted 09-16-2005 7:04 AM christ_fanatic has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by christ_fanatic, posted 09-16-2005 1:38 PM Wounded King has replied

  
christ_fanatic
Inactive Member


Message 19 of 27 (244163)
09-16-2005 1:38 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Wounded King
09-16-2005 7:39 AM


Re: Viruses and bacteria.
I've been given penicillin for a viral infection before (don't ask me why, ask the doc who gave it to me). There was an experiment with the flu(? It may have been a bacterial infection not a virus) virus that was extracted from a ship that was ravaged by a disease while it was headed toward the antarctic. The disease killed everyone (no known survivors at least). When it was extracted, the scientists compared it's reaction to antibioitics with the reaction of a modern strain of the same disease. In their results, the extracted strain survived, while the modern strain didn't. But they reported their finding's as the other way around, and when they were exposed, they admitted their wrongdoing. A similar experiment is going to be conducted with the 1918 flu strain that will be extracted from some that died in a northern European country (maybe Scandinavian). I found this ref in a paper call "Did God make Patogenic Virses?" at True Origins | alimentacin natural this ref applies to the 1918 bug not the former one, the site was closed down due to financial difficulties.
This message has been edited by christ_fanatic, 09-16-2005 01:39 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Wounded King, posted 09-16-2005 7:39 AM Wounded King has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Wounded King, posted 09-16-2005 2:07 PM christ_fanatic has replied
 Message 22 by Cal, posted 09-16-2005 2:30 PM christ_fanatic has not replied

  
Wounded King
Member
Posts: 4149
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 20 of 27 (244174)
09-16-2005 2:07 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by christ_fanatic
09-16-2005 1:38 PM


Re: Viruses and bacteria.
Sounds like your doctor was either lazy or perhaps thought your viral infection might leave you open to opportunistic bacterial infection.
There was an experiment with the flu(? It may have been a bacterial infection not a virus) virus that was extracted from a ship that was ravaged by a disease while it was headed toward the antarctic. The disease killed everyone (no known survivors at least). When it was extracted, the scientists compared it's reaction to antibioitics with the reaction of a modern strain of the same disease. In their results, the extracted strain survived, while the modern strain didn't. But they reported their finding's as the other way around, and when they were exposed, they admitted their wrongdoing.
This isn't a usable reference. I have no idea where to begin searching for anything to verify this claim.
Even the article you reference only mentions the 1918 Flu virus as an example of a virus, it gives no details of any experiment to compare modern strains with the 1918 virual strain.
Do you have any actual information on either of these two experiments?
TTFN,
WK

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by christ_fanatic, posted 09-16-2005 1:38 PM christ_fanatic has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by christ_fanatic, posted 09-16-2005 2:18 PM Wounded King has not replied

  
christ_fanatic
Inactive Member


Message 21 of 27 (244176)
09-16-2005 2:18 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Wounded King
09-16-2005 2:07 PM


Re: Viruses and bacteria.
I thought it was reffed in the article. My mistake. I am Yahoo searching to see if I can find anything on either one of the experiments I listed. I will post ASAP.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Wounded King, posted 09-16-2005 2:07 PM Wounded King has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by christ_fanatic, posted 09-16-2005 9:13 PM christ_fanatic has not replied
 Message 24 by christ_fanatic, posted 09-16-2005 9:15 PM christ_fanatic has not replied

  
Cal
Inactive Member


Message 22 of 27 (244178)
09-16-2005 2:30 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by christ_fanatic
09-16-2005 1:38 PM


Re: Viruses and bacteria.
I've been given penicillin for a viral infection before (don't ask me why, ask the doc who gave it to me).
This is one of my pet peeves.
Antibiotic resistance is a significant problem, and getting worse. Over-prescribing of antibiotics is a major contributing factor. Patient insistence on being prescribed antibiotics is a major factor contributing to this major contributing factor. The threat from antibiotic-resistant strains of bacteria is a price we all end up paying for ignorance, even when it is not our own; every prescribing of an antibiotic (whether actually indicated or not) is an opportunity for strains of bacteria to develop resistance (through a process many of the worst offenders are unwilling even to admit exists, called: "evolution"). Often, the prescribing of an antibiotic is a care provider practicing "CYA" in the face of an uncertain diagnosis (it's often favored as a less time-consuming and therefore cheaper alternative to performing expensive diagnostic tests).
The problem is made much worse by the many patients who, upon experiencing a relief from symptoms, quit taking the drug. These people make their bodies available to the bacteria as training grounds for increased resistance. Then they go off to work, to the grocery store, and their kids go off to school, exposing everyone with whom they come in contact to increasingly resistant strains -- including those who have made the effort to educate themselves on proper use of antibiotics (which really isn't all that complicated) instead of waving their responsibility in the matter away as belonging to the doctor who gave them the antibiotic.
It may be that you were prescribed an antibiotic to control a secondary infection, an opportunistic bacterial infection of the sort which often follows a viral infection; or he may have prescribed it prophylactically, to prevent such an infection. I still say: if you don't know why you got the antibiotic, you should.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by christ_fanatic, posted 09-16-2005 1:38 PM christ_fanatic has not replied

  
christ_fanatic
Inactive Member


Message 23 of 27 (244250)
09-16-2005 9:13 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by christ_fanatic
09-16-2005 2:18 PM


Re: Viruses and bacteria.
I have been unable to find any reference to the experiments I mentioned and will retract my statements about them until I have otherwise learned so.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by christ_fanatic, posted 09-16-2005 2:18 PM christ_fanatic has not replied

  
christ_fanatic
Inactive Member


Message 24 of 27 (244252)
09-16-2005 9:15 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by christ_fanatic
09-16-2005 2:18 PM


Re: Viruses and bacteria.
I have been unable to find any reference to the experiments I mentioned and will retract my statements about them until I have otherwise learned so.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by christ_fanatic, posted 09-16-2005 2:18 PM christ_fanatic has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by Wounded King, posted 09-17-2005 8:29 AM christ_fanatic has replied

  
Wounded King
Member
Posts: 4149
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 25 of 27 (244315)
09-17-2005 8:29 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by christ_fanatic
09-16-2005 9:15 PM


Re: Viruses and bacteria.
Could this be what you are thinking of in relation to the 1918 Spanish flu?
The original research (Gamblin, et al., 2004) was published in Science, so you will need a subscription to see the whole article. The abstract reas as follows...
The 1918 influenza pandemic resulted in about 20 million deaths. This enormous impact, coupled with renewed interest in emerging infections, makes characterization of the virus involved a priority. Receptor binding, the initial event in virus infection, is a major determinant of virus transmissibility that, for influenza viruses, is mediated by the hemagglutinin (HA) membrane glycoprotein. We have determined the crystal structures of the HA from the 1918 virus and two closely related HAs in complex with receptor analogs. They explain how the 1918 HA, while retaining receptor binding site amino acids characteristic of an avian precursor HA, is able to bind human receptors and how, as a consequence, the virus was able to spread in the human population.
So this discusses the molecular basis of the virulence of the 1918 strain in humans, but it doesn't say anything about viricidal resistance.
Is this what you were thinking of perhaps?
TTFN,
WK

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by christ_fanatic, posted 09-16-2005 9:15 PM christ_fanatic has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by christ_fanatic, posted 09-17-2005 1:44 PM Wounded King has not replied
 Message 27 by christ_fanatic, posted 09-17-2005 1:52 PM Wounded King has not replied

  
christ_fanatic
Inactive Member


Message 26 of 27 (244406)
09-17-2005 1:44 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by Wounded King
09-17-2005 8:29 AM


Re: Viruses and bacteria.
No it wasn't. The page I was looking for about the extraction of the 1918 flu was different. It did have some reasearch updates about the flu, but thanks for looking.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Wounded King, posted 09-17-2005 8:29 AM Wounded King has not replied

  
christ_fanatic
Inactive Member


Message 27 of 27 (244409)
09-17-2005 1:52 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by Wounded King
09-17-2005 8:29 AM


Re: Viruses and bacteria.
No it wasn't. The page I was looking for about the extraction of the 1918 flu was different. It did have some reasearch updates about the flu, but thanks for looking.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Wounded King, posted 09-17-2005 8:29 AM Wounded King has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024