Notices
Results 1 to 33 of 33
Like Tree5Likes
  • 1 Post By MacGyver1968
  • 1 Post By Cogito Ergo Sum
  • 2 Post By mat5592
  • 1 Post By Cogito Ergo Sum

Thread: A way to kill infectious bacteria instead of drugs

  1. #1 A way to kill infectious bacteria instead of drugs 
    Forum Radioactive Isotope cosmictraveler's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Key West, Florida, Earth
    Posts
    4,788
    "For bacteria to actually die, the hot water would have to be at a temperature above what your skin could tolerate. Most people can tolerate a temperature of 110 degrees for little bits of time, but that's the most we can do."



    Knowing that we could use a dialysis machine and hook up people to it and heat up their blood then cool it back down before putting it back into the person. The dialysis machine is already being made so that it would be easy to modify it to do this type of procedure.

    The rest of the blood will not be affected by doing this at this temperature I wouldn't think. This would be a way of getting rid of any infectious bacteria that people have in their blood streams.


    When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace.
    Jimi Hendrix
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Moderator Moderator Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,519
    In essence, you are proposing heat sterilization of blood in order to kill microorganisms?
    It seems to be a variant of using an autoclave (which uses steam at 394 K with a pressure of 1.1 kg/cm² for 10-15 minutes).

    In order to be effective, we would have to know the thermal death time of a particular species (and its population).
    And we would have to ensure that the proteins (e.g. Hb) do not denature, that the water does not evaporate, that the pH remains stable and that we do not deprive the patient of O2.


    "The only safe rule is to dispute only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong."

    ~ Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831), Stratagem XXXVIII.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    794
    I don't think its good for blood to coock above 42 degrees even that's I probably to high
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Genius Duck Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    12,030
    Are all bacteria solely in the blood?
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope cosmictraveler's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Key West, Florida, Earth
    Posts
    4,788
    We would need to find out the exact temperatures at which the infectious bacteria die at and from what my first post stated that woiuld be only above 110 F . We could also use a infrared light source to accomplish this but furthur investigation will be needed to see if it can be done. They already use infrared to destroy tumors inside of people so perhaps the same could be done with infectious bacteria?
    When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace.
    Jimi Hendrix
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope cosmictraveler's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Key West, Florida, Earth
    Posts
    4,788
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Are all bacteria solely in the blood?
    No, but using infrared light the areas that are infected could have that light administered to them. Just need to know at what temperatures those infectious bacteria will die at.
    When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace.
    Jimi Hendrix
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Cooking Something Good MacGyver1968's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    2,051
    Why not just introduce them to my ex-girlfriend?...she can make your blood boil.
    sculptor likes this.
    Fixin' shit that ain't broke.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Moderator Moderator Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,519
    Quote Originally Posted by cosmictraveler View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Are all bacteria solely in the blood?
    No, but using infrared light the areas that are infected could have that light administered to them. Just need to know at what temperatures those infectious bacteria will die at.

    If I understand it correctly, you propose the usage of IR on certain areas to treat sepsis due to bacteria in the blood?
    "The only safe rule is to dispute only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong."

    ~ Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831), Stratagem XXXVIII.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope cosmictraveler's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Key West, Florida, Earth
    Posts
    4,788
    Quote Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by cosmictraveler View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Are all bacteria solely in the blood?
    No, but using infrared light the areas that are infected could have that light administered to them. Just need to know at what temperatures those infectious bacteria will die at.

    If I understand it correctly, you propose the usage of IR on certain areas to treat sepsis due to bacteria in the blood?
    Correct, if that temperature will kill bacteria.
    When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace.
    Jimi Hendrix
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope cosmictraveler's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Key West, Florida, Earth
    Posts
    4,788
    Could also use ultraviolet light .

    All bacteria (and all cells) can be killed by UV, because it damages the DNA.
    When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace.
    Jimi Hendrix
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    city of wine and roses
    Posts
    6,222
    One thing to bear in mind. If you've got bacteria circulating in the blood itself, you've got a pretty sick patient in the first place.

    Better hospital practice in surgery, as well as good supervision of catheters, injection sites, IV lines, managing wounds and careful skin maintenance for people who are immobilised for long periods would prevent most of these infections in the first place. And of course, aggressive treatment of the locations of infections in organs and other tissues.
    "Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen." Winston Churchill
    "nature is like a game of Jenga; you never know which brick you pull out will cause the whole stack to collapse" Lucy Cooke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope cosmictraveler's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Key West, Florida, Earth
    Posts
    4,788
    The major problem is that there are no antibiotics that can kill the new strains of infectious bacteria, that's why I suggested these two approachs since no one as yet, that I'm aware of, have tried either.
    When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace.
    Jimi Hendrix
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,839
    Quote Originally Posted by adelady View Post
    One thing to bear in mind. If you've got bacteria circulating in the blood itself, you've got a pretty sick patient in the first place.

    Better hospital practice in surgery, as well as good supervision of catheters, injection sites, IV lines, managing wounds and careful skin maintenance for people who are immobilised for long periods would prevent most of these infections in the first place. And of course, aggressive treatment of the locations of infections in organs and other tissues.
    Adelady, would one go septic if bacteria was in the blood? I am imagining all organs would be affected.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Moderator Moderator Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,519
    Quote Originally Posted by cosmictraveler View Post
    Could also use ultraviolet light .

    All bacteria (and all cells) can be killed by UV, because it damages the DNA.

    And were you planning to expose blood to UV in the modified dialysis machine, in contrast with IR?
    Because if one would expose the skin to UV in order to kill bacteria in the blood, that could be detrimental due to the increased risk of DNA damage.
    "The only safe rule is to dispute only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong."

    ~ Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831), Stratagem XXXVIII.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope cosmictraveler's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Key West, Florida, Earth
    Posts
    4,788
    Quote Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by cosmictraveler View Post
    Could also use ultraviolet light .

    All bacteria (and all cells) can be killed by UV, because it damages the DNA.

    And were you planning to expose blood to UV in the modified dialysis machine, in contrast with IR?
    Because if one would expose the skin to UV in order to kill bacteria in the blood, that could be detrimental due to the increased risk of DNA damage.
    Let us say that a foot was lnfected. You can easily bandage up the part that isn't infected then expose the rest to the light. That way you'd only be killing those germs in that specfic area and no where else.
    When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace.
    Jimi Hendrix
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Moderator Moderator Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,519
    Quote Originally Posted by cosmictraveler View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by cosmictraveler View Post
    Could also use ultraviolet light .

    All bacteria (and all cells) can be killed by UV, because it damages the DNA.

    And were you planning to expose blood to UV in the modified dialysis machine, in contrast with IR?
    Because if one would expose the skin to UV in order to kill bacteria in the blood, that could be detrimental due to the increased risk of DNA damage.
    Let us say that a foot was lnfected. You can easily bandage up the part that isn't infected then expose the rest to the light. That way you'd only be killing those germs in that specfic area and no where else.

    Yes, but would it be effective?
    If sepsis is caused by bacteria in the blood, does that not mean that these microorganisms are transported throughout the whole cardiovascular system?
    "The only safe rule is to dispute only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong."

    ~ Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831), Stratagem XXXVIII.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope cosmictraveler's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Key West, Florida, Earth
    Posts
    4,788
    Yes, but would it be effective?
    If sepsis is caused by bacteria in the blood, does that not mean that these microorganisms are transported throughout the whole cardiovascular system?
    I do not know but I'd think that someone somewhere could do the research into this for I do not have the where with all to do so.
    When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace.
    Jimi Hendrix
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    3,452
    Just a thought here but could blood be filtered through certain types of metal filters, like silver for example, that we already know have anti-bacterial properties.
    “The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.”

    Bertrand Russell
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Moderator Moderator Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,519
    Quote Originally Posted by Ascended View Post
    Just a thought here but could blood be filtered through certain types of metal filters, like silver for example, that we already know have anti-bacterial properties.

    Yes, but what if the erythrocytes and leukocytes are greater in size then the strain (e.g. E. coli) one is trying to filter out? Would that not be problematic?
    "The only safe rule is to dispute only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong."

    ~ Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831), Stratagem XXXVIII.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    3,452
    Quote Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Ascended View Post
    Just a thought here but could blood be filtered through certain types of metal filters, like silver for example, that we already know have anti-bacterial properties.

    Yes, but what if the erythrocytes and leukocytes are greater in size then the strain (e.g. E. coli) one is trying to filter out? Would that not be problematic?
    Err, I'm afraid your knowledge vastly exceeds mine with regard to that aspect.

    Ok how about introducing some kind of friendly bacteria, that can be controlled, to out compete any of the more problematic or dangerous strains, I'm just running ideas here as again you're far more likely to beware whether such ideas could have any merit or are just impractical.
    “The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.”

    Bertrand Russell
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Moderator Moderator Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,519
    Quote Originally Posted by Ascended View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Ascended View Post
    Just a thought here but could blood be filtered through certain types of metal filters, like silver for example, that we already know have anti-bacterial properties.

    Yes, but what if the erythrocytes and leukocytes are greater in size then the strain (e.g. E. coli) one is trying to filter out? Would that not be problematic?
    Err, I'm afraid your knowledge vastly exceeds mine with regard to that aspect.

    Ok how about introducing some kind of friendly bacteria, that can be controlled, to out compete any of the more problematic or dangerous strains, I'm just running ideas here as again you're far more likely to beware whether such ideas could have any merit or are just impractical.

    I do not think that introducing a friendly bacterial strain is effective,
    given the fact that sepsis can be caused when bacteria (not necessarily (opportunistic) pathogens) are introduced into the cardiovascular system.

    The sterilization of blood (via heat and/or via filters) might be an effective method,
    but I am more in favor of using a modified dialysis machine that incorporates your idea about silver filters and member cosmictraveler's idea about applying IR or UV. Yet, many question remain (such as the ones I posed in post #2) and a stroll through the scientific literature is advisable if one wishes to elaborate the details of this idea.

    Last, physiology and pathology are not my specialties either.
    I think that member mat5592 is able to provide a more detailed answer.
    Ascended likes this.
    "The only safe rule is to dispute only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong."

    ~ Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831), Stratagem XXXVIII.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Forum Masters Degree mat5592's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    West Virginia
    Posts
    601
    Quote Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Ascended View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Ascended View Post
    Just a thought here but could blood be filtered through certain types of metal filters, like silver for example, that we already know have anti-bacterial properties.

    Yes, but what if the erythrocytes and leukocytes are greater in size then the strain (e.g. E. coli) one is trying to filter out? Would that not be problematic?
    Err, I'm afraid your knowledge vastly exceeds mine with regard to that aspect.

    Ok how about introducing some kind of friendly bacteria, that can be controlled, to out compete any of the more problematic or dangerous strains, I'm just running ideas here as again you're far more likely to beware whether such ideas could have any merit or are just impractical.

    I do not think that introducing a friendly bacterial strain is effective,
    given the fact that sepsis can be caused when bacteria (not necessarily (opportunistic) pathogens) are introduced into the cardiovascular system.

    The sterilization of blood (via heat and/or via filters) might be an effective method,
    but I am more in favor of using a modified dialysis machine that incorporates your idea about silver filters and member cosmictraveler's idea about applying IR or UV. Yet, many question remain (such as the ones I posed in post #2) and a stroll through the scientific literature is advisable if one wishes to elaborate the details of this idea.

    Last, physiology and pathology are not my specialties either.
    I think that member mat5592 is able to provide a more detailed answer.
    I'm not one for detailed answers of things online, but I can add some input.

    I don't think heating blood as a method to treat septicemia would be very effective and/or safe. Let's imagine that a patient gets food poisoning as a result of Salmonella typhi, which then progresses to a septicemia. According to this study (keep in mind it was performed on consumable meats, not humans, so it could vary), we would want to achieve a blood temperature of about 60 degrees Celsius for an extended period of time to effectively kill the organism. However, it seems that hemolysis, or lysis of the red blood cells, begins to occur at around 51 degrees Celsius. The entire practice of blood banking exists solely to prevent hemolytic transfusion reactions, so you can probably gather that this is not a good thing.

    I am aware other organisms have both higher and lower temperatures which must be acquired to kill the organisms, meaning this method might work if the causative agent had a significantly lower level of thermal inactivation. I just randomly chose Salmonella typhi for my example.

    As for the blood filter, if it's only filtering based on size, I can't imagine it would work as leukocytes, erythrocytes and even thrombocytes are much larger than any bacteria I've ever seen. If there was some property of the filter that targeted things specific to bacteria (I really have no idea), then maybe it could work.

    Edit: Forgot to address the "introducing friendly bacteria question." Again, I wouldn't recommend this. There is no normal flora of the blood and any foreign object is probably seen as a threat to your immune system, so a response would occur. Heck, even other red blood cells (with unfamiliar antigens, of course) are seen as a threat to your immune system and destroyed, even though they pose no real danger.
    Last edited by mat5592; October 27th, 2013 at 11:27 AM.
    Ascended and Cogito Ergo Sum like this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Moderator Moderator Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,519
    Quote Originally Posted by mat5592 View Post
    As for the blood filter, if it's only filtering based on size, I can't imagine it would work as leukocytes, erythrocytes and even thrombocytes are much larger than any bacteria I've ever seen. If there was some property of the filter that targeted things specific to bacteria (I really have no idea), then maybe it could work.

    Perhaps a filter that targets surface proteins via antibodies that are attached to a surface?
    "The only safe rule is to dispute only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong."

    ~ Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831), Stratagem XXXVIII.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,840
    Blood and fluids such as urine are normally sterile - no bacteria present. If there are significant numbers of bacteria in the blood stream, you have a very sick person. Probably dying.

    Most methods of killing bacteria, though, will also kill blood cells, and therefore kill the patient. This applies to both high temperature and ultra violet. This is why we use antibiotics, which are relatively harmless to humans. Finding alternatives to antibiotics is an ongoing program, and is not easy. Certainly, nothing as simple as heat or UV will do it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Forum Masters Degree mat5592's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    West Virginia
    Posts
    601
    Quote Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by mat5592 View Post
    As for the blood filter, if it's only filtering based on size, I can't imagine it would work as leukocytes, erythrocytes and even thrombocytes are much larger than any bacteria I've ever seen. If there was some property of the filter that targeted things specific to bacteria (I really have no idea), then maybe it could work.

    Perhaps a filter that targets surface proteins via antibodies that are attached to a surface?
    That might work somewhat, but again the filter must be large enough to allow things like monocytes to pass through, which are much much larger than bacteria. Even antibodies with the greatest affinities for specific antigens would have a hard time overcoming the potential distance between the two.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Moderator Moderator Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,519
    Quote Originally Posted by mat5592 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by mat5592 View Post
    As for the blood filter, if it's only filtering based on size, I can't imagine it would work as leukocytes, erythrocytes and even thrombocytes are much larger than any bacteria I've ever seen. If there was some property of the filter that targeted things specific to bacteria (I really have no idea), then maybe it could work.

    Perhaps a filter that targets surface proteins via antibodies that are attached to a surface?
    That might work somewhat, but again the filter must be large enough to allow things like monocytes to pass through, which are much much larger than bacteria. Even antibodies with the greatest affinities for specific antigens would have a hard time overcoming the potential distance between the two.

    Well then, back to the drawing board!
    mat5592 likes this.
    "The only safe rule is to dispute only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong."

    ~ Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831), Stratagem XXXVIII.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    984
    Heating blood enough to kill bacteria will also kill the blood. In anycase the bacteria are rarely in the blood.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Theatre Whore babe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Resident of Big Island of Hawai'i since 2003, and Mainland relocated to the Bay Area.
    Posts
    13,226
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Are all bacteria solely in the blood?
    I do not think so. I think you can get bacterial infections from your skin.

    People here have gotten pretty severe ones by just walking in a water source they shouldn't have.

    here is a little more information

    bacterial skin infections
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    city of wine and roses
    Posts
    6,222
    There was a Nobel Prize won for this idea in 1927!

    1. Infect syphilis sufferers with malaria.

    2. Malaria fever kills off the infection in about 4 days.

    3. Quinine treats the malaria.

    Admittedly, this wasn't the result of thinking about killing bacteria. It was a spin-off from trying to treat various forms of mental illness with heat treatments. But it worked. In the days before penicillin, this was a wonderful thing.

    Julius Wagner-Jauregg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    "Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen." Winston Churchill
    "nature is like a game of Jenga; you never know which brick you pull out will cause the whole stack to collapse" Lucy Cooke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    3,452
    Quote Originally Posted by adelady View Post
    There was a Nobel Prize won for this idea in 1927!

    1. Infect syphilis sufferers with malaria.

    2. Malaria fever kills off the infection in about 4 days.

    3. Quinine treats the malaria.

    Admittedly, this wasn't the result of thinking about killing bacteria. It was a spin-off from trying to treat various forms of mental illness with heat treatments. But it worked. In the days before penicillin, this was a wonderful thing.

    Julius Wagner-Jauregg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Interesting idea using one disease to kill off another, could this approach also work for artificially engineered protein molecules? In this way avoiding the negative side effects of another dangerous disease such as malaria but also maintaining the necessary antibacterial properties to successfully kill off bacterial infections that have become resistant to current antibiotics. So basically specifically designed to work around the bacterial resistance whilst still remaining harmless to the actual patient. I think I read a while ago that some molecules have already been synthesized that can mimic the defensive peptides acting against invading pathogens whilst they circulate in the blood.
    “The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.”

    Bertrand Russell
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,840
    Of course, quinine no longer works. Even the latest wonder drug for malaria, artemisinin, no longer works for a lot of malaria. And some malaria is lethal!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    city of wine and roses
    Posts
    6,222
    And some malaria is lethal!
    Even at the time, the form of malaria they used had a 5% mortality rate. Seeing as tertiary syphilis was 100% fatal - and that only after a long period of misery and madness - people saw it as a worthwhile risk.
    "Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen." Winston Churchill
    "nature is like a game of Jenga; you never know which brick you pull out will cause the whole stack to collapse" Lucy Cooke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33  
    Theatre Whore babe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Resident of Big Island of Hawai'i since 2003, and Mainland relocated to the Bay Area.
    Posts
    13,226
    Quote Originally Posted by adelady View Post
    There was a Nobel Prize won for this idea in 1927!

    1. Infect syphilis sufferers with malaria.

    2. Malaria fever kills off the infection in about 4 days.

    3. Quinine treats the malaria.

    Admittedly, this wasn't the result of thinking about killing bacteria. It was a spin-off from trying to treat various forms of mental illness with heat treatments. But it worked. In the days before penicillin, this was a wonderful thing.

    Julius Wagner-Jauregg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    #3.....it helps with leg cramps..
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 138
    Last Post: July 7th, 2012, 11:36 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: May 16th, 2012, 10:37 PM
  3. new technology in genetic/ infectious diseases research
    By baiayin in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: May 16th, 2012, 09:43 PM
  4. Legalizing Drugs to Win The War on Drugs
    By arKane in forum Politics
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: February 13th, 2011, 10:13 PM
  5. DRUGS
    By Darth Lord Sidious in forum Health & Medicine
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: July 31st, 2007, 01:24 AM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •