A prescription for tackling antibiotic resistance

Antibiotics are great for treating bacterial infections such as bronchitis and pneumonia. They are so great that many doctors prescribe them even when infections are caused by viruses, not bacteria.

But the overuse of antibiotics has helped spawn the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria. One obvious solution is to prescribe fewer antibiotics. But that is easier said than done.

Patients with lower respiratory tract infections caused by bacteria have the same clinical symptoms as patients with lower respiratory tract infections caused by viruses. There are tests that can tell them apart, but it can take days to get the results. Sick patients – and the doctors who treat them – simply don’t want to wait.

Wouldn’t it be great if there were some kind of test that could tell you in a matter of minutes whether your infection was caused by a bacterium or a virus?

There is, according to a study published in Wednesday’s edition of the Journal of the American Medical Assn.

Procalcitonin, or PCT, is a substance that circulates in the blood when a patient is fighting a bacterial infection but is rarely released in response to a viral infection. Hospital laboratories can measure the amount of PCT in a blood sample in about 20 minutes.

A group of Swiss researchers wanted to know whether PCT levels could help them figure out when it was appropriate to prescribe antibiotics for lower respiratory tract infections. They recruited 1,359 patients from six hospitals and randomly assigned them to two groups. One group got antibiotics according to their PCT levels; the other group’s prescriptions were determined the old-fashioned way.

It turned out that patients in the PCT group took fewer antibiotics but were just as likely to get better as patients in the control group. Not only did fewer patients in the PCT group receive antibiotics, but those who did took them for fewer days, the study found.

How big was the difference? Overall, the antibiotic prescription rate was 87.7% in the control group and 75.4% in the PCT group, according to the study. Among patients with community-acquired pneumonia, the difference was 99.1% versus 90.7%; for patients with exacerbated chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, it was 69.9% versus 48.7%; and for patients with acute bronchitis, the difference was 50% versus 23.2%.

When patients took fewer antibiotics, they also had fewer adverse events related to antibiotic use, such as nausea, diarrhea and rash, the study found.

-- Karen Kaplan

Photo: Overuse of antibiotics has led to dangerous bugs like methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, better known as MRSA. Photo credit: Visuals Unlimited

Comments

[Roy Mankovitz]

The implication from this post is that more judicious use of antibiotics will either prevent or lessen the chances of antibiotic resistance.

Some in the field of infectious disease control believe that, at best, it might slow down the development of resistant strains, but such resistance is inevitable.

Picture this: in the not too distant future (perhaps even now), it becomes painfully apparent (pun intended) that the medical community can no longer prevent, treat, or even contain catastrophic diseases that, for those infected, result in death in a matter of days. Neither antibiotics nor vaccines have any effect. Even further, the very hospitals that people run to for treatment have become deathtraps that foster the spread of these deadly diseases. The only hope is to strengthen your immune system to the point that it can deal with the pathogens, just as nature intended.

Science fiction? The book "Rising Plague" by Brad Spellberg, MD, an infectious disease expert, describes the pandemic in graphic terms, citing actual case histories that put sci-fi to shame. It is the opinion of many in this field that it has already arrived and we are doing nothing to prevent it. There is mounting evidence that infectious diseases are now the third leading cause of death in the US, and that the "antibiotic revolution" is over.

For more background, here is a link to "Bad Bugs, No Drugs from the Infectious Diseases Society of America:

http://www.idsociety.org/badbugsnodrugs.html

Information on nature-based illness prevention can be found in the book "The Wellness Project."

Roy Mankovitz, Director
http://www.MontecitoWellness.com

[MRSA Treatment]

Roy,

I completely agree with you. Antibiotic resistance is here to stay and it will not get better as the years pass. It will only turn into a bigger horror movie than it already is.

It's great to have this new PCT test, and good that the use of antibiotics in this one study were reduced slightly, but this still will not solve the problem. Too many doctors still throw antibiotics at infections they don't even perform a susceptibility test on to ensure the antibiotic will even work.

What's worse, bacteria like MRSA can spread their coded "knowledge" about how to resist bacteria to other kinds of bacteria. Some bacteria live on antibiotics alone, consuming no other food source as posted in "Science" magazine here: http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/320/5872/100

It's imperative that people learn what natural antibiotics exist and how to use them. There are many options available and I've used my education and experience as a Microbiologist, personal infection experience and research to compile a guidebook on natural Staph and MRSA infection treatments called MRSA Secrets Revealed at http://www.Staph-Infection-Resources.com.

It's up to people to educate themselves on what the time-tested alternatives are, and to bolster their immunity against these superbug bacteria. Otherwise, the consequences will likely be quite grim.

To your health,
Michelle Moore
Microbiologist, Staph Researcher and Natural Health Advocate