Anti-biotics are one of the greatest developments in human health (the others being clean water and sanitation). They have undoubtedly saved millions if not billions of lives and prevented others from being blighted by terrible and debilitating afflictions. Even something as simple as an appendix operation would be far more dangerous without anti-biotics because anti-biotics (used to) stop the infections that made operations so dangerous.
Daesh are a small aberration in history who whilst acting like a bacteria in their vile behaviour and whilst they may have killed thousands and thousands and blighted the lives of so many others, they are but a pimple compared to the megacaust that would occur without anti-biotics.
Whilst most people know that when prescribed anti-biotics we should take the stated dose and finish the course to ensure that all the bacteria have been killed ensuring that none survive to re-enter the environment, most people are totally unaware that vets and farmers routinely as in DAY AFTER DAY AFTER DAY completely disregard that advice so that the food we get is inevitably laced with anti-biotic immune bacteria.
The problem is that sooner or later all bacteria will evolve to become resistant to anti-biotics, it is really just a matter of statistics based on the speed of bacteria evolving to anti-biotics and because of our reckless behaviour of modern society, practically anti-biotics may be both the greatest achievement of humanity but also our greatest folly as this non-renewable resource is “consumed” in the fastest time, so that future generations effectively have no anti-biotics at all.
But the speed of this evolution (thus the availability to future generations) can be reduced significantly if:
- Bacteria are rarely exposed to anti-biotics so that if any traits develop that tend to make them immune – that other natural environmental factors are a more dominant evolutionary pressure, so the small advantage from anti-biotic immunity does not give any substantial benefit and therefore tends to be eliminated by dilution.
- That where anti-biotics are given, they are prescribed in such a way that they kill not only bacteria with no anti-biotic immune traits, BUT ALSO those with some immunity. This prevents bacteria with traits giving a marginal advantage against anti-biotics living through the treatment and so greatly reduces the chances of multiple such mutations which might add together to give total immunity.
- Wherever possible, the risk of transfer from one patient to another on anti-biotics should be eliminated by the use of sterile environment.
- After treatment, patient’s natural “flora” should be restocked from non-anti-biotic immune bacteria – because one of the best ways to stop anti-biotic immune bacteria infecting someone, is if that person already has a healthy natural flora of bacteria.
To put it in simple terms, to stop the development of immunity : bacteria should never see anti-biotics, but if they do – there should be a massively high dose that is guaranteed to kill them + sterile conditions to prevent cross infection + restocking of non-anti-biotic immune bacteria to try to prevent the re-infection of bacteria with some anti-biotic traits.
Farming
So, what do vets and farmers do? What do you think they do?
They routinely feed cattle in their feed “low dosage anti-biotics”. This is the perfect conditions for breeding anti-biotic immune bacteria. It really is criminal that anyone even considers feeding animals low-dosage anti-biotics when it is known to be so damaging.
The idea is that low dosages tend to reduce bacteria growth – not completely, but just enough to suppress illness. But the result is that bacteria have a low enough dose to ensure anti-biotic immune traits are heavily selected for, but not anywhere near high enough to ensure bacteria die. We therefore have precisely the conditions that doctors warn patients to avoid. It is therefore the quickest possible way to ensure anti-biotic immune bacteria evolve. Then because the cattle do not live in sterile conditions – the bacteria will very easily move from animal to animal (not helped by the way they shit on their grass food). And each new generation is fed on the same pasture – thus ensuring bacteria from one generation of cows will certainly pass onto the next.
So what’s the point in following medical advice about anti-biotic use when most anti-biotic immunity probably has absolutely nothing to do with humans?
Indeed – it’s more than likely that the meet we eat is full of anti-biotics – so unwittingly, by eating meat from countries using low dosage anti-biotics we end up promoting the development of anti-biotic immune bacteria in our own bodies and that of our children. CRAZY!!
If you want to talk about sustainability, why the **** don’t the morons going on about CO2 do something useful with their lives and tackle the fact that in a few generations there may literally be no effective anti-biotics left?
How is that sustainable?
How is the deaths of millions if not billions of people through simple infections anything anyone wants to bequeath to future generations – just so a few greedy farmers can speed up the growth of their animals?
Whilst we can control anti-biotic immune bacteria to a large degree in human society – it is impossible once they get into farms to stop us getting into contact with them without all going vegan.
So why on earth are we promoting the best possible environment for the growth of anti-biotic immunity in farming?
Actions
- The death penalty for those giving low dosage anti-biotics to anyone or anything and particularly farm animals and I’m not kidding. Throwing away one of the greatest health benefits for humanity does in my view warrant the term: crime against humanity.
- Immediate and compulsory inspection of all meat from abroad to test both for anti-biotics and for anti-biotic immune bacteria.
- Where animals are treated by anti-biotics – these should be given by a vet AT FULL DOSE and there should be a very limited class of anti-biotics intended only for animal use (ideally ones unsuited to humans). This will mean that even if anti-biotic immunity develops in animals – hopefully this doesn’t mean they are immune to the anti-biotics used in humans.
“But we can’t stop using them as production will go down”
This is what most farmers will say! It would be wrong to stop their use because there will be a reduction in farm output – but the simple fact is that when anti-biotic immunity exists throughout the world – not only humans but also animals will suffer. And whether they like it or not – farmers will have to farm without the benefit of anti-biotics.
So, it’s going to happen anyway! Sooner or later anti-biotics will be all but useless and the real question we need ask is this: “is it better to have used anti-biotics to save human life over a very extended period – or to help grow farm animals over a much shorter period”?
It’s not just the west. China in particular has abused antibiotics and anti virals by routinely putting them in bird and animal food. It irks me that patients get the blame for farming practices.
Many years ago, my work involved researching mechanisms of antibiotic resistance in bacteria, particularly, at that time, the penicillin type antibiotics. The discovery of the plasmid, a package of genes, which could be readily transferred between bacteria was key, containing the coding for the necessary enzyme(s) to confer resistance. This was probably thirty years ago and it scared me then. Little notice was taken by the medical profession, pharma companies or regulators then when these type of studies were being published, we’re now seeing the awful reality.
This lack of antibiotics is particularly relevent for the elderly. Many of the doctor/hospital visits are for pneumonia and they are almost always given two types of non functioning antibiotic before getting one that works. This means the person deteriorates to the point where the real thing often makes no difference to the final outome. Either they need to issue rules and make sure everyone knows about them, that once past a certain condition doctors will let nature ‘take its course’ or start with the functioning antibiotic from the get go. THey need to make better use of other forms of aid eg IV fluids and topical antiseptics that might negate the need for antibiotics. Those with chest infections need to sit up more and be given drugs that stop fuids building on the lung. All of which need more people but not more antibiotics.
Thanks, if you have more details I’d be happy to publish.
I often say “when people look back at our age they’ll think we are mad obsessing about CO2”, but, let us suppose that by 2030, anti-biotics have no effect, that there is then a large scale epidemic throughout the globe killing perhaps 1billion people. (1 in 10) that perhaps the death rate is up to 50% in some areas.
It is not unreasonable to think that many politicians, vets etc.who should have done something would be dragged through the streets to execution – at least in some countries.