Antibiotic resistance spreads to bacteria in birds with no human contact

[Humodour]

Please stop using antibiotics at home. Please, please, please. The stuff on your kitchen tables, on your walls all harmless, etc is HARMLESS and helps boost your immune system (yes that includes kids - they won't die). Most of the dangerous stuff is viruses (which are immune to your sprays). By using antibiotics without a prescription you're only helping the bacteria grow immune to them.

 

Why does it matter if a harmless bacteria grows immune? Because they pass the immunity onto other bacteria through a process called "horizontal transfer". Which effectively involves giving a completely different viral or bacterial species some of your genes.

 

The notable exception is soap, which is a minor antiobiotic. Always use this for a basic sterilisation of your hands.

 

http://physorg.com/news119267316.html

 

[Krookie]

We can still use regular drugs though right? Like Heroine and LSD?

[Laozi]

Good question.

[Aram]

I'm supposed to take penicillin every day for the rest of my life. I think it's BS too.

[Gorgon]

It's not really in question, it's a well documented phenomenon that these resistances spread, why else would drug resistant TB and strep strains be such a problem.

 

When you don't finish a course you teach the virus resistance, should it survive, which is why antibiotics for colds are a very bad idea.

Edited January 13, 2008 by Gorgon

[Meshugger]

I've taken anti-biotics twice in my entire life. Once in 1988 when i was a kid, and two years ago when i had an eye-infection (And i also thought that it was excesseray for a swollen eye). Other than serious infections, i fail to see the use of anti-biotics when you have a fever, cold or whatnot.

[Humodour]

It's not really in question, it's a well documented phenomenon that these resistances spread, why else would drug resistant TB and strep strains be such a problem.

 

When you don't finish a course you teach the virus resistance, should it survive, which is why antibiotics for colds are a very bad idea.

 

It is in question. So many households use antibiotic cleaners at home, for example.

 

On your second point: viruses will always survive antibiotics... antibiotics for colds is a bad idea because it's almost always a virus rather than a bacteria.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antibiotic#An...otic_resistance

 

EDIT: But you're correct about antibiotic courses. You should always finish them, even if the symptoms are gone.

 

EDIT2: Also, the vector of resistance transfer between bacteria, fungi, viruses and unicellular eukaryotes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizontal_ge...fer#Prokaryotes

Edited January 13, 2008 by Krezack

[SteveThaiBinh]

I was always told to avoid taking antibiotics unless they were really necessary, because they kill a lot of 'helpful' bacteria in your stomach - sort of a sledgehammer to crack a nut unless it's to treat something really serious.

[Humodour]

I was always told to avoid taking antibiotics unless they were really necessary, because they kill a lot of 'helpful' bacteria in your stomach - sort of a sledgehammer to crack a nut unless it's to treat something really serious.

 

Yep. Which is why you should replace your bacterial cultures after a course. Typically with yoghurt and milk.

[Hurlshort]

Yogurt also prevents vaginal irritation.

 

I'm serious.

 

edit: And I mean eating it, you sick people.

Edited January 13, 2008 by Hurlshot

[thepixiesrock]

Wait, you mean eating the yogurt, yes? Not eating the, other thing, right?

[ghosta]

I was always told to avoid taking antibiotics unless they were really necessary, because they kill a lot of 'helpful' bacteria in your stomach - sort of a sledgehammer to crack a nut unless it's to treat something really serious.

 

Yep. Which is why you should replace your bacterial cultures after a course. Typically with yoghurt and milk.

 

which is why a consisent diet will help regulate your system.

[Sand]

So the bacteria are evolving to become more resistant to antibiotics.

 

Interesting...

[Gorgon]

It's what bacteria does, the same reason it's used as a vessel for genetic manipulation, it's DNA is so eminently malleable.

Edited January 16, 2008 by Gorgon

[alanschu]

So the bacteria are evolving to become more resistant to antibiotics.

 

Interesting...

 

 

You sound surprised.

[Humodour]

So the bacteria are evolving to become more resistant to antibiotics.

 

Interesting...

 

I'm not sure what your stance on creationism/evolution is, but yeah, unicellular organisms: fungi, bacteria, archaea, viruses, etc tend to evolve very rapidly. Their evolution is both assured and documented, as it occurs in real-time.

 

IIRC, viruses are the fastest - evolving something like 10^6 (one million) times faster than eukaryotic genomes (what fungi, animals and plants have). This is why we get the flu (influenza virus) each year - it is always evolving so our immune systems never fully recognise it when it comes back.

 

Here is a nice paper on it: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlere...cgi?artid=55305

Edited January 17, 2008 by Krezack

[Sand]

I am an evolutionist, Krezy. I just think it is funny how some creationists cling to their antiquated beliefs when the evidence is right in front of their eyes.

[thepixiesrock]

If Hades can turn an argument into something he's done before, he will turn an argument into something he has done before. Especially religion. I was going to say something before, but wasn't sure if anyone would take his bait.

[Nick_i_am]

Quiet Pixies, this is probably related to our next assignment from him.

[thepixiesrock]

How did you do on his mid-term? I totally bombed it. I guess I'll just have to evolve the way I take notes!

 

 

Extra-credit!

[Nick_i_am]

The trick is to think of the subject matter as being more like an argument, so instead of just giving your opinion, make sure your opinion contradicts all the source material and even yourself if need be. Remember, you're NOT being graded on your ability to have any sort of coherant discussion.

 

You'll get an A every time, I garantee it.

[Sand]

Well, with a good understanding on micro-evolution of simple organisms such as bacteria, viruses, and the such we may gain some insight on macro-evolutionary processes on more complex organisms. The fact that these simple organisms can adapt to change very quickly is simply astounding.

[LadyCrimson]

Please stop using antibiotics at home.

I assume by that you mean antibiotic soaps and cleasners and such, not prescription antibiotics some folks actually need to combat certain problems.

 

My family has always been big on avoiding those type of soaps. They're completely unneccesary ... as are a lot of the antibiotic prescriptions people go home with. Doctors need to learn to not cave in to patients who demand they 'do something' to make them feel better when there's nothing to be done, if you know what I mean. Or at least, if they're concerned/irritated by such patients, prescribe more placebos instead of the real stuff.

 

I'm not sure we could stop resistant strains from coming along - only delay it. But we need those delays to give us more time to come up with periodic new solutions/treatments.

Edited January 18, 2008 by LadyCrimson

[Humodour]

If Hades can turn an argument into something he's done before, he will turn an argument into something he has done before. Especially religion. I was going to say something before, but wasn't sure if anyone would take his bait.

 

Uh, well it was me who brought up evolution/creationism actually.

 

Visc: Yeah I agree. I think that looking at plant evolution is the best way to understand evolution on a macroscopic scale, since it's the most well-documented and has the most dots connected up.

 

Here's an interesting tidbit: Birds are the only surviving dinosaurs. Odd isn't it? You'd think that more than one species of the thousands of dinosaur species would have survived to this day... then again a lot of what people consider dinosaurs weren't dinosaurs. E.g.: pterosaurs (flying reptiles) weren't dinosaurs, but were very closely related. Crocodiles weren't dinosaurs, but lived at the same time and were very closely related. Turtles weren't dinosaurs, they lived at the same time, but are as related to Humans as they were to dinosaurs.

 

For example, here is one of the closest ancestors of mammals:

 

The Dimetrodon.

 

We didn't actually evolve from that, but it was the closest relative of the "reptile" we DID evolve from. Which is funny because most people think the Dimetrodon is a dinosaur, let alone a mammal-like reptile.

 

And, not that it's probably a shock, velociraptors are very close cousins to birds, which are both living members of the dinosaur group maniraptor. Which isn't that hard to believe if you examine illustrations of the velociraptor:

 

 

Further, T. Rex had feathers and was also a close relative of birds.

 

These birds here seem to be the closest to the other raptors: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ratite#Galler..._Living_Species

 

A not to scale comparison of velociraptor feet with pigeon feet:

 

Oviraptors (mistakenly called egg snatchers) didn't actually steal and eat the eggs from other dinosaurs, but sat on their own nests to keep them warm - like birds do, and like other dinosaurs didn't.

 

You sort of realise that your old conception of reptiles being hard, stiff, big, slow and scaley isn't exactly correct considering they gave rise to birds and mammals and indeed many of them resembled/were birds and mammals.

[Humodour]

Also of interest is bird intelligence.

 

As you may know, human intelligence capabilities (creativity, emotion, language, etc) are something unique to mammals. They've been exhibited in many species - dolphins, chimpanzees, meerkats (a very interesting and intelligent species - altruism through sentry duty and giving their life to save their children, creativity, lateral thinking - reaching a fruit by working together and getting on another meerkat's shoulders, jealousy, love, desire, self-image, and a differentiating language - e.g. instead of one call for danger they might say "danger snake" or "danger bird"), but all these species have been mammals.

 

This is because mammals have a neocortex - a part of the brain which is very new (well 200 million years old - it evolved when the dinosaurs evolved) and evolved at the very end of the evolution from reptiles to mammals.

 

Birds obviously don't have a neocortex, since they are dinosaurs. They have a reptilian cortex like mammals and reptiles, but is that all? No. Unlike reptiles and mammals, birds have since evolved their own "new cortex". This is likely due to becoming warm-blooded, and forming societies (e.g. flocks). Interestingly, although this neocortex isn't the same as that found in mammals, it is very similar to parts of it and performs some of the same functions. A very beautiful example of convergent evolution.

 

Now, what does this mean? Are birds smart or dumb? The answer is smart. Smarter than some mammals, smarter than all reptiles and lower (fish, amphibians, insects). And some specific birds like parrots are in fact not just capable of immitation, but also intelligence. See the parrot Alex: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_%28parro...Accomplishments

And also a list of intelligence features of birds: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird_intellig...ocial_behaviour

 

Also, this isn't entirely true:

A study on the Little Green Bee-eater suggested that these birds may be able to see from the point of view of a predator. Such an ability to see from the point of view of another individual has been attributed only to the Great Apes. Such abilities form the basis for empathy.

 

Because as previously stated, meerkats are also capable of this.