Karl`s PC Help Forums Last active: Never
Not logged in [Login ]
Go To Bottom

In memory of Karl Davis, founder of this board, who made his final journey 12th June 2007

Post Reply
Who Can Post? All users can post new topics and all users can reply.
Username   Need to register?
Password:   Forgot password?
Subject: (optional)
Icon: [*]
Formatting Mode:
Normal
Advanced
Help

Insert Bold text Insert Italicised text Insert Underlined text Insert Centered text Insert a Hyperlink Insert E-mail Hyperlink Insert an Image Insert Code Formatted text Insert Quoted text Insert List
Message:
HTML is Off
Smilies are On
BB Code is On
[img] Code is On
:) :( :D ;)
:cool: :o shocked_yellow :P
confused2 smokin: waveysmiley waggyfinger
brshteeth nananana lips_sealed kewl_glasses
Show All Smilies

Disable Smilies?
Use signature?
Turn BBCode off?
Receive email on reply?
The file size of the attachment must be under 200K.
Do not preview if you have attached an image.
Attachment:
    

Topic Review
JackInCT

[*] posted on 9-9-2016 at 16:06
In today's news article:

NEW YORK (AP) — A fourth U.S. person has been diagnosed with bacteria resistant to a last resort antibiotic, but researchers are expressing relief that so far these superbug precursors have not spread to others.

The latest case is a 2-year-old Connecticut girl who was diagnosed earlier this year, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported Friday.

She and three other Americans have been found to have E. coli bacteria that were resistant to an important medicine called colistin. Colistin is an old, powerful drug with significant side effects that is reserved for germs that already resist other important antibiotics.

Health officials have worried that the colistin-resistant bacteria will spread their special trait to bacteria already resistant to other medicines, setting the stage for true superbug infections that are impervious to all known antibiotics.

For example, researchers reported last week a worrisome case of a 76-year-old man treated in 2014 at a New Jersey hospital. In follow-up testing this year, he was found to have been infected by a germ that was resistant to both colistin and another class of antibiotics called carbapenems that are also reserved to treat especially tough bugs.

It was the first time this kind of double-resistance was reported in the U.S., though several other cases have been reported elsewhere in the world.
JackInCT

[*] posted on 3-9-2016 at 03:17
USA FDA (Federal Govt Food & Drug Administration) Bans SOME Antibacterial Chemicals In Soaps

CNN article today, 09/02/16. I have opted to publish this lengthy article in its entirety. The govt has been warning for a number of years about the mutation of "supebugs" that the current antibiotics can barely cure, along with the fact that any new antibiotics that can are well off in the future. Every single doctor of mine pooh-poohs this. The problem is most likely to occur in a/any/all in-patient hospital setting where infection control is a huge problem. The FDA feels that indiscriminate use of antibiotics is speeding up the creation of these superbugs, i. e., encouraging new strains to mutate in human hosts. In particular doctors, to include ALL of mine, during out-patient office visits, refuse to give credence, when I pointed that out, from numerous credible scientific organizations that a remedy of antibiotics for the common Upper Respitory Infection (URI), i. e., the common cold, is contraindicated since the infection is almost alway viral in nature, i. e., antibiotics do NOT kill viruses.

The Article:

The Food and Drug Administration has issued a final rule that throws water on claims that antibacterial soaps and washes are more effective than regular soap.

The new rule bans antibacterial soaps and body washes containing certain ingredients from being marketed, because the ingredients were not proved to be safe and effective for long-term daily use, the FDA said Friday.

The rule applies to antibacterial soaps and washes that contain one or more of 19 active ingredients, including the most commonly used chemicals triclosan and triclocarban, but it does not affect consumer hand sanitizers or antibacterial wipes.

"Consumers may think antibacterial washes are more effective at preventing the spread of germs, but we have no scientific evidence that they are any better than plain soap and water," said Dr. Janet Woodcock, director of the FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, in a written announcement. "In fact, some data suggests that antibacterial ingredients may do more harm than good over the long-term," she added.

Companies will have one year to either remove the ingredients or no longer market their products before the final rule is effective.

The American Cleaning Institute released a statement in response in which it indicated that the FDA had data showing the safety and effectiveness of antibacterial soaps. Manufacturers plan to provide additional science and research to fill any data gaps, according to the statement.

"In the coming year, ACI and its member companies will submit additional safety and effectiveness data on the key ingredients in use in consumer antibacterial soaps today: benzalkonium chloride, benzethonium chloride and chloroxylenol. ... Consumers can continue to use antibacterial soaps with confidence as they have for decades in millions of homes, offices, schools, daycare centers and other commercial settings," said the statement by the American Cleaning Institute, a trade organization that represents the producers of cleaning products.

The FDA issued a proposed rule in 2013 that required the manufacturers of antibacterial hand soaps and body washes to prove that their products were more effective than plain soap and were safe for long-term use.

However, "antibacterial hand and body wash manufacturers did not provide the necessary data to establish safety and effectiveness," according to the FDA's new final rule. The FDA even noted that some manufacturers have started to remove certain active ingredients from their products.

What does the science say about antibacterial soaps? A 2007 paper published in the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases found that using triclosan-containing consumer soaps seemed to not offer an additional health benefit over using regular soap and water.

Rather, regularly using such antibacterial consumer soaps may be linked to the growth of dangerous drug-resistant bacteria, according to the paper.

"Those who are out washing with it in the community think they're doing a good health measure when, in fact, they aren't," said Dr. Stuart Levy, professor of molecular biology and microbiology at Tufts University School of Medicine and a co-author of the paper.

So, the new FDA rule "seems like a prudent step to prevent a possible, albeit theoretical, future adverse impact, and since the public still has the option of using hand sanitizers, which work faster and better than the current consumer 'antibacterial' soaps, I can be supportive of the ruling," said Elaine Larson, associate dean for research at Columbia University School of Nursing and a co-author of the paper.

For the paper, researchers reviewed 27 studies on the potential hazards versus benefits of antibacterial soaps. The researchers concluded, "Further studies of this issue are encouraged."

"This whole issue of antibiotics, where they do good and they don't do good, has not been explained well enough to the public, but I think it can be now," said Levy, who conducted some of the earliest studies on antibiotic resistance. "We sort of led the cause to eliminate the use of triclosan in washes, because quite honestly, it didn't show any improvement."