Scientists develop device to detect bacteria in minutes, not days

Soulstorm brew

Weaksauce
Joined
Mar 29, 2019
Messages
121
The era of doctors prescribing patients powerful antibiotics while they wait for lab reports could soon be numbered, with a new device returning results within minutes instead of days.

It was invented by a team at Penn State university and described in a paper published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences on Monday.

Co-developed by Pak Kin Wong, a professor of biomedical engineering and mechanical engineering, the device uses microtechnology to trap single bacteria cells that can then be viewed under an electron microscope.¨

https://www.timesofmalta.com/articl...to-detect-bacteria-in-minutes-not-days.709286



Great news as it will help cut down on the over prescription of antibiotics.
 

sirmonkey1985

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - July 2010
Joined
Sep 13, 2008
Messages
22,231
if you pay 3m dollars to get the test ;)


they gotta make up the difference some how, lol.
 

Uvaman2

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 4, 2016
Messages
3,143
Btw " antibiotics resistance" is largely a result of industrial use. Such bull since industries can fight effectively in our corrupt society, its the doctors and patients that lose twice.
 

Jagger100

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 31, 2004
Messages
7,710
Btw " antibiotics resistance" is largely a result of industrial use. Such bull since industries can fight effectively in our corrupt society, its the doctors and patients that lose twice.
Most antibiotic resistance is humans discontinuing their antibiotics early when they feel better. This is due to poor education on the consequences and socially taught resistance to taking medicine and selfishness. Non-clinical doses of antibiotics in food have zero impact on drug resistance. Unnecessary Drug resistance can only develop when clinical does are inadequate or discontinued early.

I will add clinical doses of antibiotics to people with compromised immune systems are also a source of developing resistance. The antibiotics in some cases just weakens growth rate so the immune system can catch up and get ahead of the infection. If there's little/no immune system. voila drug resistance.
 

Trepidati0n

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 26, 2004
Messages
9,270
I amazed her that the people against this don't realize that electron microscopes for this level of testing are benchtop sized. This is not DOA....far from it.
 

Uvaman2

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 4, 2016
Messages
3,143
Most antibiotic resistance is humans discontinuing their antibiotics early when they feel better. This is due to poor education on the consequences and socially taught resistance to taking medicine and selfishness. Non-clinical doses of antibiotics in food have zero impact on drug resistance. Unnecessary Drug resistance can only develop when clinical does are inadequate or discontinued early.

I will add clinical doses of antibiotics to people with compromised immune systems are also a source of developing resistance. The antibiotics in some cases just weakens growth rate so the immune system can catch up and get ahead of the infection. If there's little/no immune system. voila drug resistance.
Uh huh...
Not true... There more damning info around, but here is link:
https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2013/09/drug-resistant-infections/
 

Zarathustra[H]

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
35,409
Great news as it will help cut down on the over prescription of antibiotics.

I'm not sure it will have a large impact.

The most dangerous use of antibiotics comes from BRIC and third world countries, where NO ONE GETS PRESCRIPTIONS.

Feeling sick? You don't go to the doctor. You just go buy some antibiotics and use them yourself. Antibiotics cure everything right?

It's completely uncontrolled, no Doctor getting in between you and your personal knowing what is best for your body.

This is why we will all soon once again live in a world where blisters from ill fitting shoes kill you.
 

ymer

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 29, 2004
Messages
473
I'm not sure it will have a large impact.

The most dangerous use of antibiotics comes from BRIC and third world countries, where NO ONE GETS PRESCRIPTIONS.

Feeling sick? You don't go to the doctor. You just go buy some antibiotics and use them yourself. Antibiotics cure everything right?

It's completely uncontrolled, no Doctor getting in between you and your personal knowing what is best for your body.

This is why we will all soon once again live in a world where blisters from ill fitting shoes kill you.

Wrong.

Doctors love to prescribe antibiotics.
 

Derangel

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
20,103
Wrong.

Doctors love to prescribe antibiotics.

Doctors "love to prescribe" them because people come in and yell that they want antibotics for every problem. Even when doctors tell them they don't need them or won't fix what is wrong. So instead of dealing with a potential lawsuit or bad review, they appease the moronic patient.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
35,409
Doctors "love to prescribe" them because people come in and yell that they want antibotics for every problem. Even when doctors tell them they don't need them or won't fix what is wrong. So instead of dealing with a potential lawsuit or bad review, they appease the moronic patient.

I think we need regulation similar to the prescription of unneeded opiods. Prosecute doctors who prescribe antibiotics when there is no bacterial infection confirmed by a lab.
 

Derangel

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
20,103
I think we need regulation similar to the prescription of unneeded opiods. Prosecute doctors who prescribe antibiotics when there is no bacterial infection confirmed by a lab.

We need to educate people better so that they stop thinking antibiotics are magic cure-alls and they need them for every little thing as well. Charging doctors for prescribing them does nothing to deal with moronic patients that will threaten lawsuits or leave bad reviews when the doctor "won't help them".
 

dgz

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 15, 2010
Messages
5,838
Most antibiotic resistance is humans discontinuing their antibiotics early when they feel better. This is due to poor education on the consequences and socially taught resistance to taking medicine and selfishness. Non-clinical doses of antibiotics in food have zero impact on drug resistance. Unnecessary Drug resistance can only develop when clinical does are inadequate or discontinued early.

I will add clinical doses of antibiotics to people with compromised immune systems are also a source of developing resistance. The antibiotics in some cases just weakens growth rate so the immune system can catch up and get ahead of the infection. If there's little/no immune system. voila drug resistance.

Care to elaborate? Why would taking less antibiotics lead to stronger resistance to them? Isn't it quite the opposite?

It's an honest question. You're welcome to share your professional opinion but please keep it simple because I know nothing about biology :(
 

Jagger100

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 31, 2004
Messages
7,710
Care to elaborate? Why would taking less antibiotics lead to stronger resistance to them? Isn't it quite the opposite?

It's an honest question. You're welcome to share your professional opinion but please keep it simple because I know nothing about biology :(
Evolution. You develop resistence by killing off or impair the growth of the bacteria most susceptible to anti-biotic. The bacteria more resistent survive. They become the next generation. They differntiate more and some of them are even less susceptible. It's allowing near death survivors that is the most effective at developing resistence. If the concentration of antibiotic is not enough to kill off any of the bacteria, there's no change in the population's genetic variation. no evolution. Whereas if you come in hot and heavy and kill them all, leave no survivors is the next best scenario. The third best is to never use any antiboitic. The 3rd choice is pointless. So heavy doses are less a problem than under-dosing.

Also waiting to use them until its really warranted is not good (aka under prescribing). Because the bacteria get more entrenched in the body and the body's defenses are declining. So when you do start antibiotics, they are less effective and you increase the potential for survivors.

Coming in Fast and Hard is the best use of antibiotics to prevent drug resistence.
 

Derangel

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
20,103
Stopped reading right there.

All living things evolve over time. Bacteria and viruses undergo rapid evolution since their "generations" are so short. The sheer speed with which some of those can evolve makes it very hard to find effective cures. The flu and "common" cold are great examples of viruses that rapidly evolve and create new strains so quickly that they're nearly impossible to fully cure, that is why you need a flu shot every year and also why those shots aren't guaranteed to be perfect as they only effect some, but not all, of the strains of the flu virus.
 

sfsuphysics

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 14, 2007
Messages
15,520
Care to elaborate? Why would taking less antibiotics lead to stronger resistance to them? Isn't it quite the opposite?

It's an honest question. You're welcome to share your professional opinion but please keep it simple because I know nothing about biology :(
Well not all antibiotics work the same way. But a basic version of it antibiotics will do "something" to bacteria that either allows your body to destroy them much more efficiently and effectively or causes something to happen with the bacteria that causes them to die. If it's the first case, it takes time for your body's defenses to kill the bacteria, if it is the second case it takes time for all the bacteria to get affected. In both cases time is the key, if you stop taking antibiotics (see note later) then subsequent generations of bacteria may develop a resistance to that particular type of antibiotic and if your body's defenses can't take care of it then it can lead to an antibiotic resistant strain that floats around. And this is a huge problem because if you have some inflection and take antibiotics and the bacteria causing that infection drop to 1% of their original levels you'll probably feel a million bucks better (less pain, less inflammation, etc) and they say "why do I need to take these anymore" and stop, however that 1% is quite a few bacteria, and with bacteria multiplying quite rapidly subsequent generations tend to be stronger than the previous ones.

Note: If you can take NO antibiotics that is better, and yes does not make them become stronger at all. However if you start taking them, you should continue to take the prescribed amount until it's done, otherwise you introduce show the bacteria your "game plan" and it might be able to study it and find out how to effectively counter it.
 

Jagger100

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 31, 2004
Messages
7,710
Stopped reading right there.
Think selective breeding in case you think evolution is an ideology and not a biological process. Farmers have been allowing only certain animals to reproduce, or certain seeds are selected for replanting (if any still do that) for millenia. They are excluding the weaker stock for the desirable traits from future generations to shift the population of livestock as whole. Many livestock are so specialized for a farm environment they no longer can survive in the wild. Instead of someone actively selecting, success in finding food, fending predators, mating, etc. make some inheritable traits more common.
 

ymer

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 29, 2004
Messages
473
Think selective breeding in case you think evolution is an ideology and not a biological process. Farmers have been allowing only certain animals to reproduce, or certain seeds are selected for replanting (if any still do that) for millenia. They are excluding the weaker stock for the desirable traits from future generations to shift the population of livestock as whole. Many livestock are so specialized for a farm environment they no longer can survive in the wild. Instead of someone actively selecting, success in finding food, fending predators, mating, etc. make some inheritable traits more common.

Selective breeding =/= evolution.
 

trick_m0nkey

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 11, 2005
Messages
4,234
Selective breeding =/= evolution.

No one is going to (nor should they) take you seriously if you are either unwilling or unable to backup your assertions with anything other than "you're wrong, lol." This has been a friendly PSA.
 

ymer

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 29, 2004
Messages
473
No one is going to (nor should they) take you seriously if you are either unwilling or unable to backup your assertions with anything other than "you're wrong, lol." This has been a friendly PSA.

Are you asking me to prove that Selective breeding =/= evolution?

lol
 
Top