Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Healthy

Common Cold

Stomach aches

Mild influenza

Food poisoning

Influenza

Dysentery

Influenza whilst immune compromised

Ebola

Spanish flu

[Starver]

Why do you believe that these things I've linked, for example, National Institute of Health dot gov sources for, don't work? Just to pick one example, it's commonly accepted that silver, has antimicrobial properties.

And I agree that it does.  Silver has biological effects that are good against biopathogens (and possibly other pathogens, too).  Silver-impregnated socks are a thing to help prevent smelly feet and related problems.  What's more, it's apparently not actually that bad (compared to hydrogen peroxide, that is!) for the human body if ingested/taken in through wounds in small amounts (although I wouldn't swear to it being safe for a lycanthrope!).  But not, from what I've been able to read of what you've posted¹ as a direct alternative to antibiotics.  It seems it helps in topical application (externally) to wounds.  But I'm not sure how you'd apply silver to control an internal infection.

But I had a look myself for internal-use applications.  Loads of claims of something that works 'miracles', but nothing that I'd take seriously.  And when I found anything I could take seriously, it was pretty much non-supportive.

(On the basis that you probably won't trust something written by Pharma, like I won't trust something clearly written by quacks, let's try the traditional no-man's-land of documentation, where battles are fought to try to keep both sides honest.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_uses_of_silver includes the phrases "little evidence to support such use", "'cure-all' claims", "silver accumulates in the body", "more serious [various] complications", "no evidence that [it] treats or prevents any medical condition", "potential adverse effects", etc, etc...)

¹ One, in particular gives me the ominous message that "Firefox prevented this page from automatically reloading", which is probably just blocking a fancy-schmancy web-trick used for legitimate reasons, but I'm not inclined to check lest it's more...

[LordBucket]

You're quoting a quote within the thing you're citing. I hope you realize that.

One of the nih.gov citations was also citing another study. That's not a refutation.

Quote from the same guy in the same article.

Also not a refutation.

Doesn't seem too awful; then again, all of these are injected through proper medical administrative techniques;

I'm not sure what your point is. The subject of this discussion is "what happens when antibiotics no longer work?" Not "should we eliminate doctors?"

If you have a cold, no don't drink a gallon of hydrogen peroxide. If you're going to die from an infection during an era after after antibacterials no longer work, then yes, local injection of suitably diluted hydrogen peroxide might be a thing that the medical profession could find to be a suitable replacement treatment.

if you're advocating inhaling ozone as a health treatment, you're mad.

I'm pointing out that there are antimicrobial agents that will continue to be effective after widespread development of bacterial resistance to antibacterials. My thesis here is "if pharmaceuticals stop working, there are other things that kill bacteria. We can probably use them, I don't think it will be a big deal." Not "close one eye and use one hand to type your symptoms into a google search box and self administer the first one you find."

Also, I'd like to throw in my own quote: "Ozone exposure results in an acute decrease in the serum levels of thyroid hormones. Physiologic sequelae of this are unclear. Whereas thyroid hormone supplementation appears to benefit pulmonary function in septic, oxyradical models of injury, thyroid hormone increases ozone toxicity." from here.

Yes, and prescription drugs routinely have side effects and chemotherapy can kill you. Yet doctors regularly prescribe these when appropriate. If "has side effects" is a deal-breaker for you, then go read some prescription drug side effect warnings. Apply proper countermeasures when justified.  If you're going to die from an infection in an era where antibiotics no longer work, temporary hormonal imbalances seem like a perfectly acceptable alternative.

Imagine you're going to die from a staph infection and the antibiotic you're offered gives you nausea, loss of bladder control and mild intestinal bleeding. Are you going to turn it down? I don't think so.

Why are you applying a different standard to non-antibiotic treatments?

silver allergies are a real thing. Might work, but certainly not on everyone.

*shrug* Ok, and?

Are you really so determined to find excuses to object over that "oh, well it might not work for everybody" is a thing you're seriously saying?

[Skyrunner]

Huh, apparently silver nanoparticles, when injected intravenously, cause your spleen to grow in size, your liver to suffer damage, and silver particles to accumulate everywhere. It actually makes your immune system weaker! :v

abstract

[LordBucket]

What makes you think they were?

The context, delivery, and snide comments.

Well, duh.

You should do yourself the benefit of finding more reliable sources.

Finally, an actual article.

if you're advocating inhaling ozone as a health treatment, you're mad.

[Loud Whispers]

Is it? Food quality worldwide has been improved by high-intensity livestock techniques. Making meat affordable for the other 90% of humanity has greatly improved their standard of living and health. Furthermore I've read that the antibiotics used in livestock and those used in humans rarely overlap. I think we just have to accept that a connected world with medical care available to the teeming billions will come with its costs. We will pay them, in research for new drugs and in human lives when medicine fails, because it is less expensive than the alternative.

It has not gone to the other 90% of humanity, it has gone towards making beef a staple diet in the USA. I actually cannot fathom a world where wheat, rice or oats and their products do not make up the bulk of your food, it's actually quite impressive :D
But as mighty as such a diet is, its drawbacks economically, environmentally and even medically - an emphasis on diversifying the US palette would be a good idea, it could also be a very tasty one too! :P

Gargle brown-bottle hydrogen peroxide when you have a sore or strep throat. I swear by it. Tastes kind of like chlorine and turns your spit into this godawful foam, but it doesn't cause horrendous internal chemical burns or even affect your sense of taste.

No, gargle benzydamine hydrochloride - that stuff will do you wonders and won't carry an accidental risk of death. Even at lower concentrations chemical burns are likely. Benzydamine hydrochloride's only side effect is numbness and can be found in most pharmacies.


________

People, please calm down; we can talk about a post anti-biotic world without airs of superiority or disrespect.

[i2amroy]

Eat two cigarettes to kill a tapeworm. A tablespoon of kerosene also works.

Eat or drink a bit more and you won't just kill a tapeworm, you'll kill yourself.

Realistically either one is much more likely to cause yourself serious harm either through Nicotine poisoning or Kerosene poisoning long before it does much good. The only reason it might work is because you have a larger body weight than a tapeworm does and thus it takes more of either of those substances to kill you, but the exact same thing could be done with any poison that passes through the gut, like say, cyanide; you'd just need to be a bit more specific about the actual dosage.

[Shazbot]

Eat two cigarettes to kill a tapeworm. A tablespoon of kerosene also works.

Eat or drink a bit more and you won't just kill a tapeworm, you'll kill yourself.

Realistically either one is much more likely to cause yourself serious harm either through Nicotine poisoning or Kerosene poisoning long before it does much good. The only reason it might work is because you have a larger body weight than a tapeworm does and thus it takes more of either of those substances to kill you, but the exact same thing could be done with any poison that passes through the gut, like say, cyanide; you'd just need to be a bit more specific about the actual dosage.

Correct.

[Neonivek]

Eh, it's not worth trying to argue with someone who just enjoys arguing for the sake of it.

Uncalled for.

[LordBucket]

Thank you.


To take the thread in a new direction, allegedly there was going to be a nanobot human trial this year to selectively target and kill cancer cells. I'm not finding any results from the trial yet. It might still be ongoing. But given time something like this could potentially solve the infection problem too.

Sounds like the method they're using requires that the nanobots be built to target specific biomarkers, so using them as general antimicrobial agents might not be on the table just yet. But if you can identify what you want to kill from a sample, producing a bot to kill that thing on a case by case basis might be an option.

[Neonivek]

It is probably too early to expect the Nanobots to do anything spectacular.

[LordBucket]

For a lot of people, a simple injection that cures their cancer would qualify as spectacular. But within the context of the thread, even if it takes another 10 years before they're suitable for general use, we can probably afford to wait that long.

Even if antibiotics 100% stopped working tomorrow, it's not like society would end. Surgery would become riskier, and stuff like burn victim and pnuemonia survival rates would drop. Maybe the general mortality rate among children and the elderly would go up slightly, but I think most people probably wouldn't be very affected by it. I don't think I've taken an antibiotic in 20 years, have you?

This article claims resistance is predicted to cause 10 million deaths per year worldwide by 2050, up from 700,000 today.

Sure, that's not a great thing to happen, but it's not civilization-ending and 35 years is a long time to figure it out. And antiseptics will be unaffected by this. It's not like people will be dying from scraped knees.

[andrea]

I don't think I've taken an antibiotic in 20 years, have you?

several times. If you are very healthy, good for you, and many people like you. But it is people with more frail health that are affected, those who get ill. Not the majority of the population, but a sizeable part. I suppose I should do my duty for the gene pool and find a corner where to die quickly, without bothering people about how I would like some medicine?

besides, who talked about civilization ending? it is going to be bad for many people, but civilization existed before antibiotics, not too long ago.
Also, the number of affected people might be higher. not only did the article not research secondary effects( deaths from lack of treatment due to surgery being more dangerous, etc), but some infections which don't kill might leave more long lasting effects.
Civilization won't end, but it wil be less pleasant for many and I think that is reason enough to worry.

35 years should be enough to find a solution, on that I agree with you. Thankfully, it seems that there are several avenues of research currently open, as seen in this thread.

[Loud Whispers]

I don't think I've taken an antibiotic in 20 years, have you?

Finished a course three days ago

[martinuzz]

When my wisdom teeth were surgically removed about 10 years ago, the surgeon gave me a brown bottle of H2O2 solution to "wash your mouth with twice a day until the stitches have dissolved". It tastes like shit, makes your saliva foam, but the wounds heald pretty well and fast.

I don't think a surgeon would perscribe that if it were as dangerous as some people here think. Ofcourse, I was instructed not to swallow.

[Loud Whispers]

Just like a surgeon wouldn't recommend smoking?