Deadly, antibiotic resistant bacteria may claim millions next year

[Ruptga]

Per year, not cumulative.

Yeah, no. http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs194/en/

In 2012, there were about 450,000 new cases of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB). Extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis (XDR-TB) has been identified in 92 countries.

Yes, TB is just one disease, but it's kindof a big deal. http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs104/en/

Tuberculosis (TB) is second only to HIV/AIDS as the greatest killer worldwide due to a single infectious agent.

If one of the deadliest diseases on the planet is only causing half a million cases, not fatalities, what makes you think that we will see tens of millions of deaths next year? Or per year within the decade, since next year is the OP's words and not yours exactly.

As I said already, the truth of antimicrobial resistance is bad enough, there's no need to go making stuff up about it.

 

[WelshBloke]

Yeah, no. http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs194/en/

Yes, TB is just one disease, but it's kindof a big deal. http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs104/en/
If one of the deadliest diseases on the planet is only causing half a million cases, not fatalities, what makes you think that we will see tens of millions of deaths next year? Or per year within the decade, since next year is the OP's words and not yours exactly.

As I said already, the truth of antimicrobial resistance is bad enough, there's no need to go making stuff up about it.

You're misunderstanding the problem, yes resistant TB is a worry but what's worse are all the trivial things that we use antibiotics for. Once we effectively don't have antibiotics any more they stop being trivial.

Look back and see the difference antibiotics made when they were first introduced. Shit that would of killed you then became a trivial thing that a two week course of tablets solved.

 

[Ken g6]

Bring on the bacteriophages!

 

[andylawcc]

anyone suffer from MRSA too? i have a few questions for those was 'survived' it, did you ever have another case of MRSA later on in life?

 

[bradly1101]

I can't think of a problem humans face that isn't related to overpopulation.

 

[Drako]

I can't think of a problem humans face that isn't related to overpopulation.

Really?

 

[T9D]

https://chaturbate.com/female-cams/

 

[WelshBloke]

anyone suffer from MRSA too? i have a few questions for those was 'survived' it, did you ever have another case of MRSA later on in life?

Staph aureus is just the bacteria that causes boils and respiratory infections. Its normal for it to colonise your skin, you're probably covered in billions of them.
MRSA is the same bacteria that's resistant to Methicillin.

If you've ever had an MRSA infection then there's a good chance that your skin is colonised by MRSA still and you're more prone to a MRSA infection.

 

[andylawcc]

If you've ever had an MRSA infection then there's a good chance that your skin is colonised by MRSA still and you're more prone to a MRSA infection.

so if I somehow cleanse my skin of MRSA, and also my surrounding (clothes, bedsheets, towel etc), will I get similar MRSA infection from a 'basic' Staph Aureu?

 

[WelshBloke]

so if I somehow cleanse my skin of MRSA, and also my surrounding (clothes, bedsheets, towel etc), will I get similar MRSA infection from a 'basic' Staph Aureu?

You'd just get a regular Staph infection that could be treated with Methicillin I guess.

MRSA isn't any "nastier" than regular Staph aureus ( IIRC it's less virulent and gets out competed by regular Staph) it's just harder to treat.

 

[andylawcc]

why i ask is, I kept on getting it again from time to time.
but step back a little bit, as you said, maybe I am getting just a regular staph infection.

now my question is, how come my body can't defend and fight it off?

 

[DigDog]

i cant believe somebody did this.

ok, logic incoming, brace yourself.

"the world works by natural selection - death is good, antibiotics are not because death=good"
"germs will bring DEATH!! WHICH IS BAD!!"

do you see the probo ?

your thread is self defeating. either we win through antibiotics, or the germs kill enough people that we become immune again.

 

[WelshBloke]

i cant believe somebody did this.

ok, logic incoming, brace yourself.

"the world works by natural selection - death is good, antibiotics are not because death=good"
"germs will bring DEATH!! WHICH IS BAD!!"

do you see the probo ?

your thread is self defeating. either we win through antibiotics, or the germs kill enough people that we become immune again.

Immune?

 

[FelixDeCat]

Immune?

 

[Ruptga]

The introduction of antibiotics happened around the same time that germ theory gained wide acceptance, so even if all antibiotics became obsolete overnight we still would be better off than we were in the early 1800s.

Anyway, broad resistance to antimicrobials definitely is a legitimate concern, especially with the way we medicate entire livestock industries. Antimicrobials go through their systems and runoff into ponds and such, where all kinds of microorganisms then gain resistances. Most of those microorganisms are harmless, but even the harmless ones can transfer their resistance to harmful varieties through horizontal gene transfer.

The people implying that we should let nature "fix" things, or that we were immune to most things before antimicrobials came along are beyond ignorant. Nature doesn't care about any of us, because it isn't a conscious thing. "Nature" has almost eradicated life from this planet several times over its long history, and the vast majority of all species that have ever existed are now extinct. Also, look up words like cholera or pox and get back to us with how well our natural immunities worked in our lost glory days. Hint: people back then were more resistant to more things because everyone that wasn't simply died.

 

[andylawcc]

well, if germ kills everyone but the strongest of the strong, those will be "immune" no?

 

[sandorski]

Posting from my bunker until the end of Bacteriageddon, awaiting the All Clear.

 

[Ruptga]

well, if germ kills everyone but the strongest of the strong, those will be "immune" no?

No. For one, immunity is not the same thing as resistance. For another, plenty of people beat whatever infection because they just got lucky, not because they have a particular advantage. Last, there are lots of ways to resist an infection, and some of them suck. Look up sickle cell anemia and malaria for one example.

 

[andylawcc]

thx

 

[WelshBloke]

well, if germ kills everyone but the strongest of the strong, those will be "immune" no?

Well both us and the bacteria have been doing this for awhile and it hasn't happened yet.

 

[JMapleton]

It's not just the drug companies fault.

I blame you pussy ass whimps equally.

"Oh, boo hoo I have a cold I need to go to the doctor!"

Suck it up bitches and fight the cold like a man!

This. Too damn many people are going to to the doctor for every sniffle and cough. I need to be literally worried for my life to go to the doctor. If I'm not concerned I could die, I don't go. I've only been to the doctor once in the last 15 years for a headache that lasted 3 weeks nonstop.

 

[Gibsons]

well, if germ kills everyone but the strongest of the strong, those will be "immune" no?

The germs won't kill those they never infect. So the mask wearers will eventually rule the earth.

 

[DigDog]

all we are doing with antibiotics is save a bit of death every year, stockpiling it for later. nothing changes in the large scale of events. in a million years, the same number of people will have died regardless of antibiotics.

we could use the wisely and save the few who matter, instead no, we pump them into everything. sure, thats dumb, but nothing worth shouting armageddon for.

 

[Gibsons]

all we are doing with antibiotics is save a bit of death every year, stockpiling it for later. nothing changes in the large scale of events. in a million years, the same number of people will have died regardless of antibiotics.

Technologically, imo, at this point we are capable of keeping ahead of bacteria. Maybe viruses. Fungi worry me. If we are able to direct our resources properly in order to do any of this is another matter.

Anyway... trying to look a million years ahead is probably a foolish proposition. After all, we've only been observing things for a thousand years give or take.

Anyway, my opinion - I think the population number depends much more on the ability to produce food. Or get off the planet. Or something else that none of us can imagine.

 

[Jeff7]

Shens. Evolution is false. These microbes are unchanging.