Pam Thoughts & Then Other Things

 

Pam J wrote the following in comments about antibiotics I made, so I thought I should respond:

"by taking an ineffective antibiotic, are you contributing to the overall resistance of bacteria in the general population"

Pam's statement of an "ineffective antibiotic" is, I think, meant along the idea of this restatement of her question.... 

If I DO NOT have the bacteria in my body that an antibiotic is used for..... and yet I take that particular antibiotic..... am I contributing to the overall resistance of bacteria in the general population?

My answer..... NO.... if I do not have that bacteria IN MY BODY, my taking the antibiotic medication cannot affect the development of resistance in that bacteria..... since it is NOT in my body.

Bacterial resistance to antibiotics occurs from dosage related issues.   For instance, if a person has a bacterial infection and takes an antibiotic for it...... but..... stops taking the antibiotic prematurely...... in other words..... DOES NOT TAKE THE FULL COURSE of that antibiotic..... THAT is when antibiotic resistance can occur.  By stopping the medicine when you begin to feel better (instead of taking all that was prescribed).... means that there is a reasonably good probability that SOME of the bacteria may not yet have been destroyed in your body..... and those that remain are the bacteria that were better able to resist the effects of the antibiotic.  BUT, since they are still alive.... when they reproduce.... they become more ABUNDANT in the population of these bacteria than the ones that were initially destroyed by the antibiotic.  

When this incomplete taking of clinically prescribed antibiotics occurs again and again, the overall impact is to have the population of the species of bacteria become stronger and potentially resistant to that antibiotic.  It is a standard principal of the natural selection pressures faced in the evolution of any species.... and also relates to the concept of the "Selfish Gene" by Richard Dawkins and the "Shifting Balance Theory" of evolution put for by Sewall Wright.  When a population is "bottlenecked" (meaning reduced in number to a few survivors).... the population that rebuilds in subsequent generations will be comprised of the genes of those survivors.... not the ones who were killed in that bottle necking event.  

The REAL culprit is SUB-LETHAL DOSE antibiotic use (like in agriculture)..... where these animals are given antibiotics to fatten them up quicker.... and the dosage of antibiotic is LOW.... lower than what is NEEDED to kill any bacteria they may have in their bodies.  So, when a cow gets a continual, low level dosage of an antibiotic.... a dose that is sublethal to the bacteria it is designed to kill.... the body of the cow becomes a percolating cauldron that will PROMOTE any bacteria of the sort for that antibiotic that is in the cow's body.... to evolve into strong, more resistant, and more powerful forms over generational time periods.  

* * * * *

Pam J also mentioned the concept of "herd immunity" which is an important concept, but is not related to antibiotic resistance.  Herd Immunity references a communal VALUE of having a very large percentage of organisms be resistant (by prior exposure or by immunization) to a pathogen...... TO PROVIDE a wall or barrier to others in the population who are not or cannot be resistant (through age, other disease or something else).  

The basic application would be akin to..... if you live in a community who has a ~97% vaccination rate for pathogen A (let's say cholera for instance)..... herd immunity.... for that community would be strong..... and the sheer barrier provided by the ~97% who are immunized.... would give very good protection for the ~3% who are not or cannot be immunized (say newborns who cannot be vaccinated yet, or folks with autoimmune disorders who cannot get some immunizations).  

But, if the community had instead, say only ~80% vaccination rates for pathogen A.... the shield or barrier of "herd immunity" would be substantially weakened.... because with ~20% not immunized, the pathogen could (based upon mathematics/statistical analysis of populations) very easily find a conduit chain of non-immunized people within that community and the pathogen could take hold.  

Real numbers of needed percentages for "herd immunity" to be valuable would VARY depending upon the strength of the pathogen, the density of the human population, and the effectiveness of the vaccine.  Herd Immunity determinants would need to be modeled mathematically/statistically using those parameters.  

* * * * *

Haha!  I did not really mean to be so utterly verbose in the above.  But, I wanted to try to give at least a general explanation.  I apologize for the long windedness.  

What I REALLY had been planning to talk about today, was my VERY STRONG PCS today.  My Pipe Craving Score.... for reasons I am not really sure about.... have sky rocketed again.  I am most assuredly at a 9+ on the scale.  

It took tremendous effort while running this morning to focus and complete my rosary.  My mind kept side-tracking to so many varied memories of exquisite pipefulls of pipe tobacco I have experienced across the decades.  

But the 9+ scale measure also means I am feeling what I also equate with an actual "hunger" for simply the act of indulging in smoking my pipes.  It feels beyond simply WANTING to smoke a pipe.  Right now, it feels akin to my NEEDING to have a pipe.... almost like I need a NUTRIENT like Vitamin C.  

So, my feelings are intense, deep, and strong for some pipe tobacco right now.  In my mind, I keep visualizing having a gentle, smooth, warming bowl of Prince Albert.  Not sure why I am fixated on specifically Prince Albert at the moment.  But, its creamy, thick texture, and its palpable, palatable, and yet mild flavors.... and imagining the warmth of holding the bowl in my hands.... that is what my mind has been envisioning and has been desiring all day long.  

PipeTobacco