3 ms·

I don't understand your point? The only thing I said that the process of developing new medicine is ill-suited for phage treatment. This due the fact bacteria a

I don't understand your point? The only thing I said that the process of developing new medicine is ill-suited for phage treatment. This due the fact bacteria and phages are coevolving, hence any phage treatment is highly specific and hence not worth of developing. It needs new ideas to standardize the process and to make this process a legal treatment option.

JumpCrisscross 1y ago
> due the fact bacteria and phages are coevolving, hence any phage treatment is highly specific and hence not worth of developing How is this different from antibiotics? Nothing about phages makes them not worth developing. Exhibit A: they’re being researched and developed.
- looofooo0 1y ago
  They are only active against a narrow strain of bacteria unlike antibiotics.
  - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
    > are only active against a narrow strain of bacteria unlike antibiotics And this makes them “not worth…developing” why? (The comparison to antibiotics was that the antibiotic-bacteria system is coevolving too. Exhibit A: TFA on antibiotic resistance.)
    - looofooo0 1y ago
      Much slower, we are still using 100 year old antibiotics. Money one phage is going to make is much smaller. This is not cost effective to go through the whole process.
      - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
        > Money one phage is going to make is much smaller Again, what are you basing this on? > This is not cost effective to go through the whole process Now do personalized medicine.
        looofooo0 1y ago
        Phages are binding to very specific proteins, where as antibiotics disrupt more fundamental processes. Personal medicine as in individual combination of existing drugs is easier to achieve in current regulatory framework then using new drugs.
- M95D 1y ago
  1) Phages are specific for each bacteria species or sub-species. Can't treat E.coli and Klebsiella with the same phages like we do with antibiotics. Not even the test kits are the same. There are hundreds of phages for each bacteria species and only a few of them would work for each patient. 2) Phages are live organisms (as much as you can call a virus "alive"). The shelf life is very very short. A couple of days probably. 1 + 2 => A hospital would have to store thousands of different phages to be able to treat most of it's patients and it would have to replace those stores twice a week.
  - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
    > hospital would have to store thousands of different phages to be able to treat most of it's patients and it would have to replace those stores twice a week Couldn’t you create a few compound batches that treat sets of bacteria, balancing distribution cost and side effects? Do that a little, remove phages that don’t work better than antibiotics, tailor for local conditions and I doubt you’re adding more than a few dozen medicines to the hospital’s inventory. > shelf life is very very short. A couple of days probably Plenty can survive cryogenic suspension [1]. [1] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3131515/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3131515/

JumpCrisscross 1y ago

> due the fact bacteria and phages are coevolving, hence any phage treatment is highly specific and hence not worth of developing How is this different from antibiotics? Nothing about phages makes them not worth developing. Exhibit A: they’re being researched and developed.

looofooo0 1y ago
They are only active against a narrow strain of bacteria unlike antibiotics.
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago
  > are only active against a narrow strain of bacteria unlike antibiotics And this makes them “not worth…developing” why? (The comparison to antibiotics was that the antibiotic-bacteria system is coevolving too. Exhibit A: TFA on antibiotic resistance.)
  - looofooo0 1y ago
    Much slower, we are still using 100 year old antibiotics. Money one phage is going to make is much smaller. This is not cost effective to go through the whole process.
    - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
      > Money one phage is going to make is much smaller Again, what are you basing this on? > This is not cost effective to go through the whole process Now do personalized medicine.
      - looofooo0 1y ago
        Phages are binding to very specific proteins, where as antibiotics disrupt more fundamental processes. Personal medicine as in individual combination of existing drugs is easier to achieve in current regulatory framework then using new drugs.
M95D 1y ago
1) Phages are specific for each bacteria species or sub-species. Can't treat E.coli and Klebsiella with the same phages like we do with antibiotics. Not even the test kits are the same. There are hundreds of phages for each bacteria species and only a few of them would work for each patient. 2) Phages are live organisms (as much as you can call a virus "alive"). The shelf life is very very short. A couple of days probably. 1 + 2 => A hospital would have to store thousands of different phages to be able to treat most of it's patients and it would have to replace those stores twice a week.
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago
  > hospital would have to store thousands of different phages to be able to treat most of it's patients and it would have to replace those stores twice a week Couldn’t you create a few compound batches that treat sets of bacteria, balancing distribution cost and side effects? Do that a little, remove phages that don’t work better than antibiotics, tailor for local conditions and I doubt you’re adding more than a few dozen medicines to the hospital’s inventory. > shelf life is very very short. A couple of days probably Plenty can survive cryogenic suspension [1]. [1] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3131515/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3131515/