←back to thread

121 points pseudolus | 5 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
looofooo0 ◴[] No.45601997[source]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phage_therapy

Basically use dirty water, finely filter it, such that only things as big as phages remain. Put that liquid in a solution of bacteria you want to treat. Filter it again, repeat... In the end you should end up with some phage solution which specifically attacks the bacteria. If these phages don't work anymore, find new ones.

replies(2): >>45603075 #>>45603339 #
JumpCrisscross ◴[] No.45603339[source]
> In the end you should end up with some phage solution which specifically attacks the bacteria

This reminds of the universal cure to disease being a bullet [1].

Phages are promising. That doesn’t mean they can’t hurt you [2].

[1] https://xkcd.com/1217/

[2] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8310247/

replies(1): >>45603371 #
looofooo0 ◴[] No.45603371[source]
"we found some adverse events associated with phage therapy, but serious events were extremely rare."

The biggest hindrance is that the western process of developing and releasing new medicine is ill-suited for phage treatment.

replies(2): >>45603395 #>>45606736 #
JumpCrisscross ◴[] No.45603395[source]
> the western process of developing and releasing new medicine is ill-suited for phage treatment

…as evidenced by the booming phage industry somewhere in the east?

(The weird thing is this railing against western medicine or whatnot is usually a dead ringer for pseudoscience. Yet phages are a scientifically valid thereaupeutic route [1].)

[1] https://www.nature.com/subjects/bacteriophages

replies(1): >>45603552 #
looofooo0 ◴[] No.45603552[source]
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.
replies(1): >>45603819 #
JumpCrisscross ◴[] No.45603819[source]
> 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.

replies(2): >>45603919 #>>45607115 #
1. looofooo0 ◴[] No.45603919{3}[source]
They are only active against a narrow strain of bacteria unlike antibiotics.
replies(1): >>45603964 #
2. JumpCrisscross ◴[] No.45603964[source]
> 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.)

replies(1): >>45605212 #
3. looofooo0 ◴[] No.45605212[source]
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.
replies(1): >>45605348 #
4. JumpCrisscross ◴[] No.45605348{3}[source]
> 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.

replies(1): >>45605783 #
5. looofooo0 ◴[] No.45605783{4}[source]
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.