Re: Re: shalom aleichem

[Guest guest]

Very interesting...you ask some good questions. I hope we get the answers.

I'd eat sponges all day long if I thought it could get rid of these bio-films which I believe are a big factor in our chronic infection problems.

penny

From: <usenethod@...>Subject: [infections] Re: shalom aleicheminfections Date: Saturday, August 16, 2008, 2:47 PM

Madam, train your awareness on this notice in a mysterious foreign periodical: http://www.rsc. org/Publishing/ Journals/ cb/Volume/ 2008/4/marine_ inspiration_for_biofilm_ break_up. aspI have only the North Carolina group's abstracts, not their papers. As best I can tell, they are working on this "oroidin," isolated from a sponge, and on derivatives thereof. It was discovered a long time ago, but I can't seem to easily learn when its biofilm dispersing properties were discovered. Recently, I'm guessing.This paper delves a little into the ecology. It looks like oroidin saddens a whole variety of different organisms, even fish. Thus the function in the sponge is perfectly unclear. Since sponges are filter feeders, it seems clear that they should have a basically pretty

negative attitude about biofilms choking their filter pores. But they also face lots of other ecological problems in their incandescent struggle for life, knowledge, and meaning. And all their problems are ipso facto problems for their dependent bacterial symbionts as well; some products from sponges, etc, are actually made by bacterial symbionts. Sponges: un type vecu...http://www.scienced irect.com/ science?_ ob=ArticleURL & _udi=B6T4R-48F5G3W-4 & _user=10 & _ rdoc=1 & _fmt= & _orig=search & _sort=d & view= c & _version= 1 & _urlVersion=0 & _userid= 10 & md5=fc693a84d baa5c02128ab70c8 a8ad374I wonder what is up with oroidin dispersing biofilms "across order, class, and phylum." Why would lots of different, highly diverse bacteria (perhaps indeed all bacteria?)

use the very same code (ie, receptor-"hormone" pair) to signal dispersion? It's very odd since this sets them up to be "hacked" by any organism that exudes oroidin, whereas any bacterium not responsive to oroidin would not be hacked.There are possible reasons for this, I guess. Different bacterial species/strains/ whatever might be able to sense different sorts of danger/etc which render it wise to disperse extremely immediately. If these dangers/situations - or more precisely, the signs of them that can be sensed) are extremely diverse - then maybe most species wouldn't evolve to sense most of the dangers, since the selection pressure wouldn't be high enough. But if they all use the same dispersion signal, then a given species can benefit from overhearing all the other species, who sense many sorts of stimuli that the given species cannot sense. However, I think this explanation is of very

modest plausibility. As you may recall... DG Davies was supposed to have a molecule with these same properties, 18 months ago, but hasn't published. That's odd.> Can 't access pub med. Do you know what the marine natural product is specifically?> > penny> > A small molecule derived from a marine natural product with the> ability to inhibit biofilm formation and also disperse established> proteobacterial biofilms is presented.> PMID: 18368169> > SA, Melander C.> No Abstract> Construction and screening of a 2-aminoimidazole library identifies a> small molecule capable of inhibiting and dispersing bacterial biofilms> across order, class, and phylum.> Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. 2008;47(28): 5229-31. No abstract available.> PMID: 18528836 [PubMed - indexed for

MEDLINE]>

[Guest guest]

I can buy that. It would sure explain why it seems that just when you begin to start feeling really good, you suddenly seem to have a major relapse/set back. Those little buggers just aren't going to allow it. Would make sense that they'd wait until they could all get on the same page and blast you good. That's sure what it feels like, anyway.

penny

From: phagelod <mpalmer@...>Subject: [infections] Re: shalom aleicheminfections Date: Saturday, August 16, 2008, 6:02 PM

And aleichem shalomI don't have time to look into this kind of stuff these days, but it reminds me of Bonnie Bassler's work, profiled recently on PBS's Nova Now. You may already know of her. This seems to be another odd example of inter-species communication:"Instead, Bassler explained, using quorum sensing, the bacteria count themselves and when they reach a sufficiently high number, they all launch their attack simultaneously. This way, the bacteria are more likely to overpower the immune system....Bassler showed that a gene called luxS is required for production of AI-2, and that hundreds of species of bacteria have this gene and use AI-2 to communicate. This work suggests that bacteria have a universal chemical language, a type of "bacterial Esperanto" that they use to talk between species....She was also chosen as the 2004 Inventor of the Year by the New York Intellectual Property

Law Association for her idea that interfering with the AI-2 language could form the basis of a new type of broad-spectrum antibiotic. "The fantasy is to make one pill that works against all kinds of bacteria," she said."quoted fromhttp://www.hhmi. org/research/ investigators/ bassler_bio. htmlApologies if this has already been discussed.>> > Madam, train your awareness on this notice in a mysterious foreign > periodical: > > http://www.rsc. org/Publishing/ Journals/

cb/Volume/ 2008/4/marine_ inspira> tion_for_biofilm_ break_up. asp> > I have only the North Carolina group's abstracts, not their papers. > As best I can tell, they are working on this "oroidin," isolated from > a sponge, and on derivatives thereof. It was discovered a long time > ago, but I can't seem to easily learn when its biofilm dispersing > properties were discovered. Recently, I'm guessing.> > This paper delves a little into the ecology. It looks like oroidin > saddens a whole variety of different organisms, even fish. Thus the > function in the sponge is perfectly unclear. Since sponges are filter > feeders, it seems clear that they should have a basically pretty > negative attitude about biofilms choking their filter pores. But they > also face lots of other ecological problems in their incandescent >

struggle for life, knowledge, and meaning. And all their problems are > ipso facto problems for their dependent bacterial symbionts as well; > some products from sponges, etc, are actually made by bacterial > symbionts. Sponges: un type vecu...> > http://www.scienced irect.com/ science?_ ob=ArticleURL & _udi=B6T4R-> 48F5G3W-> 4 & _user=10 & _ rdoc=1 & _fmt= & _orig=search & _sort=d & view= c & _version= 1 & _urlVe> rsion=0 & _userid= 10 & md5=fc693a84d baa5c02128ab70c8 a8ad374> > I wonder what is up with oroidin dispersing biofilms "across order, > class, and phylum." Why would lots of different, highly diverse > bacteria (perhaps indeed all bacteria?) use the very same code (ie, > receptor-"hormone" pair) to

signal dispersion? It's very odd since > this sets them up to be "hacked" by any organism that exudes oroidin, > whereas any bacterium not responsive to oroidin would not be hacked.> > There are possible reasons for this, I guess. Different bacterial > species/strains/ whatever might be able to sense different sorts of > danger/etc which render it wise to disperse extremely immediately. If > these dangers/situations - or more precisely, the signs of them that > can be sensed) are extremely diverse - then maybe most species > wouldn't evolve to sense most of the dangers, since the selection > pressure wouldn't be high enough. But if they all use the same > dispersion signal, then a given species can benefit from overhearing > all the other species, who sense many sorts of stimuli that the given > species cannot sense. However, I think this

explanation is of very > modest plausibility. > > As you may recall... DG Davies was supposed to have a molecule with > these same properties, 18 months ago, but hasn't published. That's > odd.> > > > > > Can 't access pub med. Do you know what the marine natural product > is specifically?> > > > penny> > > > > > > > > A small molecule derived from a marine natural product with the> > ability to inhibit biofilm formation and also disperse established> > proteobacterial biofilms is presented.> > PMID: 18368169> > > > SA, Melander C.> > No Abstract> > Construction and screening of a 2-aminoimidazole library identifies > a> > small molecule capable of inhibiting and dispersing bacterial

> biofilms> > across order, class, and phylum.> > Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. 2008;47(28): 5229-31. No abstract available.> > PMID: 18528836 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]> >>

[Guest guest]

That totally makes sense. It's definitely sensible when you're dealing with normal bugs.

But then there are also bugs that are apparently already abx resistant when they colonize us. I took penicillin as a child, but not a whole lot else as I didn't like the idea of using antibiotics in general. However, when I had my bacteria first cultured and tested for abx sensitivities, they were already resistant to 12 of the 14 abx tested. I never took any of the abx on that list. That's discouraging. Especially if resistant bugs are out there in any great quantity and when contracted are being undertreated, which creates even stronger bugs. I'm sure my resistant bugs came from a YMCA pool, which is also discouraging, considering how much chlorine they were using. This is why I wish so much that the medical community would become more informed and spend more time trying to understand and treat these bugs as they are right now.

One interesting note: While my bugs are resistant to so many abx, penicillin still works for me. It doesn't knock the bugs out completely, but keeps them knocked down some. I can feel a regression within 24 hours if I stop taking it. Cipro's the same. I don't like it, but have to live with it until I can find something better.

By the way. What do you do in the medical field?

penny

From: jcarlozzi <jcarlozzi@...>Subject: [infections] Re: shalom aleicheminfections Date: Sunday, August 17, 2008, 8:55 AM

....and then there is also the reality of multi-drug resistance within the bacterial colonies themselves. If you keep on using the same spectrum of antibiotics to treat the same recurring organisms, they are going to develop genetic resistance to those drugs. In the medical profession, we try to start off conservative these days, but aggressive enough to treat the infection. If you sometimes start off with too many powerful guns, you run out of ammunition (sp?) too fast, and do not know where to go from there (i.e., you run out of antibiotic options, as nothing will work anymore).Hope this makes sense.Jimmy> >> > > > Madam, train your awareness on this notice in a mysterious foreign > > periodical: > > > > > http://www.rsc. org/Publishing/ Journals/ cb/Volume/ 2008/4/marine_ inspir> a> > tion_for_biofilm_ break_up. asp> > > > I have only the North Carolina group's abstracts, not their > papers.

> > As best I can tell, they are working on this "oroidin," isolated > from > > a sponge, and on derivatives thereof. It was discovered a long > time > > ago, but I can't seem to easily learn when its biofilm dispersing > > properties were discovered. Recently, I'm guessing.> > > > This paper delves a little into the ecology. It looks like oroidin > > saddens a whole variety of different organisms, even fish. Thus > the > > function in the sponge is perfectly unclear. Since sponges are > filter > > feeders, it seems clear that they should have a basically pretty > > negative attitude about biofilms choking their filter pores. But > they > > also face lots of other ecological problems in their incandescent > > struggle for life, knowledge, and meaning. And all their problems > are >

> ipso facto problems for their dependent bacterial symbionts as > well; > > some products from sponges, etc, are actually made by bacterial > > symbionts. Sponges: un type vecu...> > > > http://www.scienced irect.com/ science?_ ob=ArticleURL & _udi=B6T4R-> > 48F5G3W-> > > 4 & _user=10 & _ rdoc=1 & _fmt= & _orig=search & _sort=d & view= c & _version= 1 & _urlV> e> > rsion=0 & _userid= 10 & md5=fc693a84d baa5c02128ab70c8 a8ad374> > > > I wonder what is up with oroidin dispersing biofilms "across > order, > > class, and phylum." Why would lots of different, highly diverse > > bacteria (perhaps indeed all bacteria?) use the very same code > (ie, > > receptor-"hormone" pair) to signal dispersion? It's very

odd since > > this sets them up to be "hacked" by any organism that exudes > oroidin, > > whereas any bacterium not responsive to oroidin would not be > hacked.> > > > There are possible reasons for this, I guess. Different bacterial > > species/strains/ whatever might be able to sense different sorts of > > danger/etc which render it wise to disperse extremely immediately. > If > > these dangers/situations - or more precisely, the signs of them > that > > can be sensed) are extremely diverse - then maybe most species > > wouldn't evolve to sense most of the dangers, since the selection > > pressure wouldn't be high enough. But if they all use the same > > dispersion signal, then a given species can benefit from > overhearing > > all the other species, who sense many sorts of stimuli that

the > given > > species cannot sense. However, I think this explanation is of very > > modest plausibility. > > > > As you may recall... DG Davies was supposed to have a molecule > with > > these same properties, 18 months ago, but hasn't published. That's > > odd.> > > > > > > > > > > Can 't access pub med. Do you know what the marine natural > product > > is specifically?> > > > > > penny> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A small molecule derived from a marine natural product with the> > > ability to inhibit biofilm formation and also disperse > established> > > proteobacterial biofilms is presented.> > > PMID: 18368169> > > > >

> SA, Melander C.> > > No Abstract> > > Construction and screening of a 2-aminoimidazole library > identifies > > a> > > small molecule capable of inhibiting and dispersing bacterial > > biofilms> > > across order, class, and phylum.> > > Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. 2008;47(28): 5229-31. No abstract > available.> > > PMID: 18528836 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]> > >> >>

[Guest guest]

I'm keeping my fingers crossed that you're on the road to recovery with the discovery of these cysts.

So what I want to know is how do we get outpatient docs to treat us with the same care inpatient docs do? Or how do we get the inpatient docs to teach our outpatient docs how to treat us? I understand that inpatients are usually considered critical whereas we are not, but just because we're dying a slower death doesn't mean we're not deserving of quality care as well. This is so frustrating.

When I saw this allergist/immunologist, he was clearly surprised by the number of antimicrobials I take and asked if I'd seen an infectious disease doc and my answer was no. But not for trying. I've called numerous I.D. docs who've all said they won't see me without a referall from a doc they work with OR the more sympathetic ones told me their patient loads are too heavy to accept new patients. I'm hoping that perhaps this new guy will hook me up with a good i.d. doc. He seems to be very well connected and respected, so unless he dx's me with something crazy like allergies, perhaps I'll have an inroad to more consistent testing of my bugs.

penny

From: jcarlozzi <jcarlozzi@...>Subject: [infections] Re: shalom aleicheminfections Date: Monday, August 18, 2008, 4:56 AM

Hi Penny,You are absolutely correct. There are many bugs that are already resistant before they innoculate us. That is why it is important to perform cultures and sensitivies. As an inpatient, this is usually done routinely. The infection is treated empirically, until the C+S's return from the lab. Then, the drug regimen is changed accordingly. Unfortunately, sometimes there is so much resistance, that the options are limited, and the patient can suffer.Unfortunately, in cases like ours, MD's do not routinely order C+S's on an outpatient basis. So, they treat our infections emperically, think the drugs are working, and they really are not, or working very little.Like you, I take antibiotic regimens from time to time, with very little relief. However, like you, I do get some relief while on the course. However, once the course is complete, the infection returns shortly

thereafter, and sometimes, with a vengence. I can totally relate, as it is quite frustrating. I've just grown accustomed to having bronchitis attacks from time to time, and sinus infections routinely, all of which seem to be secondary to immunosuppresion due to amalgam sickness that I discovered I had a little over 3 years ago. However, if you can recall, my CT of my sinuses last week showed retention cysts on both of my maxillary sinuses, above where my maxillary teeth used to be (yeah, I lost them all as well, due to amalgam sickness. That was fun! <g>.). So, perhaps there is something mechanical that can be done, i.e., surgical removal. I have an appointment next week with the ENT doc, so I should have some answers and direction then. I am starting to feel a little optomistic about it now. :-)I'll keep you posted.I am so glad that I followed your advice, and did not act

upon the advice that I received from the person that I corresponded with in Delphi forums (the one that claimed that my NICO had reoccurred, and needed multiple radical surgeries). It may turn out that my discomfort is all related to only the retention cysts. I'm glad that I followed my gut feelings, as the discomfort I feel now is nothing like that excruciating pain that I was experiencing last year, before I had the NICO surgery. It is all starting to make alot more sense now, after having the CT done.BTW, in answer to your question, I am a pharmacist, and work in the inpatient hospital sector, and specialise in pediactrics.Jimmy> > >> > > > > > Madam, train your awareness on this notice in a mysterious > foreign > > > periodical:

> > > > > > > > http://www.rsc. org/Publishing/ Journals/ cb/Volume/ 2008/4/marine_ > inspir> > a> > > tion_for_biofilm_ break_up. asp> > > > > > I have only the North Carolina group's abstracts, not their > > papers. > > > As best I can tell, they are working on this "oroidin," isolated > > from > > > a sponge, and on derivatives thereof. It was discovered a long > > time > > > ago, but I can't seem to easily learn when its biofilm dispersing > > > properties were discovered. Recently, I'm guessing.> > > > > > This paper delves a little into the ecology. It looks like > oroidin > > > saddens a whole variety of different organisms, even fish. Thus > > the

> > > function in the sponge is perfectly unclear. Since sponges are > > filter > > > feeders, it seems clear that they should have a basically pretty > > > negative attitude about biofilms choking their filter pores. But > > they > > > also face lots of other ecological problems in their incandescent > > > struggle for life, knowledge, and meaning. And all their problems > > are > > > ipso facto problems for their dependent bacterial symbionts as > > well; > > > some products from sponges, etc, are actually made by bacterial > > > symbionts. Sponges: un type vecu...> > > > > > http://www.scienced irect.com/ science?_ ob=ArticleURL & > _udi=B6T4R-> > > 48F5G3W-> > > >

> 4 & _user=10 & _ rdoc=1 & _fmt= & _orig=search & _sort=d & view= c & _version= > 1 & _urlV> > e> > > rsion=0 & _userid= 10 & md5=fc693a84d baa5c02128ab70c8 a8ad374> > > > > > I wonder what is up with oroidin dispersing biofilms "across > > order, > > > class, and phylum." Why would lots of different, highly diverse > > > bacteria (perhaps indeed all bacteria?) use the very same code > > (ie, > > > receptor-"hormone" pair) to signal dispersion? It's very odd > since > > > this sets them up to be "hacked" by any organism that exudes > > oroidin, > > > whereas any bacterium not responsive to oroidin would not be > > hacked.> > > > > > There are possible reasons for this, I guess. Different bacterial > > >

species/strains/ whatever might be able to sense different sorts > of > > > danger/etc which render it wise to disperse extremely > immediately. > > If > > > these dangers/situations - or more precisely, the signs of them > > that > > > can be sensed) are extremely diverse - then maybe most species > > > wouldn't evolve to sense most of the dangers, since the selection > > > pressure wouldn't be high enough. But if they all use the same > > > dispersion signal, then a given species can benefit from > > overhearing > > > all the other species, who sense many sorts of stimuli that the > > given > > > species cannot sense. However, I think this explanation is of > very > > > modest plausibility. > > > > > > As you may recall... DG Davies was

supposed to have a molecule > > with > > > these same properties, 18 months ago, but hasn't published. > That's > > > odd.> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can 't access pub med. Do you know what the marine natural > > product > > > is specifically?> > > > > > > > penny> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A small molecule derived from a marine natural product with the> > > > ability to inhibit biofilm formation and also disperse > > established> > > > proteobacterial biofilms is presented.> > > > PMID: 18368169> > > > > > > > SA, Melander C.> > > > No Abstract>

> > > Construction and screening of a 2-aminoimidazole library > > identifies > > > a> > > > small molecule capable of inhibiting and dispersing bacterial > > > biofilms> > > > across order, class, and phylum.> > > > Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. 2008;47(28): 5229-31. No abstract > > available.> > > > PMID: 18528836 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]> > > >> > >> >>