Re: Off Topic: Penny's dog, the reason for triple abx

[Guest guest]

, there's another reason for multiple abx therapy, when the

organism is unknown. And that's because if you take the wrong abx,

it can actually cause an organism to grow bigger, especially so if

you've got co-infections (which I think most of us do). Multiple abx

coverage helps prevent this from occurring. This phenomenon also

explains why many people do abx therapy with one drug and report

getting worse rather than better.

Here's a post that made the other day on I & I about an article

on a researcher named Dr. Lindner:

" Interesting. He and allied physicians treated a rather large number

of patients with combo abx. Using binary judgements (improved vs

unimproved, bacterial blood load reduced vs unreduced), he claims

100% correlation between clinical improvement and bacteriologic

improvement.

I'd much rather see actual data, of course, and preferably data that

is much more quantitative. But this is interesting at least.

He also asserts that application of abx to which the organisms are

resistant actually stimulates their growth. "

=================

(note: HBB = Human bloodborne bacteria)

The 66 patients for whom follow-up was adequate are summarized below

by diagnosis: Chronic fatigue syndrome: 41 patients total; 30

patients improved, 11 patients did not improve. Reduced levels of HBB

were seen in all improved patients and HBB levels were not reduced in

unimproved patients. Multiple sclerosis (typical): 7 patients total;

4 patients improved; 3 patients did not improve. Two of the four

improved patients had marked functional improvement, for example,

were able to walk with a cane where a wheelchair had been previously

required. There were reduced levels of HBB in three of the improved

patients, with an insufficient culture follow-up in the remaining

improved patient. There was no reduction in HBB in the patients that

remained unimproved. Atypical multiple sclerosis: One patient was

tested and was markedly and objectively improved for five months

before developing antibiotic resistance (resistance later documented

with sensitivity testing). There was a reduced level of HBB during

the period of improvement and a marked increase in HBB during

relapse. Borderline diagnosis (either chronic fatigue syndrome or

multiple sclerosis): Three patients were tested. All three patients

improved, with reduced levels of HBB. Fibromyalgia (pure or

associated with chronic fatigue): Three patients were tested, and all

patients improved, with corresponding, reduced levels of HBB in the

blood. Arthritis (rheumatoid or other): Five patients were tested;

four improved and one did not improve. All improved patients

demonstrated reduced levels of HBB in their blood, with no reduction

in the level of HBB in the unimproved patient. Behcet's syndrome: One

patient was tested and did not improve, and there was no reduction in

the level of HBB in this patient's blood.

The striking feature of the treatment of these patients was that

there was a 100% correlation between clinical improvement in the

patient and reduction of the levels of HBB in the patient's

bloodstream. This was true even though the improvement resulted from

treatment with antibiotics--despite these illnesses never having been

associated with a bacterial cause in the prior art.

Subsequent to this study, laboratory support has been supplied to

various physicians treating patients. Results have been similar,

except that the percentage of responding multiple sclerosis patients

has appeared to be lower than the level that was seen in the small,

initial group. Furthermore, one collaborator who has been treating

chronic fatigue syndrome patients with penicillin and probenecid has

reported about 100 patients who are in complete remission from

symptoms. This correlates to about a 20% cure rate.

Clearly, the improvement in symptoms correlates with reduction in HBB

in the bloodstream. Long-term follow-up has shown that for some of

the responding patients of the original study, antibiotic resistance

has developed, though each patient benefited greatly overall from

treatment. Lately, study has also demonstrated an important

phenomenon, that is, frequently when antibiotic resistance is

present, the antibiotics can actually stimulate the growth of the

bacteria. The mechanism for this effect is unknown, but it has been

seen repeatedly both in culture and in patients. The increases in HBB

when resistance is present have correlated with increased symptoms.

>

> Hi Penny,

>

> Being an animal lover, I'm curious as to what was discovered in

your

> poor dog. The cause of the decline in health and then the lump on

> his/her head? I've never heard of anything like that in dogs (and

> I've had dogs for my whole life).

>

> I'm also kind of curious as to why the veterinarian **did** give

all

> those antibiotics. I agreed with your previous statement (a few

days

> ago) about dogs getting better care than we humans and that vets

> culture to find the cause of the infection, instead of hitting the

> dog with a " maybe " or an " I think " -- as we get from our " people

> doctors " who take stabs in the dark with our infections. Didn't

the

> vet do a culture this time, to discover what the cause of the

> infection was? Why the two IV antibiotics and then a third

orally?

> It just seems counter to what you had said before (that I agreed

> with).

>

> I just came from my vet today, and the vet tech and I talked about

> dog ages, too. I was curious about the 1 year = 7 years thing

that

> we used to hear all the time. She said that it was more like: the

> first 2 years for the dog = the first 20 years for a human

> (through " adolescence " ), and then after that, it's 1 year = 5

years.

> That seems to make more sense. Otherwise I'd hate to figure how

old

> my 15-year-old Bandit really is, poor guy.

>

> Is your woofer doing better now? I sure hope so.

>

> Take care,

>

>

> the one in Champaign IL

[Guest guest]

Now that is interesting. Thanks, Penny. I need more " mechanism "

help here. (Where's Rich!) I wonder why resistance to the abx would

cause stimulation and the bacteria to multiply. Why? This sounds

like it has important theory behind it...important for many things

besides this alone. I wish I were about 400 times smarter sometimes.

>

> , there's another reason for multiple abx therapy, when the

> organism is unknown. And that's because if you take the wrong abx,

> it can actually cause an organism to grow bigger, especially so if

> you've got co-infections (which I think most of us do). Multiple

abx

> coverage helps prevent this from occurring. This phenomenon also

> explains why many people do abx therapy with one drug and report

> getting worse rather than better.

>

> Here's a post that made the other day on I & I about an

article

> on a researcher named Dr. Lindner:

>

>

> " Interesting. He and allied physicians treated a rather large number

> of patients with combo abx. Using binary judgements (improved vs

> unimproved, bacterial blood load reduced vs unreduced), he claims

> 100% correlation between clinical improvement and bacteriologic

> improvement.

>

>

>

> I'd much rather see actual data, of course, and preferably data that

> is much more quantitative. But this is interesting at least.

>

> He also asserts that application of abx to which the organisms are

> resistant actually stimulates their growth. "

>

> =================

>

> (note: HBB = Human bloodborne bacteria)

>

> The 66 patients for whom follow-up was adequate are summarized below

> by diagnosis: Chronic fatigue syndrome: 41 patients total; 30

> patients improved, 11 patients did not improve. Reduced levels of

HBB

> were seen in all improved patients and HBB levels were not reduced

in

> unimproved patients. Multiple sclerosis (typical): 7 patients total;

> 4 patients improved; 3 patients did not improve. Two of the four

> improved patients had marked functional improvement, for example,

> were able to walk with a cane where a wheelchair had been previously

> required. There were reduced levels of HBB in three of the improved

> patients, with an insufficient culture follow-up in the remaining

> improved patient. There was no reduction in HBB in the patients that

> remained unimproved. Atypical multiple sclerosis: One patient was

> tested and was markedly and objectively improved for five months

> before developing antibiotic resistance (resistance later documented

> with sensitivity testing). There was a reduced level of HBB during

> the period of improvement and a marked increase in HBB during

> relapse. Borderline diagnosis (either chronic fatigue syndrome or

> multiple sclerosis): Three patients were tested. All three patients

> improved, with reduced levels of HBB. Fibromyalgia (pure or

> associated with chronic fatigue): Three patients were tested, and

all

> patients improved, with corresponding, reduced levels of HBB in the

> blood. Arthritis (rheumatoid or other): Five patients were tested;

> four improved and one did not improve. All improved patients

> demonstrated reduced levels of HBB in their blood, with no reduction

> in the level of HBB in the unimproved patient. Behcet's syndrome:

One

> patient was tested and did not improve, and there was no reduction

in

> the level of HBB in this patient's blood.

>

> The striking feature of the treatment of these patients was that

> there was a 100% correlation between clinical improvement in the

> patient and reduction of the levels of HBB in the patient's

> bloodstream. This was true even though the improvement resulted from

> treatment with antibiotics--despite these illnesses never having

been

> associated with a bacterial cause in the prior art.

>

> Subsequent to this study, laboratory support has been supplied to

> various physicians treating patients. Results have been similar,

> except that the percentage of responding multiple sclerosis patients

> has appeared to be lower than the level that was seen in the small,

> initial group. Furthermore, one collaborator who has been treating

> chronic fatigue syndrome patients with penicillin and probenecid has

> reported about 100 patients who are in complete remission from

> symptoms. This correlates to about a 20% cure rate.

>

> Clearly, the improvement in symptoms correlates with reduction in

HBB

> in the bloodstream. Long-term follow-up has shown that for some of

> the responding patients of the original study, antibiotic resistance

> has developed, though each patient benefited greatly overall from

> treatment. Lately, study has also demonstrated an important

> phenomenon, that is, frequently when antibiotic resistance is

> present, the antibiotics can actually stimulate the growth of the

> bacteria. The mechanism for this effect is unknown, but it has been

> seen repeatedly both in culture and in patients. The increases in

HBB

> when resistance is present have correlated with increased symptoms.

>

[Guest guest]

Well , there could be a number of reasons. Bacteria have their

own defense systems, which go into high gear when threatened.

Replication might be their best defense, since they can do it so

quickly.

Also, bacteria produce their own toxins, which keep other bacteria

in check. This bacterial " harmony " can also be seen as a constant

war. But as a result, they develop a balance. If the wrong

antibiotic is taken which only kills a less threatening bacteria (or

good bacteria), it would allow the other bacteria colony to grow

larger, since they're no longer being kept in check by the other

organisms.

This applies of course to fungal organisms as well, which are

definitely a part of the mix. If the balance gets thrown off by

killing the wrong bug, it can just result in making the bad bug

bigger while you get sicker. This is why we need good testing to see

what's happening.

This is why I'm also so against the long term herxing theory. A true

herx should be short lived, then you should rapidly begin to improve

if you're truly killing the right bugs.

My dog is an example. Yesterday, after being treated by the vet, he

looked really bad, totally out of it, completely wobbly on his feet.

Today, he's running down the stairs.

penny

>

> Now that is interesting. Thanks, Penny. I need more " mechanism "

> help here. (Where's Rich!) I wonder why resistance to the abx

would

> cause stimulation and the bacteria to multiply. Why? This sounds

> like it has important theory behind it...important for many things

> besides this alone. I wish I were about 400 times smarter

sometimes.

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Hi, .

I don't know the reason for this. Perhaps it's because the abx knocks

out the competition from other bacteria that are not resistant to teh

particular abx. That type of thing certainly goes on in the gut,

where there are literally hundreds of different kinds of bacteria

competing with each other. This phenomenon is responsible for the

development of Clostridium dificile infections in the gut for example,

which are often very tough to get rid of. A good reason to use

probiotics right after abx treatment.

Rich

>

> Now that is interesting. Thanks, Penny. I need more " mechanism "

> help here. (Where's Rich!) I wonder why resistance to the abx

would

> cause stimulation and the bacteria to multiply. Why? This sounds

> like it has important theory behind it...important for many things

> besides this alone. I wish I were about 400 times smarter sometimes.

>

>

[Guest guest]

Interesting, thank you. A simple gross analogy to your first point

would be how people used to have 6, 7, 8, 10 kids in order that their

livelihood, the farm, ranch, whatever, would be able to be

continued. People died much sooner, and kids didn't survive

childhood illnesses, so people had more kids to ensure some kind of

longevity and continuance.

I have never, ever, understood this herxing business, either short

term or long term. How can one tell the difference between what's

called " a good herx " and just being another step down in the sicker-

than-hell category?

>

> Well , there could be a number of reasons. Bacteria have their

> own defense systems, which go into high gear when threatened.

> Replication might be their best defense, since they can do it so

> quickly.

>

> Also, bacteria produce their own toxins, which keep other bacteria

> in check. This bacterial " harmony " can also be seen as a constant

> war. But as a result, they develop a balance. If the wrong

> antibiotic is taken which only kills a less threatening bacteria

(or

> good bacteria), it would allow the other bacteria colony to grow

> larger, since they're no longer being kept in check by the other

> organisms.

>

> This applies of course to fungal organisms as well, which are

> definitely a part of the mix. If the balance gets thrown off by

> killing the wrong bug, it can just result in making the bad bug

> bigger while you get sicker. This is why we need good testing to

see

> what's happening.

>

> This is why I'm also so against the long term herxing theory. A

true

> herx should be short lived, then you should rapidly begin to

improve

> if you're truly killing the right bugs.

>

> My dog is an example. Yesterday, after being treated by the vet, he

> looked really bad, totally out of it, completely wobbly on his

feet.

> Today, he's running down the stairs.

>

> penny

>

[Guest guest]

I think I understand the gist of it, Rich. Thank you. Does this

mean that while taking antibiotics, you should **not** use probiotics

at all? Or do you assume that the abx is getting rid of the " bad

guys " at the same time that you are helping replenish the good guys?

(so you should keep taking the probiotics during abx treatment)?

>

> Hi, .

>

> I don't know the reason for this. Perhaps it's because the abx

knocks

> out the competition from other bacteria that are not resistant to

teh

> particular abx. That type of thing certainly goes on in the gut,

> where there are literally hundreds of different kinds of bacteria

> competing with each other. This phenomenon is responsible for the

> development of Clostridium dificile infections in the gut for

example,

> which are often very tough to get rid of. A good reason to use

> probiotics right after abx treatment.

>

> Rich

>

>

[Guest guest]

My doc suggests probiotics 3 hours before or after your antibiotics. You must

replenish the good guys constantly. They're also being wiped out. Taken a few

hours away from the antibiotics will save them for your gut.

netsukeme <kcapel@...> wrote: I think I understand the gist of it,

Rich. Thank you. Does this

mean that while taking antibiotics, you should **not** use probiotics

at all? Or do you assume that the abx is getting rid of the " bad

guys " at the same time that you are helping replenish the good guys?

(so you should keep taking the probiotics during abx treatment)?

>

> Hi, .

>

> I don't know the reason for this. Perhaps it's because the abx

knocks

> out the competition from other bacteria that are not resistant to

teh

> particular abx. That type of thing certainly goes on in the gut,

> where there are literally hundreds of different kinds of bacteria

> competing with each other. This phenomenon is responsible for the

> development of Clostridium dificile infections in the gut for

example,

> which are often very tough to get rid of. A good reason to use

> probiotics right after abx treatment.

>

> Rich

>

>

This list is intended for patients to share personal experiences with each

other, not to give medical advice. If you are interested in any treatment

discussed here, please consult your doctor.

[Guest guest]

Oh, I see...I think. It's a matter of " hours, " not " days " at all, as

I was thinking.

Thank you.

I think I understand the gist of it,

Rich. Thank you. Does this

> mean that while taking antibiotics, you should **not** use

probiotics

> at all? Or do you assume that the abx is getting rid of the " bad

> guys " at the same time that you are helping replenish the good

guys?

> (so you should keep taking the probiotics during abx treatment)?

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Hi, .

I've read arguments both ways on this. Some advocate doing probiotics

while doing abx to make sure the bad guys don't get the upper hand

while one is defenseless in terms of not having the good guys around.

On the other hand, I've also read that the probiotics can diminish the

effects of the abx, and also that the practice of using them

simultaneously can produce resistant strains of bacteria, and even

that bacteria can " swap " genetic material and perhaps produce new

types of bacteria from this mix. I guess my view is that if the abx

treatment is relatively short term, then it's probably O.K. to hold

off on the probiotics until the abx treatment is done. If on the

other hand, the abx treatment is long term, then I think I read Garth

Nicolson suggesting that one take the probiotics several hours apart

from the antibiotics during the day. Maybe that's the best

compromise. I do know that once a person gets Clostridium dificile,

it can be a very tough job to get rid of it. The conventional docs

want to give even more potent abx in that situation, and I think some

people dig themselves into a hole that way. I think I would prefer

trying to flood the gut with many billions (literally) of good bugs to

try to overwhelm the bad ones. It could take quite a lot to do that,

though.

Rich

>

> I think I understand the gist of it, Rich. Thank you. Does this

> mean that while taking antibiotics, you should **not** use

probiotics

> at all? Or do you assume that the abx is getting rid of the " bad

> guys " at the same time that you are helping replenish the good guys?

> (so you should keep taking the probiotics during abx treatment)?

>

>

[Guest guest]

Okay, thank you.

Hmmm. I don't know what this is...Clostridium dificile.

Recommendations from anyone? Just google it?

>

> Hi, .

>

> I've read arguments both ways on this. Some advocate doing

probiotics

> while doing abx to make sure the bad guys don't get the upper hand

> while one is defenseless in terms of not having the good guys

around.

> On the other hand, I've also read that the probiotics can diminish

the

> effects of the abx, and also that the practice of using them

> simultaneously can produce resistant strains of bacteria, and even

> that bacteria can " swap " genetic material and perhaps produce new

> types of bacteria from this mix. I guess my view is that if the

abx

> treatment is relatively short term, then it's probably O.K. to hold

> off on the probiotics until the abx treatment is done. If on the

> other hand, the abx treatment is long term, then I think I read

Garth

> Nicolson suggesting that one take the probiotics several hours

apart

> from the antibiotics during the day. Maybe that's the best

> compromise. I do know that once a person gets Clostridium

dificile,

> it can be a very tough job to get rid of it. The conventional docs

> want to give even more potent abx in that situation, and I think

some

> people dig themselves into a hole that way. I think I would prefer

> trying to flood the gut with many billions (literally) of good bugs

to

> try to overwhelm the bad ones. It could take quite a lot to do

that,

> though.

>

> Rich

>

[Guest guest]

Hi ,

You may possibly have heard of it referred to as C-Dif. It is a wicked awful

diarrhea. Like nothing you ever had or would wish on your worse enemy. Often

times people will not even be able to make it to the bathroom when it really

gets going. It is what is known as a super infection. It is contagious, but it

is usually " caught " from taking very strong antibiotics, or multiple antibiotics

(or of course the weakened immune system people). It is diagnosed with a stool

culture. Does that answer your question, or is there something else you might

want to know about it?

Take care,

Dawn

Okay, thank you.> > Hmmm. I don't know what this is...Clostridium dificile.

> Recommendations from anyone? Just google it?> >

Enter the Windows Live Mail beta sweepstakes

http://www.imagine-msn.com/minisites/sweepstakes/mail/register.aspx

[Guest guest]

I didn't know any of that, Dawn. Thank you. I have to read all

kinds of genus and species stuff, but I end up knowing what only a

very few of them really are. Their " significance " or what they cause

in people.

If it's " caught " by taking many or strong antibiotics, it sounds like

it's native to the intestine and not " caught " at all.

Hmmm, Dawn? Better not make any bets on what I might wish on

my " worst enemy " till after you've met him/her! ( )

Thanks, Dawn.

>

> Hi ,

>

> You may possibly have heard of it referred to as C-Dif. It is a

wicked awful diarrhea. Like nothing you ever had or would wish on

your worse enemy. Often times people will not even be able to make

it to the bathroom when it really gets going. It is what is known as

a super infection. It is contagious, but it is usually " caught " from

taking very strong antibiotics, or multiple antibiotics (or of course

the weakened immune system people). It is diagnosed with a stool

culture. Does that answer your question, or is there something else

you might want to know about it?

>

> Take care,

> Dawn

>

[Guest guest]

So, , is this a warning not to get on your bad side? :~)

No problem. It is kind of confusing about the caught part, but it can still be

caught too. I want to be clear on that. If a patient in the hospital is

diagnosed with it, they are put contact precaution isolation. Pretty much, you

are only going to catch it if you come into contact with the infected

" material " , but you never know, some people aren't always as clean as we'd like

them to be. Hope that makes sense.

Take care,

Dawn

Hmmm, Dawn? Better not make any bets on what I might wish on > my " worst enemy "

till after you've met him/her! ( )> > Thanks, Dawn.> >

Join the next generation of Hotmail and you could win the adventure of a

lifetime

http://www.imagine-msn.com/minisites/sweepstakes/mail/register.aspx

[Guest guest]

Hahahaha. that's a good one, Dawn. I understand about " caught. " Why

you shouldn't handle door handles in restrooms and all the rest of the

cleanliness stuff. You may be soaped down and spic an' span, but the

next guy or the prevous guy in this case, may not be.

>

> So, , is this a warning not to get on your bad side? :~)

>

> No problem. It is kind of confusing about the caught part, but it

can still be caught too. I want to be clear on that. If a patient in

the hospital is diagnosed with it, they are put contact precaution

isolation. Pretty much, you are only going to catch it if you come

into contact with the infected " material " , but you never know, some

people aren't always as clean as we'd like them to be. Hope that

makes sense.

>

> Take care,

> Dawn

>