Re: Phage Therapy

[Guest guest]

Sue , couple of posts ,as you see from The MP last year

This article caught my eye today, I see some have referred to modified Phage virus’s as a possible weapon against pathogenic bacteria. The technology looks like its here now .. Is phage therapy feasible with CWD bacteria or are our bacteria too small to be considered ? http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3867331.stm

Phage therapy “The Virus That Cures,”

http://www.phagetherapy.com/ptlinks.html

And the reply

There is a very active Sarcoidosis patient community in Russia, wherephage therapy has been a front-line antibacterial treatment for years,and so this issue has been one that I looked into.

The online biology textbook explains how bacteriophages work at URLhttp://tinyurl.com/ywvxv

They are viruses, and very active ones that target specific bacterialgenomes.The problems in using bacteriophages to fight a disease such as CFS are1. The virus targets the DNA of the bacteria. This is a mechanismwhereby genetically antibiotic-resistant strains of bacteria can evolve

2. After the phage has done its job some of the virus stays in thepatient's body. The virus could well do harm in susceptibleindividuals (bacteriophage research has been focused largely on thehealthy components of the population.

IMO, Benicar and the Antibiotics we use are immeasurably safer than aphage approach. But I would be happy to help any research teams whowant to explore this area more fully.

I hope this helps.

...Trevor..

-----Original Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of SueSent: 03 May 2005 21:30infections Subject: [infections] Phage TherapyI just downloaded and watched a BBC documentary on Phage Therapy - a therapy discovered in the 30's and 40's specifically designed for antibiotic resistant infections.The documentary talks about how this therapy was developed in the Soviet Union and more recently, sponsored by an American millionare and now again, the researh has been split across oceans over patent disputes.Has anybody heard of this? The Phage are actually virus designed to attack specific infection. Here is the blurb on the program I watched.BBC Horizon - The Virus that Cures ---------------------------------- VHS>XviD 720x576 647MB 49min Channel: BBC2 Date: 1997 With the rise of MRSA and the so called "superbugs", antibiotics are becoming less and less effective against an increasing number of bacteria. What was once an easily teatable infection could now be potentially fatal. The solution to this crisis could be held by a tiny research institute in the ex-Soviet republic of Georgia who, over the past 50 years, have taken a very different approach to treating infection.Cheers,*S*

[Guest guest]

J:

I'm a bit taken aback that you would quote the Unnameable One on the

subject of his protocol's comparitive safety, without at least

mentioning his many well-known efforts to prevent unfavorable

patient reports from seeing the light of day.

It is a little like quoting the tobacco industry on the safety of

second-hand smoke.

S.

> Sue , couple of posts ,as you see from The MP last year

> This article caught my eye today, I see some have referred to

modified

> Phage virus's as a possible weapon against pathogenic bacteria. The

> technology looks like its here now .. Is phage therapy feasible

with CWD

> bacteria or are our bacteria too small to be considered ?

> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3867331.stm

>

> Phage therapy " The Virus That Cures, "

>

> http://www.phagetherapy.com/ptlinks.html

>

> And the reply

>

> There is a very active Sarcoidosis patient community in Russia,

where

> phage therapy has been a front-line antibacterial treatment for

years,

> and so this issue has been one that I looked into.

>

> The online biology textbook explains how bacteriophages work at URL

> http://tinyurl.com/ywvxv

>

> They are viruses, and very active ones that target specific

bacterial

> genomes.

> The problems in using bacteriophages to fight a disease such as

CFS are

> 1. The virus targets the DNA of the bacteria. This is a mechanism

> whereby genetically antibiotic-resistant strains of bacteria can

evolve

>

> 2. After the phage has done its job some of the virus stays in the

> patient's body. The virus could well do harm in susceptible

> individuals (bacteriophage research has been focused largely on the

> healthy components of the population.

>

> IMO, Benicar and the Antibiotics we use are immeasurably safer

than a

> phage approach. But I would be happy to help any research teams who

> want to explore this area more fully.

>

> I hope this helps.

>

> ..Trevor..

>

>

>

> [infections] Phage Therapy

>

>

> I just downloaded and watched a BBC documentary on Phage

Therapy - a

> therapy discovered in the 30's and 40's specifically designed for

> antibiotic resistant infections.

> The documentary talks about how this therapy was developed in the

> Soviet Union and more recently, sponsored by an American

millionare

> and now again, the researh has been split across oceans over

patent

> disputes.

> Has anybody heard of this? The Phage are actually virus designed

to

> attack specific infection. Here is the blurb on the program I

> watched.

>

> BBC Horizon - The Virus that Cures

> ----------------------------------

>

> VHS>XviD 720x576 647MB 49min

>

> Channel: BBC2

> Date: 1997

>

> With the rise of MRSA and the so called " superbugs " , antibiotics

> are becoming less and less effective against an increasing number

> of bacteria. What was once an easily teatable infection could

now be

> potentially fatal. The solution to this crisis could be held by a

> tiny research institute in the ex-Soviet republic of Georgia who,

> over the past 50 years, have taken a very different approach to

> treating infection.

> Cheers,

> *S*

>

>

>

>

>

> -------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

> --

>

[Guest guest]

Upstairs I have 2 papers, not available online, that I can cite if

anyone wants em.

[Guest guest]

I'm interested anything you might have bearing on the safety issues.

> Upstairs I have 2 papers, not available online, that I can cite if

> anyone wants em.

[Guest guest]

The safety issues arent really addressed in the papers I have. Dont

quote me, but I dont think any phage could ever reproduce in human

cells. There are some conceivable but probably very unlikely ways they

could cause you problems without doing so, and one must recognize one

might be hosting them at low levels for life in our situation.

A big problem is the possibility they could exchange genes between

bacteria. That could possibly produce abx strains of bacteria or

strain better adapted to exploit you. This is also a concern with a

mutagen like metronidazole, as one of the papers weve been discussing

notes. I try not to think about it whilst hooking down my tini...

Other problems are micro-delivery, poor control of herx (possibly a

danger), etc. The one paper I read used phage-infected Mycobacterium

smegmatis (essentially avirulent for humans) as a vehicle to deliver

phage to Mycobacterium tuberculosis. They used advanced microscopy

(confocal or something?) to demonstrate that the smegmatis-containing

phagosomes fused with the TB-containing phagosomes of infected

macrophages. Pretty sly - and they achieved killing comparable to abx.

But they cited an old Eastern European study where

mycobacteria-infected guinea pigs were treated with mycobacteriophage

directly in the bloodstream, and it somehow worked! (I forget to what

degree.)

A problem is, whos got the phage? To isolate a phage to decimate

something like a staph infection (as has apparantly been done), I

think all you have to do is grab a bunch of different staphylocci from

nature, perhaps from your own skin or the lab floor, and one of them

(out of ten zillion) will be dying right then of a phage suitable to

brutalize the staph strain of interest, which will easily spread thru

a petri dish of the latter when you drop it in. Whereas to find eg a

hot borrelia phage could be a challenge.

<compucruz@y...> wrote:

> I'm interested anything you might have bearing on the safety issues.

>

>

>

>

> > Upstairs I have 2 papers, not available online, that I can cite if

> > anyone wants em.

[Guest guest]

I am involved in a company that is commercializing therapeutic phage

preparations, I just joined the group a couple of days ago to

observe. When I scanned the messages in search of discussions about

phage therapy, I came across a past discussion about safety. Safety

is a very common concern of the medical and scientific communities.

I frequently travel to Republic of Georgia, which is the world center

for phage therapy. I have sat on the fence during numerous

discussions with physicians who use therapeutic phages in their

practices. Most Georgian physicians and surgeons are well aware that

treatment with phages internally, inside the body, can take place

continuously for approximately 15 days. After that period of time the

immune system develops antigens for the phages and clears them from

the system. Consequently, phage treatment must halt for a few weeks,

until those antigens clear, and then treatment can resume for another

couple of weeks. For topical use of bacteriophages it is necessary

to keep bandages moist with the phage preparation because once the

bandage dries, the phages become less effective. For internal use for

such conditions as osteomyelitis or some surgical infections it is

necessary to continually irrigate the infected area with liquid

phages. So, clearance of phages from the body is definitely not a

problem – just the converse: for the practitioner, there is more of a

problem keeping the phages constantly applied to the infected areas.

Fortunately, bacteriophages act very quickly and infections can

typically be cleared within a few days, the normal treatment time

frame involved is approximately 10 days.

Two other safety factors to consider are in the areas of phage

isolation and the toxicology testing that occurs during both clinical

trians and during production of the therapeutic phage preparation.

Not all phages are equal and the author of the above posting is

absolutely correct in stating that some species of phages will

exchange genes with certain pathogens, making the bacteria more

pathogenic, more dangerous. Those phages that behave in this manner

are called lysogenic phages. There have been many scientific papers

written on this topic. In fact part of the holdup in getting the FDA

to approve clinical trials is this issue is whether or not the

therapeutic phages contain pathogenic genes that can be transferred

to the host bacteria. However, only lytic phages are used for

therapeutic purposes. Since lytic phages lyse (explode) their host

bacteria, the argument of pathogenic gene passing is most likely

moot – there are no descendent bacteria to receive such genes, but

that argument continues…

In addition to validating the efficacy of a particular therapeutic

phage, clinical trials also involve toxicology testing. Therapeutic

phages of course should not cause the release of massive amounts of

toxins during lysis as this could harm the patient.

Vast collections of therapeutic phages that have passed such clinical

trials are the intellectual properties of both Eliava Institute

(Tbilisi, Georgia) and Herzfeld Institute (Wroclaw, Poland). These

entities have been building their therapeutic phage collections for

well over 70 years. There is a definite scientific method involved

in isolation of the correct lytic phages, toxicology testing, typing

various phages to produce effective combinations of phages in a

given " phage cocktail " , and clinical trials. It appears that many

major universities here in the West are now attempting to build

libraries or collections of therapeutic phages. One example of this

activity is occurring at Evergreen State College:

http://www.evergreen.edu/phage <- and this URL is a great place to

start learning about phage biology and phage therapy.

Phage Therapy is a very important alternative to antibiotics,

particularly for those having antibiotic resistant infections. Note,

for example, that the Canadian Ministry of Health has just recently

begun funding therapeutic phage research (I placed a link to the

program in the Links section of this forum for anyone who might be

interested).

Bacteriophages are the most ubiquitous life form on the planet and

this is the likely reason, according to Dr. Kutter of

Evergreen State College, that phage therapy is safe and has no

harmful side effects. You've been eating, drinking and wearing phages

all your life! Dr. Kutter and Sulakvelidze's

book, " Bacteriophages: Biology and Applications " provides great depth

of information for many of these areas discussed in this thread.

There is also a new translation of a book that was originally

published in German in 2003, on the topic of phage therapy; it was

written by Hausler, the title is " Viruses vs. Superbugs: A

Solution to the Antibiotic Crisis " . Both books can be purchased on

Amazon.com.

Hope this clarifies the safety issue and answers some of the

questions that were brought up in the thread.

[Guest guest]

Wow, very cool to have you here. Im the guy from up-thread.

This group focuses (not exclusively) on bacterial causition of

chronic diseases like CFS, MS, rheumatoid arthritis. For most of

these diagnoses, there is no well-characterized bacterial cause. (Tho

some here might disagree with that.) In others, like chlamydial ReA,

specific persistent bacteria (C trachomatis) are clearly present in

the diseased tissue, but theres not a clear consensus in the

scientific community on the extent of their contribution to the

disease (its likely to be large tho, would be my best guess).

So, for some of us, treatment trials like these

http://tinyurl.com/nlnqs

http://tinyurl.com/qtdba

along with anecdotal evidence are what inspire us most, and we dont

feel exactly sure what bacteria (or viruses, or autoimmune processes)

might be involved... phage therapys prospects in well characterized

infections are tough to duplicate when you dont have a specific

bacterial target in mind, Im guessing. I dont know much about phage

host ranges, other than that phage mu can take out a range of

enterobacterial species (largely because its receptor is the highly

conserved molecule LPS). I wonder if any have a host spectrum larger

than that, such that they could truly be called " broad-spectrum. "

However, some here have osteomyelitis dxd, and/or feel they know what

taxa they are aiming at, so for them phage therapy advancements could

become exciting. Do you happen to know if osteomyelitis is

established to be largely extracellular or largely intracellular? I

havent nailed that down yet.

Best of luck for your firms projects; this world could use a few

zillion years worth of medical innovation ASAP.

[Guest guest]

By the way - how does finance work with small firms once you get to the

clinic? I've heard phase III trials cost ~10x as much as phase II

trials, which in turn outstrip phase I by ~10x. I still dont quite

understand how on earth these things cost so much (~US$700 million

total for FDA approval studies on one treatment? And thats mostly phase

III?). But clearly they do!

What I'm trying to ask is, what is the point where a small biotech

invariably has to sell some/most/all of its intellectual property share

of the project in order to raise this kind of astronomical money? I'm

guessing its the start of phase II? Does that sometimes come from

venture capitalists or is it invariably from large pharma firms?

[Guest guest]

I guess it may not be totally impossible a priori that some phage

could replicate in mammal cells, at least when your knowledge of

viruses is as tiny as mine is. Others may know better. However, its

easy to collect trillions of viable phage (theyre everywhere) and see

if they can lyse mammal cell cultures. That sort of experiment should

go a long way.

Proving that they cannot persist in mammal cells (non-replicatively)

might be quite a bit harder, and I guess its conceivable they could

still be pathogenic that way. Truly, theres nothing under the sun

that could not possibly be harmful in some way...

Here are some virion titers from a paper I did for university on

phages. These titers are for all viruses, but I think most of them

would be bacteriophage:

various natural virion densities cited

by Chibani-Chennoufi et al, 2004:

nutrient-rich estuarine saltwater 10^7 /mL

marine sediment 10^9 /mL

soil 10^7 /g

ruminants' stool 10^7 /g

whey for human consumption 10^9 /mL

air 10^5 / cubic meter

or 0.1 /mL

total number of viruses on the entire earth 10^30 or more

So we are definitely exposed to alot of them as it is, all the time.

And I'm thinking the only phage that might conceivably have some

special reason to acquire the ability to infect mammal cells, would

be those that are already in contact with mammals because they infect

mammal-associated bacteria. Those, obviously, we would already in

contact with as it is, tho maybe only in our GI lumens as opposed to

in tissues where they would be during phage therapy.

I would say that if you infect many rats systemically with staph,

clear them up with a staph phage, and the rats have clean blood

parameters and their tissues look good under a microscope (double

blinded vs control animals), thats about as good a pre-clinical-trial

safety ascertainment as you can make for that phage. Thats pretty

much how pre-clinical toxicology is done with new small-molecule

drugs (rats and dogs). Certainly some degree of risk always remains

with any treatment - thats true even after FDA phase III trials in

humans clears a treatment for the USA market, because those phase III

trials simply cant be made large enough to prove causality for any

rare side effects that might occur say once per 10,000 subjects.

>

> Thanks for your post , it's good to know the research is

ongoing ..Safety

> would be an issue for most of us here , the obvious fear is

introducing

> virus's that may shall we say linger . It's thought that we host

virus's as

> a co-infection .Our IS do not eradicate those ..You say that the IS

will

> clear the phages ..How can you be so sure ?

> Looking at the site below ,the author has a different take, Phages

rely on

> the target bacteria when the bacteria goes so do the phages ..Is

this old

> news? can you explain the apparent contradiction?

> I'm not saying throw the idea out .It's just there seems to be

> contradictions ...

> 1.. They are both self-replicating and self-limiting, since they

will

> multiply only as long as sensitive bacteria are present and then are

> gradually eliminated from the individual and the environment.

> http://www.evergreen.edu/phage/phagetherapy/phagetherapy.htm

[Guest guest]

Hello Penny. You did not mention in your post what price you were

quoted for treatment nor what you are comparing the price to. Nor did

you mention whether or not Tony from Australia is a physician and what

was the nature of his medical condition.

Can you please provide more information?

[Guest guest]

Hi - I'll respond the best way that I am able. I can't really

answer your question on behalf of Dr. Kutter. I believe that she and

several other prominent American microbiologists are convinced that

phage therapy is not ready for the US market because of the potential

issue around pathogenic genes, and not so much the clearing issue.

Many of the Georgian scientists disagree with this pathogenic gene

idea, by the way. Dr. Kutter states in her book that phages appear to

be very safe and she does refer patients to the clinics in Georgia

via links on her web site. Dr. Kutter wrote that article that you are

referring to about 10 years ago, and I believe she was just getting

her feet wet at that time.

As I understand, the way that the Georgians know the antigens show up

is via blood tests that are administered during therapy. This

correlates with a reduction in effectiveness during treatment. Here

is a paper that lists the major human studies:

Minireview - Bacteriophage Therapy:

http://aac.asm.org/cgi/content/full/45/3/649.

The PDF version has tables showing the various

studies that were done in Poland and Russia.

and I think this one has some good general information as well:

The pospect for bacteriophage therapy in Western medicine

http://www.phageinternational.com/doc/nrd1111.pdf

Given the host specificity of the phages (described in the above

article), why would we care if phages linger in our bodies when they

will only infect a specific strain of bacteria? We know this to be

true about phages, because they are utilized in the lab for the

purpose of identifying specific strains of bacteria. Here's a study

that illustrates that we probably are all populated or colonized with

phages:

Bacteriophage isolation from human saliva

http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/links/doi/10.1046/j.1472-

765X.2003.01262.x/abs/

We also know that our normal flora consists of various strains of

Lactobacillus, Acidophilus, Bifidobacterium, etc. as well as non-

pathogenic strains of E.coli, Enterococcus, and even Clostridium. We

need these to survive and I wouldn't refer to this as

being " infected " . Phages may in fact be integral to our immune

system.

There is great interest in the Western scientific community around

using phages to treat bacterial infection - but the Georgians have a

70 year lead. Because their primiary purpose was support of the

military, Eliava Institute's funding was substantial during Soviet

times, and there is a lot of research there performed by hundreds of

scientists over the years. There's is simply much that the Western

scientific and medical community still do not know about producing

safe and effective therapeutic phage products. There has been,

however, some rapid progress in this area in Canada, the US, and the

UK.

Nearly the entire population of Georgia are treated with phages --

beginning at birth, and this has continued for over 70 years. There

are no known side effects. If you contrast that with the side

effects of antibiotics -- and the fact that they no longer clear many

infections, it would seem worth the risk of being colonized

temporarily with benign viruses, if it would clear a painful and

potentially deadly infection. Literally millions of people in the US

suffer with chronic infections that antibiotics won't touch; hundreds

of thousands die every year.

[Guest guest]

Hi ,

I don't know the answer to your question off hand, but I will try to

find out.

[Guest guest]

hi

Just think that phagetherapy can be beneficial to most on these forums

because conventional antibiotics really can't take out pseudonomas.

Phage therapy is very succesfull against this bug according to my

georgian friends.

>

> Hi ,

>

> I don't know the answer to your question off hand, but I will try to

> find out.

>

[Guest guest]

Hi Penny,

I am one of the founders of Phage International and we are the

holding company for the Phage Therapy Center located in Tbilisi,

Republic of Georgia.

Our History

We started with the idea of establishing a Phage International clinic

in Tijuana, Mexico where we would treat resistant infections -

primarily diabetic foot ulcers and osteomyelitis. We had (and still

have) located a very nice clinic in Tijuana, and also established the

necessary relationships in Georgia required to perform phage

sensitivity tests and receive sufficient quantities phages for

treatment of our patients. We mistakenly believed that getting an

import license and approval in Mexico would be the easy part. We

halted that process, which has been ongoing for over a year, just

before elections because, per our attorneys in Mexico City, the

decision-makers at the Ministry of Health left their posts in order

to run for office. So, we have been unable to open in Mexico, but

continue to try to open new Phage Therapy Centers there and

elsewhere. With your permission, I will post any announcements of

future clinic openings.

When the group from Phage International we went to Georgia for the

first time, we met the owners of the Georgian clinic, Phage Therapy

Center. Phage Therapy Center was founded by one group from Eliava

Institute and another from the Center for Medical Polymers and

Biomaterials. The clinic was established to bring foreign patients

into Georgia for treatment of chronic infections. This group quite

obviously had the medical and scientific expertise but they were

having a little trouble getting necessary investment, and better

access to the Western markets. We decided that a merger was a great

idea and, as I recall, this happened around January or February of

2005. We made the Phage Therapy Center a wholly-owned subsidiary. We

opened a " Western Style " clinic in September of last year and since

then, we have been treating both Georgian and foreign patients.

Phage International now consists of three persons in the US who

handle IT, marketing, and business development. In Georgia our

stakeholders include eight PhD-level microbiologists; five PhD level

chemists; a physician, and two support individuals. Phage

International is a US corporation that is privately held and

privately funded; our investors include two US physicians and an

entrepreneur from the Silicon Valley.

The Clinic

Phage Therapy Center has a new director, his name is Dr. Tengiz

Chikvashvili. Dr. Chikvashvili has over 25 years of medical

experience that includes extensive use of bacteriophages in his

practice. The clinic is staffed with two physicians, a nurse, and a

translator. Phage Therapy Center has also established a network of

relationships with many specialists and professors at the medical

universities in and around Tbilisi. Our network includes Dr. Guram

Gvasalia, who is a professor at the State Medical University and

teaches interns courses in the use of phages in surgical practice.

Dr. Gvasalia is mentioned in many of Betty Kutter's papers, he's the

surgeon featured in the White Pines documentary " Killer Cure " . Our

goal is to establish Phage Therapy Centers, staffed with the best

professional medical personnel who are trained in the use of phages,

in a number of countries.

Cost of Treatment

I don't want to post the price ranges here and would rather refer

readers to the FAQ on the www.phagetherapycenter.com web site. The

current URL is:

www.phagetherapycenter.com/pii/PatientServlet?

command=static_clinicfaq

The FAQ also contains the caveats and some of the conditions around

the logistics of getting treatment; it includes the price ranges.

Medical Conditions Treated

We are getting excellent results treating the following conditions:

- sinusitis / rhinitis;

- ear infections;

- urinary tract, kidney infections, cystitis;

- intestinal infections;

- infected wounds, diabetic ulcers and osteomyelitis;

- surgical infections; and

- chronic prostatitis.

Generally, if you have or suspect a bacterial infection it is very

likely that we can treat it. We request a bacterial sample and

medical records before you come for treatment; if you can't get a

bacterial sample, the clinic will still accept you. Getting the

sample has been very difficult for most patients; it is not a

requirement, it just shortens your stay at the clinic. Here's why:

phages are very narrow spectrum, they will only infect a single

species and in many cases a specific strain of bacteria. The clinic

uses phage cocktails, which are combinations of multiple species of

phages. The commercial versions of these cocktails were developed by

Eliava Institute, and they are " tuned " for the dominant clinically

significant pathogens in the Caucasus region. What's clinically

significant depends on where you live; in the US, this varies from

state to state (for example, check out www.narsa.net and go to their

page on Clinical Relevant Strains:

http://www.narsa.net/control/member/search?repositoryId=106). To

determine what is going to work for the individual, the lab performs

a " phage sensitivity test " – it is essentially an antibiogram that

includes the commercial phage cocktail in the test. The test and

evaluation of results takes around a week to complete. If your

infection is sensitive to that commercial cocktail, and assuming your

medical condition is treatable, then you are our patient. If the

infection is resistant to the cocktail, and if you approve the extra

costs involved, the lab will develop an autophage. Autophage

development involves manually searching a massive library or " bank "

of phages for ones that the infection is sensitive to. All of the

phages in this bank have been through clinical trials, to verify that

they are safe to use on humans. Sometimes this development takes a

couple of days; sometimes it takes a month or more – it depends on

many variables. So, if you come to our clinic without having sent a

sample, best case you'll need to stay an extra week; worst case,

you'll have to stay quite a bit longer that the average ten to twelve

days of therapy required for treatment of chronic infection.

However, some very complex, resistant conditions can take as long as

six weeks or more to complete treatment. A little over half of our

foreign patients have infections that are resistant to this

commercial preparation and require development of an autophage.

Bacteria That We Target (Genus):

- Staphyloccus;

- Proteus;

- E.coli;

- Pseudomonas;

- Enterococcus;

- Shigella;

- Klebsiella;

- Salmonella; and

- several others.

We have also had success at treating Candida/yeasts, and recently

several cases of very resistant forms of Citrobacter. There are no

bacteriophages in any of the phage banks for Citrobacter, and phages

do not work with yeasts - they were both treated with other approved

medications that are available only in Georgia.

There is also a medication and proprietary treatment protocol for

treating sinusitis that is only available at Phage Therapy Center

Georgia. They are able to remove or reduce polyps without surgery and

it apparently suppresses the symptoms for life (this requires 10

treatments; return in six months for another treatment; return again

in 10 years for a final treatment). Phages or other medications, as

necessary, are utilized to eliminate any infection.

Most of our patients whose conditions caused migraines, fatigue,

muscle aches and pains have claimed that these symptoms are

eliminated during the first few days of therapy.

In my opinion, Phage Therapy Center is the best place in the world to

get treatment for chronic bacterial infections. Thank you very much

for the opportunity to write about our clinic, it is very much

appreciated by all of us. Here are our web sites:

www.phageinternational.com

www.phagetherapycenter.com

I would be very pleased to answer any questions.

Sincerely,

, SVP and Founder

[Guest guest]

, sorry that I can't answer either of your questions directly but

here are some leads that might help:

The Genesis Clinic in Tbilisi, Georgia is a Children's clinic. The

physician that runs this clinic in the Didube district refuses to use

antibiotics, he uses bacteriophages exclusively for treating

bacterial infection. As I recall and there is a statistician on staff

there. Here's their web site: http://www.genesis.org.ge/

As for contacts in the UK, it is my understanding that a number of

people are doing phage work at Warwick University and there is a

commercial company, Novolytics (HQ is Coventry) that is also

developing products.

I read your web site last night. Very interesting. Can you please

provide some references to research on Lyme and Candida and their

relationship to autism? Autism is indeed epidemic in our area.

>

> Well, thanks for the detailed and in-depth reply ,fascinating

stuff , I

> haven't read the links yet I'll look forward to reading them over

the next

> week...Couple of questions , have you any health statistics from

Georgia

> that show clear benefits from the dosing at birth with Phage's. And

have you

> any contact details for the UK researches

> Your remarks on gut flora and immunity rings a bell, Its the

central them of

> my web site .In the " Autism is an infectious disease " section one

group of

> pioneering researches [click Bacteroides Frgilis] have found that

TH2 is our

> default setting Immune system.TH1 [adaptive] response is entirely

> attributable to our interaction with microbes. In short we depend

entirely

> on our symbiotic relationship with our microbial flora for good

health ..

>

> http://www.yeast-candida-infections-uk.co.uk/

>

[Guest guest]

Hi , my sources tell me that osteomyelitis begins on the surface

of the bone but it will " go deeper " as the infection progresses. I

didn't quite understand your question regarding whether or not it is

intracellular. I think that depends on the bacteria responsible for

the infection. From my recollection, it is typically Staphylococcus

and perhaps Pseudomonas (don't quote me on that) that is involved in

causing osteomyelitis. Generally you will find that where a pathogen

is intracellular, for example the genus Mycobacterium, there are

usually no phages available to treat it.

>

>

> Wow, very cool to have you here. Im the guy from up-thread.

>

> This group focuses (not exclusively) on bacterial causition of

> chronic diseases like CFS, MS, rheumatoid arthritis. For most of

> these diagnoses, there is no well-characterized bacterial cause.

(Tho

> some here might disagree with that.) In others, like chlamydial

ReA,

> specific persistent bacteria (C trachomatis) are clearly present in

> the diseased tissue, but theres not a clear consensus in the

> scientific community on the extent of their contribution to the

> disease (its likely to be large tho, would be my best guess).

>

> So, for some of us, treatment trials like these

>

> http://tinyurl.com/nlnqs

> http://tinyurl.com/qtdba

>

> along with anecdotal evidence are what inspire us most, and we dont

> feel exactly sure what bacteria (or viruses, or autoimmune

processes)

> might be involved... phage therapys prospects in well characterized

> infections are tough to duplicate when you dont have a specific

> bacterial target in mind, Im guessing. I dont know much about phage

> host ranges, other than that phage mu can take out a range of

> enterobacterial species (largely because its receptor is the highly

> conserved molecule LPS). I wonder if any have a host spectrum

larger

> than that, such that they could truly be called " broad-spectrum. "

>

> However, some here have osteomyelitis dxd, and/or feel they know

what

> taxa they are aiming at, so for them phage therapy advancements

could

> become exciting. Do you happen to know if osteomyelitis is

> established to be largely extracellular or largely intracellular? I

> havent nailed that down yet.

>

> Best of luck for your firms projects; this world could use a few

> zillion years worth of medical innovation ASAP.

>

[Guest guest]

Hi Penny,

With osteomyelitis, wherether or not it requires debridement depends

on a number of factors. X-rays would be necessary to make this

determination. Unfortunately there are no known phages in any of the

phage banks for treating actinomyces; there is currently no research

under way that we know of.

>

> Hi

>

> Thanks very much for the detailed description and the links. And

yes, you have permission to post news at this site, since I think

it's something we're all very interested in. I will also post a link

to your site in our links/files section.

>

> I'm very hopeful about phage therapy and sincerely hope things

progress quickly and smoothly for everyone's benefit.

>

> I have a couple more questions. I'm curious if you've found a

phage cocktail, or are working on one, for actinomyces? This is a

very destructive organism, but perhaps not so well known.

>

> I'm also curious about the osteomyelitis treatment. Are you able

to forego debridement of the necrotic bone and still accomplish a

cure? Or is debridement necessary first?

>

> Also very happy to hear you've got testing capabilities, as

that's been a very big missing piece for us so far.

>

> thanks again,

>

> penny

>

[Guest guest]

Good point... I wasnt thinking of that in phrasing my question. I read

that Staph aureus causes 80% of cases but the less common causes are

numerous and include mycobacteria. M tuberculosis populations are

actually almost completely extracellular during active pulmonary TB,

tho they are intracellular during latent infection. I dont know exactly

what happens during TB of other anatomic sites. For other mycobacteria

it may be different.

On top of this thread I think I posted some refs about phage treatment

of animals experimentally infected with mycobacteria. In one case the

(apparantly) generally benign M. smegmatis was used as a vehicle to get

the phage into the phagosomes containing M tuberculosis; in another

case (an older Eastern bloc paper) free virions were administered (IV

as I recall), yet still seemed to have a therapeutic effect (perhaps

incomplete; I dont recall). Surprising... but I cant really analyze it,

lacking much knowledge of phagosome trafficking.

I wonder if a hypometabolic physiology can affect a cells ability to be

lysed by a phage. I havent looked into that. It may have some

importance for phage therapy of certain diseases.

>

> Hi , my sources tell me that osteomyelitis begins on the surface

> of the bone but it will " go deeper " as the infection progresses. I

> didn't quite understand your question regarding whether or not it is

> intracellular. I think that depends on the bacteria responsible for

> the infection. From my recollection, it is typically Staphylococcus

> and perhaps Pseudomonas (don't quote me on that) that is involved in

> causing osteomyelitis. Generally you will find that where a pathogen

> is intracellular, for example the genus Mycobacterium, there are

> usually no phages available to treat it.

>

[Guest guest]

>

> Hi , my sources tell me that osteomyelitis begins on the

surface

> of the bone but it will " go deeper " as the infection progresses.

Hello

Thank you for your work and for joining the forum. This chronic

osteomyelitis of the jaws, sinuses, skull and disseminated chronic

infection seems to be frighteningly common (and unaddressed).

Are there phages available for the following:

Stomatococcus mucilaginosus

Viridans streptococci

H. influenzae

Haemophilus sp, NOT H. influenzae

Diptheroids

Neisseria sp

Aerobic non-sporeforming gram positive rods

(I believe the answer is " yes " to the V. strep)

If anyone has any info re the biofilm-producing status of any of

above, I'd like to hear it.

Thank you,

Jo

[Guest guest]

Hi Jo,

Of the ones on your list, our sources only have phages for the S.

viridans.

> Hello

>

> Thank you for your work and for joining the forum. This chronic

> osteomyelitis of the jaws, sinuses, skull and disseminated chronic

> infection seems to be frighteningly common (and unaddressed).

>

> Are there phages available for the following:

>

> Stomatococcus mucilaginosus

> Viridans streptococci

> H. influenzae

> Haemophilus sp, NOT H. influenzae

> Diptheroids

> Neisseria sp

> Aerobic non-sporeforming gram positive rods

>

> (I believe the answer is " yes " to the V. strep)

>

> If anyone has any info re the biofilm-producing status of any of

> above, I'd like to hear it.

>

> Thank you,

> Jo

>

[Guest guest]

>

> Hi Jo,

>

> Of the ones on your list, our sources only have phages for the S.

> viridans.

Thank you, Chris. I guess these aren't the usual OM bugs then.

BW

Jo