Re: pathogens...coag. neg. staph?

[Guest guest]

It's a very common belief. You should ask/him her to test for antibiotic sensitivities and toxicity. If the bug is resistant to various antibiotics (as it so often is) how can he say it's not possbily a pathogen that may also be colonized in other parts of your body? If I were you, I'd do a search and see what articles I could come up with to change his mind, but in my experience only some special docs, and infectious disease docs, take coag. neg. staph as seriously as they should. As you can see below, coag. neg. staph is considered an "environmental organism" and is commonly associated with endocartitis (heart infections) and cathether line infections. http://www.surgical-tutor.org.uk/default-home.htm?core/preop1/staph_strep.htm~right http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=272495 And it's rapidly becoming a serious problem in dairy cattle, http://www.uwex.edu/milkquality/PDF/emergingmastitispathogens_2001.pdf but yeah, it's harmless, nothing to worry about. Here's another link. http://healthsciences.columbia.edu/dept/ps/2007/mid/2006/MID8.pdf the above links were just the first few on a google search (coagulase negative staph pathogenic). As you can see, there's tons of stuff on coag. neg. staph, it just doesn't reach our docs. pennyChristi Howarth <salzberglver3@...> wrote: Speaking of pathogens...Today my son's doctor statedthat coag. neg. staph colonizing in the nasal cavityis not pathogenic...only coag positive staph. Anyonehave any articles on this statement?Christi> What a strange viewpoint ,my head is swimming , We> are not talking of> hospital settings , this is mass illness in a normal> population ..Not the> killer bugs malaria ,cholera etc ..but common> ubiquitous organisms

,> mycoplasma and the like..The vulnerability is the> key ..Its not the super> bugs its our inability to combat everyday ubiquitous> would be pathogens> > > > RE: [infections]> Re: antibiotic...> > > Why is it "clear" we're looking at an> immunity problem?> > How long have bacteria been around? And> humans? Which do you think> has a better chance of survival in the face of> catastrophy? My money' s on> bacteria over even the healthiest human immune> system. Especially when> you've

got a medical establishment that's been doing> a good job of creating> ever more resistant bugs. How's an immune system> supposed to keep up with> that?> > penny> > > > Jaep <JaepLineone (DOT) net> wrote:> Yes , your post reflects your experience> 's ,But many would say> CFS is yeast infection ,5,000 in the UK alone belong> to a group dedicated to> fight th e infection ...Do you think these people> are deluded? You surly> don't think the explosive growth of Lyme , autism ,> CFS, autoimmune, yeast> infections are coincidental ..Seems to me people> cherry pick information> ..it's clear that we are looking at an overall> problem wi th immunity and> that yeast is central to the problem ...> > > -----Original Message----->

From:> infections > === message truncated ===__________________________________________________

[Guest guest]

P.S. The search I did was actually "coagulase negative staph pathogen". Tons of links. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en & lr= & q=coagulase+negative+staph+pathogen & btnG=Search Check them out. I'm sure you'll find additional info with different searches. You can also searc pub med, or do a Google Scholar search. You'll see where the old belief that CNS is not really pathogenic is being more and more challenged. One link states that a physician should do several blood cultures before ruling whether it's pathogenic or not. Another link states that CNS in urine can indicate a pathogenisis. CNS is frequently acquired with trauma, injury,

or a hospital stay. pennyPenny Houle <pennyhoule@...> wrote: It's a very common belief. You should ask/him her to test for antibiotic sensitivities and toxicity. If the bug is resistant to various antibiotics (as it so often is) how can he say it's not possbily a pathogen that may also be colonized in other parts of your body? If I were you, I'd do a search and see what articles I could come up with to change his mind, but in my experience only some

special docs, and infectious disease docs, take coag. neg. staph as seriously as they should. As you can see below, coag. neg. staph is considered an "environmental organism" and is commonly associated with endocartitis (heart infections) and cathether line infections. http://www.surgical-tutor.org.uk/default-home.htm?core/preop1/staph_strep.htm~right http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=272495 And it's rapidly becoming a serious problem in dairy cattle, http://www.uwex.edu/milkquality/PDF/emergingmastitispathogens_2001.pdf but yeah, it's harmless, nothing to worry about. Here's another link. http://healthsciences.columbia.edu/dept/ps/2007/mid/2006/MID8.pdf the above links were just the first few on a google search (coagulase negative staph pathogenic). As you can see, there's tons of stuff on coag. neg. staph, it just doesn't reach our docs. pennyChristi Howarth <salzberglver3@...> wrote: Speaking of pathogens...Today my son's doctor statedthat

coag. neg. staph colonizing in the nasal cavityis not pathogenic...only coag positive staph. Anyonehave any articles on this statement?Christi> What a strange viewpoint ,my head is swimming , We> are not talking of> hospital settings , this is mass illness in a normal> population ..Not the> killer bugs malaria ,cholera etc ..but common> ubiquitous organisms ,> mycoplasma and the like..The vulnerability is the> key ..Its not the super> bugs its our inability to combat everyday ubiquitous> would be pathogens> > > > RE:

[infections]> Re: antibiotic...> > > Why is it "clear" we're looking at an> immunity problem?> > How long have bacteria been around? And> humans? Which do you think> has a better chance of survival in the face of> catastrophy? My money' s on> bacteria over even the healthiest human immune> system. Especially when> you've got a medical establishment that's been doing> a good job of creating> ever more resistant bugs. How's an immune system> supposed to keep up with> that?> > penny> > > > Jaep <JaepLineone (DOT) net> wrote:> Yes , your post reflects your experience> 's ,But many would say> CFS is yeast infection ,5,000 in the UK alone belong> to a group dedicated to> fight th e infection ...Do you

think these people> are deluded? You surly> don't think the explosive growth of Lyme , autism ,> CFS, autoimmune, yeast> infections are coincidental ..Seems to me people> cherry pick information> ..it's clear that we are looking at an overall> problem wi th immunity and> that yeast is central to the problem ...> > > -----Original Message-----> From:> infections > === message truncated ===__________________________________________________

[Guest guest]

Thanks for the articles Penny. Very interesting.

According to what I read...staph epi. or coag . neg

staph is a common human pathogen and a common cause of

nosocomal bacteraemia which can have significant

consequences! Why do so many doctors downplay it as a

common skin flora that we all have? Feels like they

are lazy and don't want to go the extra mile to figure

out if it may be causing havoc in other parts of the

body as well. Most will not even culture it for

sensitivities and resistancies.

Christi

> It's a very common belief. You should ask/him her to

> test for antibiotic sensitivities and toxicity. If

> the bug is resistant to various antibiotics (as it

> so often is) how can he say it's not possbily a

> pathogen that may also be colonized in other parts

> of your body? If I were you, I'd do a search and see

> what articles I could come up with to change his

> mind, but in my experience only some special docs,

> and infectious disease docs, take coag. neg. staph

> as seriously as they should.

>

> As you can see below, coag. neg. staph is

> considered an " environmental organism " and is

> commonly associated with endocartitis (heart

> infections) and cathether line infections.

>

>

>

http://www.surgical-tutor.org.uk/default-home.htm?core/preop1/staph_strep.htm~ri\

ght

>

>

>

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=272495

>

> And it's rapidly becoming a serious problem in

> dairy cattle,

>

>

>

http://www.uwex.edu/milkquality/PDF/emergingmastitispathogens_2001.pdf

>

> but yeah, it's harmless, nothing to worry about.

>

> Here's another link.

>

>

>

http://healthsciences.columbia.edu/dept/ps/2007/mid/2006/MID8.pdf

>

> the above links were just the first few on a

> google search (coagulase negative staph pathogenic).

> As you can see, there's tons of stuff on coag. neg.

> staph, it just doesn't reach our docs.

>

> penny

>

> Christi Howarth <salzberglver3@...> wrote:

> Speaking of pathogens...Today my son's

> doctor stated

> that coag. neg. staph colonizing in the nasal cavity

> is not pathogenic...only coag positive staph. Anyone

> have any articles on this statement?

> Christi

>

> > What a strange viewpoint ,my head is swimming , We

> > are not talking of

> > hospital settings , this is mass illness in a

> normal

> > population ..Not the

> > killer bugs malaria ,cholera etc ..but common

> > ubiquitous organisms ,

> > mycoplasma and the like..The vulnerability is the

> > key ..Its not the super

> > bugs its our inability to combat everyday

> ubiquitous

> > would be pathogens

> >

> >

> >

> > RE: [infections] Re:

> > antibiotic...

> >

> >

> > , I've tried to read your site. I get a

> > bit lost there, sorry.

> >

> > I agree that flora balance is very important,

> > but I blame the invading

> > bacteria for throwing off the balance in the first

> > place, not my own immune

> > system. We are not built to be impervious to

> > bacteria, no matter how

> > strongly our immune systems are designed. I also

> > agree that abx can disturb

> > the flora balance. If my symptoms got worse with a

> > particular abx rather

> > than better, well naturally, I'd stop taking them

> > (and I sometimes do). But

> > my symptoms are most often relieved with the

> correct

> > abx, which indicates to

> > me that my flora balance has already been

> > compromised by the bacteria, and

> > reducing the bad bacterial load improves the

> > balance, as evidenced by my

> > improved health.

> >

> > Like you, I'd prefer to target specific bugs,

> > and not use broad

> > spectrum killing. Something lik e phage therapy

> > would be ideal. Like smart

> > bombing, able to zoom in on the specific target we

> > want to take out while

> > leaving everything else standing. I hope that

> > becomes a reality soon. I also

> > hope docs start testing us to correctly identify

> > which organisms are

> > overtaking us. Otherwise, it's just more shooting

> in

> > the dark.

> >

> > penny

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Jaep <Jaep@...> wrote:

> >

> > I wish you would read my site ..Bacteria

> > rule ,and have done for

> > a ve ry long time 80% of the biomass of the planet

>

=== message truncated ===

__________________________________________________

[Guest guest]

Chrisi

Look up coag neg staph species ID lugdununsis(spelling). This is a

major heart pathogen and all it is is a coag neg staph ...There's

heaps more examples and the species ID follow up most labs can do

puts them in there correct places alongside antibiuotic

sensitivities...

> > Yes , your post reflects your experience

> > 's ,But many would say

> > CFS is yeast infection ,5,000 in the UK alone belong

> > to a group dedicated to

> > fight th e infection ...Do you think these people

> > are deluded? You surly

> > don't think the explosive growth of Lyme , autism ,

> > CFS, autoimmune, yeast

> > infections are coincidental ..Seems to me people

> > cherry pick information

> > ..it's clear that we are looking at an overall

> > problem wi th immunity and

> > that yeast is central to the problem ...

> >

> >

> > -----Original Message-----

> > From:

> > infections

> >

> === message truncated ===

>

>

> __________________________________________________

>

[Guest guest]

I dont see why in vitro abx resistances (which would probably be

genomic resistances) should make it more likely that a bug is

pathogenic. Is that something that is a generally accepted view? I

havent heard that it is.

In fact, I have even heard one casual reference to MRSA being a weaker

pathogen than fully sensitive SA. Now, I dont know the person who made

that statement and have no idea what may be behind the statement.

> It's a very common belief. You should ask/him her to test for

antibiotic sensitivities and toxicity. If the bug is resistant to

various antibiotics (as it so often is) how can he say it's not

possbily a pathogen that may also be colonized in other parts of your

body? If I were you, I'd do a search and see what articles I could come

up with to change his mind, but in my experience only some special

docs, and infectious disease docs, take coag. neg. staph as seriously

as they should.

[...]