Re: potentially hefty breakthru in biofilm treatment

[Guest guest]

Well, here's his lab page, which has no new info:

http://biology.binghamton.edu/davies/frominsidebu.htm

As I said, he hasn't published anything directly topical to this

stuff. Oddly, it appears some of his buddies have, but he's not an

author: http://jb.asm.org/cgi/content/abstract/186/21/7312

Looking at the " reverse citation list " at the bottom of that page, you

can see that this paper was cited by others recently writing on

related biology.

[Guest guest]

I couldn't see that he named the compound. I looked at the USPTO

and couldn't find an application. I wonder if the compound is

farnesol, or a derivative. It converts candida biofilms into non-

pathogenic yeast forms and I think it works with staph and strep

somewhat as well (search PubMed with keywords = farnesol biofilm).

Farnesol is used for scents and I think in very small quantities as

a food additive. It's commercially available, but not FDA approved

for human consumption at the levels that would probably be needed

therapeutically. There's vague references to a " psychosedative "

effect of farnesol in mice/rats, but that's the extent to which it's

been tested in animals. I wouldn't want to be the first to try it.

I've also wondered about the utility of xylitol. It's used in some

sugar free gums. I'm guessing you'd have to eat boat-loads though

to have a therapeutic effect, and that might be toxic.

Whatever his compound, I hope he IDs it publicly soon.

Your biofilm review looks like a definitive reference. Might be

worthy of being put in the links section.

Matt

>

> Well, here's his lab page, which has no new info:

> http://biology.binghamton.edu/davies/frominsidebu.htm

>

> As I said, he hasn't published anything directly topical to this

> stuff. Oddly, it appears some of his buddies have, but he's not an

> author: http://jb.asm.org/cgi/content/abstract/186/21/7312

>

> Looking at the " reverse citation list " at the bottom of that page,

you

> can see that this paper was cited by others recently writing on

> related biology.

>

[Guest guest]

> I couldn't see that he named the compound. I looked at the USPTO

> and couldn't find an application. I wonder if the compound is

> farnesol, or a derivative.

I didn't see a name either, but I thought this description indicated

it was a native pheromone or at least a close analog thereof... I

agree that it also sounds consistent with what you say about

farnesol:

" The small molecule Davies is working with appears to be one of the

few known examples anywhere in nature of a communication signal that

remains effective across species, family and phyla. "

I now realize, I guess it's possible they could be talking about a

second messenger, not a pheromone.

This could even have eventual repercussions outside biofilms - but

probably not (wild speculation) in reduced-genome obligate parasites

like chlamydiae, since they may well have dispensed with the

relevant biologic equipage (total speculation there, but they

certainly have dispensed with a lot of other stuff).

[Guest guest]

Here's an excerp From his bio:

QUOTE:

Davies received his training at the Center for Biofilm Engineering at

Montana State University, where he earned his doctoral degree and

conducted his postdoctoral research. He has worked with many

industrial collaborators, including S. C. and Son, Inc.,

ARCO, Chevron, Dupont, Unilever, NALCO, SGM Biotech and others. He

also developed an in situ biofilm monitoring device, patented by

Montana State University.

END QUOTE

He probably holds many patents with these Commercial Industrial

Companies.. all propietary... so he's unlikely to have the same stuff

ublished on PubMed.

He's probably working on the transitiion from industrial biofilms to

medical as the inductrial patents will cross disciplines and cover

medical...

Here's something interesting.....

You know that skin ablation procedure that dermatologists used to

remove little ugly sopys and small wrinkes from people.. it's sort of

a laser zapper? That was developed in my lab at IBM over 20 years

ago for industrial use- that found it's way to medical use....I

didn't work on a big enough part of the project to be a co-author on

the Patent.. that one was worth alot of $$$. So computer cip make IBM

holds the patent on Medical laser ablation.

Barb

>

> This guy is making (very recently) absolutely enormous claims to

the

> media, which don't seem to be supported by any work indexed in

> pubmed to date, but rather by unreviewed experiments in his lab:

>

> http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-10/bu-bur101206.php

>

> I have to write a mock grant application for a class, and was

> looking down this direction. Too bad for me, it's just now already

> cookin.

>

> What he said at above URL seems broadly sound to me (insofar as I'm

> informed about this sort of thing, that is). Assuming he has the

> data to back it up. I lack the patience to work through this one

> carefully

>

> http://biology.binghamton.edu/davies/frominsidebu.htm

>

> but it might be of interest.

>

> Basically he claims to be able to disperse biofilms by small-

> molecule drugging of bacterial signaling. It sounds like what he is

> using, precisely, is a/the native pheromone or close to it. If it

> does not have good properties as far as absorption, clearance, and

> toxicity - and unfortunately, a pretty big chunk of small molecules

> do not - then there may or may not be much room for chemical

> alterations. So (assuming his stuff is in the first place really as

> potent in vitro as he says) a safe systemic therapy mgiht well be

> within reach, yet that is far from assured at this point. And the

> process may well take several years.

>

> If this is the real thing, then wow, more power to this guy, and I

> hope he enjoys his zillionaire retirement. This will be very

> engrossing to watch and has the potential to really change medicine.

>

[Guest guest]

I can't tell if we're on the same wavelength or not. Just to

clarify, farnesol *is* viewed as a pheromone, used by divergent

species. It's used not only by Candida (and staph/strep?) but by

some insects as well--all as a signaling molecule. That's why

Davies' quote made me think of farnesol.

You pointed out the likely insolubility of farnesol. I think it's

in " essential oils " which would be consistent with the lipophilic

nature of farnesol that you noted. I wonder.....

.......what its biodistribution would look like in people.

......how a long hydrocarbon could get airborne to serve as a

pheromone and as a scent in human products.

......if the putative benefits of some " essential oils " (which I've

not investigated) derive from its farnesol.

Matt

>

>

> > I couldn't see that he named the compound. I looked at the

USPTO

> > and couldn't find an application. I wonder if the compound is

> > farnesol, or a derivative.

>

> I didn't see a name either, but I thought this description

indicated

> it was a native pheromone or at least a close analog thereof... I

> agree that it also sounds consistent with what you say about

> farnesol:

>

> " The small molecule Davies is working with appears to be one of

the

> few known examples anywhere in nature of a communication signal

that

> remains effective across species, family and phyla. "

>

> I now realize, I guess it's possible they could be talking about a

> second messenger, not a pheromone.

>

> This could even have eventual repercussions outside biofilms - but

> probably not (wild speculation) in reduced-genome obligate

parasites

> like chlamydiae, since they may well have dispensed with the

> relevant biologic equipage (total speculation there, but they

> certainly have dispensed with a lot of other stuff).

>

[Guest guest]

Wow, if it could really convert the big 3 to non pathogenic forms, I'd be a guinea pig, no problem. :-) Thanks guys for keeping us informed. If you learn anything else, PLEASE let us know. I'm ripe for a new experimental treatment. :-) pennyphagelod <mpalmer@...> wrote: I couldn't see that he named the compound. I looked at the USPTO and couldn't find an application. I wonder if the compound is farnesol, or a derivative. It converts candida

biofilms into non-pathogenic yeast forms and I think it works with staph and strep somewhat as well (search PubMed with keywords = farnesol biofilm). Farnesol is used for scents and I think in very small quantities as a food additive. It's commercially available, but not FDA approved for human consumption at the levels that would probably be needed therapeutically. There's vague references to a "psychosedative" effect of farnesol in mice/rats, but that's the extent to which it's been tested in animals. I wouldn't want to be the first to try it.I've also wondered about the utility of xylitol. It's used in some sugar free gums. I'm guessing you'd have to eat boat-loads though to have a therapeutic effect, and that might be toxic.Whatever his compound, I hope he IDs it publicly soon.Your biofilm review looks like a definitive reference. Might be worthy of being put in the links section.Matt---

In infections , " " <usenethod@...> wrote:>> Well, here's his lab page, which has no new info:> http://biology.binghamton.edu/davies/frominsidebu.htm> > As I said, he hasn't published anything directly topical to this > stuff. Oddly, it appears some of his buddies have, but he's not an > author: http://jb.asm.org/cgi/content/abstract/186/21/7312> > Looking at the "reverse citation list" at the bottom of that page, you > can see that this paper was cited by others recently writing on > related biology.>

[Guest guest]

That would be amazing, wouldn't it? If essential oils were the answer? I'm ready to stick farsenol up my nose, if I could find it. This sinus infection is killing me! By the way, I've used xylitol spray in the past. And chewed xylitol gum. I think you're right, that very large amounts would probably be needed to deal with our problems. Maybe I'll try it again though, right after my next betadine rinse. I've been adding saline and a tiny bit of bleach to 2 cups water, and I definitely feel way better after each rinse. But it doesn't last. Perhaps an application of xylitol, right after I've cleaned my sinuses, could help prevent the bugs from reattaching? I'm basically trying everything right now. Unfortunately, when I had my sinus surgery, there were no abx that my sinus bugs were sensitive to, so I've got to go with alternatives at this point. phagelod <mpalmer@...> wrote: I can't tell if we're on the same wavelength or not. Just to clarify, farnesol *is* viewed as a pheromone, used by divergent species. It's used not only by Candida (and staph/strep?) but by some insects as well--all as a signaling molecule. That's why Davies' quote made me think of farnesol.You pointed out the likely insolubility of farnesol. I think it's in "essential oils" which would be consistent with the

lipophilic nature of farnesol that you noted. I wonder...........what its biodistribution would look like in people......how a long hydrocarbon could get airborne to serve as a pheromone and as a scent in human products......if the putative benefits of some "essential oils" (which I've not investigated) derive from its farnesol.Matt>> > > I couldn't see that he named the compound. I looked at the USPTO > > and couldn't find an application. I wonder if the compound is > > farnesol, or a derivative. > > I didn't see a name either, but I thought this description indicated > it was a native pheromone or at least a close analog thereof... I > agree that it also sounds

consistent with what you say about > farnesol:> > "The small molecule Davies is working with appears to be one of the > few known examples anywhere in nature of a communication signal that > remains effective across species, family and phyla."> > I now realize, I guess it's possible they could be talking about a > second messenger, not a pheromone.> > This could even have eventual repercussions outside biofilms - but > probably not (wild speculation) in reduced-genome obligate parasites > like chlamydiae, since they may well have dispensed with the > relevant biologic equipage (total speculation there, but they > certainly have dispensed with a lot of other stuff).>

[Guest guest]

Penny

What was the rationale for the xylitol spray? Were you using it to

break down biofilms? Did you use it in your sinuses? Is xylitol

actually marketed as a spray, or did you just decide to administer

it that way?

Matt

>

> That would be amazing, wouldn't it? If essential oils were the

answer?

>

> I'm ready to stick farsenol up my nose, if I could find it. This

sinus infection is killing me!

>

> By the way, I've used xylitol spray in the past. And chewed

xylitol gum. I think you're right, that very large amounts would

probably be needed to deal with our problems. Maybe I'll try it

again though, right after my next betadine rinse. I've been adding

saline and a tiny bit of bleach to 2 cups water, and I definitely

feel way better after each rinse. But it doesn't last. Perhaps an

application of xylitol, right after I've cleaned my sinuses, could

help prevent the bugs from reattaching? I'm basically trying

everything right now.

>

> Unfortunately, when I had my sinus surgery, there were no abx

that my sinus bugs were sensitive to, so I've got to go with

alternatives at this point.

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I used/use it as a nasal spray, when I read that it prevents all kinds of infections, colds etc., by not allowing the organisms to "stick". Apparently, there's lots of European research on xylitol, and the results look very favorable as far as simple infections/viruses go. When I found out I had these infected sinuses in addition to the infected jaw, I tried all kinds of things. But since I didn't have sinus symptoms, it was kind of hard to know if anything was happening. Now's a good time to try again, since I definitely have sinus symptoms. I chewed the gum because of my jaw, again, just as an adjunct, not really expecting any kind of miraculous result because I know the infection is deep seeded. But thought if I could prevent more bacteria getting to the the area, it might make a tiny difference. penny phagelod <mpalmer@...> wrote: PennyWhat was the rationale for the xylitol spray? Were you using it to break down biofilms? Did you use it in your sinuses? Is xylitol actually marketed as a spray, or did you just decide to administer it that way?Matt>> That would be amazing, wouldn't it? If essential oils were the answer? > > I'm ready to stick farsenol up my nose, if I could find it. This

sinus infection is killing me!> > By the way, I've used xylitol spray in the past. And chewed xylitol gum. I think you're right, that very large amounts would probably be needed to deal with our problems. Maybe I'll try it again though, right after my next betadine rinse. I've been adding saline and a tiny bit of bleach to 2 cups water, and I definitely feel way better after each rinse. But it doesn't last. Perhaps an application of xylitol, right after I've cleaned my sinuses, could help prevent the bugs from reattaching? I'm basically trying everything right now.> > Unfortunately, when I had my sinus surgery, there were no abx that my sinus bugs were sensitive to, so I've got to go with alternatives at this point.> > > >

[Guest guest]

Thanks for the fixed link, . I found the line interesting that suggested Citric Acid could be used as a chelating agent against mineral deposits on the roots of teeth. I've also read that citric acid can destroy biofilms and have wondered in the past if this might not be one reason people seem to be finding some success with the salt/c combo therapy. penny <usenethod@...> wrote: This guy is making (very

recently) absolutely enormous claims to the media, which don't seem to be supported by any work indexed in pubmed to date, but rather by unreviewed experiments in his lab:http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-10/bu-bur101206.phpI have to write a mock grant application for a class, and was looking down this direction. Too bad for me, it's just now already cookin. What he said at above URL seems broadly sound to me (insofar as I'm informed about this sort of thing, that is). Assuming he has the data to back it up. I lack the patience to work through this one carefully http://biology.binghamton.edu/davies/frominsidebu.htmbut it might be of interest. Basically he claims to be able to disperse biofilms by

small-molecule drugging of bacterial signaling. It sounds like what he is using, precisely, is a/the native pheromone or close to it. If it does not have good properties as far as absorption, clearance, and toxicity - and unfortunately, a pretty big chunk of small molecules do not - then there may or may not be much room for chemical alterations. So (assuming his stuff is in the first place really as potent in vitro as he says) a safe systemic therapy mgiht well be within reach, yet that is far from assured at this point. And the process may well take several years.If this is the real thing, then wow, more power to this guy, and I hope he enjoys his zillionaire retirement. This will be very engrossing to watch and has the potential to really change medicine.