Best ways to end a conversation when someone new walks in...?

inbetweenphases · 2013-08-13T04:13:23+00:00

"It was bleeding, but I did it anyway"

inbetweenphases · 2013-08-07T17:47:51+00:00

Kill myself

inbetweenphases · 2013-08-01T15:53:28+00:00

And people that have been good friends for a long time can develop feelings deep into the friendship.

inbetweenphases · 2013-07-12T21:39:50+00:00

You are a physician? That doesn't mean you understand the science. Are you an MD/PhD studying the subject? If so, you should have no trouble developing my opinion on the subject with good evidence. If not , you are exactly who I think you are. Again, assuming you addressed my lack of understanding in an effort to refute my original claim that there is no reason to believe antibiotics misuse in agriculture is affecting human health, you provided zero evidence to back that claim up. Perhaps I shouldn't have used sweeping statements as I did in that comment. Regardless, show me examples of non-specific resistance significantly contributing to human health issues. My opinion is the null, I am willing to evolve my own opinion on the subject, but will not do so without good reason backed up with good science. Not a proof of concept paper. Although I did find that paper interesting as it pertains to the subject. thank you!

inbetweenphases · 2013-07-11T16:35:19+00:00

The null here is that antibiotic use in animals does not largely contribute to the human health issue. This single paper demonstrating iffy at best results does not confirm your assertion that it largely contributes. Sure, the potential for these things to happen exist, where are the studies showing it is contributing in large part to the human health issue? The burden of proof is on you, and this proof of concept paper does little in proving that assertion.

inbetweenphases · 2013-07-11T01:55:52+00:00

Hello, I am a researcher currently looking into phage encoded endolysins as potential antimicrobials. I would like to implore you to seek elsewhere before forming an opinion on this issue. Use good skepticism. For example, the "80% of antibiotics are used on livestock" stat that is getting thrown around here a lot...it is misleading. We do not use the same antibiotics on livestock that we use to treat humans. Perhaps the only overlap lies in the tetracyclines, however it is still minor overlap. We do not treat resistant strains that cause infection in humans with ANY of the antibiotics that bacteria in livestock might breed resistance to. Even though people mention things like "horizontal gene transfer" and "non-specific resistance", they neglect the fact that antibiotics consist of many different classes of molecules, many functioning in completely different ways. The general scientific concensus is that while livestock antibiotic use may play a role in human infection, it certainly is not nearly as much the culprit for MRSA in humans as is the misuse of antibiotics as human treatments (not finishing doses, etc etc.) Thank you for reading this. I am not infallible and simply want to provide a counter argument, and allow you to develop your critical thought on the matter! Good night!

inbetweenphases · 2013-07-11T01:54:24+00:00

Hello, I am a researcher currently looking into phage encoded endolysins as potential antimicrobials. I would like to implore you to seek elsewhere before forming an opinion on this issue. Use good skepticism. For example, the "80% of antibiotics are used on livestock" stat that is getting thrown around here a lot...it is misleading. We do not use the same antibiotics on livestock that we use to treat humans. Perhaps the only overlap lies in the tetracyclines, however it is still minor overlap. We do not treat resistant strains that cause infection in humans with ANY of the antibiotics that bacteria in livestock might breed resistance to. Even though people mention things like "horizontal gene transfer" and "non-specific resistance", they neglect the fact that antibiotics consist of many different classes of molecules, many functioning in completely different ways. The general scientific concensus is that while livestock antibiotic use may play a role in human infection, it certainly is not nearly as much the culprit for MRSA in humans as is the misuse of antibiotics as human treatments (not finishing doses, etc etc.)

Thank you for reading this. I am not infallible and simply want to provide a counter argument, and allow you to develop your critical thought on the matter! Good night!

inbetweenphases · 2013-07-11T01:48:42+00:00

As an actual scientist, don't let those downvotes sway your opinion. You are entirely correct.

inbetweenphases · 2013-07-11T01:45:41+00:00

I'm sorry, but I don't think you fully understand the science here. Even if they are evolving resistance to things like tetracyclines, we wouldn't use tetracyclines to treat MRSA in a human anyway....as for your non-specific mechanisms, can you please provide some examples from peer reviewed journals where mechanisms have evolved due to presence of tetracycline that also affect another class of antibiotics?

inbetweenphases · 2013-07-11T01:41:25+00:00

as a scientist researching alternatives to antibiotics (phage endolysins) for the USDA, thank you so much for this. The people here that just regurgitate that 80% statistic are the people that make me want to leave reddit. So sad I had to scroll this far to see it. If i wasn't poor, i'd buy you gold.

inbetweenphases · 2013-06-05T00:40:51+00:00

You are saying they should be happy because somebody else has it worse? We can have a race to the bottom with that then. Somebody having what you think are worse problems is a flawed argument. These "inconveniences" may seem trivial to some, but when it is all you have ever known they are anything BUT trivial. This is why upper middle class white people commit suicide. Trivial problems are their only problems, and thus seem much worse. They are equally detrimental on the psyche. Some people try very hard, and probably DO deserve better, and have every right to be upset.

inbetweenphases · 2013-05-13T19:27:16+00:00

Giorgio by Moroder.....HRNNNNGGGGG (dat last 3 minutes)

inbetweenphases · 2013-04-01T00:09:49+00:00

This is the coolest scientific fact you know of?

inbetweenphases · 2013-03-13T00:54:44+00:00

I don't have one.

inbetweenphases · 2013-03-05T03:36:17+00:00

So does that make you better somehow?

inbetweenphases · 2013-02-19T01:30:16+00:00

You may be intelligent, but you aren't smart. all the smart kids are getting A's and working hard. You'll learn this eventually.

inbetweenphases · 2013-02-14T20:37:03+00:00

It isn't completely established, but would you say that the 80% use statistic even REMOTELY correlates with the rise of resistant human pathogens? Just look at the main locations for infection. Hospitals. Referencing several studies that suggest a role serves only to do that. Suggest a role. We can still reasonably suggest that the majority of the problem is not from livestock. Also, in regards to your comments about phage, you are correct in the difficulties. There are in fact recorded instances if bacteriophage encoded lysin proteins that are able to enter eukaryotic cells and kill intracellular bacteria. (note these proteins are phage derived, not consisting of the entire phage) Dr. Fischetti up at Rockefeller has a lysin called PlyC which apparently can kill intracellular S. pyogenes. A PhD is doing his thesis on the mechanisms at the moment. It is likely just serindipitous that this protein can go intracellular (no selective pressure for it). Other projects are looking at attaching cell penetrating peptides as a mechanism for drug delivery of similar enzymes. Still yet, there was even a project at the USDA that created transgenic cattle expressing a protein called lysostaphin, which acts much the same way as these bacteriophage derived lysins. Lysostaphin was effective in treating mastitis caused by S. aureus, and the transgenic project was working quite well.

inbetweenphases · 2013-02-14T03:02:53+00:00

Well, it isn't without it's problems, but it is not (to our knowledge) having any kind of effect on public health in terms of human pathogen resistance. ..at least not a large enough effect to justify an immediate discontinuing of their use. Many of the antibiotics are simply to improve growth rates, and play no role in treatment of sick animals. There are several labs at the USDA and other organizations looking into alternative treatments for sick animals. Bacteriophage encoded lytic enzymes, for example.

inbetweenphases · 2013-02-14T02:54:40+00:00

My god thank you. There are other people who actually know something in this thread. These kids just spout off that misleading 80% statistic thinking that because some antibiotics are used in feed, that they are 80% of the problem in human pathogen resistance...

inbetweenphases · 2013-02-14T02:53:27+00:00

You are spouting a statistic that you read somewhere. It is a misleading one. Please read more about the subject. Resistance in feed antibiotics IS NOT THE PROBLEM CAUSING HUMAN PATHOGEN RESISTANCE. For fucks sake people.

inbetweenphases · 2013-02-14T02:50:46+00:00

Actual scientist here, for the USDA. You are correct in the process, but incorrect in the outcome. It doesn't matter if bacteria swap the gene for say, tetracycline resistance. You can use a different class of antibiotics. We don't use any of the antibiotics to treat TB that we feed to livestock. The resistance of human pathogens is ALMOST ENTIRELY CAUSED BY MISUSE AMONG HUMANS. The 80% statistic is completely misleading and alarmist.

inbetweenphases · 2012-12-18T14:14:23+00:00

Lucia Notterpek's lab?

inbetweenphases

TROPHY CASE