Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nasal Bacteria Pump Out a Potential New Antibiotic That Kills MRSA

scientificamerican.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 98 posts

Re: Nasal Bacteria Pump Out a Potential New Antibiotic That Kills MRSA

#11

Post by doesnotexist »

Benjamin_Dobell wrote: post #9
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have to choose a system. If we don't want naturally-occurring compounds patented, but we want them researched for potential drug use, we need more public funding. Otherwise, we have to offer researchers and drug manufacturers an incentive to take risks with exploring these compounds. Barring lugdunin from being patented while providing no public funding would incentivise this group to withhold publication until t…

At least if they'd kept their findings secret, researchers could independently be researching the same thing. Now independent researchers won't want to touch lugdunin because they'll need to license the patent, however they won't know whether licensing the patent is worthwhile until they do their research. This will prevent further research, not encourage it.

Are you sure about that? I would think that the patent wouldn't apply to non-commercial investigations or research. That is you would be free to synthesize or extract this chemical in a laboratory environment. However, if you wished to manufacture the drug for commercial purposes then you would need to license the patent.

Re: Nasal Bacteria Pump Out a Potential New Antibiotic That Kills MRSA

#13

Post by iofj »

This does nothing to solve the real problem. The issue isn't (or wasn't) that we couldn't cure MRSA at all, it was a gradual evolution. In the 1960's we had 5 working drugs that would kill essentially any bacteria.

And then we had 4. We discovered new ones, at one point I believe up to 7. But resistance made it go down pretty much by one per decade, but each next one ended faster. And then it hit zero, in 2012 I believe.

Now we may (maybe) be back up to one. Big whoop. Not going to last.

The problem is that evolution is out-researching us, the problem is that we're losing the war, not any particular battle. Antibiotics used to last 3-5 decades. Now we're down to years. While we do find new antibiotics on a regular basis, the problem is the speed of adaptation. The problem is that science is losing/has lost the "battle with darkness" as it was called 700 years ago. We are now in the situation that there are people dying because they entered hospitals for unrelated reasons (where they were exposed to these bacteria).

The problem is that we need to let millions of people die of curable diseases constantly or risk a Spanish flu like incident that can be reasonably expected to kill somewhere between 500 million and a billion humans today.

Re: Nasal Bacteria Pump Out a Potential New Antibiotic That Kills MRSA

#15

Post by pyre »

doesnotexist wrote: post #11
Benjamin_Dobell wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least if they'd kept their findings secret, researchers could independently be researching the same thing. Now independent researchers won't want to touch lugdunin because they'll need to license the patent, however they won't know whether licensing the patent is worthwhile until they do their research. This will prevent further research, not encourage it.

Are you sure about that? I would think that the patent wouldn't apply to non-commercial investigations or research. That is you would be free to synthesize or extract this chemical in a laboratory environment. However, if you wished to manufacture the drug for commercial purposes then you would need to license the patent.

Well, potential researchers will also have to weigh the possibility that they spend all of the time and effort to research other possibilities for it only to find out that after all of the licensing fees, etc they won't even be able to break even on the fruits of their research.

It carries too high of a risk for financially-minded people (looking for a return on investment) to throw money at it.

Re: Nasal Bacteria Pump Out a Potential New Antibiotic That Kills MRSA

#16

Post by Benjamin_Dobell »

doesnotexist wrote: post #11
Benjamin_Dobell wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least if they'd kept their findings secret, researchers could independently be researching the same thing. Now independent researchers won't want to touch lugdunin because they'll need to license the patent, however they won't know whether licensing the patent is worthwhile until they do their research. This will prevent further research, not encourage it.

Are you sure about that? I would think that the patent wouldn't apply to non-commercial investigations or research. That is you would be free to synthesize or extract this chemical in a laboratory environment. However, if you wished to manufacture the drug for commercial purposes then you would need to license the patent.

You're right that it won't apply for non-commercial investigations. But how are you funding the investigation? It's typically funded by the proceeds generated from the research. Research is always hit and miss as to profitability, more miss than hit. Factor in potentially unknown licensing arrangements, even if you do have a "hit", and suddenly your research doesn't look like such a good idea.

Re: Nasal Bacteria Pump Out a Potential New Antibiotic That Kills MRSA

#18

Post by ss248 »

iofj wrote: post #13

This does nothing to solve the real problem. The issue isn't (or wasn't) that we couldn't cure MRSA at all, it was a gradual evolution. In the 1960's we had 5 working drugs that would kill essentially any bacteria. And then we had 4. We discovered new ones, at one point I believe up to 7. But resistance made it go down pretty much by one per decade, but each next one ended faster. And then it hit zero, in 2012 I beli…

"The problem is that we need to let millions of people die of curable diseases constantly"

Not the case at all. Biggest use of antibiotics today is in food production(agriculture etc.), not in hospitals. And it's also completely unregulated.

"The problem is that evolution is out-researching us"

Evolution also has a simple rule: "Use it or lose it". So don't be afraid. There are ways around acquired immunity.

Re: Nasal Bacteria Pump Out a Potential New Antibiotic That Kills MRSA

#19

Post by PhasmaFelis »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #7
Benjamin_Dobell wrote: post #4

Awesome research. But... > The researchers then checked snot from hospitalized patients. Of 187 samples, all but one were colonized by either S. aureus or S. lugdunensis > S. lugdunensis, was killing S. aureus. Its weapon of choice? A small compound dubbed lugdunin > The German researchers who performed the study have filed a patent for lugdunin Are we really allowing people to patent naturally occurring biological c…

You have to choose a system. If we don't want naturally-occurring compounds patented, but we want them researched for potential drug use, we need more public funding. Otherwise, we have to offer researchers and drug manufacturers an incentive to take risks with exploring these compounds. Barring lugdunin from being patented while providing no public funding would incentivise this group to withhold publication until t…

It sounds like drug discovery ought to be taxpayer-funded, then, as a project that is in the public interest but difficult to monetize without jeopardizing the public interest.

Re: Nasal Bacteria Pump Out a Potential New Antibiotic That Kills MRSA

#20

Post by danmaz74 »

iofj wrote: post #13

This does nothing to solve the real problem. The issue isn't (or wasn't) that we couldn't cure MRSA at all, it was a gradual evolution. In the 1960's we had 5 working drugs that would kill essentially any bacteria. And then we had 4. We discovered new ones, at one point I believe up to 7. But resistance made it go down pretty much by one per decade, but each next one ended faster. And then it hit zero, in 2012 I beli…

AFAIK bacteria aren't developing a way to get resistant faster; the problem is antibiotics over-use (and misuse). Also, if an antibiotic for which resistance was developed doesn't get used for a long enough time, the bacteria lose the resistance.

The bottom line is that we need to use newly developed antibiotics more carefully, continue researching new ones, and no Spanish flu like incident will happen (even without considering that the Spanish flu was a virus, not a bacterium).

Post reply on HN