Comments on: The Return Of MRSA Expert Dr Malyszewicz

By: jiangjiang

jiangjiang — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 02:09:46 +0000

ed hardy ed hardy ed hardy clothing ed hardy clothing ed hardy shop ed hardy shop christian audigier christian audigier ed hardy cheap ed hardy cheap ed hardy outlet ed hardy outlet ed hardy sale ed hardy sale ed hardy store ed hardy store ed hardy mens ed hardy mens ed hardy womens ed hardy womens ed hardy kids ed hardy kids ed hardy kids

By: quiact

quiact — Sun, 10 May 2009 20:21:26 +0000

Sometimes, death is a very good thing- for a vicious multi-cellular organism.
There are a variety of different types of bacterial infections one can get from many different sources, yet some locations are more common than others. If bacteria are not beneficial for your health, as many bacteria are, they should die in order to restore your health.
Bacteria are a simple life form, yet are incredibly productive and efficient. As with other life forms, they exist to reproduce, and does so about every hour. Bacteria mutate, evolve, and adapt according to the host in which they exist.
To do this, it fully utilizes all available resources and energy to develop the protein that is essential for its survival in their host. Bacteria need exactly 7 genes to produce the essential ribosomes for their existence. Any more or less genes than 7, the bacteria is not maximizing its efficiency to survive and reproduce. Amazing.
Strep infections are caused by what are called gram positive bacteria, and they are the most common bacteria that infect other humans. . Group A strep infections can cause diseases such as strep throat and pneumonia. Also, staph bacterial infections are gram positive as well that potentially infect humans, and do so often.
Of all pathogenic, or disease-causing bacteria that exist, it is the MRSA, the methicillin resistant staff aureus bacteria, that are most concerning to health care providers in particular. This is because MRSA bacterial infections are the most difficult to cure when a patient suffers from their damage from being infected by these bacteria.
Another difficult situation is when a patient is infected by VRE, Vancomycin Resistant Enterococci, which is another type of gram positive bacteria that exist.
These MRSA and VRE bacteria are difficult to eradicate due to the fact that most antibiotics that are available to rid the patient of other bacterial infections, MRSA and VRE are resistant to the effectiveness of these antibiotics.
MRSA and VRE infected patients are quite challenging for the health care provider who is attempting to cure patients infected with these particular bacterial infections.
In many situations, pathogenic bacteria infect a patient already within a medical institution for another disease. When this occurs, it is called a nosocomial infection.
Greater than 5 percent of nosocomial infections are determined to be MRSA infections, it has been reported. As a result, there are about 100,000 serious hospital infections, as well as about 20,000 deaths from MRSA infections annually.
Since there are several types of pathogenic bacteria that exist, a diagnostic test called a culture and sensitivity is usually performed at a clinical laboratory to assure the correct antibiotic is selected for treatment, as the bacteria are identified with this diagnostic method.
Typically, fluid from the area suspected of being infected is obtained from the patient suspected to have an infection and smeared on what is called a petrie dish. And then these dishes are incubated for 2 to 3 days. Gram positive bacteria stain during this process a dark violet or blue. Gram negative bacteria would be pink in color, and are capable of harm as well to a human being.
When the culture is complete, technology that is available offers recommendations on the appropriate class or brand of antibiotic to treat the pathogenic bacteria present in another person- presuming the bacteria will not be resistant to the antibiotic recommended, as this happens on occasion.
Usually, classes of antibiotics that are used to treat gram positive strep infections that are not VRE or MRSA bacteria are cephalosporins, macrolides, or general penicillins. If the microbe that is causing the infection is resistant to the antibiotic from such classes that are administered to the infected patient, other options should be considered for anti-microbial therapy.
With two very powerful antibiotics in particular, which are methicillin and vancomycin, their frequent use in infected patients has resulted in VRE and MRSA bacteria that are now resistant to these antibiotics.
When a patient is infected with VRE or MRSA bacteria, other selections for antimicrobial therapy that provide more efficacy should be selected for a patient infected with these types of infections. Such brands and types of antibiotics for MRSA and VRE bacteria include Zyvox, which has both IV and oral dosage options, and an antibiotic called Cubicin.
However these antibiotics for antibiotic resistant bacteria are given usually due to infections that have progressed to a more serious nature within a patient infected in such a way, so a cure is not immediate when these antibiotics are selected for such patients.
Progressive medical conditions with such infected patients include sepsis, or blood infection, osteomyelitis, or bone infection, as well as pneumonia, which is a serious lung infection. A hospital stay is normally required with such patients infected with MRSA and VRE infections that cause such diseases.
This is because when the antibiotics that potentially cure the patient of these microbes are selected, they are usually given via IV administration, and are administered normally for several days, if not several weeks.
There are numerous classes and types of antibiotics available, yet bacterial resistance to most of these antibiotics, with the exception of the two mentioned earlier, constantly remain a serious concern for the health care provider, and the MRSA and VRE infected patient.
With MRSA at the top of the list of concerns for the health care providers, this infection continue to occur progressively, which amplifies the concerns of others.
Medical institutions should possibly consider quarantine for those patients at their locations that have been determined to be infected with the MRSA and VRE bacteria more often in the future.
www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dhqp/ar_mrsa_spotlight_2006.html
Dan Abshear

By: Patrick Holford and the Pioneering Nutrition Course « Holford Watch: Patrick Holford, nutritionism and bad science

Wed, 25 Jun 2008 23:20:38 +0000

[...] my work is evidence-based”) and Ben Goldacre have also had a lively time in the past (and here). Holford Watch has devoted an entire blog to the quality of Patrick Holford’s research and [...]

By: AJH

AJH — Wed, 28 Jun 2006 10:00:38 +0000

Well I take it back, having re-read this thread and this time noticing raygirvan’s link, grew was not making it up. Sorry for calling you a troll.

But nobody should apologise for what they have said about Mr Malysewicz on this forum, nor should anyone feign grief for a man they did not know and had no respect for. You don’t earn respect by dying.

Condolences to his family, but I won’t pretend I’m sad.

By: AJH

AJH — Wed, 21 Jun 2006 11:55:22 +0000

Oh, and either give us a link to a news story reporting CM’s death or piss off, grew, you troll.

By: AJH

AJH — Wed, 21 Jun 2006 11:49:05 +0000

HAHAHAHAHAHA!
I’ve just checked Companies House for Chemsol Group Limited and here’s what it says:

Name & Registered Office:
CHEMSOL GROUP LIMITED

Nature of Business (SIC(03)):
9999 – Dormant Company

HAHAHA! See for yourself:
wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/7bda6d468f2e06a2b719685143cf2559/compdetails

See also CHEMSOL LABS LIMITED registered at the same address which shows
Status: Active – Proposal to Strike off
because his accounts are late.

By: JQH

JQH — Sun, 28 May 2006 23:11:04 +0000

Sorry, “Dr” should have been in inverted commas there, since he got his Ph.D. by mail order from a non-accredited university.

By: Dr Aust

Dr Aust — Fri, 26 May 2006 11:16:45 +0000

The dishonesty of the tabloid scare-hunters is no surprise, but there is a wider problem with reporting of science and medical issues in the UK media in general, even the upmarket places. One is lack of time and inclination to get to the bottom of things – it is easier to bang out something cribbed straight from other news stories or press releases, no fact-checking or wading through specialist material required.
Apart from the time pressures on the reporters, I also suspect a signficant number of them simply don’t have the scientific or medical understanding to get to the bottom of things. Finally there is the argument that articles that tackle the issues properly will be so long and turgid that no-one will read them – Tim Radford has often said this over the years. To get the story read by the news editor, and then printed, the science journos tend to fall back on one of the stereotypical “would you believe it” formats than Ben G has written about – “Shocker – butter was bad for you – now boffins say its good!” etc etc.

Having said that, the health writers CAN do it properly when they try, which makes it more of a shame that they don’t try more often. Take herceptin and cancer as a recent example. All the broadsheets papers printed loads of superficial and misleading stuff quoting the campaigning patients (human interest! news!) and reciting the highly selected statistics direct off the patient campaign group websites. It took months and months of this before even one health journo (Sarah Boseley in the Guardian) FINALLY read the coverage in the medical journals properly and wrote a sensible piece, quoting the real cancer recurrence figures (not just the carefully massaged “maximum impact” statistics the drug companies and the patient groups prefer to use) and giving some assessment of the deeper issues.

You could contrast the coverage of health and scientific issues in the UK with that in some of the European countries. Of course, the serious newspapers in Spain, Germany and France are a bit dry and plodding to read, but at least those who want information can find it. UK newspapers are all in the entertainment business, and informative content is now an occasional treat when they do an “in-depth major feature” It would be nice to think there was a middle way somewhere, but don’t hold your breath.

By: kim

kim — Fri, 26 May 2006 07:50:15 +0000

Does anybody find it odd that none of the nationals seem to have picked up on the news of Dr Malyszewic’s death? Or have I missed something?

I also note that Private Eye this week ran the story about The Observer using Dr M as an MRSA expert.

By: Michael Harman

Michael Harman — Fri, 19 May 2006 19:43:24 +0000

On the libel point, the action tended traditionally to be for damages for loss of reputation and/or reparation for financial loss. But nowadays, things like damages for mental stress can get brought in. So yes, if a hospital administrator gets seriously distressed as a result of a misleading report about MRSA in the hospital, they can probably sue. And they can sue even if they’re not directly involved in MRSA management and control. And I’m not sure whether they have to sue for libel, or whether they can sue under some other ground which is easier to sue under. (Human rights are very popular nowadays.)

By: Robert Carnegie

Robert Carnegie — Fri, 19 May 2006 14:52:23 +0000

Does this mean no more bollocks about hospital MRSA in tabloids? Surely not.

I suppose a report that MRSA is rampaging unchecked through one given hospital or the whole NHS could be considered a libel against a person whose job or reputation involve making sure that MRSA is not rampaging etc.

By: Aspiring Pedant

Aspiring Pedant — Fri, 19 May 2006 14:48:03 +0000

I think Hector is still alive and kicking -

www.mast-victims.org/forum/index.php?action=vtopic&forum=3

and as rational as ever.

By: Fyse

Fyse — Fri, 19 May 2006 14:35:00 +0000

My god, that’s quite a coincidence. Still, I guess if we talk about enough people eventually one of them will die. I wonder how Hector is? He’s gone mighty quiet suddenly…

Incidentally, the article says there’s been 50% increase in fatalities on Northamptonshire’s roads in the last year. Anyone fancy discussing whether that’s significant, or just due to sampling error from the underlying distribution? Joke, don’t worry.

By: JQH

JQH — Fri, 19 May 2006 13:40:02 +0000

raygirvan

Thanks for the link. I see Northampton Today considers “Dr” Malpractice to be a bacteria expert etc. Obviously don’t read the Guardian or listen to Radio 4.

Maybe this forum should mark the misfortunes of pseudoscientists with something like Private Eye’s “Curse of Gnome”?

If it’s a genuine curse may I suggest Gillian McTeeth and that patronising bitch from “Ten Years Younger” as the next targets?

By: raygirvan

raygirvan — Fri, 19 May 2006 11:49:01 +0000

No: it's true. See Northampton Today.

By: JQH

JQH — Fri, 19 May 2006 11:35:02 +0000

grew, are you just saying that to cheer us all up or is it true?

If the latter , expect the internet and the tabloid press to be full of conspiracy theories.

By: grew

grew — Fri, 19 May 2006 09:49:29 +0000

Dr Christopher Malyszewicz died in a Car accident on Wednesday Morning [17-may-06]

Thanks

By: JQH

JQH — Wed, 17 May 2006 13:37:11 +0000

Filias Cupio

I believe I am correct in saying that unlike corporations such as Macdonalds, public bodies cannot sue for libel so unless the newspaper or “Dr” Malyszewicz name a specific individual a libel suit will fail. I f any lawyers are reading could they say whether my understanding of the law is correct.

Regarding Radio 4 the BBC is required to be “even-handed” which as John Pilger once remarked, can lead to being even-handed towards oppressors and the oppressed.

By: kim

kim — Wed, 17 May 2006 08:15:36 +0000

Daveyboond – I emailed the readers’ editor yesterday. Will be interesting to see if they respond.

Filias Cupio – That’s an interesting point about the libel. Perhaps they could at least complain to the PCC.

About the radio interviewer’s question. Radio interviews, particularly on Radio 4, seem to feel the need to be completely even-handed when they’re interviewing two people. I always have this little fantasy of the Today programme interviewing Churchill and Hitler together. “Well, Mr Churchill, that’s a fair point that Herr Hitler just made about invading Poland, wasn’t it?” I think it must be inherent in the format that if you’ve got two people you don’t want to seem biased towards one of them, even if the other is clearly an idiot, a charlatan or an evil maniac.

By: Filias Cupio

Filias Cupio — Wed, 17 May 2006 00:10:29 +0000

Another thought – given that “Dr” Malyszewicz has been ‘outed’, would a hospital now have good grounds for a libel suit if a newspaper publishes a new story based on his lab results? Would it strengthen their case to send letters in advance to newspapers pointing out that he is a charletan? (To avoid a “we didn’t know there was any question about his competence” defense.)