Prescription antibiotics almost always completely useless for UTIs in older women, study finds

 A recently published research paper revealed that prescription antibiotics may not be as effective as previously thought, and may even cause more harm than good in older patients with urinary tract infection. Research author Dr. Thomas E. Finucane of the Johns Hopkins Geriatrics Center at Johns Hopkins in Baltimore noted that antibiotic treatment may often be avoided as UTI remains to be a vague and overused diagnosis that may apply to asymptomatic older patients who may also show ambiguous signs including urinary bacteria, falls, and confusion.

Dr. Finucane also stressed that the scientific community has already gained better understanding of the types of bacteria, viruses, and other microorganisms that are present in the human body. According to the health expert, it is common knowledge that the human urine hosts various viruses and bacteria, and that certain microorganisms are actually beneficial to the body’s overall health. The geriatrics specialist also emphasized that antibiotic therapy may even be detrimental to the elderly population.

However, Dr. Finucane said certain groups may still benefit from antibiotic treatment for UTI. These include pregnant women, people about to have bladder or urinary tract surgery, individuals with invasive bacterial diseases such as kidney infections, and people in need of immediate antibiotic treatment. The health expert also cited microbiome studies indicating that the treatment might be more harmful than previously estimated. However, the doctor urged people with UTI and those undergoing antibiotic treatment to discuss these concerns with their health care providers before changing their care plan.

“Significant bacteriuria and urinary symptoms are common, often occur together, and generally resolve spontaneously. Neither is strongly linked to serious urinary tract disease or to likelihood of benefit from antibiotic treatment, with the limited exceptions discussed above…Nonetheless, treatment for “UTI” is common for individuals with symptoms, bacteriuria, or both and for those with delirium and standard bacteriuria…It is likely that careful discussion of risks and benefits would reduce antibiotic overuse. Decision-making with or on behalf of long-term care residents with bacteriuria who develop delirium should also include disclosure of the high prevalence of asymptomatic bacteriuria in stable residents, the corresponding likelihood that the bacteriuria is coincidental, lack of evidence of benefit from treatment, risks imparted by treatment, and consistent expert advice counselling against treatment. Public education would also help because some individuals and their families resolutely expect antibiotic treatment on hearing the diagnosis of “UTI”,” Dr. Finucane wrote in the Journal of the American Geriatrics Society.

Study: Antibiotic treatment falls short on UTI efficacy

A previous study demonstrated that antibiotic treatment may not show utmost efficacy in relieving UTI in older patients. Published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal, researchers revealed that the antibiotic drug nitrofurantoin was not the most effective UTI treatment, and even spurred unwanted side effects in older patients. To carry out the study, a team of researchers from the Western University in London, Ontario examined 10,000 older women with low kidney function and more than 180,000 women with normal kidney function.

The study also concluded that nitrofurantoin fell short in relieving UTI in patients compared with other treatments. The study showed that nitrofurantoin raised the risk of repeat UTI treatment with other drugs. Patients who took the drug were also more likely to be hospitalized for UTI. In addition more than 25 percent of patients exhibited reduced kidney function. Bladder cancer was the most common complaint among patients, the researchers said. (Related: Here’s how you can combat UTI the natural way)

“In our setting, nitrofurantoin was the most commonly prescribed antibiotic for a urinary tract infection in older women irrespective of their kidney function. These patients had more treatment failures with nitrofurantoin compared with other antibiotics such as ciprofloxacin. However, this was evident regardless of a patient’s level of kidney function,” lead researcher Dr. Amit Gargwuoted said in HealthDay.com.

Sources include:

ScienceDaily.com

OnlineLibrary.Wiley.com

Consumer.HealthDay.com

CMAJ.ca

TOTAL MYTH: No, McDonald’s did not stop using all antibiotics in their chicken

You’ve probably seen the headlines about McDonald’s forgoing the long-held practice of feeding their chickens a never-ending stream of antibiotics. In fact, the massive food corporation has even been praised for dumping antibiotics from their chicken.

While even the smallest steps forward should always be appreciated, the fact of the matter is that McDonald’s new “antibiotic ban” has been grossly blown out of proportion: McDonald’s will still be using some antibiotics in their food, just not the ones that are important to humans. The company even made a statement on their own website, which reads:

We are committing to use chicken that is not raised with antibiotics important to human medicine. McDonald’s has been working closely with farmers for years to reduce the use of antibiotics in our supply, thus we are able to commit today to stop using antibiotics important to human medicine in chicken production for McDonald’s USA by March 2017.

As you can see, they have not said they would be stopping the use of antibiotics in entirety — they will just be avoiding the ones that are most relevant to humans.

It’s not a secret that antibiotics have been used in factory farming operations for decades — and that the intent behind their use is not always so benign. While the drugs are also given to help heal sick animals, antibiotics quickly became known for an unintended side effect: Weight gain. As Eater.com reports, back in the 1950s people discovered that feeding their hogs and chickens antibiotics helped them to gain more weight at a faster pace, without having to eat more food.

It didn’t take long for the addition of small amounts of antibiotics to farm animals’ feed and water to become commonplace. As Eater.com explains, “In 2012, almost 97 percent of agricultural antibiotics were sold without a veterinary prescription. Agricultural producers purchase more than 30 million pounds of antibiotics annually, accounting for an estimated 80 percent of all antibiotics sold in the United States.”

There are two types of antibiotics farmers use: Antibiotics used in human medicine, and those tailored for livestock. While McDonald’s has pledged to phase out the latter, that doesn’t mean that livestock-specific antibiotics will rid the world of its antibiotic-resistant bacteria.

Even though they will not be using human-grade antibiotics in their products, the fact is that antibiotic resistant bacteria can still develop from their livestock rearing techniques.

Because scientists do not yet fully understand the scope and potential for bacterial resistance to drugs, the practice of adding unnecessary antibiotics to food at all should be avoided, regardless of whether or not the antibiotics are used in humans or livestock.

Recently, scientists discovered that bacteria can share their resistant genes not just “vertically” within future generations, but “horizontally,” as in spreading the resistant trait by sharing parts of their genetic material with other organisms. Horizontal transfer can even occur across different species of bacteria — a finding that is truly alarming. As Scientific American reported in 2016, scientists said the finding showed “resistance to drugs can spread more widely than previously thought and firms up links in the resistance chain leading from animal farm to human table.”

We already know that bacteria are capable of developing resistance via random mutation. We also know there several classes of antibiotics, and many of them are at least similar in one way or another. Who is to say that the bacteria which grow resistant to the “livestock-only” antibiotics (and they will), cannot or will not mutate into a bacteria that is resistant to a similar human medication?

Sources:

News.McDonalds.com

Eater.com

Emerald.Tufts.edu

ScientificAmerican.com

Consumers now demanding their meat be raised “humanely,” without growth hormones or GMOs, according to new study

Recent polls indicate that over 90 percent of Americans want their food labeled in a way that clearly indicates the presence of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). It is unsurprising, therefore, that a recent study conducted by the University of Illinois confirmed that when it comes to beef, chicken, eggs and dairy, the majority of people have key areas of concern that they want clearly indicated on food packaging, including the presence of GMOs.

The study, which examined how important seven key issues are to consumers, determined that the three most important factors were that animals had not been given growth hormones; that no GMOs had been used in the production of the food; and finally, that the animals had been humanely raised. This third issue was seen as more important for animals that keep producing items like milk and eggs, than for animals raised for slaughter.

Other issues of concern to consumers included:

• That the animal had not been given routine antibiotics;
• That it had been raised in a free-range environment;
• That the animal had been grass-fed or raised on a vegetarian diet; and
• That the product overall was certified as organic.

Researchers were surprised to find that consumers seemed to want specific issues identified individually, rather than by blanket terms like “organic” or “raised humanely,” which are legislated to cover multiple issues. Both the terms “organic” and “raised humanely,” for example, already indicate that no growth hormones have been given to the animal.

“When most people hear the term ‘organic,’ they think of produce, fruits, and vegetables,” said lead researcher Brenna Ellison. “I don’t think the term translates as well to animals. Consequently, consumers may not understand that the organic certification for meat and other animal products actually already includes a lot of these other production attributes.”

Labeling, therefore, has a direct impact on the salability of a product, and consumers are demanding clear, understandable labeling that clarifies issues that are important to them in a very direct way.

This is interesting when looked at in the context of the federal GMO labeling law signed by President Obama in August 2016. After Vermont passed its own GMO labeling law in 2014, many big food companies began labeling their products, even those sold outside of the state. There were several who even started removing GMOs from their products. That all ground to a halt when President Obama signed a toothless and confusing federal labeling law last year. In terms of that law, instead of the clear, concise labeling that the public had been demanding, food producers were offered the following three labeling options:

• They can clearly state the presence of GMOs on the food label;
• They can add a barcode which consumers with smartphones can then scan to get the relevant information; or
• They can simply print an 800-number on the package which consumers will have to phone if they really want to know whether or not the food contains GMOs.

Guess which option all the food manufacturers are likely to choose? Clue: It’s most probably not going to be the first one.

Many consumers were outraged by the law. For one thing, there are still many people who do not have access to smartphones. For another, who has the time to scan a barcode or call an 800-number for every product they want to pick up at the store?

The University of Illinois study really drives home the point that consumers want clarity. They want to know what they’re eating; they want to know what the animal they’re eating was fed; they want to know what hormones and medications it was given. It’s not complicated – just inconvenient for those who wish to keep those facts hidden.

Sources:

Phys.org

NaturalNews.com

HuffingtonPost.com

Shocking study finds that penicillin changes childrens’ brains, causing them to grow up angry and violent

Antibiotic treatment during late pregnancy and early childhood spurred aggression and long-term behavioral changes in animal models, a recent study showed. A team of researchers at the McMaster University and St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton in Ontario, Canada examined the effects of low-dose penicillin treatment in pregnant mice and their offspring, and found that the antibiotic triggered neurochemical changes in the brain and spurred a gut bacteria imbalance in mice. These changes coincided with increased aggression and reduced anxiety in the animal models, researchers said. However, the study revealed that giving mice a lactobacillus strain of bacteria helped prevent the onset of these negative behaviors.

“In this paper, we report that low-dose penicillin taken late in pregnancy and in early life of mice offspring, changes behaviour [sic] and the balance of microbes in the gut. While these studies have been performed in mice, they point to popular increasing concerns about the long-term effects of antibiotics. Furthermore, our results suggest that a probiotic might be effective in preventing the detrimental effects of the penicillin,” said lead author Dr. John Bienenstock in an article in ScienceDaily.com.

The findings were published in the journal Nature Communications.

Antibiotics’ potential impact on children’s behavior

The lead author also noted that children were exposed to antibiotics during infancy, and stressed on the potential effects of early antibiotic treatments on the children’s future behavioral development. “There are almost no babies in North America that haven’t received a course of antibiotics in their first year of life. Antibiotics aren’t only prescribed, but they’re also found in meat and dairy products. If mothers are passing along the effects of these drugs to their as yet unborn children or children after birth, this raises further questions about the long-term effects of our society’s consumption of antibiotics,” Dr. Bienenstock said.

Another study has demonstrated a similar effect on animal models. Canadian researchers examined healthy mice and used antibiotics to alter their gut bacteria. According to the study, mice that received antibiotics displayed increased eagerness and less apprehension compared with those in the control group. The researchers also found that antibiotics-treated mice had higher levels of a brain protein associated with depression and anxiety compared with the controls. The findings were published in the journal Gastroenterology.

A meta-analysis published in 2014 also confirmed that using antibiotics to treat inflammation leads to a chemical imbalance in intestinal bacteria. These effects spur changes in the gut function and behavior of hosts, the review noted. The results appeared in the journal Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology.

Modern society and the vicious cycle of aggression

A vast number of studies show that certain behavioral changes such as early aggression in children could manifest well into adolescence and adulthood. An analysis by the Frances McCleland Institute in Tucson, Arizona revealed that boys were more likely than girls to engage in aggressive acts such as hitting and punching others. However, the review also showed that girls were more likely than boys to use social aggression. The study also revealed that both genders tend to use these two forms of aggression simultaneously.

Aggressive behavior in adolescence was also associated with more violent behaviors — such as sexual abuse, child abuse, domestic violence, and homicide — in adulthood, a meta-analysis revealed. A report by the U.S. Department of Justice showed that young adults ages 18 to 24 years had the highest rates of homicide. Data also showed that 7.7% of all American women suffered sexual violence, while 22% were subject to domestic abuse. The results were published in the Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing. (Related: Know more about the current state of violence in the U.S. at Violence.news and Civilwar.news)

A number of research, collectively known as “Bobo doll” studies, by renowned psychologist Albert Bandura demonstrate a vicious cycle of aggression that can be transmitted between parents and their children. According to Bandura’s studies, parents who exhibit aggression were more likely to have children displaying similar behaviors.

Sources: 

DailyMail.co.uk

ScienceDaily.com

LiveScience.com

McClellandInstitute.Arizona.edu

NCBI.NLM.NIH.gov

NCBI.NLM.NIH.gov

PsychologyToday.com