How treating traveler's diarrhoea with antibiotic risks your health

April 1, 2017

Washington, Apr 1: Turns out, antibiotic use for travelers` diarrhoea favours particularly resistant super bacteria, increasing the patients` risk of getting an infection.

pelancongEvery year, millions of travellers visit countries with poor hygiene, and approximately one third of them return home carrying antibiotic-resistant ESBL intestinal bacteria. Most of them remain unaware of this, as the bacteria cause no symptoms.

High-risk areas for contracting ESBL bacteria are South and South-East Asia, Africa and Latin America.Diarrhoea is the most common health complaint for people who travel to poor regions of the world.

Those contracting diarrhoea have an increased risk of ESBL acquisition, and if they choose to they treat it with antibiotics, the risk becomes multiplied.

A Finnish study led by Anu Kantele and published two years ago showed that among people travelling to high-risk areas, those contracting diarrhoea and taking antibiotics, up to 80 percent brought ESBL super bacteria home with them.

A follow-up study led by Kantele has now established that antibiotics taken while abroad not only render the tourist susceptible to an ESBL infection, but also lead to the most resistant strains of these bacteria being selected.

"ESBL bacteria are resistant to penicillins and cephalosporins, which is why infections caused by them are treated with antibiotics from other groups, such as fluoroquinolones (e.g. ciprofloxacin).

When we analysed the patients with ESBL more closely, we found that among those who had not resorted to using antibiotics, 37 percent had an ESBL strain resistant to fluoroquinolone.

As for the travellers who had taken fluoroquinolone, 95 percent had a strain of ESBL resistant to fluoroquinolone and, indeed, a variety of other antibiotics. Antibiotic use thus implies selecting ESBL strains with the broadest spectrum of resistance," Kantele explained.Kantele noted, "The finding makes sense.

When we take an antibiotic, the bacteria that survive in our digestive system are those resistant to the treatment.

"Antibiotic resistance can be transferred between bacteria through a package containing a variety of resistance genes, meaning that one package may contain resistance to several types of antibiotics.

Indeed, most fluoroquinolone-resistant ESBL strains were also found resistant to certain other types of antibiotics the resistance to which is known to be transferred in the same gene packages that transfer ciprofloxacin resistance.

"In practice this means that travellers pick up the most resistant strains of ESBL, and we are left with dwindling treatment options for ESBL infections," stated Kantele.The study appears in Travel Medicine and Infectious Disease.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
July 7,2020

The World Health Organization (WHO) is reviewing a report that suggested its advice on the novel coronavirus needs updating after some scientists told the New York Times there was evidence the virus could be spread by tiny particles in the air.

The WHO says the Covid-19 disease spreads primarily through small droplets, which are expelled from the nose and mouth when an infected person breaths them out in coughs, sneezes, speech or laughter and quickly sink to the ground.

In an open letter to the Geneva-based agency, 239 scientists in 32 countries outlined the evidence they say shows that smaller exhaled particles can infect people who inhale them, the newspaper said on Saturday.

Because those smaller particles can linger in the air longer, the scientists - who plan to publish their findings in a scientific journal this week - are urging WHO to update its guidance, the Times said.

"We are aware of the article and are reviewing its contents with our technical experts," WHO spokesman Tarik Jasarevic said in an email reply on Monday to a Reuters request for comment.

The extent to which the coronavirus can be spread by the so-called airborne or aerosol route - as opposed to by larger droplets in coughs and sneezes - remains disputed.

Any change in the WHO's assessment of the risk of transmission could affect its current advice on keeping one-metre physical distancing. Governments, which also rely on the agency for guidance policy, may also have to adjust public health measures aimed at curbing the spread of the virus.

"Especially in the last couple of months, we have been stating several times that we consider airborne transmission as possible but certainly not supported by solid or even clear evidence," Benedetta Allegranzi, the WHO's technical lead for infection prevention and control, was quoted as saying in the New York Times.

WHO guidance to health workers, dated June 29, says that SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes Covid-19, is primarily transmitted between people through respiratory droplets and on surfaces.

But airborne transmission via smaller particles is possible in some circumstances, such as when performing intubation and aerosol-generating procedures, it says.

Medical workers performing such procedures should wear heavy-duty N95 respiratory masks and other protective equipment in an adequately ventilated room, the WHO says.

Officials at South Korea's Centers for Disease Control said on Monday they were continuing to discuss various issues about Covid-19, including the possible airborne transmission. They said more investigations and evidence were needed.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
March 15,2020

Should you let your babies "cry it out" or rush to their side? Researchers have found that leaving an infant to 'cry it out' from birth up to 18 months does not adversely affect their behaviour development or attachment.

The study, published in the Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, found that an infant's development and attachment to their parents is not affected by being left to "cry it out" and can actually decrease the amount of crying and duration.

"Only two previous studies nearly 50 or 20 years ago had investigated whether letting babies 'cry it out' affects babies' development. Our study documents contemporary parenting in the UK and the different approaches to crying used," said the study's researcher Ayten Bilgin from the University of Warwick in the UK.

For the study, the researchers followed 178 infants and their mums over 18 months and repeatedly assessed whether parents intervened immediately when a baby cried or let the baby let it cry out a few times or often.

They found that it made little difference to the baby’s development by 18 months.

The use of parent’s leaving their baby to ‘cry it out’ was assessed via maternal report at term, 3, 6 and 18 months and cry duration at term, 3 and 18 months.

Duration and frequency of fussing and crying was assessed at the same ages with the Crying Pattern Questionnaire.

According to the researchers, how sensitive the mother is in interaction with their baby was video-recorded and rated at 3 and 18 months of age.

Attachment was assessed at 18 months using a gold standard experimental procedure, the strange situation test, which assesses how securely an infant is attached to the major caregiver during separation and reunion episodes.

Behavioural development was assessed by direct observation in play with the mother and during assessment by a psychologist and a parent-report questionnaire at 18 months.

Researchers found that whether contemporary parents respond immediately or leave their infant to cry it out a few times to often makes no difference on the short - or longer term relationship with the mother or the infants behaviour.

This study shows that 2/3 of mum's parent intuitively and learn from their infant, meaning they intervene when they were just born immediately, but as they get older the mother waits a bit to see whether the baby can calm themselves, so babies learn self-regulation.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
January 4,2020

Washington D.C., Jan 3: A new study has found out that diet significantly affects the mental health and well being of an individual.

The study was published in the journal European Neuropsychopharmacology.

"We have found that there is increasing evidence of a link between a poor diet and the worsening of mood disorders, including anxiety and depression. However, many common beliefs about the health effects of certain foods are not supported by solid evidence," said the lead researcher, Professor Suzanne Dickson.

According to the researchers, the link between diet and mental health can be firmly established in certain cases like that of the ability of a ketogenic diet being helpful for children with epilepsy and the impact of vitamin B12 deficiency on poor memory, depression and fatigue.

"With individual conditions, we often found very mixed evidence. With ADHD for example, we can see an increase in the quantity of refined sugar in the diet seems to increase ADHD and hyperactivity, whereas eating more fresh fruit and vegetables seems to protect against these conditions," said Dickson

But there are comparatively few studies, and many of them don't last long enough to show long-term effects," added Dickson.

The study further concludes that some food items can be associated with treatment and the betterment of certain mental health conditions.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.