Antibiotic resistance: The medical mainstream can’t see the solution in plain sight

Schemers & dreamers

It’s one of the most outrageously dimwitted plans I’ve ever heard of.

It’s so preposterous, it’s like it’s dreamed up by children.

But you can almost imagine it becoming a reality for one reason: It would make many many drug company executives very very happy.

And when drug execs are happy, a huge network of mainstream underlings (you know, like lobbyists and Congressmen)become very happy too.

Gone hog wild

I’ve been doing a lot of research lately on a serious and growing problem: antibiotic resistance.

It’s more than a problem really. It’s a crisis. When bacteria mutate to survive antibiotic drugs, they become superbugs. And in the worst cases, such as the MRSA superbug, they’re often impossible to control with drugs.

Currently, there are only a few antibiotics in the drug development pipeline, so this problem is quickly turning into a crisis.

What to do?

Researchers at the London School of Economics (LSE) came up with a plan: Incentivize drug companies.

You see, the drug industry has three “incentive” problems with antibiotics: 1) The drugs are only given for a short period. You can’t make billions off a three-week treatment! 2) Many antibiotics become obsolete as bacteria develop resistance. And 3) Patents run out too soon for drug giants to make the multi-billion dollar profits they demand.

It’s a lose-lose-lose for drug companies.

So LSE dreamed up two seductive schemes to lure in the drug giants.

Scheme One: Extend patents. Longer patents equals more peak profit years. On the surface, that seems reasonable. But when you look a millimeter deeper, it gets a little crazy. Rather than extend their patent on the antibiotic, this scheme would also allow drug companies to transfer the patent extension to other types of drugs — such as a blockbuster drug nearing the end of its patent period.

So if Pfizer, for instance, developed a new antibiotic under this plan, it could extend Lipitor’s patent protection.

Scheme Two: Government rewards. These rewards would be in the form of vouchers that could be traded for accelerated
regulatory approval. Oh sure — great idea! Rush it to market because you have a coupon!

But wait…that’s not even the worst part.

Once a company has committed to developing an antibiotic, the vouchers don’t have to be used for the antibiotic, they could be used to accelerate approval of ANY type of drug. Imagine how many useless, ineffective, dangerous drugs could be brought to market right away with this system!

Just inSANE! The very idea of exposing unsuspecting patients to even greater dangers with poorly-tested drugs as an INCENTIVE is almost pathological.

Silver lining

Here’s what makes much more sense: OPEN YOUR EYES, LSE!

Long before pharmaceutical antibiotics first appeared in the 1940’s, colloidal silver was a commonly used antibacterial agent. Colloidal silver disrupts enzymes that bacteria require for oxygen metabolism. Bacteria can’t replicate without those enzymes.

But once antibiotic drugs were on the scene, colloidal silver was pushed to the back seat. Eventually it was rebranded by the medical mainstream as a bizarre quack treatment, even though it’s nothing more than submicroscopic silver particles finely dispersed in water.

Colloidal silver has one enormous advantage over synthetic antibiotic drugs: Bacteria never develop resistance — not even to the dreaded MRSA.

Never. Period.

So here’s a REAL challenge for LSE researchers: Come up with a scheme that will incentivize the medical establishment to accept colloidal silver as a solution to the antibiotic resistance crisis.

Maybe it would work if they include a “get out of jail free” card…

Sources: 
“The Desperate Need for New Antibiotics” Eben Harrell, Time magazine, time.com