Ok so I have a ton of time to think while at work, and while i'm obviously not a scientist (though I do play one at bars!) I do have a good imagination. Imagination + tons of thinking time = you come up with some odd ideas. And since Einstein said imagination is vastly more important than knowledge, one shouldn't discount how imagination has lead to important discoveries. I don't claim that anything I offer would be considered useful, because there are probably too many hurdles to make any of them functional, or non harmful...BUT, the important thing to remember is that tons of people are creative, and hard problems are rarely solved with conventional thought paths. So I ask, have any of you guys ever thought about potential weird ways to treat our disease? I have always believed that there is everything we need for every problem we have or will ever have right here on earth either via nature, or creative applications of common substances. Anyways, here are a couple of mine (please share yours):
#1 Ultraviolet light lung scoping: Yes ultraviolet light damages our cells. But it also does something else more helpful...It kills bacteria/viruses/mold/fungus (microorganisms in general). Well since our main problem in general is pseudo/staph/etc, one would think someone would have come up with a way for say a once a month lung scope of UV light via a fiber optic/medical grade light source, to go into our lungs, and turn up the light. There are of course problems with this. Microorganisms need direct exposure to the light, and there is the problem of amount of time of exposure to kill different types of organisms. Also, the question of mucous biofilm comes into play. UV has a hard time penetrating some depths of materials, like cloth, some opaque masses, etc. Then the final aspect of amount of exposure and strength of the light to our cells (wouldn't want to get cancer from treatment, etc). Anyways, I don't have even 3% of the time I used to have to look into things due to work, but quickly looking around I found this page:
<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.maxmax.com/aUVGermicidalTechnicalData.htm
">http://www.maxmax.com/aUVGermicidalTechnicalData.htm
</a>
As you can see by the list, staph aureus has the second to lowest microwatt exposure time needed to kill it. And removing a large amount of staph without antibiotics from our lungs would help. Yes there are tons of nooks and crannies in our lungs where it would continue to live, BUT, it would also help quite a bit even if it killed 25% of our lung bugs. Also you get into the aspect of UVA or UVB, and which is less harmful to us, more technically sound, and more lethal to the organisms. Anyways, just an idea to think about.
#2 Electrical current to kill microorganisms: Electricity has been used for quite a while to kill off bacteria. In various forms and applications, with additions of solutions (what we do now anyways with aresols). There has also been very effective use of electricity to kill of bacteria that form biofilms (what we deal with now). I have had similar drunk discussions with another CF engineer online on the old UK board, and oddly enough...The more we talked and exchanged ideas (me an educated layman, him an educated engineer)...The more we came to the conclusion that there might really be something here application wise. Of course there are tons of complications with this. You can't just go and blast someones lung tissue with a large dose of electricity. But what if more research was done, where we found out pseudo and staph had a pretty low resistance towards current? What if we found out with a proper combination of chemical inhalation/antibiotics, and anesthetizing the lung area some, then applying a low grade current either in pulses or one slightly uncomfortable jolt, it would either weaken our bacterias outter layer, thus improving their susceptibility to antibiotics (or the previously discussed UV light therapy), or flat out kill them? Just spending a few minutes looking around the net, i found some interesting information regarding electrical current and killing bacteria. I will copy and paste just one of the sites:
<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/mole00/mole00142.htm
">http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/.../mole00/mole00142.htm
</a>
Question is what is the minimal(threshold) type
of current necessary to kill bacteria? AC or DC?, voltage?, were the
microorganisms in solution of
some sort, etc. Any and all info would be helpful.
Dear Mr. Gross,
My experience with electrical shock and bacteria is
limited to the application of 'electroporation' (also
called electro-transformation), a method to force DNA
into bacteria. The bacteria are suspended in a
solution of glycerol and glucose (isotonic so that the
bacteria won't burst as they do in water, and free of
ions to give sufficient resistance). This solution is
put in a cuvette sided with two electrodes and DNA is
added. An electrical current is applied for several
milisec, and the result is that the DNA is 'shot' into
the bacterial cells. The voltage should be high enough
to be effective, but not too high so that the bacteria
survive. When salts (from the growth medium) are not
sufficiently removed, the voltage results in a current
(a flash!) and the bacteria are killed. I am not sure
weather it is the heat or the current itself (or the
combination) that kills the bugs. How much current is
needed for electroporation, and how much the bacteria
can survive, is dependent on the organism. Note,
however, that these experiments are optimalized for
cell survival, not for killing. I did a quick search
for you on the internet about applications:
Research is going on to use electrical current to kill
micro-organisms, see for instance this (lay-man)
article on killing bacteria and viruses in medical
blood products
(<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.ioa.com/~dragonfly/blackbox.html).
">http://www.ioa.com/~dragonfly/blackbox.html).
</a>
Bacteria that form biofilms (multiple layers of
tightly packed cells) on catheders are a serious
problem in invasive medicine. Such bacteria are hard
to treat with antibiotics because the inner layers are
not reached. The application of electrical current
(1-10 mA/cm2), often in combination with antibiotics
is used for desinfection of such devises. See for
instance this scientific publication
(<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://aac.asm.org/cgi/reprint/40/9/2012?view=reprint&pmid=8878572).
">http://aac.asm.org/cgi/reprint...eprint&pmid=8878572).
</a>
Another application to kill bacteria with help of
electricity is to rinse foods/cutting boards etc. with
electrolyzed water (see
<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/20000728182516data_trunc_sys.shtml).
">http://www.scienceagogo.com/ne...ata_trunc_sys.shtml).
</a>In this case it is the acidity of the water and
oxidation/reduction that distroy the microorganisms.
3# Alcohol hand sanitizers: So we all hear how these alcohol gel sanitizers absolutely obliterate all bacteria/many microorganisms. We obviously can't inhale that. But, their main ingredient is alcohol. There are quite a few different types of alcohol, some obviously inappropriate for internal applications, but others are more friendly (like ethanol for example, we ingest that all the time with drinking). One would think, there would be some way to isolate the killing properties of common alcohol, and possibly alter the chemical structure to remove the harmful aspects for internal use, if any. Imagine an altered alcohol aresol solution that has been made with some form of liposomal fat aspect, where when inhaled it clings for a period of time to the surface of our lung tissue, just lung enough to directly impact most of our microorganisms...Then after X amount of time, the molecules either become watersoluble and dissolve and coughed up via therapy, or the other option, the molecules outter shell degrade and release that way. Basically, with such a powerful wide spectrum non-antibiotic germ killer such as alcohol, and the very unlikely chance of bugs becoming resistant to it, I would love to see this option pursued in research. Even if the molecules weren't able to be modified like I was discussing, and they were absorbed...The pros outweight the cons in my mind. The cons would be drying of the lungs (something that could be countered with strong hydration both orally and direct inhalation), and slight inebriation. Of course diabetic patients that can't drink would have a problem with this...BUT, them aside (and I know that accounts for a good many of them) being able to kill off a very large amount of our lung bugs without resistance, would be a HUGE pro. There has to be some application somewhere here as well.
4# Bacterial communication: There have been several articles not too long ago telling us that bacteria communicate, talk to each other about reproducing, etc etc. That bit of knowledge would be a HUGE boost against any enemy in a time of war. There should be no reason why we can't aggressively use that information with proper R&D to our advantage. We know whales communicate. If we were able to decode their communications, we could then in turn to malicious things to them via trickery, subterfuge, etc. What makes it easier for us for bacteria, is we know they communicate chemically. Thankfully instead of having to decode very intricate sound patterns like whales, we do know our chemicals very well. We have been playing with them for a long time now. We use chemicals in countless ways to trick our bodies into either doing, or not doing something, and it works VERY well. There should be no reason why with more work, we can't find a way to use bacterias communication against them. Just some simple ideas without much work put into the thinking process: Have them congregate in areas more accessable for our other treatments (like the light treatments that need direct exposure to kill, the alcohol, etc), confuse their basic everyday activity so that they are less likely to colonize into more dangerous biocolonies, disrupt their reproductive abilities. As I said, there has got to be something we can do with this new found knowledge. In any war, understanding your enemies communication is the biggest factor in winning any war.
#5 Intense sound therapy: Similar approach as the UV light treatment, but using the properties of sound either via exterior source, or interior invasive source. We all know what it's like to get too close to an amp stack at a rock concert. Your whole entire insides shake, you might cough up some goo, etc. Which by the way should be more aggressively pursued for regular mucous clearing treatments, but thats another discussion really, since i'm talking about bacteria. Anyway, just like with kidney stones, or ANY matter really, anything can become unmassed via intense sound wave exposure. Nikolai Testa did a ton of experiments with various frequency/vollume sound applications, and he was rumored to have accomplished some very weird things. He was able to supposedly have destroyed all kinds of matter just with sound. Given that string theory seems to be leaning that all matter, regardless what it is, reverberates with some level of sound wave. Like countless little threads all vibrating at their own resonance, and everything vibrates at a resonance. Given that (as long as we accept it as fact, which we can't prove 100% now but research is leaning that way), there has got to be a way to either weaken the structure of microorganisms, or flat out kill them with sound. The tricky part is of course finding the frequency that harms the bacteria, and doesn't turn our lungs into liquid. With better knowledge and equipment, given enough time, I would be almost willing to guarantee that I would be able to finally find a good middle ground sound wise just from trial and error on human tissue and microorganisms. Sound is a very powerful tool, and should be investigated more thoroughly
And last...
#6 CF related PC "folding": In case you aren't aware what "folding" is: <a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fold_%28higher-order_function%29
">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F...her-order_function%29
</a><a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://folding.stanford.edu/English/Science
">http://folding.stanford.edu/English/Science
</a>
Basically "folding" is a process where home users download a client for their PC. In times when the PC is not in use (you are afk, screensaver up, when you are sleeping, etc) the pc uses it's vast computing power to "crunch" a ton of numbers gathered elsewhere, compiles them, then sends them back to whatever organization is doing the folding, for the crunched/decoded data to be scrutinized. For example, Seti@home has their radio telescopes scouring the skies collecting rediculous amounts of data (sounds from the universe) that they would never be able to compile/crunch on their own in millions of years if just their PC's did it. But, if you look at the human race's PC's more like a quantum machine, everyones PC takes one part of that massive information, does its job, and they all send it back to the source, reducing what would have taken 1-200 pc's at their site millions of years to do, down to either hours or just a few years.
What we need is a directed folding network for CF research. It seems there is folding done for everything, from cancer to alzheimers and parkinsons, and while CF is mentioned on the stanford site, it just mentioned proteins in general, not directed folding just for our particular disease. That should change and I would love to be involved in getting that going (with what little time I have), but it is much bigger than me. For example, the "folding" for our disease (just using one small example) could use the example I brought forth regarding sound frequency and bacteria destruction. Computers work on 1's and 0's, and they essentially can be brought down to the basic computer function of "If this then that". We could use our PC downtime to scrutinize known sound frequency research and characteristics of various bacteria and human biology to crunch numbers for us, and vastly reduce these long wait times for CF research...
Anyways, just some ideas. As I said I do a ton of thinking because my job is very boring. Too bad my life ended up the way it did, I would have enjoyed going into medical research because I love problems involving logic and non conventional approaches. Instead, somehow I went into criminal justice. When I took my voc rehab testing they showed I had strong aptitude towards medicine, but because of their low funding, they already sent their one person allowed that year to medical school...Oh well.
Anyways, feel free to scrutinize my layman ideas, and if you have any of your own please feel free to offer. I think the biggest problem in our science paradigm is that we are never stressed the importance of imagination (except for engineering) vs conventional approaches. We need to think differently.
#1 Ultraviolet light lung scoping: Yes ultraviolet light damages our cells. But it also does something else more helpful...It kills bacteria/viruses/mold/fungus (microorganisms in general). Well since our main problem in general is pseudo/staph/etc, one would think someone would have come up with a way for say a once a month lung scope of UV light via a fiber optic/medical grade light source, to go into our lungs, and turn up the light. There are of course problems with this. Microorganisms need direct exposure to the light, and there is the problem of amount of time of exposure to kill different types of organisms. Also, the question of mucous biofilm comes into play. UV has a hard time penetrating some depths of materials, like cloth, some opaque masses, etc. Then the final aspect of amount of exposure and strength of the light to our cells (wouldn't want to get cancer from treatment, etc). Anyways, I don't have even 3% of the time I used to have to look into things due to work, but quickly looking around I found this page:
<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.maxmax.com/aUVGermicidalTechnicalData.htm
">http://www.maxmax.com/aUVGermicidalTechnicalData.htm
</a>
As you can see by the list, staph aureus has the second to lowest microwatt exposure time needed to kill it. And removing a large amount of staph without antibiotics from our lungs would help. Yes there are tons of nooks and crannies in our lungs where it would continue to live, BUT, it would also help quite a bit even if it killed 25% of our lung bugs. Also you get into the aspect of UVA or UVB, and which is less harmful to us, more technically sound, and more lethal to the organisms. Anyways, just an idea to think about.
#2 Electrical current to kill microorganisms: Electricity has been used for quite a while to kill off bacteria. In various forms and applications, with additions of solutions (what we do now anyways with aresols). There has also been very effective use of electricity to kill of bacteria that form biofilms (what we deal with now). I have had similar drunk discussions with another CF engineer online on the old UK board, and oddly enough...The more we talked and exchanged ideas (me an educated layman, him an educated engineer)...The more we came to the conclusion that there might really be something here application wise. Of course there are tons of complications with this. You can't just go and blast someones lung tissue with a large dose of electricity. But what if more research was done, where we found out pseudo and staph had a pretty low resistance towards current? What if we found out with a proper combination of chemical inhalation/antibiotics, and anesthetizing the lung area some, then applying a low grade current either in pulses or one slightly uncomfortable jolt, it would either weaken our bacterias outter layer, thus improving their susceptibility to antibiotics (or the previously discussed UV light therapy), or flat out kill them? Just spending a few minutes looking around the net, i found some interesting information regarding electrical current and killing bacteria. I will copy and paste just one of the sites:
<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/mole00/mole00142.htm
">http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/.../mole00/mole00142.htm
</a>
Question is what is the minimal(threshold) type
of current necessary to kill bacteria? AC or DC?, voltage?, were the
microorganisms in solution of
some sort, etc. Any and all info would be helpful.
Dear Mr. Gross,
My experience with electrical shock and bacteria is
limited to the application of 'electroporation' (also
called electro-transformation), a method to force DNA
into bacteria. The bacteria are suspended in a
solution of glycerol and glucose (isotonic so that the
bacteria won't burst as they do in water, and free of
ions to give sufficient resistance). This solution is
put in a cuvette sided with two electrodes and DNA is
added. An electrical current is applied for several
milisec, and the result is that the DNA is 'shot' into
the bacterial cells. The voltage should be high enough
to be effective, but not too high so that the bacteria
survive. When salts (from the growth medium) are not
sufficiently removed, the voltage results in a current
(a flash!) and the bacteria are killed. I am not sure
weather it is the heat or the current itself (or the
combination) that kills the bugs. How much current is
needed for electroporation, and how much the bacteria
can survive, is dependent on the organism. Note,
however, that these experiments are optimalized for
cell survival, not for killing. I did a quick search
for you on the internet about applications:
Research is going on to use electrical current to kill
micro-organisms, see for instance this (lay-man)
article on killing bacteria and viruses in medical
blood products
(<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.ioa.com/~dragonfly/blackbox.html).
">http://www.ioa.com/~dragonfly/blackbox.html).
</a>
Bacteria that form biofilms (multiple layers of
tightly packed cells) on catheders are a serious
problem in invasive medicine. Such bacteria are hard
to treat with antibiotics because the inner layers are
not reached. The application of electrical current
(1-10 mA/cm2), often in combination with antibiotics
is used for desinfection of such devises. See for
instance this scientific publication
(<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://aac.asm.org/cgi/reprint/40/9/2012?view=reprint&pmid=8878572).
">http://aac.asm.org/cgi/reprint...eprint&pmid=8878572).
</a>
Another application to kill bacteria with help of
electricity is to rinse foods/cutting boards etc. with
electrolyzed water (see
<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/20000728182516data_trunc_sys.shtml).
">http://www.scienceagogo.com/ne...ata_trunc_sys.shtml).
</a>In this case it is the acidity of the water and
oxidation/reduction that distroy the microorganisms.
3# Alcohol hand sanitizers: So we all hear how these alcohol gel sanitizers absolutely obliterate all bacteria/many microorganisms. We obviously can't inhale that. But, their main ingredient is alcohol. There are quite a few different types of alcohol, some obviously inappropriate for internal applications, but others are more friendly (like ethanol for example, we ingest that all the time with drinking). One would think, there would be some way to isolate the killing properties of common alcohol, and possibly alter the chemical structure to remove the harmful aspects for internal use, if any. Imagine an altered alcohol aresol solution that has been made with some form of liposomal fat aspect, where when inhaled it clings for a period of time to the surface of our lung tissue, just lung enough to directly impact most of our microorganisms...Then after X amount of time, the molecules either become watersoluble and dissolve and coughed up via therapy, or the other option, the molecules outter shell degrade and release that way. Basically, with such a powerful wide spectrum non-antibiotic germ killer such as alcohol, and the very unlikely chance of bugs becoming resistant to it, I would love to see this option pursued in research. Even if the molecules weren't able to be modified like I was discussing, and they were absorbed...The pros outweight the cons in my mind. The cons would be drying of the lungs (something that could be countered with strong hydration both orally and direct inhalation), and slight inebriation. Of course diabetic patients that can't drink would have a problem with this...BUT, them aside (and I know that accounts for a good many of them) being able to kill off a very large amount of our lung bugs without resistance, would be a HUGE pro. There has to be some application somewhere here as well.
4# Bacterial communication: There have been several articles not too long ago telling us that bacteria communicate, talk to each other about reproducing, etc etc. That bit of knowledge would be a HUGE boost against any enemy in a time of war. There should be no reason why we can't aggressively use that information with proper R&D to our advantage. We know whales communicate. If we were able to decode their communications, we could then in turn to malicious things to them via trickery, subterfuge, etc. What makes it easier for us for bacteria, is we know they communicate chemically. Thankfully instead of having to decode very intricate sound patterns like whales, we do know our chemicals very well. We have been playing with them for a long time now. We use chemicals in countless ways to trick our bodies into either doing, or not doing something, and it works VERY well. There should be no reason why with more work, we can't find a way to use bacterias communication against them. Just some simple ideas without much work put into the thinking process: Have them congregate in areas more accessable for our other treatments (like the light treatments that need direct exposure to kill, the alcohol, etc), confuse their basic everyday activity so that they are less likely to colonize into more dangerous biocolonies, disrupt their reproductive abilities. As I said, there has got to be something we can do with this new found knowledge. In any war, understanding your enemies communication is the biggest factor in winning any war.
#5 Intense sound therapy: Similar approach as the UV light treatment, but using the properties of sound either via exterior source, or interior invasive source. We all know what it's like to get too close to an amp stack at a rock concert. Your whole entire insides shake, you might cough up some goo, etc. Which by the way should be more aggressively pursued for regular mucous clearing treatments, but thats another discussion really, since i'm talking about bacteria. Anyway, just like with kidney stones, or ANY matter really, anything can become unmassed via intense sound wave exposure. Nikolai Testa did a ton of experiments with various frequency/vollume sound applications, and he was rumored to have accomplished some very weird things. He was able to supposedly have destroyed all kinds of matter just with sound. Given that string theory seems to be leaning that all matter, regardless what it is, reverberates with some level of sound wave. Like countless little threads all vibrating at their own resonance, and everything vibrates at a resonance. Given that (as long as we accept it as fact, which we can't prove 100% now but research is leaning that way), there has got to be a way to either weaken the structure of microorganisms, or flat out kill them with sound. The tricky part is of course finding the frequency that harms the bacteria, and doesn't turn our lungs into liquid. With better knowledge and equipment, given enough time, I would be almost willing to guarantee that I would be able to finally find a good middle ground sound wise just from trial and error on human tissue and microorganisms. Sound is a very powerful tool, and should be investigated more thoroughly
And last...
#6 CF related PC "folding": In case you aren't aware what "folding" is: <a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fold_%28higher-order_function%29
">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F...her-order_function%29
</a><a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://folding.stanford.edu/English/Science
">http://folding.stanford.edu/English/Science
</a>
Basically "folding" is a process where home users download a client for their PC. In times when the PC is not in use (you are afk, screensaver up, when you are sleeping, etc) the pc uses it's vast computing power to "crunch" a ton of numbers gathered elsewhere, compiles them, then sends them back to whatever organization is doing the folding, for the crunched/decoded data to be scrutinized. For example, Seti@home has their radio telescopes scouring the skies collecting rediculous amounts of data (sounds from the universe) that they would never be able to compile/crunch on their own in millions of years if just their PC's did it. But, if you look at the human race's PC's more like a quantum machine, everyones PC takes one part of that massive information, does its job, and they all send it back to the source, reducing what would have taken 1-200 pc's at their site millions of years to do, down to either hours or just a few years.
What we need is a directed folding network for CF research. It seems there is folding done for everything, from cancer to alzheimers and parkinsons, and while CF is mentioned on the stanford site, it just mentioned proteins in general, not directed folding just for our particular disease. That should change and I would love to be involved in getting that going (with what little time I have), but it is much bigger than me. For example, the "folding" for our disease (just using one small example) could use the example I brought forth regarding sound frequency and bacteria destruction. Computers work on 1's and 0's, and they essentially can be brought down to the basic computer function of "If this then that". We could use our PC downtime to scrutinize known sound frequency research and characteristics of various bacteria and human biology to crunch numbers for us, and vastly reduce these long wait times for CF research...
Anyways, just some ideas. As I said I do a ton of thinking because my job is very boring. Too bad my life ended up the way it did, I would have enjoyed going into medical research because I love problems involving logic and non conventional approaches. Instead, somehow I went into criminal justice. When I took my voc rehab testing they showed I had strong aptitude towards medicine, but because of their low funding, they already sent their one person allowed that year to medical school...Oh well.
Anyways, feel free to scrutinize my layman ideas, and if you have any of your own please feel free to offer. I think the biggest problem in our science paradigm is that we are never stressed the importance of imagination (except for engineering) vs conventional approaches. We need to think differently.