Antibiotic-resistant
diseases pose 'apocalyptic' threat, top expert says
Chief
medical officer Dame Sally Davies tells MPs issue should be added to
national risk register of civil emergencies
23
January, 2013
Britain's
most senior medical adviser has warned MPs that the rise in
drug-resistant diseases could trigger a national emergency comparable
to a catastrophic terrorist attack, pandemic flu or major coastal
flooding.
Dame
Sally Davies, the chief medical officer, said the threat from
infections that are resistant to frontline antibiotics was so serious
that the issue should be added to the government's national risk
register of civil emergencies.
She
described what she called an "apocalyptic scenario" where
people going for simple operations in 20 years' time die of routine
infections "because we have run out of antibiotics".
The
register was established in 2008 to advise the public and businesses
on national emergencies that Britain could face in the next five
years. The highest priority risks on the latest register include a
deadly flu outbreak, catastrophic terrorist attacks, and major
flooding on the scale of 1953, the last occasion on which a national
emergency was declared in the UK.
Speaking
to MPs on the Commons science and technology committee, Davies said
she would ask the Cabinet Office to add antibiotic resistance to the
national risk register in the light of an annual report on infectious
disease she will publish in March.
Davies
declined to elaborate on the report, but said its publication would
coincide with a government strategy to promote more responsible use
of antibiotics among doctors and the clinical professions. "We
need to get our act together in this country," she told the
committee.
She
told the Guardian: ""There are few public health issues of
potentially greater importance for society than antibiotic
resistance. It means we are at increasing risk of developing
infections that cannot be treated – but resistance can be managed.
"That
is why we will be publishing a new cross-government strategy and
action plan to tackle this issue in early spring."
The
issue of drug resistance is as old as antibiotics themselves, and
arises when drugs knock out susceptible infections, leaving hardier,
resilient strains behind. The survivors then multiply, and over time
can become unstoppable with frontline medicines. Some of the best
known are so-called hospital superbugs such as MRSA that are at the
root of outbreaks among patients.
"In
the past, most people haven't worried because we've always had new
antibiotics to turn to," said Alan Johnson, consultant clinical
scientist at the Health Protection Agency. "What has changed is
that the development pipeline is running dry. We don't have new
antibiotics that we can rely on in the immediate future or in the
longer term."
Changes
in modern medicine have exacerbated the problem by making patients
more susceptible to infections. For example, cancer treatments weaken
the immune system, and the use of catheters increases the chances of
bugs entering the bloodstream.
"We
are becoming increasingly reliant on antibiotics in a whole range of
areas of medicine. If we don't have new antibiotics to deal with the
problems of resistance we see, we are going to be in serious
trouble," Johnson added.
The
supply of new antibiotics has dried up for several reasons, but a
major one is that drugs companies see greater profits in medicines
that treat chronic conditions, such as heart disease, which patients
must take for years or even decades. "There is a broken market
model for making new antibiotics," Davies told the MPs.
Davies
has met senior officials at the World Health Organisation and her
counterparts in other countries to develop a strategy to tackle
antibiotic resistance globally.
Drug
resistance is emerging in diseases across the board. Davies said 80%
of gonorrhea was now resistant to the frontline antibiotic
tetracycline, and infections were rising in young and middle-aged
people. Multi-drug resistant TB was also a major threat, she said.
Another
worrying trend is the rise in infections that are resistant to
powerful antibiotics called carbapenems, which doctors rely on to
tackle the most serious infections. Resistant bugs carry a gene
variant that allows them to destroy the drug. What concerns some
scientists is that the gene variant can spread freely between
different kinds of bacteria, said Johnson.
Bacteria
resistant to carbapenems were first detected in the UK in 2003, when
three cases were reported. The numbers remained low until 2007, but
have since leapt to 333 in 2010, with 217 cases in the first six
months of 2011, according to the latest figures from the HPA.
Leading
scientists condemn decision to continue controversial research into
deadly H5N1 bird-flu virus
Research
has already led to the creation of a mutated form of avian flu that
can spread easily between mammals – including humans
23
January, 2013
Leading
scientists have condemned a decision by flu researchers to continue
their controversial research into the deadly H5N1 bird-flu virus,
which has already led to the creation of a mutated form of avian flu
that can spread easily between mammals – including humans.
Forty
of the world’s most prominent flu researchers have decided to lift
their voluntary moratorium on studies into the airborne transmission
of the H5N1 strain of bird-flu, which they imposed upon themselves
last January following public outrage over the work.
They
said that the benefits of the research in preventing and dealing with
a future flu pandemic outweigh the risks of an accidental leak of the
mutant virus from a laboratory or the deliberate attempt to create
deadly strains of flu by terrorists or rogue governments.
However,
other leading scientists vehemently denounced the decision on the
grounds that it would be more dangerous to proceed with the research
than to continue with the moratorium, claiming that there has been
little discussion of the decision outside the flu-research community.
Professor
Lord May, a former government chief scientist and past president of
the Royal Society, said the moratorium should be continued because
there are two possible downsides to research that deliberately aims
at making the H5N1 bird-flu virus more infectious to humans.
“As
this research becomes more widely known and disseminated, there is
the opportunity for evil people to pervert it. My other concern is
the statistics of containment are not what they ought to be,” Lord
May told The Independent.
“The
dangers of going ahead with the research outweigh the benefits of
what may emerge. As I look at it, on the balance of probabilities,
going ahead and lifting the moratorium is more dangerous than not
going ahead,” he said.
Sir
Richard Roberts, who won the Nobel Prize in medicine in 1993 and is
an expert in genetic engineering, said there has not been enough
public consultation about the work. “The decision to lift the
moratorium, which seems to have been made a small group of
self-interested scientists, makes a mockery of the concept of
informed consent,” Sir Richard said.
The
ending of the voluntary moratorium was announced last night in the
form of a letter signed by 40 flu scientists to the journals Science
and Nature, which published the original H5N1 transmissions studies
by Ron Fouchier of the Erasmus Medical Centre in Rotterdam and
Yoshihiro Kawaoka of the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
The
scientists independently discovered that they could mutate the H5N1
strain of bird-flu so that it could be transmitted through the air
between laboratory ferrets, the standard animal model used to study
influenza in humans.
Although
H5N1 can pass from infected poultry to people, it is not easily
transmitted from one person to another – unlike ordinary flu.
However, scientists fear that if airborne transmission became
possible it would lead to a deadly flu pandemic killing millions of
people because most of the individuals who are known to have been
infected with H5N1 die from the virus.
Dr
Fouchier said that it was important to re-start the transmissions
studies because it will help to identify the precise genetic
mutations that make the H5N1 virus capable of passing from one person
to another through the air.
“We
really need to understand how these viruses become airborne. With the
knowledge of these mutations we can do better surveillance to
identify where these mutations are popping up in nature,” Dr
Fouchier said.
Dr
Kawaoka said: “We want the world to be better prepared than we are.
We understand the risk and consider the H5N1 research safe. There can
never be zero risk, but the risk can be managed and we believe the
benefits of H5N1 research outweigh the risks.”
However,
other virus experts disagreed. Simon Wain-Hobson, professor of
virology at the Pasteur Institute in Paris, said he was taken by
surprise by the suddenness of the announcement to end the moratorium.
“There
has been no consultation with any virologist outside the flu
community on this and, as a virologist, I’m not convinced of the
benefits of this research,” Professor Wain-Hobson said.
“The
risks are clear for all to see and the benefits are qualitative, and
that’s rather weak. Civil scientists are not here to increase the
risk from microbes. We are not here to make the microbial world more
dangerous,” he said.
Although
the flu researchers have now abandoned their one-year moratorium, the
transmissions studies with live H5N1 are not likely to start soon.
The US Government has yet to decide on guidelines for research that
it funds, and both Dr Fouchier and Dr Kawaoka are funded by the US
National Institutes of Health.
However,
Dr Fouchier said that it may start the work again with research funds
he receives from the EU and the work could begin within the coming
weeks.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.