Is S.A.R.S. a antibiotics caused Super Strain?

I know that the reason for taking your full-prescribed dose of antibiotics is to avoid in aiding a virus into mutating into a so-called “Super Strain”. Is this why China is now dealing with “Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome”(SARS)? Is this the equivalent to an airborne Staph infection?
Wouldn’t a culture, (like the USA) that has antibiotics dispensed like candy, be the location where strains like this killer originate? Has the USA ever have one been born here?

This just might be the real “Doomsday” asteroid we have all been waiting for!
SCARY, Real Scary!!!

No. Current thinking is that it’s a corona virus, like the common cold. Antibiotics don’t work on viruses.

I didn’t know that!
What kills viruses?

Old age?

Nothing.

Some viruses are vulnerable to antiviral drugs we have. Those drugs don’t really kill viruses, merely prevent them from reproducing. Nothing really kills a virus, short of being physically destroyed by a toxin or something.

SARS doesn’t seem to be vulnerable to any antivirals we have.

Exposure to air kills cold viruses. That’s why they must be transmitted via droplets (OF SNOT).

Much the same deal with AIDS virus.

Duality, I suppose the toxin would be oxygen?

Some Chinese researchers are claiming that SARS is a variant of chlamydia, which is a bacterium (hence, it is vulnerable to antibiotics.) If SARS is caused by chlamydia, which I doubt, then antibiotic use is one possible factor in its creation. However, both bacteria and virii mutate all the time, so there is no reason yet to believe that antibiotics caused it.

Thearticle that discussed this chlamydia theory also claimed that chlamydia is a virus, which is wrong. (Why is it that journalists are so often ignorant about basic science?)

Chlamydia is also extremely common in the general population, so it is not surprising that they are finding it in the victims of SARS.

If SARS is a virus (not definitely established), then it has nothing to do with antibiotics since antibiotics do not touch viruses. AFAIK, the reason that antibiotics attack bacteria and not human or other animal cells is that they specifically target the cell walls, which are quite different in bacteria. Viruses are constructed totally differently.

First, as has been stated, antibiotics cannot touch viruses. Thus, antibiotic use or misuse would have nothing to do with SARS if it is caused by a virus.

Second, chlamydia is a yeast. Yeasts are also not touched by any clinically-used antibiotics. When I got thrush a few years ago, I had to take an anti-fungal medication.

Chlamydia is NOT a yeast; it’s a disease caused by the BACTERIUM Chlamydia trachomatis, and it’s treated with antibiotics. Thrush has nothing to do with chamydia or this thread.

Viruses mutate billions of times a day, over the entire world, and have done so throughout history. Most of the mutations are fatal to the virus, and of the small percentage that are not, most have very little effect on the virus or its host at all. The extremely small percentage of cases where the virus actually acquires a significant new characteristic represent the general source of continuing viral infections in animals, including man.

Your body eventually learns to kill viruses on its own, unless you die. So does the body of every duck in China. Given that there are several billion ducks in China, and the additional coincidence that those ducks tend to live in close proximity to both pigs and humans, it ends up being the ducks that matter more. One of the things a mutation can do is to allow a virus that previously lived only in ducks to survive in pigs. In one in a hundred thousand cases of such species change, it can happen that the same mutation or a subsequent one will allow the virus to live in humans. In one case, recently, it is believed that a virus may have moved directly from ducks and chickens, to humans.

This phenomenon, called zoonosis, creates a source of new viral infection agents among humans. By itself it really doesn’t make a lot of difference, and until the last century, it was mostly a once a century thing for a new plague to sweep across a large population of humans. Without a vector that crossed large distances in a short time, the virus would die out with its most susceptible victims, and the remaining population would have some immunity to it, thereafter.

The common cold, for instance, is not a single disease, caused by a single virus. It is a description for a set of symptoms caused by a group of viruses, and has often been applied to other viral agents, some of which later cause other symptoms. Viral Pneumonia is such a disease, in some cases. Antibiotics do not affect viruses, although they can prevent, or cure subsequent microbial infections that opportunistically exploit weakened victims.

In the last hundred years the picture has changed dramatically. There is no place on earth that is not now visited by people from far away on at least an occasional basis. The Tibetan Monasteries are tourist attractions, and the Headwaters of the Amazon have regular boat traffic. These places are in turn connected by Airports, and regular flights, so that the entire world now lives a day and a half from your front porch. The duck that Cho sells in Guodong Province on Monday, is butchered by a chef in Hong Kong, that afternoon, and the tourist who ate the salad he sneezed over flies back to Toronto the next morning. When he comes down with SARS, he checks into a hospital there.

And in Hanoi, another person returns from Beijing, from the international hog farmers’ convention. That Thursday, two computer programmers from Tokyo return from their sales meeting in Shenzen with the same new disease, but both of them have very high resistance. They just go on working, although they sneeze a lot. Their company sends out it sales teams to Switzerland, Kenya, and Brazil on Monday. The same first week after zoonosis that would have seen five people in a farming village get sick, has, in the twenty first century infected people on five continents. And so far, it’s just a dozen people with severe colds. One got pneumonia, and may die. No one has even given this new disease a name. In fact, no one even knows it is a new disease yet.

The duck thing is just a forinstance. Chickens or iguanas could do it, or fleas, or frogs. Hogs are similar in chemistry enough to be a good intermediary step for viruses, but so are horses, and chimpanzees. Measles, mumps, and various poxes have done it in the past, each coming from a species domesticated by man.

The only thing that has changed is that man is now his own best vector. We are healthy. We are strong. And we go everywhere, all the time. We do it even when we are a bit under the weather. After all, it’s just a cold. Aspirin, fluids, and rest. “I’ll sleep on the plane.”

Tris
“Here Kitty, Kitty, Kitty.” ~ Erwin Schrodinger ~

This is all true, but don’t forget Chlamydia pneumoniae & Chlamydia psittaci: All 3 cause Chalmydia cause human disease.

http://www.emedicine.com/med/topic341.htm

“Chlamydia is NOT a yeast; it’s a disease caused by the BACTERIUM Chlamydia trachomatis, and it’s treated with antibiotics.”

Not quite. The Chinese thought that the epidemic of SARS they experienced in Guangdong province was caused by Chlamydia pneumoniae, not Chlamydia trachomatis, which causes eye infections (“trachoma”) and genital infections (“chlamydia”).

Not really. It’s dessication (or drying out), I would imagine. The AIDS virus can’t survive outside of its body-fluid environment. That’s why you can’t get AIDS from a toilet seat. A cold virus must be contained within body fluid or droplets in order to survive.

Heaven help us if the AIDS virus ever develops the capability to transmit itself via mosquitos.

How does a vaccine, (like the one responsible for halting Polio) work on a virus or how does it effect the host?

College Biology was a long time ago!

A typical vaccine does not attempt to “cure” or attack the virus itself. Rather, it is a weakened form of the virus or a variant that would not do damage but is similar in structure to the target virus. By introducing the vaccine typically prior to infection, this would allow the body to develop its antibody defenses against virii of similar structure - including, if the vaccine has been developed correctly, the target virus.

A more technical explanation of vaccines here.

In the case of HIV, the virus mutates too quickly for any single vaccine to be effective. In the case of the common cold, there are again too many variants to protect against.

It depends. Antibodies target certain receptors on the protein surface of their targets. So unless a microbe suddenly loses those receptors, which seems to be quite unlikely, vaccine remain effective.