I am scared of antibiotic resistant diseases. Comfort me /sci/.

I think we can continue to develop stronger antibiotics if we start funding that research again. The trouble is for the past thirty years or so we stopped developing antibiotics because it is much more profitable to offer treatments rather than cures. But if shit ever hits the fan, I imagine the government might override that.

>>8501766
It's going to be fine, OP. You are such a smart boy.

>>8501766
Earth needs a good monkey cleansing. You know deep down inside it's going to be something mother nature concocts if we don't manage to do it ourselves. At this juncture, the sooner the better.

>>8501805
More like "concocks" amirite?

>>8501769
Just look around on pubmed, and for nearly every common bacteria out there, there are studies which show novel antibiotics which out perform the current treatments. They won't reach market for years though because it's not profitable.

>>8501766

There are solutions that overcome that problem, like trying to find inhibitors to plasmid transmission and quorum sensing, since these don't affect bacteria survival directly I find it hard for bacteria to adapt any time soon.

File: kys wiht a gun.jpg (26KB, 600x726px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 600x726px

>>8501766
>Comfort me /sci/.
if you catch it, you can always depart this world in a less painful way.

>>8501845
>They won't reach market for years though because it's not profitable

I'm seeing a common pattern here

>>8501766

It's the sort of problem that is easily fixed, but it won't be fixed because you can't trust people to not do stupid things

I have heard about antibiotic treatments that resolve around mechanically destroying bacteria somewhere. Sounds interesting to me.

>>8501952

This smells like the nanobot meme thing.

>>8501766
Don't worry. We can go back to cutting of limbs when they get infected, but it's the future so we can replace them with awesome cyborg parts.

>>8501766
... They could resolve the issue of overpopulation?

>>8501766
Death from infection will be short on the grander scale of things and after that, eternal peace

>>8501984
The issue of overpopulation was caused by low life expectancy and high infant mortality, which was caused by infectious diseases. Any dent in the population caused by a widespread infectious disease would eventually lead to a population rebound that would overshoot the previous peak population, probably by quite a bit.

B A C T E R I O P H A G E S

also the corporate greed thing from the posts above mine

>>8501984
There is no issue of overpopulation right now. The issue is poor use of land when it comes to optimizing agricultural production and people living on top of each other in tight spaces like cities. A lot of the land in the world is unused and a lot of the farmable land is unused or being used inefficiently.

File: nanotech-05_01[1].jpg (57KB, 500x450px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 500x450px

Any chance of nanobots or is it just a pipe dream ?
Also can they physically rip apart the bacteria and virus membranes or will they simply serve as drug transporters ?

>>8502723
>nanobots

We have bacteria anon, they have been doing nanobot things for years, is just that we don't understand how to convince them into doing the things we want.

>>8504130
C R I S P R
R
I
S
P
R

>>8501766


Most 'superbugs' are poorly adapted for competition and can't survive outside of sterile environments like hospitals where they have to butt heads with other microbes.

You that old grade school experiment of taking a swab from your skin or inside your cheek and putting it on a petri dish, and watching all the native flora shit on there blow up and grow?

Yeah, that's your biggest defense against dirty foreigner microbes.

I'm confident that super-bacteria will not be an issue in 20 years with things like CRISPR, nano-technology, etc. Hopefully we don't get wiped out first.

>>8501766
that's the least of your problems