NEW drugs which it is hoped will offer an alternative treatment to antibiotics could increase the spread of disease, according to researchers.
Scientists have given a cautious welcome to treatments currently being developed by pharmaceutical companies, which work by limiting the symptoms caused by a bug or virus in the body, rather than killing it.
However, they also warn the medicines might mean that patients feel well when they are highly infectious. As a result they may continue their daily lives, mixing with others and passing on the illness.
Dr Pedro Vale, from Edinburgh University School of Biological Sciences, worked on the research, which has been published in the journal PLoS Biology. He said it was important to develop new ways of tackling infection because of the way bugs had become resistant to antibiotics.
He said: "Fifty, sixty years ago, no one could have guessed that all this antibiotic resistance would have emerged. We can plan from history, so if we are planning new drugs we have to understand what the long-term consequences are."
The new "damage limitation" therapies are intended to help patients tolerate disease and buy the immune system time to get rid of the infection naturally.
Mathematical models were used by the research teams to predict the likely impact of these treatments.
Dr Vale said: "Damage limitation therapies may be a useful alternative to antibiotics, but we should be cautious, and investigate their consequences."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article