MRSA

[BootmanLA]

1 hour ago, fuckholedc said:

No - in the results section they clearly state:

Then they start talking about the synergistic effects of various antibiotics with fresh garlic extract and focus on that leading to the conclusion that you posted.

However they clearly state that fresh garlic extract (FGE) by itself "displayed evident inhibition properties against C. albicans and MRSA". 

The fact that they then emphasized that FGE showed a synergistic effect with some antibiotics may mean that they considered FGE by itself to not be clinically effective, although they did not state that.

The problem with this approach is that "evident inhibition properties" is not the same thing as "does something of substance towards killing MRSA". "Inhibiting" could simply mean that with FGE, the cultures grew slower - still expanding, still a problem, just not growing as fast. In other words, it makes the environment a little less hospitable to grow.

If they'd found it actually killed any MRSA cells, they would undoubtedly have so stated. 

[funpozbottom]

4 hours ago, fuckholedc said:

No - in the results section they clearly state:

Then they start talking about the synergistic effects of various antibiotics with fresh garlic extract and focus on that leading to the conclusion that you posted.

However they clearly state that fresh garlic extract (FGE) by itself "displayed evident inhibition properties against C. albicans and MRSA". 

The fact that they then emphasized that FGE showed a synergistic effect with some antibiotics may mean that they considered FGE by itself to not be clinically effective, although they did not state that.

If I remember my herbal medicine class correctly, garlic has anti-microbial properties (anti-microbial means it has some effect at inhibiting bacterial, viral, and fungal growth). If you eat a lot of garlic, or take a garlic supplement, you may be less susceptible to certain infections. However, you have to eat a lot of it so that it is coming out of your pores and making your skin a hostile environment to harmful microbes. Garlic is best used as a preventive measure and is not very effective on it's own at curing an illness that has already occurred.

Interactions between drugs and foods are not unusual. Many drugs have warnings not to take the medication with certain foods. On the other hand, garlic can sometimes enhance the effectiveness of treatments against some microbes by retarding their  growth.  In short, adding garlic to your diet may be helpful as part of a treatment regimen,  but it's not going to cure you on its own.

Edited November 25, 2023 by funpozbottom
fix a typo

[ErosWired]

6 hours ago, BootmanLA said:

This is not only false, but dangerously false.

Roughly 2% of people are *carriers* of MRSA - which is hardly "everyone", a word that you might consider looking up - but not even all of those 2% are infected with it.

I realize that virtually none of us here are doctors (and very few others are other medical personnel), but throwing out bullshit information like this in a health forum is downright irresponsible - especially when even a CURSORY google search like "How many people have MRSA" yields the correct answer repeatedly in the top results, including from the CDC (for the technical minded) and WebMD (for the average user).

[think before following links] [think before following links] https://www.cdc.gov/mrsa/healthcare/index.html 

[think before following links] [think before following links] https://www.webmd.com/skin-problems-and-treatments/understanding-mrsa 

The way my doctor addressed this question was to explain that a) All human beings carry some varieties of staphylococcus about with them, and it is essentially impossible to avoid it, as they are ubiquitous in the environment; b) Staph that is not resistant intermixes and interbreeds readily with staph that is, and newly resistant strains are emerging constantly, both as a result of transmission, and mutation; c) Even if a host is not fully colonized, genetic code is being transmitted through staph in a generalized way, such that any individual may have some trace of staph resistant to some degree at any given time. What everyone doesn’t have is a colony sufficient to pose an infection risk.

He said, “It’s simply not possible to eliminate staph completely from the body - and they’ve tried.”

[BootmanLA]

19 hours ago, ErosWired said:

The way my doctor addressed this question was to explain that a) All human beings carry some varieties of staphylococcus about with them, and it is essentially impossible to avoid it, as they are ubiquitous in the environment; b) Staph that is not resistant intermixes and interbreeds readily with staph that is, and newly resistant strains are emerging constantly, both as a result of transmission, and mutation; c) Even if a host is not fully colonized, genetic code is being transmitted through staph in a generalized way, such that any individual may have some trace of staph resistant to some degree at any given time. What everyone doesn’t have is a colony sufficient to pose an infection risk.

He said, “It’s simply not possible to eliminate staph completely from the body - and they’ve tried.”

All good points - but to clarify, he's saying that all people have some staph, but not all is resistant (in fact most is NOT), and even among those who do have some resistant staph, not all of them are themselves infected.

As you know it's still a serious concern, not something "everyone" has.