hygromycin A selectively kills Borrelia burgdorferi

This is a newer finding.

Researchers found that a neglected antibiotic called hygromycin A selectively kills the bacteria that cause Lyme disease.
The antibiotic was able to treat Lyme disease in mice without disrupting the microbiome.

https://www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-research-matters/targeted-antibiotic-treating-lyme-disease#:~:text=researchers%20found%20that%20a%20neglected,mice%20without%20disrupting%20the%20microbiome.

Post Edited (newuser22) : 2/2/2023 6:36:51 PM (GMT-8)

yep the topic comes up every few months since the original flurry of activity in the press in, i think, 2021

the drug is being promoted for use against acute lyme ( i.e. in the first month or so of infection ) based on its narrow spectrum antispirochetal activity and hence its less damaging effects on the gut microbiome.
this is being sold as a major advantage as the authors point to an association between disturbed microbiome and chronic lyme - theorising that treating lyme without disturbing the microbiome as much as regular antibiotics may help avoid chronic lyme.

however, that is just a theory, association is not proof of causation, so this benefit or reduced risk of chronic lyme is far from proven.
there are other spins on the story presented at the time that also raise concern in terms of credibility - eg blanketing the countryside with hygromycin laced baits to eradicate Lyme in the wild - which is a absurdly impractical suggestion to anyone with any concept of the epidemiology of borrelia - or even basic arithmetic for that matter (Think about the land area involved in north America alone, and how much laced bait one would have to distribute - and how often - since we know migratory birds carry both ticks and borrelia - and the cost of that - let alone any unintentional consequences ecological impacts).

really, the science reporting around this subject was misleading to say the least.

anyway, if it stops people from developing chronic lyme - because its more effective than existing drugs at treating acute lyme ( we don't know this yet) then that's of course a good thing.

but for the vast majority of people here, as far as i am aware there are no articles on its use in chronic lyme - which is where the real scale of the problem is.

there was a discussion here in the last week where some people on a facebook group set up to discuss it, seem convinced that it is going to be a game changer for people with Chronic Lyme - but as far as i am aware there is no good evidence to base such a conclusion on.

in fact Prof Kim Lewis - who is the researcher who surfaced this drug for lyme - is apparently on record at a conference in Columbia Uni - saying he doesn't think it will work for chronic lyme - acc to members of the Disulfiram and Azlocillin for Lyme facebook group who were there.

we do not know if its been tested in any way on chronic lyme - most likely not as there is No FDA approval as yet and human trials not yet done a far as i am aware - but his area of research is persisters - so he is in a good position to judge

not wishing to put a negative spin on the story - just to apply some factual balance to the somewhat inflated stories that circulated after the press release.

if anyone has links to any new studies on the drug i would of course be interested

Ah - OK - yes - the authors rather than the press first suggested it - thanks for clarifying

i did some basic arithmetic on how much it would take to bait the north American continent and the numbers were astronomical - no one would fund that kind of spending
and even then it would just get repopulated due to migrating birds that carry lyme etc

let alone the appalling track record of us attempting to control natural population of pests in the past - which is littered with failure's and unintended consequences

just seems v poorly thought through

the amount of spin around the story seems unusually high

perhaps its to do with raising its profile to assist in obtaining funding or FDA approval ?
not sure - just seems a bit odd to me

yeah, i understand Rainy - i feel a deep connection to nature and spending time in nature is important to me - but i also feel wary of many situations - who wouldn't after being through what we have been through

if its any consolation - i am increasingly coming to believe healthy humans will not typically get symptoms of a simple lyme only infection - i think our immune systems if in good shape will be adequate to fight it off - possibly even multiple infections from a single tick bite.

think how much of our evolution will have been spent in caves and huts with animals or hunting and foraging in the wild for foods in the shrubbery - then carrying dead animals of all sorts and species back to camp wearing only animal skins or no clothes at all - then skinning them ourselves etc - exposure was guaranteed. ticks and lyme have been around for millions of years
we simply would not be here today if it made even the majority of healthy humans ill.

where i think people get ill with lyme is when our immune systems are compromised and one too many infections build up in the host and overwhelm their immune system.
modern life, industrial foodstuff, chronic stress, pollution, forever chemical exposure are all stressors that disrupt our immune systems - and this may have as much to do with the perceived increase in Lyme prevalence as anything else.

my feeling is if we can truly shake this infection / infections and return to full health - i actually think there is a good chance we could enjoy those things again without constant fear of getting ill again

i know for me very high chronic stress - lack of sleep - and perhaps a less than ideal diet were all contributors to my immune system being way below optimal at the time i became ill