I've long had the concern, given that humans are one of the largest sources of genetically homogenous biomass on the planet, that "benign" organisms are going to start eating us more aggressively.
I've long had the concern, given that humans are one of the largest sources of genetically homogenous biomass on the planet, that "benign" organisms are going to start eating us more aggressively.
I work with this particular fungi in a lab setting, and this one in particular is nothing we should be concerned about. I hope that always some fear. :)
I work with this particular fungi in a lab setting, and this one in particular is nothing we should be concerned about. I hope that always some fear. :)
A wide range of otherwise innocuous organisms will affect immunocompromised people. The problem is that eradicating them with antibiotics/antifungals selects for resistance, and then when a...
A wide range of otherwise innocuous organisms will affect immunocompromised people. The problem is that eradicating them with antibiotics/antifungals selects for resistance, and then when a pathogenic variant comes along, it's a huge problem. Fungal infections are hard enough to treat without resorting to very toxic compounds.
Well yes, any number of commensals will kill us if we’re sick enough, but if we’re talking about extinction outcomes I think it’s far more likely that humans make the Earth totally inhospitable...
Well yes, any number of commensals will kill us if we’re sick enough, but if we’re talking about extinction outcomes I think it’s far more likely that humans make the Earth totally inhospitable toitself than any Candida species turning into “superbug” that kills us.
Even the most invasive strains of Candida I’ve worked with are pretty tame, not to mention that there are several feedback loops that prevent Candida from becoming hyper invasive in an otherwise healthy person.
I think you may be underestimating the epidemiological risks, here. Firstly, the extent of the population vulnerable to superinfection with Candida sp. is much larger than you might think. Candida...
I think you may be underestimating the epidemiological risks, here. Firstly, the extent of the population vulnerable to superinfection with Candida sp. is much larger than you might think.
Candida causes pathogenic conditions in infants and young children (thrush), healthy men (jock itch) and women (candidiasis), diabetics, corticosteroid users (e.g. asthma, allergy and auto-immune disease patients), elderly people... Most of these people require treatment with conazole drugs to control what starts as a superficial infection.
Secondly, untreated Candida infection isn't just annoying, but can predispose to life-threatening illnesses. Candida in women increases susceptibility to HIV and other STDs; thrush increases risk of Strep/Staph infections and poor nutrition in children; Candida is present in bedsores and urogenital infections resulting in sepsis or renal failure in the elderly, etc. [There's some evidence that Candida alone, in otherwise healthy people, can provoke serious autoimmune disorders, but it's nearly impossible to fully sort the epidemiological risks of commensal fungi that everyone carries.]
Thirdly, the prevalence of invasive pathogenic Candida sp. is rising, especially in hospitals, along with resistance to all but the most toxic anti-fungal medications.
Lastly, catastrophism is one of the biggest problems in dealing with human impacts on the planet. We keep waiting for the superbug that wipes us all out, a sudden superhurricane/typhoon, or some other dramatic event that marks "the end".
It's not going to be a "dinosaur" moment that leads to human extinction, but a long-term succession of smaller compromises to our ability to survive - the wheat rust that cuts food production 20%; the creeping increase in disease that "only" affects the already unwell combined with an increase in conditions that make us unwell; gradual climate changes that enlarge the territories of parasites and pathogens...
[Side note - as the possessor of both a female ecosystem and ID sensitization, I can say that Candida superinfection is a horror show and there's an element of personal terror at the notion that cheap, relatively safe conazoles won't work anymore.]
I've long had the concern, given that humans are one of the largest sources of genetically homogenous biomass on the planet, that "benign" organisms are going to start eating us more aggressively.
I work with this particular fungi in a lab setting, and this one in particular is nothing we should be concerned about. I hope that always some fear. :)
A wide range of otherwise innocuous organisms will affect immunocompromised people. The problem is that eradicating them with antibiotics/antifungals selects for resistance, and then when a pathogenic variant comes along, it's a huge problem. Fungal infections are hard enough to treat without resorting to very toxic compounds.
Well yes, any number of commensals will kill us if we’re sick enough, but if we’re talking about extinction outcomes I think it’s far more likely that humans make the Earth totally inhospitable toitself than any Candida species turning into “superbug” that kills us.
Even the most invasive strains of Candida I’ve worked with are pretty tame, not to mention that there are several feedback loops that prevent Candida from becoming hyper invasive in an otherwise healthy person.
I think you may be underestimating the epidemiological risks, here. Firstly, the extent of the population vulnerable to superinfection with Candida sp. is much larger than you might think.
Candida causes pathogenic conditions in infants and young children (thrush), healthy men (jock itch) and women (candidiasis), diabetics, corticosteroid users (e.g. asthma, allergy and auto-immune disease patients), elderly people... Most of these people require treatment with conazole drugs to control what starts as a superficial infection.
Secondly, untreated Candida infection isn't just annoying, but can predispose to life-threatening illnesses.
Candida in women increases susceptibility to HIV and other STDs; thrush increases risk of Strep/Staph infections and poor nutrition in children; Candida is present in bedsores and urogenital infections resulting in sepsis or renal failure in the elderly, etc. [There's some evidence that Candida alone, in otherwise healthy people, can provoke serious autoimmune disorders, but it's nearly impossible to fully sort the epidemiological risks of commensal fungi that everyone carries.]
Thirdly, the prevalence of invasive pathogenic Candida sp. is rising, especially in hospitals, along with resistance to all but the most toxic anti-fungal medications.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3928396/
https://www.cdc.gov/fungal/candida-auris/candida-auris-qanda.html
Fourthly, the balance between "commensal" and "pathogen" isn't as rigid as you imply, as we've seen previously with E, coli. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-04081-1
Lastly, catastrophism is one of the biggest problems in dealing with human impacts on the planet. We keep waiting for the superbug that wipes us all out, a sudden superhurricane/typhoon, or some other dramatic event that marks "the end".
It's not going to be a "dinosaur" moment that leads to human extinction, but a long-term succession of smaller compromises to our ability to survive - the wheat rust that cuts food production 20%; the creeping increase in disease that "only" affects the already unwell combined with an increase in conditions that make us unwell; gradual climate changes that enlarge the territories of parasites and pathogens...
[Side note - as the possessor of both a female ecosystem and ID sensitization, I can say that Candida superinfection is a horror show and there's an element of personal terror at the notion that cheap, relatively safe conazoles won't work anymore.]