Amoxicillin and pneumonia

Before Fleming left for a two-week vacation, a petri dish containing a staphylococcus culture was left on a lab bench and never placed in the incubator as intended. Somehow, in preparing the culture, a Penicillium mold spore had been accidentally introduced into the medium—perhaps coming in through a window, or more likely floating up a stairwell from the lab below where various molds were being cultured. The temperature conditions that prevailed during Fleming’s absence permitted both the bacteria and the mold spores to grow; had the incubator been used, only the bacteria could have grown.

Fleming’s laboratory notebooks are sketchy, and his subsequent accounts of the discovery are contradictory. The evidence of the first culture, which he photographed, indicated that he observed lysis, the weakening and destruction of bacteria—as in his lysozyme studies. But sometimes he described the key observation as an instance of inhibition or prevention of bacterial growth in areas affected by the mold “juice,” evidenced by a clear zone surrounding the mold. Although these two effects occur under quite different conditions, Fleming probably forgot which observation came first, for in the months subsequent to the original observation he conducted many experiments while varying conditions systematically.

He discovered that the antibacterial substance was not produced by all molds, only by certain strains of Penicillium , namely, Penicillium notatum . Although he could not isolate it, he named the active substance “penicillin.” He studied methods of producing the impure product and determined its stability at different temperatures and over various lengths of time.

He investigated its effect on many microbes, curiously omitting the familiar spirochete that causes syphilis (which Salvarsan controlled but did not eliminate). He tested its toxicity on a laboratory mouse and a rabbit.

Forever after, it has been a puzzle why he did not inject these or other laboratory animals with staphylococcus or other disease-causing bacteria before injecting them with the fluid containing penicillin.

Perhaps the explanation lay in his belief that cures come from within the body itself, rather than from an external agent.

So he was not looking for a curative agent but rather focused on his new find as a topical antiseptic. In later years he claimed that the difficulties he had experienced in isolating and stabilizing penicillin, let alone the problems of producing sufficient quantities for clinical trials, had prevented him from realizing the full fruits of his research.

In fact, in the 1930s, little notice was taken by the scientific community of his paper published in the British Journal of Experimental Pathology (June 1929).

Those few scientists who sent for samples and tried to gain more understanding of the properties of penicillin did not or could not capitalize on Fleming’s discovery.

The information contained in this biography was last updated on December 5, 2017.

Study shows pharmacists knew more about penicillin allergy than MDs.

ARLINGTON HEIGHTS, IL (June 13, 2017 – 12:01 am ET) – If you have gone through life avoiding certain antibiotics because you think you’re allergic to penicillin, you’d probably want to know if you’re not actually allergic. A new study shows many physicians who treat patients with “penicillin allergy” listed in their charts may not fully understand important facts about penicillin allergy. They may not be aware penicillin allergy can resolve over time and they don’t fully understand the importance of allergy testing to make sure a penicillin allergy currently exists.

The study in Annals of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology , the scientific publication of the American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology (ACAAI) examined 276 surveys completed by non-allergist physicians, physician assistants, nurse practitioners and pharmacists at Rochester Regional Health.

They found more than 80 percent of the general practitioners surveyed in their system knew a referral to an allergist for testing is appropriate for someone with a reported penicillin allergy. Despite that, the physicians had either never referred their patients to an allergist, or had only done so with one patient a year. In addition, pharmacists surveyed in their system had a better overall understanding of penicillin allergy.

“We were not surprised pharmacists understood the course of penicillin allergy better than other clinicians, given more extensive pharmacology education,” says infectious diseases pharmacist Mary Staicu, PharmD, lead author of the study. “Of those surveyed, 78 percent of

pharmacists

physicians

Between 10-20 percent of Americans believe they have a penicillin allergy.

But

Even in people with documented allergy to penicillin, only about 20 percent are still allergic ten years after their initial allergic reaction.

“Our research found a poor understanding of penicillin allergy among non-allergists,” says allergist Allison Ramsey, MD, study co-author and ACAAI member. “This was not a surprising finding given the clinical experience of most allergists, but it does provide an excellent opportunity for education on the topic – not just for patients,

but

labeled

“Our survey showed only 30 percent of physician survey respondents knew that.

It’s important that doctors understand the importance of confirming penicillin allergy.

But it’s even more important that those who carry the label be educated and tested.” An allergist can work with you to find out if you have a true drug allergy and determine what antibiotics are available for safe and effective treatment. If you’re

not

use

Federal

Before sharing sensitive

information

This site is also protected by an SSL (Secure Sockets Layer) certificate that’s been signed by the U.S.

The https:// means all transmitted data is encrypted — in other words, any information or browsing history that you provide is transmitted securely. National Center for Agricultural Utilization Research: Peoria, IL.

Large-scale commercial production of penicillin during the 1940s opened the

era

It was not until 1939 that a group of scientists at England's Oxford University began intensive research and was able to demonstrate penicillin's ability to kill infectious bacteria. As the war with Germany continued to drain industrial and government resources, the British scientists could not produce the quantities of penicillin needed for clinical trials on humans and turned to the United States for help. They were quickly referred to the Peoria lab where scientists were already working on fermentation methods to increase the growth rate of fungal cultures.

Arriving on July 14, 1941, work on the challenge began the very next day.

Pumping air into deep vats containing corn-steep liquor (a non-alcoholic by-product of the wet milling process) and adding other key ingredients was shown to produce faster growth and larger amounts of penicillin

than

Ironically, after a worldwide search, a strain of penicillium on a moldy cantaloupe from a Peoria market was found to produce the largest amount of penicillin when improved and grown in deep-vat, submerged conditions.

Production methods and samples of the new strain were transferred both to other research groups and private industry and clinical trials were performed in 1943.

When the

trials

The acceleration of penicillin production was one of the most successful achievements of American chemists and chemical engineers, establishing the production of antibiotics and fostering today's pharmaceutical industry.

While it was often called the "wonder drug" because of its effectiveness, one of penicillin's true wonders was the short development time from recognizing its value to mass availability.

Three members of the British group were awarded the Nobel

Prize

In this section we provide tips on the usage of various standard antibiotics for Lyme disease as well as less standard ones.

We also review other treatment approaches for pain, fatigue, insomnia, memory, and mood. We refer the reader to other sources that describe why patients might have persistent symptoms and other treatment options (e.g., in portions of our book Conquering Lyme Disease: Science Bridges the Great Divide ). Here we simply wish to provide some important facts that people should know about various treatments. Doctors are taught in medical school: "Above all due no harm".

However, nearly all treatments have both benefits and risks.

Therefore prior to any thereapeutic intervention (e.g, medicinal, herbal, diet change, even exercise), individuals need to review

how

When considering treatment options for Lyme disease, patients should find out how well studied these treatment are, whether they have been shown to be effective, and what the side effects are.

Patients should also keep an open mind regarding what might help as some symptoms may reflect active infection (and therefore benefit from antibiotics) while others may reflect the residual effects on the body of the prior infection (and therefore require

non-antibiotic

The goal is to restore one's health and functional status so as to maximize quality of life.

As with all recommendations on this website, the taking of over-the-counter or prescribed medications should be carefully

reviewed

Pregnant women in particular should check with their physician; a good website to check for for drug interactions is "Mother to Baby". The three first-line oral antibiotics for Lyme disease include doxycycline (Monodox, Doryx, Vibramycin, Oracea), amoxicillin (Amoxil), and cefuroxime (Ceftin, Zinacef). Ceftriaxone (“Rocephin”) administered

intravenously

Amoxicillin (Amoxil) Amoxicillin is a broad spectrum bacteriocidal antibiotic that works by inhibiting cell wall synthesis.

This a medicine that requires 3x daily dosing; it is important to maintain frequent dosing in order to keep the blood levels of the antibiotic high enough to be effective.

Amoxicillin is often prescribed to children under age 8 and to pregnant women who get Lyme disease. Augmentin is a combination medication that includes both amoxicillin and the enzyme inhibitor clavulanate that allows the amoxicillin to be more effective against other penicillin-resistant microbes; a downside of this combination is that it might cause signfiicantly more gastrointestinal disturbance than plain amoxicillin. Most studies have found plain amoxicillin to be highly

effective

Borrelia

A severe allergic reaction known as anaphylaxis is a medical emergency that requires immediate attention.

Cefuroxime (Ceftin) Cefuroxime, a bacteriocidal 2nd generation cephalosporin, is FDA approved for the treatment of early Lyme disease. Cefuroxime works by disrupting cell wall synthesis and does cross the blood brain barrier to some extent.

(The term “generation” when applied to cephalosporins simply refers to when the drug was developed and generally means that the “later” generation versions have a longer half-life (so they don’t need to be taken as frequently) and have better efficacy and safety.) Cefuroxime should be taken with food in twice daily dosing.

Note: if one is penicillin allergic, there may be an increased risk of developing an allergic reaction to cefuroxime.

Doxycycline (Doryx, Monodox) Doxycycline is considered the first-line drug of choice for Lyme disease by most physicians.

Doxycycline, a bacteriostatic antibiotic, has the advantage of

twice

for

some