Sunday, May 5, 2013


Study: Early humans loved to eat brains

Early members of the human family enjoyed digging into the heads of antelope and wildebeests.

Our evolutionary ancestors were hungry for braaaiiins — antelope brains, that is.
Sets of animal bones recently unearthed in Kenya, believed to be the earliest evidence of hominid hunting, show previous members of the human family enjoyed digging into the heads of antelope and wildebeests, as well as snacking on gazelle meat, Science News reports.
They knew a thing or two about butchery, too, cutting the animals into parts before selecting the meatiest bones.
Scientists also have found a disproportionate number of animal skulls in the area, suggesting our ancestors scavenged the untouched heads from carcasses left behind by big cats after their own meals.
Dents inside the skulls indicate they dug in with stones to get at the delicious, juicy brains inside. According to a study of the findings, this nutrient-rich brain tissue may have helped homo erectus support larger bodies, bigger brains, and travel longer distances.

Saturday, May 4, 2013


scientists' hope for HIV cure

Researchers are working on "novel strategies" to find a cure for HIV, with the first results expected “within months”.

Scientists on brink of HIV cure
With modern HIV treatment if medication is stopped, HIV reservoirs become active and start to produce more of the virus Photo: Alamy
Danish scientists are hoping for results that will show that “finding a mass-distributable and affordable cure to HIV is possible”.
They are conducting a clinical trial to test a “novel strategy” in which the HIV virus is "reactivated" from its hiding place within human DNA and potentially destroyed permanently by the immune system.
The move would represent a step forward in the attempt to find a cure for the virus, which causes Aids.
The scientists are currently conducting human trials on their treatment, in the hope of proving that it is effective. It has already been found to work in laboratory tests.
The technique involves unmasking the “reservoirs” formed by the HIV virus inside resting immune cells, bringing it to the surface of the cells. Once it comes to the surface, the body’s natural immune system may be able to kill the virus.
In vitro studies — those that use human cells in a laboratory — of the new technique proved so successful that in January, the Danish Research Council awarded the team 12 million Danish kroner (£1.5 million) to pursue their findings in clinical trials with human subjects.
These are now under way, and according to Dr Ole Søgaard, a senior researcher at the Aarhus University Hospital in Denmark and part of the research team, the early signs are “promising”.
“I am almost certain that we will be successful in activating HIV from the reservoirs," he said.
“The challenge will be getting the patients’ immune system to recognise the virus and destroy it. This depends on the strength and sensitivity of individual immune systems, as well as how large a proportion of the hidden HIV is unmasked.”
Fifteen patients are currently taking part in the trials, and ithe first results from the trial are expected to presented in the second half of 2013.
Dr Søgaard stressed that a cure is not the same as a preventative vaccine, and that raising awareness of unsafe behaviour, including unprotected sex and sharing needles, remains of paramount importance in combating HIV.
With modern HIV treatment, a patient can live an almost normal life, even into old age, with limited side effects.
However, if medication is stopped, HIV reservoirs become active and start to produce more of the virus, meaning that symptoms can reappear within two weeks.
Finding a cure would free a patient from the need to take continuous HIV medication, and save health services billions of pounds.
The technique is being researched in Britain, but studies have not yet moved on to the clinical trial stage. Five universities — Oxford, Cambridge, Imperial College, London, University College, London and King’s College, London — have jointly formed the Collaborative HIV Eradication of Reservoirs UK Biomedical Research Centre group (CHERUB), which is dedicated to finding an HIV cure.
They have applied to the Medical Research Council for funding to conduct clinical trials, which will seek to combine techniques to release the reservoirs of HIV with "immunotherapy", which gives patients a better chance of destroying the virus.
In addition, they are focusing on patients that have only recently been infected, as they believe this will improve chances of a cure. The group hopes to receive a funding decision in May.
“When the first patient is cured in this way it will be a spectacular moment,” says Dr John Frater, a clinical research fellow at the Nuffield School of Medicine, Oxford University, and a member of the CHERUB group.
“It will prove that we are heading in the right direction and demonstrate that a cure is possible. But I think it will be five years before we see a cure that can be offered on a large scale.”
The Danish team’s research is among the most advanced and fast moving in the world, as that they have streamlined the process of putting the latest basic science discoveries into clinical testing.
This means that researchers can progress more quickly to clinical trials, accelerating the process and reaching reliable results sooner than many others.
The technique uses drugs called HDAC Inhibitors, which are more commonly used in treating cancer, to drive out the HIV from a patient’s DNA and onto the surface of infected cells. The Danish researchers are using a particularly powerful type of HDAC inhibitor.
Five years ago, the general consensus was that HIV could not be cured. But then Timothy Ray Brown, an HIV sufferer — who has become known in the field as the Berlin Patient — developed leukaemia.
He had a bone marrow transplant from a donor with a rare genetic mutation that made his cells resistant to HIV. As a result, in 2007 Mr Brown became the first man to ever be fully cured of the disease.
Replicating this procedure on a mass scale is impossible. Nevertheless, the Brown case caused a sea change in research, with scientists focusing on finding a cure as well as suppressing the symptoms.
Two principal approaches are currently being pursued. The first, gene therapy, aims to make a patient’s immune system resistant to HIV. This is complex and expensive, and not easily transferrable to diverse gene pools around the world.
The second approach is the one being pursued by Dr Søgaard and his colleagues in Denmark, the CHERUB group in Britain, and by other laboratories in the United States and Europe.

Saturday, April 27, 2013


milk doesn't do a body good

5 ways milk doesn't do a body good
Got milk? Not so fast. The All-American beverage of choice is high in calories, saturated fat, and unnatural chemicals that can cause a range of health problems
PUBLISHED JULY 19, 2012, AT 7:42 AM
According to The Department of Agriculture people should drink three 8-ounce glasses of milk per day, which weighs in at around 1.5 pounds. Photo: ThinkStock/Photos.com
Milk was once christened "nature's perfect food," says Mark Bittman at The New York Times. The Department of Agriculture recommends three 8-ounce glasses of the stuff a day (which equals about 1.5 pounds). After all: It builds strong bones, is packed with nutrients, and helps kids grow taller. But drinking dairy can be problematic, and its most notorious ingredient, lactose, is indigestible by a significant percentage of Americans. Here, five reasons milk actually doesn't do a body good:
1. It's high in calories and saturated fat
Ounce for ounce, milk has about "the same calorie load as soda," Neal Barnard, president of the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, tells The New York Times. Lactose is still a sugar, and contributes about 55 percent of skim milk's calories. Plus, milk and other dairy products are big sources of saturated fat, "and there are very credible links between dairy consumption and both Type 1 diabetes and the most dangerous form of prostate cancer." One serving of 2 percent milk has even been found to have the same saturated fat countas a serving of french fries.
2. A lot of people can't drink it
In the United States, as many as 50 million people are lactose intolerant: Roughly 90 percent of Asian-Americans can't drink milk, and 75 percent of all African-Americans, Mexican-Americans, and Jewish-Americans are similarly lactose intolerant. Recent studies suggest soy milk might not be much better: An article published in the Journal of Dentistry suggests that soy milk encourages bacteria in our mouth to produce five to six times more acid than usual, leading to plaque, tooth decay, and cavities.
3. Milk is often full of chemicals
"Commercial milk is disgusting," says Deborah Dunham at Blisstree. The mass-produced stuff is filled with growth hormones and antibiotics used to make cows lactate unnaturally. These additives may make the milk appear white and creamy-looking, but "all of this has been blamed for skin problems, acne, allergies, inflammation of the body," and much more. "Not to mention the fact that drinking cow's milk is simply unnatural — no other species drinks milk from another species except us."
4. Many people are allergic
Sure, the peanut allergy is the number one food allergy in the country. But did you know that the second most common type is "milk allergy"? It affects an estimated 3 million children in the United States. Like peanut allergy, the severity of milk allergy can range from mild reactions to being life-threatening.
5. You don't need milk for strong bones
"You don't need milk, or large amounts of calcium, for bone integrity, says the Times' Bittman. Not only are fracture rates the highest in milk-drinking countries, but it turns out that the biggest two factors contributing to bone strength are "lifelong exercise and vitamin D, which you could get from sunshine." All of this isn't to say that milk doesn't have its health benefits, says Adam Dachis at Lifehacker. But now there seems to be a likelihood that "dairy is a food you should eat because you enjoy it and not for its claims of better health."
Posted by 

Wednesday, April 24, 2013


Daily Soft Drinks Raise Diabetes Risk by 22%, Study Shows

Just one soft drink consumed daily can raise the risk of diabetes by 22 percent, a study showed.
A mere 12 ounces serving size of sugar-sweetened soft drink a day may increase the chance of developing Type 2 diabetes, the most common form of the disease, according to a study published today by Diabetologia.
The study, led by Dora Romaguera, Petra Wark and Teresa Norat, researchers at the Imperial College in London, adds to a growing body of evidence that sugar intake has an impact both on weight gain and diabetes. This has been fueling a debate over public policy aimed at curbing the obesity epidemic and related diseases, including New York City’s decision to restrict sales of large-sized sugary soft drinks.
Consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages, on the rise in Europe, induces rapid spikes in blood sugar levels and in insulin secretion, leading to insulin resistance, one of mechanisms which causes diabetes, according to the authors of the study published on Diabetologia, the journal of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes.
“It’s alarming,” Romaguera said in a phone interview yesterday. “Most people are not really aware of the dangers of these drinks.”

Sugar-Sweetened

The researchers used data on consumption of juices and nectars, sugar-sweetened soft drinks and artificially sweetened beverages collected across eight European patient groups participating in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition, also known as EPIC.
The study included 12,403 Type 2 diabetics and a random population of 16,154 people identified within EPIC. The researchers found that, after adjusting for confounding factors, a single serving size of sugar-sweetened soft drink per day increased the risk of developing Type 2 diabetes by 18 percent when the results were adjusted to reflect total energy intake and body-mass index.
Consumption of sugar-sweetened soft drinks “increases your risk of developing diabetes beyond the effect on body weight,” Romaguera said. “You may remain thin and still have a higher risk of developing diabetes.”
With artificially sweetened soft drinks, the association disappeared after taking into account the BMI of participants. Consumption of pure fruit juices and nectars, juices that have been diluted to some extent and may contain additives, was not significantly associated with diabetes incidence.

Keep Moving

Lifestyle changes around the globe have kindled a surge in diabetes cases. The number of sufferers worldwide will almost double to an estimated 552 million by 2030, according to the International Diabetes Federation. Some diabetics, suffering from so-called Type 1 diabetes, have a lifelong inability to produce insulin. The Type 2 variant tends to strike later in life, brought on by obesity and sedentary lifestyles, as people become resistant to the insulin their own body produces.
The increased risk of diabetes among sugar-sweetened soft drink consumers in Europe was similar to that found in an analysis of previous studies conducted in North America, Romaguera said.
Sugary soft drinks are becoming “a very hot topic”, with campaigns taking place in places like New York, Romaguera said.
In March, New York City challenged a state supreme court ruling throwing out Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s plan to restrict sales of those soft drinks to no more than 16 ounces a cup. The city’s Board of Health approved the plan in September, rejecting arguments from Coca-Cola Co. (KO)PepsiCo Inc. (PEP) and restaurant companies whose coalition said consumers should be free to choose. The mayor is founder and majority owner of Bloomberg News parent Bloomberg LP.
Some companies have started taking action. The London-based drugmaker GlaxoSmithKline Plc (GSK) said today it plans to sell the Lucozade Energy and Ribena drink businesses. Coca-Cola, Nestle SA (NESN) and Tesco Plc (TSCO) also have signed up to the British government pledge to reduce calories in their products, the U.K. health department said earlier this year.
To contact the reporter on this story: Albertina Torsoli in Paris at atorsoli@bloomberg.net
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Phil Serafino at pserafino@bloomberg.net

Sunday, April 21, 2013


Double up: Diet, exercise together are key to success

People who tackle diet and exercise at the same time do better at making healthy changes.

Folks who want to get in better shape and eat healthier are often encouraged to make one change at a time, but a new study finds that people are the most successful when they tackle their diet and exercise habits simultaneously.
"It comes down to making them both priorities and thinking about both throughout the day," says lead researcher Abby King, professor at the Stanford (University) Prevention Research Center.
King and colleagues worked with 200 inactive, mostly overweight people, 45 years and older, who had relatively unhealthy diets that didn't include enough fruits and vegetables and contained too much saturated (animal) fat.
Published online in Annals of Behavioral Medicine, the study shows participants were divided into four groups: One learned to make diet and exercise changes at the same time; another learned to make diet changes first and then a few months later began working on their exercise habits. A third group changed their exercise habits first, then their diet later. And the fourth group learned stress-management techniques but did not get diet and exercise guidance.
Participants weren't trying to lose weight, just live healthier lifestyles. Health educators met with them at the beginning of the year and then called them once a month to provide advice and support.
The goals were for participants to meet the government's physical activity guidelines of doing at least 150 minutes a week of moderate-intensity physical activity, such as walking, eat five to nine servings of fruits and vegetables a day and keep their saturated fat intake to 10% or less of daily calories.
The findings after one year: Those who made changes in their diet and exercise habits at the same time did the best at meeting all three goals — eating enough fruits and vegetables, limiting saturated fat and exercising enough to meet the government's guidelines.
Participants who started with exercise first also did pretty well at meeting diet and exercise goals, but not quite as well as the group that did both at the same time, King says. Those who started with diet first managed to meet dietary goals but not their exercise goals.
She says the results were surprising, because doctors and nutritionists often encourage people to make one change at a time. "For some people, that may be the best approach, but we found that you may get the most bang for your buck by making these changes together."
This was not a weight-loss study, and participants were not taught portion control and other strategies important for weight loss, King says. However, some people did drop pounds, and researchers are studying those results now.
Tim Church, director of preventive medicine research at Pennington Biomedical Research Center in Baton Rouge, says, "This provides really strong evidence that you might as well do both from the beginning of your program."
Felicia Stoler, a registered dietitian and exercise physiologist in Holmdel, N.J., says when she works with patients she gives them both a nutrition plan and a physical-activity plan. Many people would rather change the foods they eat than their physical activity, she says. "But when people become more physically active they feel better about themselves, and they often no longer want to put bad food in their system

 Primal Primer: Testosterone
Posted By Mark Sisson On June 22, 2010 @ 9:22 am In Aging,Health,How To | 237 Comments
testosteroneIf you’ve been reading recently you know I’ve been on a hormone kick recently. That sexy looking molecule to the right and the hormone du jour: testosterone. Testosterone is the principal anabolic and sex hormone in humans, responsible for sexual desire and function, muscular hypertrophy, densification of bones, and hair growth. Compared to females, males famously produce about ten times the amount of testosterone, but females are far more sensitive to its effects. Though testosterone is largely responsible for those traits and characteristics that are considered “masculine” – physical strength, body hair, dominance, and virility – both sexes require it for proper sexual and physical development. In mammals, males secrete it primarily from the testicles (about 95% of the total amount, in fact) and women secrete it from the ovaries. A modicum is produced in the adrenal glands in both sexes.

Testosterone plays an important role throughout every stage of a person’s life:
Prenatally, testosterone – along with dihydrotestosterone, a more potent anabolic hormone – is partly responsible for the formation of the male genitalia. It helps determine gender identity (with society bringing up the rear later in life, of course) and it spurs development of the prostate and seminal vesicles.
In early infancy, boys’ testosterone levels rise, almost to puberty levels, only to plummet at 4-6 months. We’re still not entirely sure what the rise means and what all that testosterone is doing, but it’s definitely doing something. One theory is that the brain is being “masculinized.”
Immediately prior to puberty, testosterone begins to rise in both boys and girls. Childhood is departing, replaced by budding pubic hair, the beginnings of body odor, growth spurts, oily hair and skin, and that ridiculous peach fuzz above the lips that every eleven year-old male tries to cultivate and claim as facial hair. Bones mature and the arm pits grow hair.

During puberty, testosterone enjoys a massive increase.  Most of you reading this probably recall those awkward, exciting change-filled times: new odors, inconvenient fluctuations in the functionality and appearance of certain organs, strange new outlooks on the opposite sex. Good times. Thanks, testosterone!

In adults, testosterone’s effects on growth and development have largely manifested and maintenance becomes its province. Libido is preserved for both men and women and erection strength and frequency are regulated by testosterone. Muscles resist wasting thanks to T (and even grow larger).
I would be remiss if I failed to mention testosterone’s chief antagonist: cortisol [1]. Cortisol, as you know, is one of the stress, fight-or-flight hormones. It kept us alive and our wits about us under short-term life-or-death situations for much of our evolution. Unfortunately, when cortisol is constantly elevated – as it often is in the sleep-deprived and chronically-stressed – testosterone is muted. Cortisol is catabolic [2] (breaks tissue down), while testosterone is anabolic [3]. Excessive levels of cortisol produce insulin resistance, fat gain, and muscle wasting, while testosterone promotes muscular hypertrophy and lean mass gains. Cortisol contributes to metabolic syndrome, while testosterone helps alleviate it.
Ironically, serum testosterone status seems to predict the cortisol response [4] of people faced with victory or defeat. High T men and women who “lost” released more cortisol, the stress hormone; when they “won,” less cortisol was released. Low T folks’ cortisol changes did not depend on winning or losing. I guess that’s a downside to high T levels, technically, but it’s to be expected. I’m reminded of the Jimmy Cliff classic [5], “The bigger they come, the harder they fall”.
Low serum concentrations of testosterone are also independently associated with higher mortality rates in men [6], even when you consider other risk factors and preexisting health conditions.
Testosterone is important in the formation of bones, as I mentioned earlier, but it’s also crucial for the maintenance of bone density, especially in the elderly [7].
Testosterone aids in protein synthesis, effectively helping rebuild muscle fibers with amino acids. It can preserve existing mass or build upon it, creating more.
So, testosterone is important, and even vital, if you want to build (and keep) strong bones and muscles, maintain a healthy, active sex life, and live long and well into old age – but how do we make sure we’re making enough?
In 1889, a Harvard University professor by the name of Charles-Édouard Brown-Séquard injected himself with a “rejuvenating elixir” containing the extract of dog and guinea pig testicle, reporting increased vigor and feelings of well-being. Traditional Chinese herbalists would often prescribe dried tiger’s penis for impotence, and ancient Greek Olympians feasted on goat and lamb testicles to boost stamina and athletic performance. Clearly, even before testosterone was specifically identified, the ancients (and not-so-ancients) knew that the loins were involved in vigor, strength, and stamina.
Their (our) fixation on consumption of genitalia and genitalia extractions to correct deficiencies in strength, vigor, sexual stamina, and general “well-being” sounds intuitive, in a folksy, endearing sort of way. Does it make sense to eat bull testicles to restore one’s manhood and increase available testosterone?
Not really. Testosterone doesn’t pool up in one’s testicles. It’s not a static reservoir waiting in reserve to be disseminated throughout the body. It’s a hormone that the testicles (in men) and ovaries (in women) produce. That mouthful of fluid you got when biting into a roasted sheep’s testicle on your Greek vacation wasn’t pure, liquid testosterone – sorry. In order to get testosterone, you have to produce it (or inject it, but that’s an entirely different post) endogenously. And if you want to manipulate the amount of testosterone you have available, you can do it the same way you manipulate other hormones, like insulin [8]leptin [9]growth hormone [10], and cortisol [11]. You tinker with your diet, your exercise, and your basic daily lifestyle.

Lift Heavy Things

Resistance training is a potent stimulant of testosterone production, so be sure to lift heavy things every now and again. If you want to tinker even further, messing around with rest intervals between sets can stimulate different hormonal responses. In one study [12], resting 90 seconds between squat and bench press sets boosted post-workout T levels the most, followed by rest periods of 120 seconds. Resting 60 seconds increased growth hormone the most and T the least.

Sprint

In young men, a short six-second bout of sprinting increased serum total testosterone levels [13]. Levels remained elevated during recovery. Interestingly, testosterone was also correlated with lactate levels in the blood. It would be even more interesting to know if any training that causes lactate levels to rise would also increase testosterone.

Avoid Excessive Cortisol

Since cortisol antagonizes and reduces free testosterone levels, and stress promotes the release of cortisol, avoiding stress becomes crucial for maintaining or boosting T levels. Make sure you get a good night’s sleep, every night (which in and of itself increases testosterone levels [14]). Avoid overtraining [15], especially in the Chronic Cardio [16] arena, which mayaffect T levels and reproductive function [17]. And be sure to take time to chill out and relax (read a book, go for a walk, play [18]).

Get Sun, or Take Vitamin D Supplements

Vitamin D [19], already associated with bone and muscular strength, also positively correlates with testosterone levels in men [20]. Back in February, the vitamin D/T link got a decent amount of media attention [21].

Eat Clean, Pastured Animal Products

Toxic substances called dioxins have been shown to interfere with the male reproductive system [22], including production of testosterone. While concentrated sources of dioxins include Agent Orange (which I’m sure you’re already avoiding), we obtain most of our dietary dioxins through conventionally-raised animal products [23], especially animal fats [24] and dairy [25](dioxins accumulate in fat). If you’re going to be eating fatty cuts of meat or using dairy, try to go for pastured, grass-fed animals to reduce your exposure and lessen the negative impact on your testosterone levels.

Eat Saturated and Monounsaturated Fat

low-fat, high-fiber diet reduced serum and free testosterone levels [26] in middle-aged men. T usage wasn’t affected, but T production was reduced. Another look at male athletes found that both saturated fat [27]monounsaturated fat [28], and cholesterol [29] intakes were positively correlated with resting testosterone levels [30]PUFA [31] intake was barely associated with increased levels.

Avoid Foods that Regularly Spike Your Blood Glucose Levels

Researchers found [32] that 75 grams of pure glucose – and the resultant spike in blood sugar – was enough to drop testosterone levels by as much as 25% in a random grouping of healthy, prediabetic, and diabetic men. Now keep in mind how rapidly many SAD carb choices (pasta, cereal, bread, etc) convert to glucose upon digestion…

Get Adequate Zinc Intake

A zinc deficiency predicts lowered testosterone in men [33] (eat your shellfish), but heroic supplementary doses of the mineral don’t boost T levels beyond normal [34] in men with adequate dietary intake.
All in all, testosterone is an incredibly important hormone for health, longevity, and vitality – in both men and women. Leading a Primal life, free of excessive stress and peppered with smart, intense workouts, full of healthy animal fats and plenty of vitamin D, should be enough to promote adequate amounts of testosterone coursing through your veins. It may sound a bit redundant at times (advice: live Primal!), but what can you do when a common, uniting thread seems to run through almost every aspect of human health. It almost writes itself.

Get Free Health Tips, Recipes and Workouts [35] Delivered to Your Inbox

Thursday, April 18, 2013


Ancient Bacteria-Killing Virus Holds Evolutionary Secret Against Antibiotic Resistance


The emergence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria is a common concern in hospitals worldwide, and is the evolutionary result of the selective pressures caused by our extensive use of antibiotics to fight bacterial infections.

Scientists are often fighting the losing battle against antibiotic-resistant bacteria, with every new antibiotic treatment outwitted by the bacteria’s uncanny ability to adapt to whatever adversity comes their way. Although bacteria’s evasive strategies may have outwitted scientists in the last century, their strategies still fall prey to the nature’s billion-year old bacteria-killing virus known as bacteriophages.

According to a recent PLOS One article, bacteriophages have long evolved a way to kill bacteria for good, specifically by targeting an essential and evolutionarily conserved component of any bacteria: the bacteria’s cell wall
Why is the bacteria cell wall so important? It turns out that all bacteria have a high salt/ion content relative to their environment, attracting the influx of water through their water channels, and causing the bacteria to swell up. Much like an inflated balloon, the unabated swelling can cause the bacteria to lyse (or blow up); a process that is physically hindered by the confines of the universal cell wall found in virtually any bacterial strains throughout evolution.

Consequently, bacteriophages have evolved to kill any bacteria by breaking down the cell wall, causing the bacteria to swell and lyse; releasing bacteriophage progeny in the process. Because the cell wall is so important for the survival of bacteria throughout evolution, it is no surprise that there are no bacterial strains in the last billion years that can resist the onslaught of bacteriophage infection.
Exploiting nature’s wisdom to undercut bacteria’s evasive strategies, Dr. Vincent A. Fischetti at Rockefeller University and colleagues developed a new drug that suppresses the building and maintenance of the bacteria cell wall. The drug, named Epimerox,works by suppressing a key enzyme crucial for the membrane building process known as 2-epimerase; an enzyme found in virtually all bacterial strains including the methicillin (antibiotic)-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) found commonly in hospitals. Fischetti further reported that Epimerox can effectively kill MRSA, as well as a number of bacterial strains, all without causing any detectable emergence of Epimerox-resistance.

The study suggests that Epimerox may be the first broad-acting antibiotic that can significantly reduce the probability for antibiotic-resistance.
The discovery of Epimerox is a breakthrough in microbial control, an elixir that can help undo the evolutionary damage done by our extensive use of antibiotics in the past. 
Schuch et al., Use of a Bacteriophage Lysin to Identify a Novel Target for Antimicrobial Development. PLOS ONE. April 2013. 10.1371/journal.pone.0060754