kleinerkiffer
Bluelight Crew
^What questions do you have ?
From the bacterial side, they observed that in vitro treatment of the S. aureus bacteria had no effect on bacterial growth, but that meth treatment did enhance biofilm formation. “Biofilm is present in only 6% of acute wounds but over 90% of chronic wounds,” he explains. By exposing the bacteria to the drug, “we found that meth enhances biofilm formation by multiple clinical S. aureus strains.” Biofilms are notoriously hard to treat, because an extracellular matrix that surrounds the bacterial community. This not only makes it harder for the immune cells to access the bacterial cells inside the biofilm, but also is harder to penetrate with antibacterial molecules such as antibodies and antibiotics.
^not completely answering your question, but
http://mbioblog.asm.org/mbiosphere/...egative-effects-of-meth-on-wound-healing.html
From the bacterial side, they observed that in vitro treatment of the S. aureus bacteria had no effect on bacterial growth, but that meth treatment did enhance biofilm formation. “Biofilm is present in only 6% of acute wounds but over 90% of chronic wounds,” he explains. By exposing the bacteria to the drug, “we found that meth enhances biofilm formation by multiple clinical S. aureus strains.” Biofilms are notoriously hard to treat, because an extracellular matrix that surrounds the bacterial community. This not only makes it harder for the immune cells to access the bacterial cells inside the biofilm, but also is harder to penetrate with antibacterial molecules such as antibodies and antibiotics.
I couldn't find any sources on the webpage you are quoting ^here^. It's not that I don't believe methamphetamine is bad for your body, I just like to see sources to back up what I'm reading and what I already believe to be true.
Do you know where I could find the info on the studies performed that resulted in the conclusion that meth enhances biofilm formation in acute and chronic wounds?