Talk:Bacitracin

message: Recently heard of bacitracin being applied to the inside of the nostrils for treatment of chronic Staph (aureus) infection -- specifically methicillin resistant staph.  Anybody qualified to comment?
:Bactroban is, I think, more commonly used to reduce nasal carriage of MRSA, usually in hospital or nursing home staff, but certainly Bacitracin is also used. This isn't treatment of an infection: it's a means of reducing colonization of the nares in order to prevent spread to individuals likely to develop infection. - Nunh-huh 00:03, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bacitracin/Nostrils

message: ANTIBIOTICS
Bacitracin has the same basic mechanism of action as vancomycin (i.e. it inhibits peptioglycan synthesis)... but does anyone know what its spectrum of activity is? Vancomycin only works on gram positive bacteria. Is bacitracin the same? Cajolingwilhelm 03:28, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Indications for Bacitracin?

message: Was the girl named "Tracy I" or "Margaret Tracy"?   Could the history section be expanded a bit to explain the background of how the bacteria and antibiotic were isolated and under what conditions this occurred?   --98.70.142.120 (talk) 19:33, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The name is surely NOT Margaret Tracy, but "Tracy I." We don't know her last name except that it starts with the letter "I." The cite (from Science, 1945) is given in the article. SBHarris 23:18, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm a bit unsure about how you can be so certain.  The article referenced says: "We named this growth-antagonistic strain for the patient, 'Tracy I.'"   I understand 'Tracy' to be the surname and 'I.' to refer to a laboratory numbering system (so 'Tracy I.' refers to the name of the strain, not the patient).   At any rate, the Merriam-Webster dictionary lists the origin of bacitracin as from "Margaret Tracy...1936 American child in whose tissues it was found".   Could you please list your source that indicates otherwise?   --128.227.7.23 (talk) 15:34, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey guys, I just looked up Meleney and Johnson's work: Bacitracin, Meleney & Johnson, American Journal of Medicine. 1949 Dec;7(6):794-806. It looks like 'Tracey I' is the name of the strain, and either the girl's first or last name is 'Tracey' with an 'e'.   Here's the first paragraph of the article."The antibiotic bacitracin, is produced by the Tracey I strain of Bacillus subtilis which was discovered in June, 1943, in the Laboratory of Bacteriological Research of the Department of Surgery, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University.   The organism was recovered from the damaged tissue and street dirt debrided from the compound fracture of a seven year old child by the name of Tracey.   The antibiotic was therefore named 'bacitracin.'"   --159.178.246.30 (talk) 18:58, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: So, after all of this, I'm fairly certain that the girl's LAST name is Tracy or Tracey...   Are there any other references or sources of information about her?   --98.70.52.179 (talk) 16:47, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

text: I also was interested in bacitracin's origins...  So after all of this we don't have any other references?   This sounds like the HeLa cells story.   If anyone else has a published reference that may clear this all up, please post it!   --159.178.249.176 (talk) 13:59, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tracy 

message: I believe the structure is incorrect. Specifically the dihydroxythiazole ring has the incorrect connectivity. The L-leucine should be connected at the 4 position instead of the 5. The correct structure is shown here http://www.sinoapi.com/Pharmacopoeia/pharmacopoeia-ep5.asp?cas=1405-87-4 and in the crystal structure: (FEBS, 1991, 285(1)115-119).Jtyndall03 (talk) 23:06, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chemical Structure is wrong 

message: Are people reading the research that they cite???  Based on this paper (which I don't doubt):
:Title: Infection and allergy incidence in ambulatory surgery patients using white petrolatum vs bacitracin ointment. A randomized controlled trial.
:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8805732
someone decided that this was appropriate to say in the wikipedia article:
:Despite frequent topical use, there is little evidence that bacitracin is more effective than simple petroleum jelly for minor wounds.[1]
BUT if you follow that link, they've obviously taken liberties with the conclusion.  THAT RESEARCH HAD TO DO WITH COMPARING THE ADVERSE REACTIONS BETWEEN THE TWO, NOT WITH HOW EFFECTIVE THEY ARE IN COMPARISON TO EACH OTHER.  If you read the entire paper, you'll see what it's talking about.  In fact, here's the conclusion:
:CONCLUSIONS:
:"White petrolatum is a safe, effective wound care ointment for ambulatory surgery. In comparison with bacitracin, white petrolatum possesses an equally low infection rate and minimal risk for induction of allergy."
The statement in the article cannot stay there.  This throwing in of non-supporting citations as a kind of false support is rampant in wikipedia.Tgm1024 (talk) 15:42, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation does not support claim.  Claim must be removed. 

message: Ok, somehow (either by hand editing the section headers, or by someone not understanding how to add a new section, etc.) the section headers ended up being completely frigged up.  People were editing this talk page directly instead of clicking on "new section", or editing the section itself.
The talk page structure therefore caused the automatic generation of the table of contents to be missing.  Also, I added a section title to the topmost conversation.
Please be careful people.Tgm1024 (talk) 16:07, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  I fixed section headers in this talk page.  Talk page Table of Contents could not be made automatically.  Talk page was completely frigged up