Talk:Discovery of penicillin: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Derek Harkness (typo) |
imported>Howard C. Berkowitz (→Verifiability of folk uses?: new section) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{ | {{subpages}} | ||
== Verifiability of folk uses? == | |||
Many years ago, I worked with the chemistry and microbiological effects of penicillins. Very little benzylpenicillin was produced by the early Fleming and Westling strains of ''Penicillium notatum'', with ''Penicillium chrysogenum'', in submerged culture, being the modern producer. | |||
Has there been experimental verification that some of the tales of folk use of moldy bread and the like would have a clinically significant effect? I can believe that random contamination of pure cultures, as Fleming observed, could inhibit growth, but I find it harder -- not impossible -- to believe that a natural form would have that much antibiotic activity. [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 23:21, 9 May 2008 (CDT) | |||
Latest revision as of 22:21, 9 May 2008
Verifiability of folk uses?
Many years ago, I worked with the chemistry and microbiological effects of penicillins. Very little benzylpenicillin was produced by the early Fleming and Westling strains of Penicillium notatum, with Penicillium chrysogenum, in submerged culture, being the modern producer.
Has there been experimental verification that some of the tales of folk use of moldy bread and the like would have a clinically significant effect? I can believe that random contamination of pure cultures, as Fleming observed, could inhibit growth, but I find it harder -- not impossible -- to believe that a natural form would have that much antibiotic activity. Howard C. Berkowitz 23:21, 9 May 2008 (CDT)