Original press release here, but it doesn't mention HIV
<a href="http://www.ibn.a-star.edu.sg/images/cms_press/press_82.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.ibn.a-star.edu.sg/images/cms_press/press_82.pdf</a><p>My interpretation is that the hyrdagel-based "nanomeds" have the main advantage that they break-up biofilm colonies, which have a higher (100-1000x) drug resistance than free floating bacteria. It seems to be operating through mechanical rather than biological methods, but the exact mechanisms aren't described well in either article.
Why is parkinson even mentioned? It is not a disease that is caused by infection.<p>Same question for HIV. It's a virus so it doesn't have a membrane which this gel is supposed to attack.<p>Same question for toenail infections. This is caused by fungi, not bacteria.<p>Lots of marketing hype here. I don't believe a word of it.
The mention of HIV in an article talking about bacteria confuses me. Do bacteria and the HIV virus share some physical/biological property that makes it possible for them to be targeted and destroyed via the same mechanism?
That's great it kills bacteria... but what about the text spelling applications?<p>I want a vial of that stuff, and then if someone asks me a question I don't like... I'll say "here, this gel will give you the answer." Then I'll walk away, and the gel will slowly form into the letters "Fuck You."
The real hard bit is to break is the idea that every bacterial disease needs antibiotics NOW. If used sparingly, those that were given a medication may actually benefit from it. But it's likely easier to create a new breed of medications than it is to reset expectations.
"We can kill 100 percent of the bacteria"<p>Didn't read further. There's no such thing as "100%" in medicine (even pure alcohol does not). They're not scientists.