I started writing a lengthy response to a reader comment on one of Heather’s posts, but decided it could use a post of it’s own.

The question:

As to being pathogenic, is it possible that many bacteria are pathogenic if given sufficient opportunity?
[snip]
It seems largely to me that the line between pathogenic and non-pathogenic is pretty blurry.

Totally.

Let’s get some definitions out of the way first – a pathogen is an organism that causes disease. That seems simple enough, but when you examine the real world more carefully, things turn complicated pretty fast. What do I call the cold I was infected with last year? It can’t infect me anymore (my immune system would recognize it immediately and smack it down), but it might infect you just fine. Or what about E. coli? There are billions of them in your gut right now, and you can get along with them quite well. But give that same bug a little stretch of DNA, and they can become deadly.

Commenter Mike also mentioned a previous post of mine, where I talked about Clostridium difficile, a bacterial species that is normally present in the human gut at very low concentrations without causing problems. But a heavy dose of antibiotics can clear away other commensal bugs, allowing Clostridium populations to explode and cause severe inflammation (take a look at part 3 of this lecture). So what do you think – is Clostridium a pathogen?

It turns out there’s a spectrum of pathogenicity that any organism can fall on:

1) Some bugs could never survive in our body’s environment therefore are never pathogenic.

2) Some bugs (like Candida albicans, a fungus) could survive, but don’t have ways of evading the immune system so they’re efficiently mopped up. These aren’t generally pathogens in normal individuals, but if you have a compromised immune system (from AIDS or immunosuppression for instance), they can cause infections.

3) Other bugs (like E. coli), have non-pathogenic forms but can also acquire DNA that codes for proteins called virulence factors that allow the bug to be pathogenic (usually virulence factors are proteins that allow a bug to invade cells, or pump cells with things that disrupt the immune system).

4) Some bugs are just wired for infection, and can only make their living as a pathogen (Vibrio cholerae is a timely example)

If you’re willing to think a bit outside the box, I would throw Clostridium in category 2. The microbes that live in our gut are functionally part of our immune system. They fill the niches that many pathogens need to survive. In this case, the antibiotics act a bit like immunosuppressants, and allow a bug that’s normally harmless to gain a foothold and start causing disease.

Don’t get me wrong – if you’re prescribed antibiotics, you should take them faithfully. Clostridium infection is a pretty rare side effect and usually only happens with the massive antibiotic doses that are necessary when some other bacterial infection is running wild. Besides, pretty soon we’ll be able to cure you with a poop-infusion.

Comments

  1. #1 Mike Olson
    February 28, 2011

    I’m glad I good both provide grist for the mill, as well as recieve a very thorough answer to my question. Thanks!

  2. #2 Mike Olson
    February 28, 2011

    I am not glad that I refuse to proof read before posting! Tonight I have no excuses. I continue to enjoy your stuff!

  3. #3 justawriter
    March 1, 2011

    I would add a fifth category for those pathogens who accidentally find themselves in the wrong host, causing significant damage from infection but unable to infect others of the same species. In humans, these would be primarily zoonoses. Hantavirus is a possible example of this type of pathogen. The irony is that the pathogen may kill its ill-chosen host but will die along with it.

  4. #4 Lab Rat
    March 1, 2011

    Not just bacteria that find themselves in the wrong organism, but also bacteria that find themselves in the wrong *place* in the organism. Many commensal bacteria can be quite harmless until they get somewhere they shouldn’t be, such as the bloodstream or the brain, and then they can cause quite dangerous infections.

  5. #5 Kevin
    March 1, 2011

    @ Mike – No problem, keep those comments coming.

    @ Justawriter and Lab Rat – Excellent points. I just came up with those categories off the top of my head, thanks for the additions.

  6. #6 Paul
    March 1, 2011

    Great Post! You can make a similar spectrum for pathogenicity vs. mutualism and have a whole crazy triangle of symbiosis!

  7. #7 Mike the Mad Biologist
    March 1, 2011

    I would confuse this a little more. In E. coli, some of the most common commensal clones (those that live in your gut and don’t cause disease) are also superb urinary tract pathogens. I typically describe them as opportunistic commensals.

The site is currently under maintenance and will be back shortly. New comments have been disabled during this time, please check back soon.