hello
welcome to the discussion and thank you for your contribution
but ref the below statement - is this more "shooting from the hip" - or are there references that support this view
the reason i ask is that when i have looked into the mechanism of action for bacteriostatic antibiotics - most authorities sources state that bacteriostatic antibiotics do indeed render bacteria more susceptible to the immune system
eg
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/nbk547678/Mechanism of ActionBacteriostatic antimicrobials most commonly function via the inhibition of bacterial protein synthesis pathways.
As a class, the primary mechanism of action of tetracycline antimicrobials is the reversible inhibition of the 30S bacterial ribosomal subunit.
[6][16] This inhibition causes the arrest of bacterial protein production, which inhibits bacterial defenses and allows for host immune cells to eliminate the offending bacteria.
this also explains why patients experience herxhiemer reactions despite having taken only bacteriostatic antibiotics (which do not kill bacteria outright ) and in the absence of increased killing of damaged bacterial cells by the immune system would be hard to explain.
Idyllic said...
I would agree with the laboratory BlazerGermany. Having worked in a laboratory myself, it's fair to say that they know very well what they are talking about (it's a lot of repetitive work)
I do agree that the pace of bacterial multiplication may be slowed by certain antibiotics, but this does not necessarily render the germs more vulnerable to immune system capture. It's actually the antigenic characteristics of the bacteria and the efficacy of the host's immunological defenses that dictate how the immune system reacts to bacteria.
.