Pasteur-Koch Aug. 27 / Discussion

This is the discussion related to the wiki page Pasteur-Koch Aug. 27.

JAPauk 28 Aug 2009 02:17

this article just goes to show how difficult communication can be! If only Pasture and Koch spoke the same language. Brittany is right. If these two could have worked together the results would have been phenominal! None the less I am still greatfull for the controbutions these two made to biology and the medical field. Without the work of Pasture, milk wouldn't be safe to drink or eggs to eat, and so many would have died from diseases without the development of vaccines. Without Koch's work, we may still not understand that there is a link between bacteria (or viruses) and diseases.

jjh008 28 Aug 2009 12:59

I thought this article was very interesting. Also it is amazing how competitive scientific research can become.

Assigned Questions on Article

arw004 31 Aug 2009 04:54

Philosophical Differences between Pasteur and Koch

Koch believed that the biological and chemical characteristics of a microbial species were not only specific but also permanent. These views contradicted Pasteur’s concept that microbial virulence is not constant but, instead, is a variable property of microbial species—a property that can be lost but also recovered. ( pg 386 in handout)

Pasteur was deeply interested in questions of immunity and in developing specific means to protect humans or other animal species against specific infectious diseases. By contrast, Koch favored public health measures for controlling infectious diseases. Pasteur’s approach was to vaccinate individuals, whereas Koch’s approach was to rely on sanitary methods to protect populations. Despite both Koch and Pasteur being impatient and intolerant and despite their bitter personal and nationalistic differences, both men defended truth and devoted their intellectual powers and their hearts in service to humanity. (pg 387 in handout)

Koch’s Postulates
1. The microbe is found in all cases of the disease, but is absent from healthy individuals.
2. The microbe is isolated from the diseased hose and grown in pure culture.
3. When the microbe is introduced into a healthy, susceptible host (or animal model), the same disease occurs.
4. The same strain of microbe is obtained from the newly diseased host. When cultured, the strain shows the same characteristics as before.

Are Koch’s postulates correct???
- They are used to determine if a given strain of microbe causes a disease, but the postulates remain only as a guides, but individual diseases and pathogens may confound one or more of the criteria

Are there diseases caused by microorganisms that are exceptions to Koch’s Postulates? Why?
- Tuberculosis bacteria are known to cause symptoms in only 10% of the people infected
- AIDS, the concentration of HIV virus is so low that initially no virus could be detected in patients with fully active symptoms
o Another difficulty is the absence of an animal host that exhibits the same disease.

jjh008 31 Aug 2009 05:02

Philosophical Differences between Koch and Pasteur:
Koch- Favored public health measures for controlling infectious diseases, approach was to rely on sanitary method to protect population from disease
Pasteur- Approach was to vaccinate individuals as a method to protect from disease
Contrasting Views:
Koch- believed that biological and chemical characteristics of microbial species were specific and permanent
Pasteur- Believed Microbial virulence is not constant but instead a variable property of microbial species- a property that can be lost but also recovered