I have a dental infection and seeing dentist today. Will need antibiotics. I’m trying to figure out which antibiotics are better for me to take and which to avoid.
I don’t have much time before appointment so looking for your thoughts, I know others have looked into this.
So far I’ve found that doxycycline and minocycline may be preventive.
As far as negatives: “According to the results of the study, the researchers observed the strongest connection with PD risk for oral exposure to macrolides and lincosamides (OR=1.416; 95% CI, 1.053 to 1.904). Following corrections on multiple comparisons, exposure to antianaerobics and tetracyclines 10 to 15 years before the index date, sulfonamides and trimethoprim 1 to 5 years before the index date, and antifungal medications 1 to 5 years before the index date were positively associated with increased PD risk. A post hoc analyses further revealed positive links between PD and broad‐spectrum antibiotics.”
Help much appreciated. I have a complicated mouth— jaw reconstruction with metal plates and implants, so I’m sure this will not be the only time I have to deal with this.
Written by
rebtar
To view profiles and participate in discussions please or .
I read an abstract that doxycycline could stop PD tremors. I had a mild cold so I put myself on doxy, 100mg twice daily. I got over the cold but it did nothing to stop the tremors.
I'm a veterinarian but can tell you doxycycline will not do much for mouth infection in other animals (not sure with humans). You have to target the bacteria where you are treating.
This may not be the type of answer you are looking for, it is just my experience and the experience of a friend of mine. I have always been able to treat a toothache/infection effectively by applying colloidal silver to a square cotton pad that I think is used as a facial cleaner. I have also used a plain cotton ball saturated with colloidal silver effectively too. I take this dripping pad and roll it up and place it between my cheek and gum directly at the area of the toothache/infection. I go to sleep with it like that and I can have one in place during the day also. It usually clears the infection/toothache in a day or two.
My friend uses a similar technique with the antibiotic itself. He takes an antibiotic capsule and dissolves it in a very small bottle such as a half ounce or 30 ml with some water in it and shakes until dissolved. Once dissolved, he pours it onto a cotton ball and then places the wet cotton ball between his cheek and his gum in the area of the pain. Again, this approach gets rid of the infection in a day or two.
I imagine the reason it works as quickly as it does is because I am reaching a fairly high local tissue concentration very quickly compared to if I take the colloidal silver orally and I suspect the same in my friends case. We have both used our respective techniques multiple times and always to good effect. In my friends case, it means he does not have to expose his system to anywhere near as much antibiotic as he would if he took an oral regimen of antibiotics. He told me that he told his sister about it and she had similar results in a day or two.
I am not recommending this approach to anyone, just describing what I and a friend have done that has worked well in each case. If you are considering it, just ask your dentist if either method could be a possible option in your case. Myself, I do not do well with some antibiotics, so this is a good option for me. The last time I went to a dentist for a toothache, over 20 years ago, he just said I needed a root canal and a course of antibiotics and he did it with no discussion about any other options and at the time I simply did not know that there might be a simpler option.
I figure that if it ever doesn't work for me, I can always let the dentist do his thing again because my results are so quick, there would be little if any delay with ending up letting my dentist do what he wants. It has also been useful for when I have gotten a toothache on a Friday, because my dentist doesn't work on weekends. Rather than suffer in pain all weekend, I just put the cotton wad in place and the pain is usually gone in a day or so.
I have not tried it myself, but some people claim they can do similar with a fresh garlic clove because garlic is a potent antibacterial, but I consider this approach a little dangerous because some people do not realize that garlic is a "hot herb" as it can literally burn your gum or skin if left in place too long! Then there is the issue of tasting and smelling of garlic, which I would like to avoid if at all possible, so for me, I would always choose colloidal silver and never a garlic clove unless it was my only available option. I prefer colloidal silver over an antibiotic also because colloidal silver is likely a broader spectrum antibiotic than any antibiotic so I feel I have a better chance of being sure I will neutralize the offending pathogen. Colloidal silver is capable of killing hundreds of pathogens.
In any case, always get your dentist's approval first if you are considering any of these!
Some years back when I needed a root canal I injected sterile clindamycin solution subcutaneously through the skin just above my lower jaw in the vicinity of the infected tooth root, twice daily. I did this with the advice and consent of my dentist and being careful to avoid a nerve in the vicinity. It did not eliminate the need for the root canal – I doubt that is possible – but it did prevent infection from spreading.
The ionic and silver nanoparticles are able to penetrate the skin, especially the ionic silver particles which is the one most commonly available from retail and online sellers. Apparently the antibiotic my friend uses is a small enough molecule to do so also.
I have issues with needles in that it is very difficult for me to stick myself, but not a problem if someone else is doing it for me. The thought of hitting a nerve with a needle would be off putting for me also, ouch!
For a very deep infection, I would use topical and oral application of silver nanoparticles for best effect.
I can tell you from experience and studies that colloidal silver nanoparticles (AGNPs) are highly effective internally, externally, in vitro and in vivo. It can only kill where it can reach because in order to kill or neutralize a pathogen, it has to come in physical contact with the pathogen, when the AGNP actually releases ionic silver particles that attack and neutralize the pathogen which is mainly in the blood unless otherwise delivered manually to a non-blood area, such as the inside of the lungs where it can be delivered by a cold process ultrasonic humidifier or high volume nebulizer via inhalation.
It also possesses the ability to break down some biofilms, recycle certain antibiotics, kill established MRSA infections externally and internally, kill some cancers in vitro, kill many blood borne pathogens and is very good at not having many pathogens become resistant to it, unlike current day antibiotics. As far as biofilms, in vitro studies look promising because they can use relatively strong amounts, but I think in vivo is much less so because of the inherent dilution of AGNPs once in the circulatory system at levels that have shown the ability to neutralize pathogens while doing minimal damage to normal cells. A lot of evidence is anecdotal, but there are a few good studies to confirm its multi-pathogen neutralizing effects.
Silver nanoparticles do not come with the potential for severe side effects associated with some antivirals and antibiotics. AGNPs are also synergisitic with a growing list of antibiotics and represents one avenue to potentially deal with antibiotic resistance because of its abilities to have synergy with certain antibiotics.
The study you linked to is discussing the effectiveness of a colloidal silver gel in basically a test tube setting (test wells/discs) and shows it to be quite effective at breaking down the tested biofilms, individually and in total, but this is quite different than would be seen inside the body. In the body, I would expect a much much slower kill rate as it takes time for circulating AGNPs to come in actual physical contact with each and every pathogen and biofilm. One point that I did not see covered in the study was the actual size of the silver nanoparticles that were used and this is very important because in the human body, particles below 10 nm are more toxic to pathogens, but also more toxic to normal human cells and can be used to make the effects look stronger than would actually be the case had they used particles in the 12~20 nm sweet spot. In an in vitro study, use of AGNPs with a particle size below 10 nm would likely produce better results, but would be much less practical in the body due to the more toxic nature to normal human cells of these smallest AGNPs. Even the color of the solution changes as the particles size reaches closer to 1 nm.
I make and use a colloidal silver mouthwash which comes in contact with many pathogens at a relatively high concentration of AGNPs and as the study suggests is likely effective, though they only tested 3 biofilm formations in this study, but there are hundreds of these biofilms and as broad spectrum as AGNPs are, I am doubtful they are as effective against all biofilms in which case other biofilm busters would need to be incorporated into a treatment plan. I do not consider biofilms to be AGNPs strongest attribute even though it has shown some potential in other studies. There are so many different biofilms it is almost a case of seeing if AGNPs will be active against the particular biofilm or not. From studies, AGNPs strength seems to be exceptional antiviral and antibacterial qualities followed by weaker antifungal and antiparasitic qualities and then of course the antibiofilm quality.
AGNPs would be an excellent inclusion in any survival kit, because of those broad antibacterial and antiviral qualities, but importantly also because it can make some undrinkable water, drinkable again.
I was able to see a guy survive for two years with HIV because he had no insurance to pay for his meds so he took AGNPs everyday for those two years until he was able to get insurance again. I'm not thinking HIV is all too susceptible to the placebo effect , so I am going to think that AGNPs do what some studies suggest, interact with HIV at multiple points in the replication process to interfere significantly with that process and kill circulating viral cells. Since the particles have to come in contact with the pathogen as it appears in the blood, AGNPs can not fully eradicate the virus due to reservoirs of virus that are not in the blood, but rather thought to be hiding in soft tissues or possibly areas of the gut where the AGNPs do not go. Here is a link to some research on HIV and AGNPs that discusses at least two possible methods by which AGNPs may inactivate the HIV virus :
Another issue with AGNPs is their stability, which is poor at best if they are not capped with an effective capping agent. The capping agent protects the water suspended AGNPs from agglomeration where the cells start to join together until they become so large that they fall out of suspension and the particles become too large to effectively neutralize pathogen. This will happen quickly in the stomach where the AGNPs run into hydrochloric acid and NaCl. The capping agent will protect each particle and allow the particles to reach the small intestine where the capping agent is digested by enzymes and then the AGNPs can then reach the blood stream where they will neutralize pathogens that they come in contact with. Most studies utilize a capping agent of some sort. A couple of years back "green silver nanoparticle studies" were all the rage and apparently there was plenty of funding to repeat these studies over and over again using plants as the reducing and capping agent to good effect. Thos studies are less popular now, but one thing they very effectively proved is the value of a quality capping agent in greatly improving the effectiveness of AGNPs.
The following study demonstrates how a good capping agent improves the effectiveness of AGNPs :
There is much more I can say about AGNPs and I am a firm believer in their effectiveness, but I also understand that there is a very high placebo effect involved in some peoples reports of their use of colloidal silver or ionic silver as well illustrated in the Amazon review section for the colloidal and ionic silver products that they carry. In those reviews you will see that people report amazing results using only teaspoon and tablespoon amounts of ionic silver, which according to studies is way far below the amount of silver that would be needed in the human body in order to start neutralizing pathogens and on Amazon, I am talking about thousands of reviews!
Thanks Art for your lengthy exposition. Can you point me in the direction of a peer reviewed and published piece of research that gives the results of an in vivo study. My search of papers has only managed to dig up the latest piece of published research which was in vitro.
All I ever find are rodent and animal studies or test tube studies. The few human studies are generally in topical application which tells nothing about what happens in humans. Like HDT/B-1, we are basically not seeing human studies because funding is not there and consequently no studies for something that is not patentable for the purpose of making money.Sad, but true.
There are studies to show AGNP's have synergy with chemo agents and antibiotics, but nothing in humans. I get the the costs of human studies are prohibitive, but the government could fund such studies in small amounts, but the NIH is setup to fund studies, not so much to do them. This very short abstract of a study is typical of what many AGNP studies look like, they talk about the very good potential that AGNPs show for the specific studies such as cancer, but no human studies to confirm efficacy:
I have pointed out the PD mouse model study of the use of AGNPs which determined that it crosses the BBB and helps increase the highly antiinflammatory Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S). Given the very good safety profile of AGNPs it does not seem like such a stretch to apply AGNPs in humans in a similar study, but no such study has appeared and does not seem likely to. Here is that PD mouse model study :
I wish I could change the way these studies go in terms of human usage, but I can't. AGNPs at the proper dose range and particle size has a very good safety profile, but even that is not enough to encourage human studies. There is tons of anecdotal evidence, but human studies are needed in order to take full advantage of what AGNPs have to offer in terms of health issues.
If you go back to the pre -1940's, you can see that silver was the main go to antibacterial in medicine until the advent of antibiotics which were patentable and money makers. The forms of silver that were used back then had more issues such as argyria, whereas the newer AGNPs have a better safety profile and little chance if any to cause argyria.
The closest you are likely to find in terms of human studies are dosing studies where they are trying to see what happens to AGNPs once they are swallowed by humans such as this one below. A mjor problem with this human study is the dose is way too low at just 480 ug/day in the higher dose group . It is already known that 10 mg /day is a more realistic figure in order to reach serum levels that would be effective against many pathogens in the blood. As would be expected with such a low dose, there was nothing much to speak of in terms of a measurable effect of any kind, either positive or negative. This also speaks to what I was talking about in terms of a large placebo effect that many are likely seeing in these commercial silver products sold online. A dose like this is less than 1/20th of what is needed to start to see positive effects in humans yet these are similar dosing to what people report seeing good effect from on Amazon reviews!
The long and the short of it is that human studies are lacking even though there are thousands of studies about silver nanoparticles showing positive results !
Thanks to all for replies. After some discussion of options, my dentist prescribed amoxicillin. Because of the complexity of the work in my mouth and jaw, I think knocking out the infection as soon as possible is advisable and will go ahead with the antibiotic. My hs-CRP Has been elevated for a while and a low level ongoing dental infection may be the cause. Knocking it out will tell me something about that, hopefully.
If eradicating the infection does not lower your elevated High Sensitivity C-Reactive protein level, Amla Extract might. In one of the studies I linked to in my Amla post, it lowered HS-CRP by greater than 53% in twelve weeks!
Yes, the dose recommended in the study was 500 mg twice a day ( 1 gram total per day) in the high dose group and was clearly much more effective than the low dose group of 250 mg two times per day. In one of the studies, they used an even higher dose to good effect! It was 1 gram twice per day for 2 grams total per day showing that Amla has a wide range of potential dosing that have all shown varying degrees of benefit!
Here is a link to the extract form of Amla that was used in at least two of the studies and is available on Amazon :
It should be noted that before there was True Caprose Amla Extract, tradition has shown significant benefit in the first place, so we can not be sure that True Caprose AE is better than other amla extracts, but it is what was used in at least two of the studies to very good effect!
Here is the link to my original Amla Extract post in case you want to look anything up. Also, some of the links I refer to are not in the original post, but are down lower in a couple of my reply posts.
Amoxicylin is a pretty safe bet - and expected medical advice. Sometimes in dentistry you get issues with anaerobic bacteria, and so don't be surprised if Flagyl (metronidazol) is prescribed. Heed the advice about avoiding alcohol if you get Flagyl
Both will nuke your microbiome, so look to yoghurt, kefir, and kombucha whilst you are taking them, and for a week or so afterwards
More important to tackle the correct biologics with the antibiotics, and that takes lab work. As soon as the dental work is done you should have a wide spectrum antibiotic prescribed as prophylactic, and administered for the moment, while your dentist/oral surgeon then simultaneously swabs your oral injuries that would transmit antibiotics sampled and have them labbed, and then the day after have your doctor do the same thing as well as take delivery of the lab results. A good doctor can have the lab results in a few minutes if connected to a clinic with an inhouse lab. Meanwhile, warm saltwater swishes/irrigation often. Get the jump since so many organisms are so very resistant, you can't afford to daudle or let the pro's do so. Just tell them what you are thinking, they will realize it is a good course for everyone's benefit. If there is a ready silver-based product like the old silvadiene, ask if you can have that at the ready immediately post-dental work...though it is frowned on as an internal, you can ask after whether any oral equivalents might exist these days. Even a flourine swab would be possible. Best infection is the one aggressively prevented!!!
Let me see if I understand you correctly, Marion. I should have both the dentist/oral surgeon and my regular doctor swab to ID the bacteria that’s causing the infection, so that I can make sure the correct antibiotic is prescribed to knock it out, AFTER any necessary dental work is done?
I see Silvadene online as an OTC cream but nothing for oral use. This is different from the AGNP’s Chartist is talking about?
Yes it is different, better, more appropriate. ANGP, yes. Well, forget the silvadene comment, I wasn't sure about that.
But yes, any dental work involves some bleeding, which means bacteria in your mouth can transmit right there and some species move extremely quickly so yes, the dentist should then swab and call his lab...if he has one to call.
Meanwhile doctors and dentists, before knowing which is the most likely antibiotic to try have a number of broad-spectrum antibiotics they can prescribe, preventively or to get as much of a step ahead as they can...which can matter quite a bit...ultimately expecting to switch to the group of anti-biotics indicated positively by the eventual lab results.
Everyone reading here is different as to the healthcare they have access to and the location they are in. In my town every one of the following is possible, depending on the access, money, plan, time to get in to be seen:
Suppose you or some reader lives in a rural area. Or has healthcare plan that cheaps out and forces the doctor to send the sample across the county for growing and then testing and then returning the results that takes a few days. With some bugs, no big deal. With others, it could be digging a hole in your heart by then and resist much of what exists to treat it. Some bugs can start in a finger, get into your blood, travel up your artery or vein and corrode them and necrotize them in astoundingly fast fashion.
If it is going to be 2-3-4 days for a lab to do it from the connection from a dentist, or the dentist isn't going to do the swab, then get your butt to a doctor/health service who will, and asap. If your lab is one of those that will need turnaround time, cross your fingers that it isn't one of those bacteria, more frequently seen lately, that can require amputation of a limb in 48 hours or that is so resistant that one must get a very fast start to fight it. IF you even have a doctor. Or a urgent care clinic. IF you have access. Not every doctor has access to a fast lab in his building, sometimes they are sent out to labs and it can be a matter of days. But other doctors have access to lab equipment and techs right in his practice or her clinic or his building and can have the results within a few minutes.
The thing is in general, this is no longer the era in which one can treat bacteria casually. And though unusual, a bacterium capable of requiring your arm to be removed in 72 hours can be in a soil in a golf course in Myrtle Beach one minute and under your fingernail and thence carried into a dentist or oral surgeons office pen that was just shared with someone while filling out a form in Mombasa, in not very much much more time it takes to get there on a commercial flight.
Point being, this is no longer an era in which we can treat bacteria too casually.
Bacteria are everywhere and we can get paranoid about them. We have many bacteria on and in our bodies that may, or may not, affect us. Widespread use of antibiotics, even when they are not clinically required, is one of the reasons we now have multi resistant bugs. Prophylactic use of antibiotics should only be for those with severe problems and not the worried well.
Content on HealthUnlocked does not replace the relationship between you and doctors or other healthcare professionals nor the advice you receive from them.
Never delay seeking advice or dialling emergency services because of something that you have read on HealthUnlocked.
Antibiotics and PD symptomology
Neuropathy and Parkinson's 
Any suggestions for managing this kind of dyskinesia?
45 mins conversation with dr. Jeanmonod regarding FUS
Is Rytary really working better than Carbidopa/Levodopa?
