The Antibiotics Crisis: How Did We Get Here And Where Do We Go Next?
Antibiotics and Microorganisms
Antibiotics are drugs that kill microorganisms like bacteria, fungi and
parasites. They do not work against viruses because viruses are not
microorganisms. When the press and media talk about antibiotics they
generally mean drugs that kill bacteria, because most of the stories that
have been hitting the headlines in recent years are about antibiotic
resistant bacteria or "superbugs" like the Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRS)
Bacteria are very small creatures of usually only one cell, comprising
internal cell structures but no distinct nucleus, surrounded by a cell
wall. They can make their own proteins and reproduce themselves as long as
they have a source of food.
As far as humans are concerned, some bacteria are friendly and essential to
wellbeing, they do helpful things like break down food in our gut, while
others are dangerous because they attack our tissue and cells to make their
food, or they produce toxins that poison and kill.
Some bacteria cause no harm while they live in one part of the body, but
then become potentially deadly once they enter the bloodstream. A good
example is Escherichia coli (E. coli), which lives in the
human gut and helps break down food, but if it enters the bloodstream (eg
through a perforation in the intestines), it can cause severe cramping,
diarrhea, and even death from peritonitis if not treated promptly.
Another example is Staphylococcus, which lives harmlessly on human
skin or even in our nostrils, but if it enters the bloodstream, it can lead
to potentially fatal conditions like toxic shock syndrome.
Our immune system has special cells that recognize bacteria as foreign
agents and mobilize existing counter-agents or antibodies, or trigger the
production of new antibodies, to attack and destroy the bacteria before
they get a chance to seize a foothold and start replicating inside us.
However, sometimes we lose the fight and succumb to infection, and in some
cases, without treatment, the consequences can be very severe and even
Antibiotics have made a big difference to mankind's fight against
infectious microorganisms and have vastly improved the conditions and
chances of success in many fields of medicine all over the world.
They work because they block a life-sustaining function in the unwelcome
microorganism. Some stop the microorganism from being able to make or
maintain a cell wall, while others target a particular protein that is
vital for survival or replication.
An example of the former is penicillin, the first commercially available
antibiotic that Alexander Flemming discovered in 1929. Penicillin stops
bacteria like Strep (Streptococcus, a bacterium that is commonly
found on skin or in the throat) from making strong cell walls. Before the
introduction of penicillin in World War II, soldiers were more likely to
die of bacterial infections than from their wounds.
Viruses are not microorganisms, and although capable of self-replicating,
do not appear to be "alive" at all: they are particles consisting of DNA or
RNA, some long molecules, and a protein coat. They are much smaller than
bacteria, have none of their internal cell machinery, and no cell wall. To
replicate they have to get inside host cells and hijack their resources.
And here lies a clue as to why we have a global problem with antibiotics
and antibiotic resistance: too many doctors and healthcare professionals,
often encouraged by patient demand, have been prescribing antibiotics to
treat viral infections. This leads to imprudent use of antibiotics and
greater opportunity for bacteria to mutate into resistant forms.
How Antibiotic Resistance Arises -
Click here for LifeSource Vitamins
Microorganisms are always evolving. By chance, every now and again, a
generation gives rise to offspring with slightly different genes to their
forebears, and the ones whose variations confer a survival advantage, eg to
make better use of a resource or withstand an environmental stress, get to
produce more offspring.
Now add to that scenario the efforts of mankind: the production of
antibiotics that are designed to kill off bacteria. From the perspective of
microorganisms, this is just another environmental stress, or "selective
pressure" that ensures those with the survival advantage get to produce
proportionally more offspring next time around.
This survival advantage perchance could be to evolve a slightly different
protein or cellular mechanism to the one targeted by the antibiotic. Now
you have a recipe for breeding resistant mutants, while killing off the
ones with no resistance. Eventually, the dominant strain becomes the
resistant one, as long as there is enough exposure to the antibiotic.
In fact, several mechanisms have evolved in bacteria to make them
antibiotic resistant. Some chemically modify the antibiotic rendering it
inactive, some physically expel it from the bacterial cell, and others
change the target site so the antibiotic can't find it or latch onto it.
This evolutionary process is further boosted by the fact that bacteria also
"swap" bits of genetic material, thus increasing the opportunity for bits
that confer survival advantage to spread "horizontally" among species and
not just "vertically" down generations of the same species. This is known
as "horizontal gene transfer", or HGT.
An example of HGT that hit the headlines in 2010 is the transfer of a piece
of genetic material that codes for the enzyme NDM-1 (New-Delhi metallo
beta-lactamase), an enzyme that destroys antibiotics, even (and this is why
NDM-1 is cause for alarm) the super-strong carbapenems, which are generally
reserved for use in emergencies and the treatment of infections caused by
NDM-1 is most often seen in Klebsiella pneumoniae and E.coli.
Many of the antibiotics in use today are chemically synthesized cousins of
naturally occurring molecules that evolved in microorganisms over millions
of years, as they fought for dominance over limited resources. They
themselves powered the means to produce and overcome, different antibiotic
But the problem we are seeing now, of rising antibiotic resistance, has not
taken millions of years, but only decades to come about, so what might
When we began to use antibiotic molecules to treat bacterial infections, we
exposed far more bacteria to much higher levels of antibiotics than they
would come across in the natural world, producing an effect that the
British Society for Immunology describes as "evolution in real time".
In fact, resistance to antibiotics is not a new thing, and the early signs
started quite soon after their introduction. For instance, resistance to
streptomycin, chloramphenicol and tetracycline and the sulfonamides, was
noted in the 1953 Shigella dysentery outbreak in Japan, only a decade after
those drugs were introduced.
Widespread and Misguided Use Is to Blame
Many experts believe that it is our widespread, and often misguided use of
antibiotics to treat humans and animals that is responsible for the vastly
accelerated speed at which antibiotic-resistant microorganisms have
However, while numerous studies have shown there is a dynamic relationship
between the prescribing of antibiotics, and the levels of antibiotic
resistance in populations, too many doctors still prescribe antibiotics to
patients to treat viral infections like coughs and colds.
Some suggest this habit persists because doctors and patients fail to
recognize that a course of antibiotics can result in resistance in a single
person: they assume it is a population effect. Others may also not realize
the full extent of the risks to health of inappropriate prescribing.
In a study published last year in Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology, US researchers found
that giving patients antibiotics for viral infections not only did not
benefit them, but may even have harmed them. For instance, a significant
number of the patients they studied developed Clostridium difficile diarrhea, a bacterial condition linked with
The problem of medical over-use not just confined to the US. For instance,
in most European countries, antibiotics are the second most widely used
drugs after simple analgesics.
Also, prescription drugs are not the only source of antibiotics in the
environment to put "selective pressure" on bacteria.
Antibiotics are in food and water. In the US, for example, giving
antibiotics to animals is routine on large, concentrated farms that breed
beef cattle, pigs and poultry for human consumption. The drugs are given
not just to cure infection in sick animals, but also to prevent infection
and promote faster growth in healthy animals. The antibiotics then find
their way via effluent from houses and feedlots into the water systems and
contaminate streams and groundwater.
Such routine use of antibiotics affects not only the animals and the people
who eat them, but also all those who consume the contaminated water.
In his comprehensive and highly readable online "Textbook of Bacteriology",
Dr Kenneth Todar, an emeritus lecturer in Microbiology at the University of
Wisconsin-Madison, calls this a "double hit", because "...we get
antibiotics in our food and drinking water, and we meanwhile promote
For this reason, the European Union and other industrialized nations, have
banned feeding antibiotics to animals, and recently, the US Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) started urging farmers to limit their use of
antibiotics. In fact, after decades of deliberation, it appears the FDA may
be poised to issue its tightest guidelines yet on use of antibiotics in
animals, with the intention of bringing to an end the use of the drugs
simply to make animals grow faster.
Todar says that the "non-therapeutic use of antibiotics in livestock
production makes up at least 60 per cent of the total antimicrobial
production in the United States", so this is not a small thing.
Another industry that is starting to be a cause for concern is genetically
modified crops, because some have antibiotic-resistant genes inserted as
"markers". The marker genes are introduced into the crop plant during the
early stages of development for scientific reasons (eg to help detect
herbicide-resistant genes), but then serve no further purpose, and are left
in the final product.
Some people have criticized this approach because they say it could be a
way for microorganisms in the environment to acquire the
antibiotic-resistant genes. Todar says that in some cases, these "marker
genes confer resistance to front-line antibiotics such as the beta-lactams
Multiple Drug Resistance (MDR)
As the bacteria have evolved and acquired resistance to antibiotics, we
have tried to stay one step ahead by developing new drugs, and adopting a
protocol of first, second and last-line treatment. Last-line treatment
drugs are reserved for patients whose bacterial infection is resistant to
first and second-line treatments.
But we are now seeing more and more multiple-drug-resistant (MDR) bacteria,
that are able to resist even last-line treatments.
In December 2010, the journal Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology, published a study
that reported a three-fold increase in cases involving drug-resistant
strains of Acinetobacter in US hospitals from 1999 and 2006. This
dangerous bacteria strikes patients in Intensive Care Units (ICUs) often
causing severe pneumonia or bloodstream infection, some of which are now
resistant to imipenem, a last-line treatment antibiotic.
The researchers said that a lot of attention was being paid to MRSA, but we
should also be worried about other bacteria like Acinetobacter
because there are even fewer drugs in the development pipeline and we are
running out of treatment options.
As well as affecting ICU and other patients, Acinetobacter
infections are arising in soldiers returning from the war in Iraq.
It would appear that a contributing factor to the surge in MDR bacteria, or
"superbugs", is that they spread from patient to patient in hospitals and
long term care facilities like nursing homes.
A study published in the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases in
June 2005, found that living in a long-term care facility, being 65 or
older, or taking antibiotics for two or more weeks, were all factors that
increased patients' likelihood of carrying MDR bacteria upon admission to a
Also, more recent research suggests that the problem of MDR may be more
than just genetic. In a study published online in January 2011 in the Journal of Medical Microbiology, researchers proposed that a
non-genetic mechanism called "persistence" makes bacteria temporarily
hyper-resistant to all antibiotics at once. They found "persister"
bacterial cells of Pseudomonas aeruginosa, an opportunistic human
pathogen and a significant cause of hospital-acquired infections, were able
to survive normally lethal levels of antibiotics without being genetically
resistant to the drug.
Fewer Drugs in the Pipeline
One of the reasons that despite being around for decades, it is only now
that the threat of antibiotic resistance is being taken so seriously, is
there has been a massive decline in the development of new antibiotics.
Since the discovery of two classes of antibiotic over 70 years ago,
penicillin in 1929 and the first sulfonamide, prontosil, in 1932, the
ensuing decades have given rise to a total of 13 classes of antibiotic,
some now in their fifth generation. At the peak of development, new drugs
were coming out at a rate of 15 to 20 every ten years, but in the last ten
years, we have seen only 6 new drugs, and, according to another article in
the May 2010 issue of BMJ, titled "Stoking the Antibiotic
Pipeline", only two new drugs are under development, and both are in the
early stages when failure rates are high.
In that article, authors Chantal Morel and Elias Mossialos of the London
School of Economics and Political Science, cite that in 2004, only 1.6 per
cent of drugs in the pipeline of the world's 15 largest drug companies were
antibiotics, and give a number of reasons why the companies have reduced
investment in antibiotics research. Among these (ironically) is the fact
doctors are being encouraged to restrict use of antibiotics for the more
serious cases, and antibiotics are not as profitable as drugs that mitigate
symptoms. Plus of course, the spectre of antibiotic resistance means the
lifespan of a new drug is likely to be curtailed, which means smaller
returns on investment.
This bleak scenario prompted Professor Tim Walsh of UK's Cardiff
University, and colleagues, who in the September 2010 Lancet Infectious Diseases told us about NDM-1 and its threat to
public health worldwide, to ask the question, "Is this the end of
In an interview with the Guardian newspaper, Walsh said there are no
antibiotics in the pipeline that are effective against bacteria that
produce NDM-1 enzymes:
"We have a bleak window of maybe 10 years, where we are going to have to
use the antibiotics we have very wisely, but also grapple with the reality
that we have nothing to treat these infections with," said Walsh.
"In many ways, this is it," he said, "this is potentially the end."
The British Society for Immunology agrees: the idea that all you have to do
to keep on fighting the bacteria successfully is every year come up with
"something new" no longer works when the pipeline for new drugs runs dry,
"Push and Pull" Incentives for Drug Research
Against this prospect of a bleak future for our fight against harmful
bacteria,with many experts saying it will take decades to reverse the
dearth in research and development of antibacterial treatments, governments
appear to be converging on a two-pronged approach: accelerate the
development of new drugs and be very prudent with how we use our current
and future arsenal of antibiotics so as to minimize exposure and slow down
the evolution of drug-resistant strains of infectious bacteria.
With the first of these strategies in mind, the European Council and the US
have recently set up task forces and committees to spur the research and
development of new antibacterial drugs, with the goal of developing 10 new
drugs by 2020. To do this will take a huge concerted effort, plus
significant changes in funding and legislation.
In their BMJ paper, Morel and Mossialos suggest a range of
mechanisms to encourage drug companies to develop new antibiotics. These
include "push" mechanisms to subsidize early research, "pull" mechanisms to
reward results, some significant changes to laws and regulations, and
others that use a combination of methods.
For instance, under "push" mechanisms they suggest tax incentives tied to
early research activities, plus greater funding of public-private
partnerships and schemes that train new and experienced researchers,
promote multidisciplinary collaboration and create open access resources
such as molecule libraries.
And under "pull" mechanisms they suggest introducing schemes to purchase
drugs at pre-agreed prices and volumes, plus prizes and lump sum rewards,
including the option of allowing developers to choose between keeping
ownership of the patent for a new drug, or being bought out of it with a
financial lump sum.
To accelerate the timescale of drug development, Morel and Mossialos also
suggest ways to speed up assessment, and that some or even a large
proportion of phase III trials should be allowed to take place after the
drug is already on the market.
They also suggest relaxing anti-trust laws to encourage developers of
products with similar resistance-related characteristics to work together,
eg so as to reduce the risk of drug resistance arising from different
products for the same condition.
Another idea is to give antibiotic drugs "orphan-like" status, a scheme
currently used in Europe to incentivize drug companies to make drugs for
rare diseases, such as getting help with protocols, tax incentives, fee
reductions before and after authorization, and 10-year market exclusivity.
Morel and Mossialos point out, none of this will work, if we don't at the
same dismantle the current "incentive structures that lead to overuse of
antibiotics, which is currently fueling the spread of resistant bacteria".
However, despite this rather pessimistic backdrop, there appears to be a
faint glimmer of optimism among some scientists who believe that the tide
is already starting to turn.
In a paper published in the July 2010 issue of the International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents, Dr Ursula
Theuretzbacher, founder and principal of the Center for Anti-Infective
Agents in Vienna, Austria, wrote that innovation in antibiotic drugs
"proceeds in waves", and that "interest in antibiotics, particularly in
drugs effective against MDR Gram-negative bacteria, is back".
She said we appear to be at the start of a new wave that will hopefully
yield new antibiotic drugs in about 10 to 15 years time; but, she agrees
with many others who say that in the meantime we must continue to address
the problem with "a multifaceted set of solutions based on currently
A November 2010 article in the New York Times also hints of a new wave,
suggesting signs that the drug industry is picking up on its own. This is
supported by figures from the FDA that show the number of antibiotics in
clinical trials has gone up in the last three years, which the New York
Times says is mostly due to the efforts of small drug companies, who can be
satisfied with lower sales volumes.
Meanwhile, Make Prudent Use of Antibiotics
Whether "push and pull", or any other incentives can help stoke the
research and development pipeline, it still makes sense to make prudent use
of antibiotics, because unnecessary exposure just gives bacteria another
opportunity to develop resistance.
The consensus appears to be that a multifaceted strategy is needed, which
includes ongoing education of prescribers and users of antibiotics,
evidence-based guidelines and policies for hospitals and healthcare
settings (including improving hospital hygiene), and improved prescribing
For example, as part of a set of key messages for hospital prescribers the
European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC), suggests:
- Monitoring of hospital antibiotic resistance and antibiotic use.
- Optimizing timing and duration of antibiotics for surgery to lower
surgical site infections and reduce emergence of resistant bacteria.
- In some cases, shorter rather than longer treatments can be given without
affecting patient outcomes and lowers the frequency of antibiotic
- Taking samples before therapy, monitoring culture results, and
streamlining use of antibiotics based on these results can lead to
reductions in unnecessary use of antibiotics.
The "European Antibiotic Awareness Day" is run in November every year by
the ECDC. The latest campaign stresses a number of messages for primary
"If we continue to consume antibiotics at the current rate, Europe may face
a return to the pre-antibiotic era where a common bacterial infection could
be a death sentence."
The ECDC urges doctors to:
- Note that antibiotic exposure is linked to the emergence of antibiotic
- Take responsibility for promoting appropriate use of antibiotics in order
to keep antibiotics effective.
- Only prescribe antibiotics when necessary.
- Base antibiotic prescriptions on a symptomatic diagnosis and not on
- Use their status as an authoritative source of information to advise
patients on the risks of inappropriate antibiotic use.
Across the Atlantic, the US Centers for Disease Control and Development
(CDC) "Get Smart: Know When Antibiotics Work" campaign repeatedly
"Antibiotics cure bacterial infections, not viral infections such as colds
or flu, most coughs and bronchitis, sore throats not caused by strep, or
Get Smart includes a comprehensive set of education materials for doctors
and patients, and also urges doctors not to give way to patient pressure
and to educate their patients about appropriate use of antibiotics.
The message appears to be getting through, because National Ambulatory
Medical Care Survey (NAMCS) data shows that the Get Smart Campaign
contributed to a 25% reduction in antimicrobial use per outpatient office
visit for presumed viral infection, and has reduced antibiotic
prescriptions for children under 5 in ambulatory ear infection visits: in
2007, there were 47.5 antibiotic prescriptions per 100 visits, down from 61
in 2006 and 69 in 1997.
Some Interesting Directions for the Future
A number of new studies published recently suggest that our fight against
harmful microorganisms might proceed in some rather interesting new
Cold plasma therapy:
A team of Russian and German scientists found that a ten-minute treatment
with low temperature plasma (high energy ionized gas) killed drug-resistant
bacteria causing wound infections in rats and increased the rate of wound
healing by damaging microbial DNA and surface structures. Their study
appears in the January 2010 issue of the Journal of Medical Microbiology.
Researchers at the University of East Anglia in the UK found that ants, who
tend farms of fungi that they grow to feed their larvae and queen, use
antibiotics to inhibit the growth of unwanted microorganisms. The
antibiotics are made by actinomycete bacteria that live on the ants in a
mutual symbiosis. The researchers said they not only found a new
antibiotic, but they also learned important clues that can teach us how to
slow drug-resistant bacteria. The study appeared in the journal BMC Biology in August 2010.
Natural enzymes in body fluids:
A US team from Georgia Institute of Technology and University of Maryland
has developed a pioneering method of identifying naturally occurring "lytic
enzymes" found in body fluids like tears and saliva that are capable of
attacking harmful bacteria, including antibiotic-resistant ones like MRSA,
while leaving friendly bacteria alone. The study appeared in the journal Physical Biology in October 2010.
Good Samaritan bacteria:
Dr James Collins, a biologist at Boston University and his team were
astonished to find an example of Good Samaritan behavior among bacteria,
whereby resistant mutants were secreting a molecule called "indole" that
thwarts their own growth but helps other bacteria survive by triggering
drug-expelling pumps on their cell membranes. The team hope their research
on "bacterial charity", which appeared in a September 2010 issue of Nature, will spur the development of more powerful antibiotics.
Also, the current crisis in antibiotic therapy, may also mean that we turn
our attention to other, long forgotten ways of overcoming microorganisms.
One of these is Phage Therapy, which has been practised in the Soviet Union
since the days of Stalin. Click here for LifeSource Vitamins
All Natural Antibiotics
Phages are natural viruses that specifically infect and kill target
bacteria, in a similar way to the lytic enzymes discovered by the US team
reported in the Physical Biology study.
The discovery of antibiotics is thought to have turned Western countries
away from phage therapy, but there are reports that soldiers with dysentry
in World War I were successfully treated with phages, as were cholera
victims in India in the 1920s.
The Eliava Institute of Bacteriophage, Microbiology, and Virology (EIBMV)
in Tbilisi, Georgia receives patients from all over the world for treatment
with phage therapy. They have successfully treated patients with chronic
conditions like sinusitis, urinary tract infections, prostatitis,
methicillin-resistant Staph infections, and non-healing wounds, according
to an article that appeared in Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology News
in October 2008. EIBMV have a large phage collection and have recently
partnered with a California-based company to bring their expertise to a
wider international market.
10 Jan 2011 Medical News Today
Sources: Medical News Today Archives; MedicineNet.com;
ExplorePAHistory.com; "The Future of Antibiotics", British Society for
Immunology, May 2010; So, Gupta and Cars, "Tackling antibiotic resistance", BMJ BMJ 2010, 340:c2071; "Antibiotic resistance" European Research
in Action Leaflet, European Commission, Aug 2003; Shiley, Lautenbach, and
Lee, "The Use of Antimicrobial Agents after the Diagnosis of Viral
Respiratory Tract Infections in Hospitalized Adults: Antibiotics or
Anxiolytics?" Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology Nov
2010, 31:11; Pop-Vicas and D'Agata, "The Rising Influx of
Multidrug-Resistant Gram-Negative Bacilli into a Tertiary Care Hospital",Clinical Infectious Diseases, Jun 2005, 40:12; De Groote et al "Pseudomonas aeruginosa fosfomycin resistance mechanisms
affect non- Pollack, "Antibiotics Research inherited without antibiotics?"
Guardian, 12 Aug 2010; Theuretzbacher, "Future antibiotics scenarios: is
the tide starting to turn?", International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents, 34 (1), Jul
fluoroquinolone tolerance", Journal of Medical Microbiology 2011;
Morel and Mossialos, "Stoking the antibiotic pipeline", BMJ 2010,
340:c2115; Kumarasamy, Toleman, Walsh et al, "Emergence of a new
antibiotic resistance mechanism in India, Pakistan, and the UK: a
molecular, biological, and epidemiological study", Lancet Infectious Diseases, 10 (9), Sep 2010; Sarah Boseley, "Are
you ready for a world 2009; Andrew Subsidies Weighed by US", New York
Times, 5 Nov 2010; "Questions and answers about NDM-1 and carbapenem
resistance", Health Protection Agency, 2010; Erik Eckholm, "US Meat Farmers
Brace for Limits on Antibiotics", New York Times, 14 Sep 2010; Todar's
Online Textbook of Bacteriology; "Bacteriophage-Based Antibiotic Therapy",
Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology News, Oct 2008.
Proudly Made in the USA!
Every LifeSource Vitamins product exceeds all regulatory standards and
requirements set forth in the FDA's Code of Federal Regulation. (
21 CFR, part 111
as well as all Good Manufacturing Practices enforced by the FDA. CGMP's
provide for systems that assure proper design, monitoring, and control of
manufacturing processes and facilities. (
LifeSource Vitamins: Driven by Faith ~ Powered by God
Have Questions on this or any other product or health issue for you or a
loved one? It can be overwhelming we know. Call us, we will walk you
through what supplements will help you and which ones you really don’t
need. It’s what we do! Toll-Free: 800-567-8122
LifeSource Vitamins – Founded in 1992
100% of our profits are donated to Christian Organizations like these
and many others worldwide:
Campus Crusade for Christ - CRU
The Jesus Film Project
The Tim Tebow Foundation
The Herman and Sharron Show on CTN (Christian Television Network)
and many more…
E-mail Us: info@LifesourceVitamins.com
or Call Us: 800.567.8122
We Are Built on Compassion - Driven by Faith & Powered by God!
None of the above statements have been evaluated by the FDA. These products
are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.
As always, consult your physician before taking any and all
LifeSource Vitamins. Individual results may vary.
All the information contained throughout this website is based upon the
opinions of the founder of LifeSource Vitamins, Bruce Brightman, and the
entire team at LifeSource Vitamins whose relentless research and studies
have been ongoing since 1992. Other articles and information are based on
the opinions of the authors, who retain the copyright as marked in the
article. The information on this site is not intended to replace your
health care professional, but to enhance your relationship with them. Doing
your own studying and research and taking your health care into your own
hands is always best, especially in partnership with your health care
If you are pregnant, nursing, taking medications, or have any medical
conditions, always consult your health care professional before taking
supplements based on the information on this site.
LifeSource Vitamins: from the nutrients we choose, to the way we run
our business, we answer to God in all we do!