Phage therapy’s influence has varied over time and across different countries such as Russia, Poland, India, and the United States. Politics and culture have both contributed to increases and limitations of the use of phage therapy.
In the 1940s–50s Russia, the state health system controlled the treatment of diseases due to its limited supplies. During World War II, Soviets received Western support and funding which allowed for antibiotic production. This support was removed after the war. Since Russia provided universal health care without charge, the Soviets did not have the resources to continue antibiotic production or buy from American pharmaceutical companies. The lack of resources caused phage therapy to regain popularity through government-supported propaganda which promoted patriotism.
World War II had differing influences on the phage research institutions including the Ludwik Hirszfeld Institute of Immunology and Experimental Therapy in Wroclaw and the Eliava Institute in Tbilisis. In Wroclaw, Poland, the Hirszfeld Institute was in fear of Stalin’s Lysenkoism since “more than 90% of Wroclaw’s Jewish population was killed” and both the founder, Ludwik Hirszfeld, and many staff members had Jewish heritage (Kuchment 65). After Stalin’s death, the Polish government provided support to the Hirszfeld institute. In contrast, the Eliava Institute had its peak during World War II since they received support from other countries to create phages to use for soldiers. After the war their funding was eliminated, they started to focus more on research than the production of phages. In 2003, two Eliava Institute scientists created the Phage Therapy Center in Tbilisi with goals of making phages more available for use. The outcomes of these centers can be contributed to political influences and differing priorities.
During the 1990s in the United States, an antibiotic resistance article led to a phage experiment performed by Merril, Carlton, and Adhya. Although other phage studies had already been performed in Russia and Poland, many Western scientists remained skeptical of how reliable the outcomes of these experiments were due to their poor study designs. In Merril’s experiment, the design considers various variables including: phage’s narrow host range, possible presence of phage lysate toxins, and the patient’s immune defense system. Mice were divided into four groups: a control group, a W60 (the “parent” lambda phage) treated group, an Argo1 treated group, and Argo2 treated group. Through serial-passage techniques, they were successfully able to isolate phages (Argo1 and Argo2) that could survive longer than the original lambda phage and eradicate the target bacteria.
With concerns for the antibiotic resistance problem, many companies are still looking into phage therapy as a possible alternative. In 1993 in the United States, Exponential Biotherapies emerged to commercialize phages to specifically target inflammatory responses. In 2000 in India, Dr. J Ramachandran founded GangaGen Inc. In recent publications, GangaGen has looked into using phage-derived lysins to break down biofilms which have high resistance to antibiotics. They are also working on a phage to target antibiotic resistant MRSA and VRSA infections. Although more research is being performed, there are still some holes that research should fill before phage therapy can be applied to modern Western medicine. More experiments should use a design that considers variables and uses controls in order to show that phages are safe and beneficial. For instance, would the use of phages to treat minor infections significantly more beneficial or even necessary? Most doctors believe “draining puss from an infection is often enough to cure it – even without phages or antibiotics” (Kuchment 69). If phage therapy becomes approved in the United States for patients, it most likely will be used with antibiotics and probably will not replace them since it would be extremely rare for a bacterium to develop resistance to both phages and antibiotics.
By time traveling through different stages of phage therapy history, one can grasp a greater understanding of how the various political climates and cultural mindsets shaped the spread of phage therapy across different countries.
