Malaria Parasites May Be Allies Against Drug Resistance

Malaria treatments aimed at killing every last parasite may be contributing to the problem of drug resistance. Weaker treatments may be stronger medicine. Steve Mirsky reports.

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


At least a million people die of malaria every year.  And one problem with treating the disease may be…treating the disease.  The current dosages of drugs used to fight malaria may sometimes make the problem worse—by allowing the malaria-causing parasites to become drug resistant faster.  That’s what evolutionary biologists said recently in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Various strains of malaria parasites compete with each other in an infected patient.  So parasites that are easier to kill actually help keep down the populations of hardier parasites.  But a big dose of drugs wipes out the weak players, leaving the field open to the resistant bugs.  Working with infected mice, the researchers found that more drugs and longer treatments tended to actually worsen the situation.  Current public health policies try to kill every last parasite.  But if the condition in people acts like it has in mice, a better idea may be to try to use the amount of medicine that will keep the person healthy—but will also let the parasites continue to duke it out with each other.

—Steve Mirsky

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe