U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Health and Wellness
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-27-2019, 10:09 AM
 
Location: Central IL
15,925 posts, read 9,133,497 times
Reputation: 37587

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by mike1003 View Post
Years ago there was no understanding that bacteria are smarter than we are and can rapidly adapt to antibiotics,


But, we do know that today. Yet mothers still beg for antibiotics for their kids who don't need them and Drs still prescribe hem


We did know, and always told patients, to completely finish the antibiotic fill, even when feeling better. Yet they still stop treatment all the time


We are rapidly running out of antibiotics and the bacteria are winning the race
And why do people stop taking when they still have pills? Is it truly because they think they are completely better? They are "saving" the pills for a future illness? Or are they deep down skeptical and just feel better not having to take a pill so they stop as soon as they are "able"?

All points to a general skepticism of science and medicine, unfortunately. Certainly we didn't understand the concept of resistance at the beginning of antibiotics but soon it was known and hence the admonishments to take the full dose - that was unheeded by many and contributed to what we are seeing now. Of course science is being blamed for not knowing at the outset of this outcome....

Science will never have all the answers but for now, we know what we know and hopefully keep improving on that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-27-2019, 10:38 AM
 
Location: Loudon, TN
6,322 posts, read 5,179,355 times
Reputation: 21839
I personally know 2 individuals who've become infected with resistant bugs post surgery. One had a knee replacement 7 years ago and has never walked properly since. He spent almost a year on IV AB trying to control the infection in the knee. He's had additional surgeries to clean out the ongoing infection, and told us just last week about the disgusting fluids still draining from his knee. He walks with a cane now, and will for life. They've told him his best bets are to have additional surgery to immobilize his knee, or amputate. He's afraid that either option will trigger another raging infection, and possibly his death. Another friend had a skin cancer removed from his shin and has had an open, infected wound on his shin for over a year. He nearly died from the initial infection which manifested itself about 2 weeks after the very superficial surgery on his leg. He was on IV AB for 6 to 8 weeks, and still carefully bandages his leg every day, but even with proper wound care, he's got to deal with it.

I will think long and hard before any surgery. My DH has to have skin cancers removed on an annual basis and I keep my fingers crossed we don't encounter any super bugs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2019, 11:42 AM
 
5,171 posts, read 11,312,096 times
Reputation: 12597
Quote:
Originally Posted by coschristi View Post
Oh brother.

Doctors like you are why I have 'sulfa abx' listed as an allergy on my chart.

I am not allergic to Sulfa's.

Sulfa's seem to work on my infections for the first 24 hours. Within 48 hours I will be on a tilt table in the ER with IVs running wide open, trying to mitigate my 105 degree fever. This has happened to me over & over & over ...

The C&S will state the bug is resistant to Sulfa's. But that bug in ME + Sulfa results in a 'super-bug'. You know why? Because I had chronic strep as a child & was on antibiotics for sometimes 9 months out of 12.

I AM resistant to many broad-spectrum abx & doctors do not LISTEN to me; so now I just keep it simple for them so they don't put me into septic shock with their 'Bacteria are either susceptible or not; not the patient' trope.

And the CDC is gaming us here. They have their annual 'Antibiotics awareness week/month' to coincide with the start of flu season. Then doctors are wary of treating the secondary pneumonia's with antibiotics which inevitably leads to higher 'influenza & pneumonia' mortality.

Guess what that increases the demand for?

This excessive pearl-clutching of 'antibiotic awareness' this year is just a preliminary fear-mongering for the upcoming ETVAX, for diarrhea from E Coli. E. Coli is treatable with antibiotics.
You really have no idea what you are talking about

YOU are not resistant to antibiotics.

Micro organisms become resistant through natural selection

Since you don’t seem to comprehend that simple concept there is no point even responding to the rest of this nonsense
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2019, 12:30 PM
 
Location: colorado springs, CO
5,934 posts, read 2,633,683 times
Reputation: 18901
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluedevilz View Post
You really have no idea what you are talking about

YOU are not resistant to antibiotics.

Micro organisms become resistant through natural selection

Since you don’t seem to comprehend that simple concept there is no point even responding to the rest of this nonsense
This is why my chart states:

ALLERGY: Sulfa Antibiotics

Easier than the septic shock that will occur if you were to prescribe me ... sulfa antibiotics, for something the lab C&S states: 'Susceptible ... Sulfonamide.'

Case in point. How many times should I have to be treated for sepsis to prove you wrong?

Last edited by coschristi; 11-27-2019 at 12:44 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2019, 12:38 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
24,170 posts, read 29,247,848 times
Reputation: 30056
Quote:
Originally Posted by coschristi View Post
And the CDC is gaming us here. They have their annual 'Antibiotics awareness week/month' to coincide with the start of flu season. Then doctors are wary of treating the secondary pneumonia's with antibiotics which inevitably leads to higher 'influenza & pneumonia' mortality.
Doctors are not deliberately withholding antibiotics so more people will die from pneumonia. The idea is asinine.

There are indications for treating patients who have flu with antibiotics.

The first line of defense for flu is prevention with the vaccine.

For those who do get flu, initial treatment is with antiviral medication, not antibiotics.

https://www.webmd.com/cold-and-flu/f...otics-or-not#1

See section VI here for the use of antibiotics in patients with influenza, from the Infectious Disease Society:

https://www.idsociety.org/practice-guideline/influenza/

In a patient with suspected or confirmed influenza, when should bacterial coinfection of the upper or lower respiratory tract be considered, investigated, and treated?

Quote:
  • Clinicians should investigate and empirically treat bacterial coinfection in patients with suspected or laboratory-confirmed influenza who present initially with severe disease (extensive pneumonia, respiratory failure, hypotension, and fever), in addition to antiviral treatment for influenza (A-II).
  • Clinicians should investigate and empirically treat bacterial coinfection in patients who deteriorate after initial improvement, particularly in those treated with antivirals (A-III).
  • Clinicians can consider investigating bacterial coinfection in patients who fail to improve after 3–5 days of antiviral treatment (C-III).
Quote:
Originally Posted by coschristi View Post
This excessive pearl-clutching of 'antibiotic awareness' this year is just a preliminary fear-mongering for the upcoming ETVAX, for diarrhea from E Coli. E. Coli is treatable with antibiotics.
Multi-drug resistance is a problem with E. coli.

What do you not understand about how preventing infections with vaccines reduces overall antibiotic use?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6304973/
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2019, 12:46 PM
 
Location: Ohio
20,774 posts, read 14,696,701 times
Reputation: 17034
Quote:
Originally Posted by SimplySagacious View Post
A century of so-called progress is what caused this antibiotic resistance. Hindsight is 20/20.
It has nothing to do with "progress."

Whether you over-prescribed antibiotics or not, you'd ultimately reach this point.

All organisms mutate. That's what they do. Every organism has a rate of natural mutation, in addition to the rate of coerced mutation. Not only that, but in complex organisms, different cell groups have different rates of natural mutation.

In you, your bone cells, kidney cells, liver cells, brain cells, pancreas cells, lung cells, etc etc each have a natural rate of mutation. The bulk of mutations, better than 95% are benign. A small fraction are harmful and we give that the generic name "cancer." The others are beneficial.

On top of that, species have different rates of reproduction. E Coli reproduces every 20 minutes, or 3 generations per hour or 72 generations in 24 hours.

How long would it take a human to produce 72 generations? About 15 centuries.

In that 15 centuries, E Coli has produced 37,843,200 generations.

Given the rate of natural mutation for E Coli, there will be new variants of E Coli.

Then you have mutations caused by the photo-electric effect and chemical interaction.

The photo-electric effect is just photons from our Sun, other stars and radioactive isotopes on Earth, like the Radon gas in your basement. On top of that you have protons, neutrons, fission fragments, Alpha and Beta particles from our Sun, other stars and radioactive isotopes on Earth.

Chemical reactants are sometimes called "carcinogens" because they will alter genes in a way that is know to be harmful. Those chemical reactants can be inorganic, like metals and minerals, or organic like unsymmetrical dimethylhydrazine.

So, it was only a matter of time before bacteria underwent a natural mutation or a coerced mutation to tolerate antibiotics and thus "be resistant."

It's not like we haven't seen that before. It is, in fact, one of the reasons you exist.

For the first 2.5 Billion years of Earth's existence there was no Oxygen in the atmosphere. It was 72% Nitrogen, 26% CO2 (or 26,000 ppm if you prefer) and trace gases. No, there was no runaway greenhouse effect, but there were anaerobic bacteria on Earth and plankton-like organisms in the ocean (and there was only one ocean at the time).

The plankton-like organisms produce Oxygen as a by-product of photosynthesis which at first bonded with reactive metals and minerals dissolved in the ocean. After they precipitated out, the ocean absorbed Oxygen until it became saturated and then Oxygen started leaching into the atmosphere.

Anaerobic bacteria do not need Oxygen and it is a poison: it kills them.

So, anaerobic bacteria started dying en masse until one mutated to tolerate Oxygen.

Later, one of those mutants mutated again to not just tolerate Oxygen, but to incorporate Oxygen as part of its metabolism, and that's one reason we're all here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2019, 12:57 PM
 
Location: colorado springs, CO
5,934 posts, read 2,633,683 times
Reputation: 18901
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
Doctors are not deliberately withholding antibiotics so more people will die from pneumonia. The idea is asinine.
Who said doctors are witholding antibiotics so that patients will die? I said the CDC's campaign is causing doctors to be wary of prescribing antibiotics; which is causing patients to die.

Doctors are under mandates to limit prescribing & face disciplinary actions if they exceed mandated limits. According to my doctor, my dad's doctor & my uncle, who is a doctor. All in Colorado, so YMMV.

As doctors lose their autonomy in treating patients as individuals; patient care & patients ... suffer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2019, 01:05 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
88,159 posts, read 104,396,895 times
Reputation: 33793
Quote:
Originally Posted by KaraG View Post
How can you say that we didn't know this years ago? It was mid-80's when I was in the library reading about the dangers of overuse of antibiotics, my son had been prescribed 13 times at 18 months for ear infections and they weren't working on him anymore. As a mom, a non-medically trained person, I was worried that his little body wouldn't be able to use antibiotics to fight off a serious disease.

I was able to get the cycle of ear infections stopped with a homeopathic chiropractor.

The info was out there decades ago. The fact that doctors still pass out antiobiotics like candy is horrible, not to mention the overuse of antibacterial soaps and hand cleaners.
I learned about antibiotic resistance in microbiology class in 1968. It was there we learned about antibiotic overuse as well. So I agree with the bold. The rest of your post?

Well, I can't support use of chiropractic, especially in kids. Maybe your "homeopathic chiropractor" didn't tell you this, but kids tend to outgrow ear infections around two years of age.

I don't think doctors pass out antibiotics like candy, and that is verified by a 45 year nursing career, including the last 11 in a pediatrics office where I saw things first hand.

Antibiotic hand sanitizers and the like are controversial; clean hands are not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2019, 02:29 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
24,170 posts, read 29,247,848 times
Reputation: 30056
Quote:
Originally Posted by coschristi View Post
Who said doctors are witholding antibiotics so that patients will die? I said the CDC's campaign is causing doctors to be wary of prescribing antibiotics; which is causing patients to die.

Doctors are under mandates to limit prescribing & face disciplinary actions if they exceed mandated limits. According to my doctor, my dad's doctor & my uncle, who is a doctor. All in Colorado, so YMMV.

As doctors lose their autonomy in treating patients as individuals; patient care & patients ... suffer.
I gave you the criteria for using antibiotics in patients with flu. Doctors are not "causing patients to die" by under-prescribing antibiotics. They are "wary of prescribing" them without a clear indication. Any doctor who is unsure whether antibiotics are indicated can get an infectious disease consultation.

Please provide a source (other than a personal anecdote) where doctors "face disciplinary actions if they exceed mandated limits". How does that work? You can only treat ten patients with bacterial pneumonia with antibiotics and the eleventh patient is just out of luck? You are only allotted a certain number of doses of antibiotics per month no matter what diagnoses your patients have?

If a doctor were to be treating every patient he saw with an upper respiratory infection with antibiotics I can see how he might be strongly counselled to stop doing that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2019, 04:37 PM
 
5,171 posts, read 11,312,096 times
Reputation: 12597
Quote:
Originally Posted by coschristi View Post
This is why my chart states:

ALLERGY: Sulfa Antibiotics

Easier than the septic shock that will occur if you were to prescribe me ... sulfa antibiotics, for something the lab C&S states: 'Susceptible ... Sulfonamide.'

Case in point. How many times should I have to be treated for sepsis to prove you wrong?
How do you think you have "proven me wrong"???

I seriously have ZERO idea what you are trying to state and I'm reasonably sure YOU have ZERO idea what you are trying to state....

So your chart states ALLERGY: Sulfa antibiotics???? Your point is what exactly???

So you have an allergy or adverse reaction to sulfa antibiotics....LOTS of people have SULFA allergies

What does the sensitivity report stating "sensitive to sulfa antibiotics" have to do with YOU being "resistant" (you aren't) ????????????

Microbacteria are checked against a PANEL of antibiotics for sensitivity......so if the organism grown from your body fluids is sensitive to SULFA it is likely sensitive to other agents as well (unless it isn't hence the whole point of this thread which you seem to have missed)

Regardless, if you are ALLERGIC to or in your case more likely have an ADVERSE REACTION to SULFA drugs then you shouldn't receive them...simple

If you have received them despite your chart stated ALLERGY then that is a whole 'other problem which has nothing to do with this thread..

Finally...if you have an ALLERGY or ADVERSE REACTION to SULFA....giving you SULFA drugs will manifest in an allergic response which by definition is histamine related or in your case some odd adverse reactions.

What it WON'T DO is CAUSE septic shock.....not possible.....again LEARN what septic shock is, how it is diagnosed, how it is mediated and how it is treated and then get back to me...

If the organism being treated is resistant to SULFA and the patient is being treated with wrong antibiotic then sure, septic shock can follow due to the LACK of proper treatment not BECAUSE of the antibiotic

There are also cases where antibiotics work TOO well resulting in rapid endotoxin release, more typically seen with beta lactase of which sulfa is not one...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Health and Wellness
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top