Forget anti-vaxers, now we have anti-antibiotics

[ladidah]

Thank you for helping me wise up, FlorenceHamilton, emmiedahl, and argypargy! I have quite a few doctors and nurses in my family, but I'm usually too embarrassed to reveal my ignorance by asking these questions. Three cheers for the scientifically informed internetz!

[maybeizfundie]

Thank you all who answered the flu shot question! That makes total sense.

I don't think a lot of people even know what the flu really is. Anything more than a mild cold is called "the flu" around here. So people totally believe the flu shot gave them "the flu". And of course, all stomach bugs are "the flu" too. "I had The Flu and it wasn't that bad. Why are people so worried about it?" No, you had a tummy bug. You felt like crap for a few days, barfed a lot, and then you got better. It wasn't influenza. There needs to be a huge educational campaign or something.

We have been really fortunate to avoid the flu for the most part (vaccines, maybe?) but I still remember when my little sister got it. She missed school for *three weeks* because of how sick she was-she ended up with pneumonia. That's not something I want to put my kids through, if I can help it.

[doggie]

slowly research and doctors are learning good gut bacteria is critical for health. Antibiotics can really screw it up and I think we are finding long term problems with too much antibiotics. it sure is for me.

[lovefromgirl]

This anti-antibiotic movement makes my blood boil. If strep throat is left untreated it can turn into Rheumatic fever where the child will most likely be weak and sickly for the rest of its life. The worst case is obviously death.

Are people really this stupid?! Really?!!!!

It makes me even more angry because I'm allergic to amoxicillin (and other 'cillins), which is the most effective antibiotic for strep, I believe. When people don't complete their antibiotics (especially the ones I can take like z-pack), it contributes to resistant bacteria. In turn, people like me are stuck without an effective antibiotic.

FWIW, I quit the antibiotic I was taking because it was making me way sicker than I'd been (which at that point was saying something). Knowing the science, I'm infinitely grateful that it was a misdiagnosis of something I would've caught from a tick. Not, IOW, something I could easily transmit to friends, family, or the general allergic-to-this-shit population.

But what do you do when you're on something and the cure is that much worse than the disease? My logic says "Ask for a different antibiotic, so the bug dies anyway", but my science on this is iffy.

[gardenvarietycitizen]

Rapid strep tests are standard now, so doctors can often confirm strep and write a prescription while your in the office. Rapid tests are not perfect though, and can produce a lot of false negatives. The last time I had strep (10 years ago) the rapid test was negative, but the visual exam was pretty convincing, so the doctor did a culture and went ahead and wrote the prescription for antibiotics. The culture came back positive.

I'm all for conservative use of antibiotics, but do not mess around with strep. I had scarlet fever when I was a kid (in 1989), and I was sick enough that neighbors and friends from church were sending get well cards. I was pretty young, but remember enough of it to know I never want to be that sick again, and that was with timely and appropriate medical care.

Ah. It being faster makes sense (yay scientific progress) but it seems the idea is still there, make sure it's strep (or bacterial, anyway) before prescribing. I do hear a lot about overuse of antibiotics but I think most of the (reasonable) discussion there is on taking antibiotics when it turns out you aren't actually infected with bacteria, but rather a virus or just nothing.

I'm 100% in favor of taking antibiotics when actually infected with something they will kill. :) Strep is definitely one of those things!

I only ever had "regular" strep infections in my life and those were plenty bad enough, bring ON the drugs!!!

[argypargy]

FWIW, I quit the antibiotic I was taking because it was making me way sicker than I'd been (which at that point was saying something). Knowing the science, I'm infinitely grateful that it was a misdiagnosis of something I would've caught from a tick. Not, IOW, something I could easily transmit to friends, family, or the general allergic-to-this-shit population.

But what do you do when you're on something and the cure is that much worse than the disease? My logic says "Ask for a different antibiotic, so the bug dies anyway", but my science on this is iffy.

That's a good question. I kept giving DS his Amoxicillin, even though he had major diarrhea, and resulting diaper rash, from it. that was the worst of it, though. If it made me sicker than sick, I would probably get a script for another antibiotic to make sure the bacteria is completely wiped.

[gardenvarietycitizen]

I do think some of the problem of people not finishing up their antibiotic regimens (which is often given as one cause of the antibiotic resistant bacteria evolution problem) is that they don't have reliable access to medical care (including antibiotics) and so they make the rational decision for their immediate situation, which is "I'm feeling okay now that I've beaten it down a bit, I'm going to save the rest of these precious, precious drugs for later in case this happens to me again."

It's a terrible thing to do on a wide scale, but plenty of people do this, or halve their doses for similar reasons. Yet another reason we really do need to consider adequate health care access for ALL - it ends up affecting everyone in the world.

Meanwhile to bring fundies back into it, there are a LOT of fundies into the Weston A. Price woo. Reading around the Buckhales of Alaska a while back, there were plenty of families in that orbit who posted quite a bit about it, including the need for organ meat (and bone broth in particular), raw castor oil, and raw milk, including baby formula made from raw milk (there are plenty of recipes out there).

From there it's only a tiny step to the people brushing their teeth with butter and clay.

[ladidah]

There's also a fairly reasonable debate within the medical profession about the occasional prescription of antibiotics for prophylactic reasons (usually to stave off the risks associated with some other medical procedure). Infectious disease specialists tend to be more cautious than other MDs on this issue, which makes sense, since ID specialists are the ones who wind up treating you when your immune system is seriously compromised and/or you've got an antibiotics-resistant infection. AFAIK, it's more of an intra-medicine debate—hence, happily, a more conspiracy-theory-free one—than the over-prescription arguments.

Back to the original topic: as several people have pointed out, financial problems and under-insurance often lie at the root of the conspiracy-theory approach—or at least that's certainly true of the religious and non-religious folks I know who get into this stuff.

[MrsKay]

OFFS. I admit it, I'm in the non-vaccinating crowd; sorry, the kids can't handle vaccines, I can handle a few, but you bet your ass that I, and the husband, get every one that we can to protect the kids (seriously, it's not open for debate - there's no way I can vax my kids).

I totally have a love/hate thing with antibiotics. Rarely took them as a kid. Lived with my now-ex and his parents as a teen, and his mother hauled us to the doctor for every little sniffle, and demanded antibiotics. No sooner was I out of that environment than I came down with a lengthy illness that demanded huge doses of strong antibiotics. I had also lost a lot of my ability to fight things off like I used to, or at least it seemed that way, and I appear to be immune to the more basic antibiotics now. My gut is also trashed, and I've been fighting a losing battle with candida for years.

However, they've saved my life, and my two older kids. I remember when GirlKay was a baby, and was diagnosed with Scarlet Fever. I almost shit myself - Pioneer/Frontier Days books and shows flashbacks, anyone? :shock: I couldn't believe it when the doctor, after dealing with my hysteria, sent us home with a bottle of antibiotics. Seriously - my kid wasn't going to die, or go blind??? Then during my pregnancy with BoyKay... first, when my membranes ruptured more than 3 months before his birth, and then when they realized, right before my c-section, that I had tested positive for Group B strep at least 2 WEEKS before then... You bet your ass I was praying at the invisible Shrine of Antibiotics.

We also had the endless ear infections with GirlKay, and her sinuses, and a few bouts of random crap with BoyKay. ToddlerKay has only needed antibiotics once, that I can recall. Yes, we dealt with terrible diaper rash and tummy issues as a result, and a scary allergic reaction with ToddlerKay, but I'll gladly take those any day if it means having live, healthy kids (I always have Epi-Pens and allergy meds around, so the allergic reaction wasn't as scary as it could have been). I do try alternative methods if I can; ToddlerKay has avoided a few doses because, I believe, of creative breastmilk use and breastfeeding, and I am all for watchful waiting if I can control the pain and the child doesn't appear to be at risk of lasting damage. However, if I believe antibiotics are needed, then I will suck it up and get them.

I hate that we can't vax our kids, but take comfort in the fact that at least SOME of the things aren't that common, and also that MrKay and I can help minimize the risk by getting shots. I can't even imagine the wreck that I would be, not having access to antibiotics, with the dangers that can pop up from the most basic regular kid behavior. Watch a group of kids for five minutes, and most parents will be silently thankful that antibiotics exist, seeing kids pick, lick and touch anything and anyone within reach. Even with side effects like yeast or gut issues, and problems like drug-resistant bacteria, there are so many alternatives or ways to minimize the issues, and so many ways that a child (or anyone) can be killed or suffer needlessly that could be avoided with antibiotics. I just can't even pretend to understand the reasoning behind this movement.

[emmiedahl]

MrsKay, if you cannot vaccinate then that is the Final Word. But your children are the ones that really worry me because there are so many elective non-vaxers out there. If we were all well-vaccinated, the occasional child who cannot do so would be no big deal and protected by herd immunity.

[Deleted03]

Emmie in some places it's hard to find a doctor. Although I see the point of not seeing a doctor you don't trust, well sometimes you have no choice. I have seen a doctor prescribing 3 times in a row (within a month and a half) the same exact antibiotic to that child. So no not all doctors are great, if you can change then it's awesome, but some are truly not that great.

Now antibiotics are a shared responsibility, in France at least there has been a lot of campaigns about antibiotics and telling people that you don't need antibiotics every time you are sick.

As for ear infections, I was prescribed antibiotics as late as then of the 1990's in France. I don't know if they still do that now, what with all the campaigning that's been going on.

Anyway, some people take it to the extreme, but IMO there's no reason mocking people who question doctors. They are just human after all, and the medical system is a system of power. I think that access to the Internet will help make that system better, and more user conscious. I personally just got blood work results back and although I love my practitioner, the comments she made were really minimal and I don't understand half of the numbers that were sent. I think it's healthy to wonder how good the translation is, when you have a doctor you might know well yet. Trust should be a building process rather than just assumed IMO. Dealing with a knowledge/power system is not easy and I think absolutely normal that some are questioning what is said to them. Now that they get their sources in the wrong place is a totally different issue. But I tend to err on the side of not mocking someone who is trying to understand what is dealt to them.

[Austin]

My son was recently hospitalized for a complication of strep throat. He developed an abscess in his throat as a result of strep. This was on a Sunday morning and he was seen at Urgent Care because he felt so bad, and they sent him immediately to the ER. The abscess was growing by leaps and bounds and was threatening to cut off his airway, so it needed to be drained ASAP. They ended up admitting him because even after that procedure, he was very ill.

I had looked in his throat that morning, but I could not see the abscess, although retrospectively, I remember noting that his uvula looked like it was "crooked". If I had just been like, "Oh, well, I know you feel much worse, but let's just see what happens," who knows what would have happened.

Strep is nothing to mess with, no matter how you feel about antibiotics. It can kill you or cause long term damage.

We take antibiotics as seldom as possible and are in most cases perfectly comfortable with the watch and wait approach. But if it's strep, of course we're going to take antibiotics.

[Witsec7]

I'm very conservative with my use of antibiotics. Although the DD was a healthy kid, strep outbreaks in her school were common, and we had an excellent rural physician who would aggressively treat the infection. I would not have had it any other way.

[Anise]

My son was recently hospitalized for a complication of strep throat. He developed an abscess in his throat as a result of strep. This was on a Sunday morning and he was seen at Urgent Care because he felt so bad, and they sent him immediately to the ER. The abscess was growing by leaps and bounds and was threatening to cut off his airway, so it needed to be drained ASAP. They ended up admitting him because even after that procedure, he was very ill.

I had looked in his throat that morning, but I could not see the abscess, although retrospectively, I remember noting that his uvula looked like it was "crooked". If I had just been like, "Oh, well, I know you feel much worse, but let's just see what happens," who knows what would have happened.

Strep is nothing to mess with, no matter how you feel about antibiotics. It can kill you or cause long term damage.

We take antibiotics as seldom as possible and are in most cases perfectly comfortable with the watch and wait approach. But if it's strep, of course we're going to take antibiotics.

Yikes, that actually happened to me as well. Except, in my case, the abscess was only on one side and was very visible- the side of my mouth was touching the uvula. The nurse had us rush off to a specialist who drained it (and their equipment failed, so it had to be done manually- cut and spit). I was such a mess, and I kept apologizing because it was so disgusting. The doctor wanted to remove my tonsils, which he thought were just too large. I didn't let him take them out, and I've had no problem with abscesses since then. But, yeah, at the time it was scary.

I think I've had strep three times in my teen years, and it scares me that I might get it and not realize what it is and so not get proper treatment and incur permanent heart damage. Strep is definitely not something that requires just a little rest.

[browngrl]

Should antibiotics be prescribed only after careful consideration? Yes. Might you need to take steps to restore your gut microbes after antibiotic use? Yes. However, this is going too far. Guess what happened to far too many people with bacterial infections before the use of antibiotics? They died or suffered greatly. Guess what happens to people today who are unlucky enough to get an infection that is resistant to all/most antibiotics. They die or suffer greatly. These anti- antibiotic-ers are fools. They have thrown the baby out with the bathwater and deserve the consequences of their choice. On the plus side: they will likely prove to be nice examples of evolution in action.

[Witsec7]

Should antibiotics be prescribed only after careful consideration? Yes. Might you need to take steps to restore your gut microbes after antibiotic use? Yes. However, this is going too far. Guess what happened to far too many people with bacterial infections before the use of antibiotics? They died or suffered greatly. Guess what happens to people today who are unlucky enough to get an infection that is resistant to all/most antibiotics. They die or suffer greatly. These anti- antibiotic-ers are fools. They have thrown the baby out with the bathwater and deserve the consequences of their choice. On the plus side: they will likely prove to be nice examples of evolution in action.

You touched on some points that are germane here in Boregonia. We have a cult, The Followers of Christ, up north that deny medical care and meds to children and depend on faith healing. In the past children have died for the lack of a simple antibiotic. I don't want to muddy the waters too much and confuse the arguments. But besides the faith healing these cultees really think antibiotics are part of some NWO conspiracy or some such nonsense.

[ILoveJellybeans]

Do people want to go back hundreds of years to the time when getting sick could mean death and most kids would die before they were 5.

[caito]

I know a few people on another site who say they don't use antibiotics. One says she's doomsday prepping and keeps all the antibiotics the docs give her and puts them with her stash.

I understand that antibiotics aren't needed for every single little thing (that's how superbugs are created), but there is absolutely a time and place where they're needed.

[ladidah]

Do people want to go back hundreds of years to the time when getting sick could mean death and most kids would die before they were 5.

Most of these folks talk endlessly about living "naturally." They don't seem to have much sense of how cruel nature really is.

[Minerva]

Most of these folks talk endlessly about living "naturally." They don't seem to have much sense of how cruel nature really is.

This right here.

If your only justification for something is "it's natural", you're doing it wrong. If you can prove how it's naturalness is beneficial, as in "it doesn't contain pesticides", "it can be composted instead of being sent to a landfill" or even simply "it makes me feel warm and fuzzy inside", that works. Assigning a moral value to naturalness itself doesn't.

[ILoveJellybeans]

Yeah, cause poisonous plants are natural, but we dont eat them.

[MrsKay]

Yikes, that actually happened to me as well. Except, in my case, the abscess was only on one side and was very visible- the side of my mouth was touching the uvula. The nurse had us rush off to a specialist who drained it (and their equipment failed, so it had to be done manually- cut and spit). I was such a mess, and I kept apologizing because it was so disgusting. The doctor wanted to remove my tonsils, which he thought were just too large. I didn't let him take them out, and I've had no problem with abscesses since then. But, yeah, at the time it was scary.

I think I've had strep three times in my teen years, and it scares me that I might get it and not realize what it is and so not get proper treatment and incur permanent heart damage. Strep is definitely not something that requires just a little rest.

OMG - that sounds horrifying! I seem to be prone to abcess formation; when I was a kid, I had one on my throat, but it formed on the outside. It still obstructed my windpipe etc., but could be lanced from outside. It was insanely painful, and almost killed me - I can't even imagine what it would have felt like inside my throat!

Collecting antibiotics for a doomsday collection is nuts - they do have expiration dates! :roll:

[rock_girl]

I know a few people on another site who say they don't use antibiotics. One says she's doomsday prepping and keeps all the antibiotics the docs give her and puts them with her stash.

I understand that antibiotics aren't needed for every single little thing (that's how superbugs are created), but there is absolutely a time and place where they're needed.

Is she aware that medicines have expiry dates? I really, really hope that her doctors aren't prescribing tetracyclines.

[Wolfie]

The alterations that I made were actually pretty minimal. I've been pretty conscious of what I eat since I was a teenager. I was eating mostly organic, lots of fruits and vegetables, but a lot more grains than I am now. I'm pretty low carb right now - I haven't had pasta in about two and a half years. The two biggest things are 1) I cut out all processed sugars and 2) I started cooking with lard/butter instead of olive oil. The rest was just changing the ratios of what I was eating. My diet now has a lot more meat and dairy and I eat organ meats pretty regularly. Also I make sure to eat seafood at least twice a week.

Maybe it's not the diet in particular, but the lower carbs.

For many people, the fat, lard, butter, organ meats, ect, would be a death sentence, because high cholesterol and heart disease tend to be genetic.

[Angharad Crewe]

Maybe it's not the diet in particular, but the lower carbs.

For many people, the fat, lard, butter, organ meats, ect, would be a death sentence, because high cholesterol and heart disease tend to be genetic.

I wouldn't say that I was really high carb before, but certainly way more than I am now. I'm pretty low carb relative to most people, but not ridiculously low carb. ( I think that it's a really bad idea to cut out an entire macronutrient.) I actually started by cutting out all processed grains and sugars and that gave me a noticeable improvement in healthiness but not significant enough for where I needed to be. There were only significant changes after I started being really strict about what I was eating.

As far as high cholesterol and heart disease goes, I don't really think that high cholesterol is the problem. For one, a significant number of people who have heart attacks also have low or normal levels of cholesterol ( this was reported in Jan. 2009 American Heart Journal). Ancel Keys published a really strong correlation between high cholesterol and heart disease in the 7 countries study, but there were 22 countries available to him and he ignored the ones that did not support his claim. Although there is still a correlation when all 22 countries are considered, it is not nearly as distinct. Keys admitted towards the end of his life that there is no connection between cholesterol in the blood and dietary cholesterol and that it only matters "if you happen to be a rabbit or a chicken."

There's a really interesting article here:

http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com/D ... -Myth.html

Of course I could be totally wrong. I guess to me it makes sense on an evolutionary level - people would have eaten what they had access to and would have consumed the whole animal, not just the lean muscle meats. Also, early humans would not have had access to large amounts of processed grains and sugars or to modern vegetable oils.