The overuse of antibiotic prophylaxis in the US, and the lame fear that a scratch WILL kill you!!!!!

This is in the rant section because, well, it is a rant.
I have noticed (anecdotally) in pretty much any thread discussing the resistance of bacteria to current antibiotics, that at least one US member will always reply with some doom-porn statement like "that scratch chopping wood will now be a killer again" or other such drama.
Have you guys not got soap, or even salt water?!
I work in general building/construction in the UK and I probably draw blood through a scratch two or three times a week. Sometimes it's only a drop or two, but other times I may need to get the Gaffa tape and a tissue out to seal the wound after a quick wash under the tap.
In 5 years I've never had an accident related infection that required antibiotics, and neither have any of the guys I work with.

I was chatting about this with a few guys at work last week and we came to the conclusion that either US citizens are more prone genetically to infections or their use of antibiotics as a prophylaxis has made them more susceptible to such infections due to killing all their good bacteria. Either way, if bacteria are becoming resistant to antibiotics then the widespread use of them as a prophylaxis in the US is a major contributing factor for the development of resistance worldwide.

I had major mouth surgery about 6 months ago, and two weeks later an infection developed, which while being very unpleasant, was fixed with antibiotics as the problem developed. I was, and still am, glad that I wasn't released from hospital with a dose of antibiotics, prescribed just in case. Whereas I am of the understanding that prophylaxis use of antibiotics would have been expected as the norm in the US.

Bacteria will of course continue to adapt to our antibiotics, but I strongly believe that countries such as the US are to blame for speeding the process up with your lame fear of any scratch or injury automatically 'becoming infected'.
Get over it guys, it isn't the wild west any more, you have soap, and disinfectant to clean your own wounds now, even just salt water and hot showers you know. YOU DO NOT ALWAYS NEED TO USE PROPHYLAXIS ANTIBIOTICS FOR A MINOR CUT.

This is rather telling...
www.cdc.gov...

Parent pressure makes a difference. For pediatric care, a study showed that doctors prescribe antibiotics 62% of the time if they perceive parents expect them and 7% of the time if they feel parents do not expect them.

Dish them out like sweets/candy and it's no wonder bacteria are becoming resistance eh. Thanks for that America.

They give antibiotic's in the USA as a prophylaxis?



As a microbiologist Im horrified!


Let them have meth, crack , Heroine but regulate antibiotic's!

Holy crap! Once they go a simple operation or dental procedure could mean death! Hell the average life expectancy will drop a decade or two!

a reply to: crazyewok
You may find this article interesting reagrding the prophylactic use of antibiotics in the US:
www.aafp.org...

Appropriately administered antibiotic prophylaxis reduces the incidence of surgical wound infection. Prophylaxis is uniformly recommended for all clean-contaminated, contaminated and dirty procedures. It is considered optional for most clean procedures, although it may be indicated for certain patients and clean procedures that fulfill specific risk criteria.

Im sorry what are you talking about?

a reply to: Fargoth
I'm sorry, if it's some of the big words that you are struggling with then I suggest Googling them, but if it is my suggestion that the US overuses antibiotics then I imagine you are really just pretending not to understand that rather simple concept?

a reply to: grainofsand

i think the real problem here is not letting children play rough and tumble outside in the fresh air .

parents are over protective in keeping their children clean .

children need to build up an immunity to germs and infections and they cannot do this if the parents are over protective

I worked construction for years. I needed some powerful antibiotics a few times. I didn't go to the doctor unless I had to, and one time I had red lines running up my arm. The doctor said he was going to take my hand off for the thirteen slivers I had in a finger if it didn't respond to the antibiotic in three days. Three pills cost a hundred five bucks, but did they work. I heated right up, couldn't stand on a ladder for three days, and the infection went away.

I've had antibiotics about twenty times in my life, mostly for bronchitis and plurasy. I checked back through all the medical we have, the only times I actually got either of these, I was on beta blockers. I was on different ones occasionally but the side effects on thinking were terrible, I didn't realize it depressed my immune system though. Well, they block the adrenal gland, so I guess that it would lower immune response

Another time I had something eating at my leg, I think it came from a brown recluse. Those were some good antibiotics that heated me up and were expensive too. My neighbor wound up with a big hole in his leg when he got it, different doctor.

a reply to: tom.farnhill
I have similar concerns regarding developed immunity and the sterile environments which some children grow up in.
It is an interesting subject I shall look more into.

originally posted by: Fargoth
a reply to: grainofsand

Oh your going to use condescending words that's cute and totally a sign of intelligence. I'm probably smarter than you are, I just avoid arguing and crap talking on the internet. Maybe your just a moron who has no idea whats going on besides what you read? Going to infer your opinion is fact? OK. then you most likely really are stupid.

My my, such emotion...this is the rant forum though so fill your boots if you like lol, aw...but I still love you x

a reply to: grainofsand

a reply to: rickymouse
Wow twenty times? I hope they were needed for an actual infection.
I've never had or needed antibiotics for an accident type cut/scratch, ever, and prescribing antibiotics just in case is often irresponsible by the doctors involved. Maybe I'm just lucky, but I do believe that a strong dose of antibiotics is unhelpful in keeping our 'good' bacteria doing their jobs, I'll only take them when it looks like my body is losing the health battle.

When they're needed, they're lifesavers. It's sad that they're being misused/overused by doctors that know better.
It'll cost lives at some point, when they no longer work.

Last time I had pinkeye, the doc gave me a prescription to fill, only if green tea bags didn't work.
I didn't need the antibiotics at all.

Some Cdn doctors are actually looking at natural remedies when possible.
It's getting too hard fighting the super bugs and antibiotic resistant diseases.

a reply to: grainofsand

originally posted by: snowspirit
It'll cost lives at some point, when they no longer work.

That pretty much sums up my rant here.
Without new developments in antibiotics it is always going to happen at some point, but it may be the case that stupid decisions by humans have helped prematurely quicken the process.

a reply to: Fargoth
Aw, bless your heart, you must be really sensitive about some things.
...it's ok, I'm just someone on the internet, I mean nothing to you, you need not suffer any torment as I think you are a beautiful and unique snowflake.

globalnews.ca...

“We’re at a very precarious point simply because we don’t have any new drugs coming on board,” Wright told Global News.

But if the drugs aren’t evolving, the bugs are: There’s a growing number of “superbugs” that can’t be treated by the existing antibiotics in our arsenal.

Above is an article about the find of a fungus that may be developed into another antibiotic against one of the superbugs.