Quote:
Originally Posted by Rowcoy
Sad fact is that most antibiotics that have been prescribed were not needed and have simply been used to treat viral infections or mild bacterial infections that the bodies own immune system would have dealt with if it had been given a chance. These infections are largely self limiting and whilst they can be unpleasant they are not in themselves any threat to the individual. In fact there is increasing evidence that show a correlation between increasing antibiotic use and increased incidence and prevalence of autoimmune disease.
|
I think that's a unproven fact but rather speculation.
What is a fact tho that the strict auditing of drugs this country has is burdening the system.
You even went on to prove my point in that I said the immune system is over estimated in its abilities by many people, and then you went onto say that the immune system would cope anyway. I got news for you it does not always cope. A moderate bacterial infection without antibiotics can grow out of control rapidly. When antibiotics is pointless is when it is a viral infection, of which antibiotics will have no affect, however if a doctor cannot be sure it is a viral infection then they should play it safe.
I have an ongoing eye infection for the past 5 years, the immune system clearly cannot cope, likewise whenever I have had infections via my teeth antibiotics have always been needed.
Before antibiotics were invented people would routinely die of teeth abscesses at a young age.
Resistance will grow, its inevitable, I find it a weak reason to hold treatment back, if you holding treatment back, its the same affect as the treatment not working is it not? Requiring GPs to approve minor drugs simply takes up resources.
Also I spoke to my GP this morning about some problems, she is clearly under a ton of pressure to save money as she has started to take the NHS line where my illness is my fault and more specifically all under my control, by this if you look at the NHS website, various articles disagree with the common global opinion and blame the patient for specific health issues. After a heated conversation I have to go in for an examination to see if I warrant the support I have asked for. It looks like I am going to need to put some cash aside for private treatment as the NHS is becoming more and more unfit for purpose with the state it is in.
When my eye infection blown up I had to get private treatment then to get it in a manageable state.
Back on to the subject of drugs it is clearly more dangerous to withold drugs than to issue them "just in case" something happens like the person developing a resistance. It is also clearly a expensive policy to audit the use of such drugs as they are currently.
Instead of telling me whats wrong with the ideas I listed why not come up with some of your own? or do you think the NHS is fine as it is and doesnt need changing?
http://www.dhdeurope.com/blog/antibi...fe-expectancy/
Mind you I suppose if we withdrawn antibiotics it would help the NHS given people would die earlier and there would be less pensioners tieing up the beds.
An interesting read as an example. Am I fat because of a slow metabolism? Check "Am I fat because of a slow metabolism?" and "Can certain medical conditions cause a slow metabolism?", assumptions been made abou tthe patients to justify a cheap type of treatment.
http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/loseweigh...etabolism.aspx
Also interesting is comparing how american doctors talk about conditions and comparing it to the UK NHS guidelines. Differences can be quite stark. e.g. American doctors consider withdrawing antibiotics too early as dangerous because the affect is that they withdrawn before the infection is beaten, then if they are represcribed later it can then be too late as the infection has time to develop a resistance during the gap of treatment.
There is also certian conditions in america that are treated as an emergency whilst for the same conditions in the UK the NHS advises people to wait it out "just in case you recover on your own".
One big problem with the NHS which is used to save money is to make assumptions based on probability e.g. if a hospital doctor has a choice of sending someone for a scan or discharging them with the merit that people in their age group only have a 2% chance of having a condition they can use the probability as a justification which is dangerous. A lady died in her 20s 3 years ago of a condition that typically only people 50+ get, the doctors continued to refuse to diagnose it simply based on her age.