Did you read the article exNYer or did you just go into panic mode again?
Its said that about 15% of the cases aren't cured by "first line treatment." I know a lot of people who don't get cured by "first line treatment" because that is usually the weakest effective treatment.
Also, the article states
Also, Gonorrhea cases are down in the US.
The sky ISN'T falling.
Originally Posted by gnadfly
Head in the sand again?
How about this - Why don't YOU post an article from a competent medical journal or a government medical body that says there isn't anything to worry about? That antibiotics are going to remain effective and all this contrary talk is just paranoia?
And my comments weren't limited to gonorrhea. I am talking about all infectious diseases.
MRSA is a problem in hospitals and the only defense we have against it is a major scrubbing of every surface in every operating room and recovery room.
Every year 10s of millions of people get prescriptions for antibiotics. 15% of that number constitutes MILLIONS of people who have to go to a second drug.
And that 15% is increasing as more strains of bacteria become resistant.
The antibiotics we developed in the past were the low hanging fruit. They were relatively easy to discover and did not cost an exorbitant amount for R&D.
But the low hanging fruit is now gone. Future antibiotics - if there are any to be had - will cost an exorbitant amount of money to discover - IF you discover them. Drug companies don't want to take big risks for doubtful rewards.
So, few if any companies are still looking for new antibiotics.
The clock is ticking on the ones we have.
Or do you have some alternative theory you would like to offer that explains how the drugs we still have will continue to be effective - even though they already are ineffective against some diseases?