3 ms·

Because unlike recreational drugs^, antibacterials re-enter the water supply, change the biology of your neighbors and farm animals, and cause existing strains

Because unlike recreational drugs^, antibacterials re-enter the water supply, change the biology of your neighbors and farm animals, and cause existing strains of bacteria to become more antibiotic-resistant. It is possible that within a decade or two, penicillin will be lose its usefulness, and we'll be back to the stage of history where cuts and scrapes could become life-threatening. ^ a related problem is the flushing of non-consumed, non-recreational antibiotic drugs, incidentally [update] just after leaving this thread, I saw an article about a new comic book that is specifically about a post-antibiotic future, so here's a possibly more entertaining rundown: http://io9.gizmodo.com/a-horrifying-comic-book-future-where-antibiotics-dont-w-1786100167?utm_campaign=socialflow_io9_twitter&utm_source=io9_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow http://io9.gizmodo.com/a-horrifying-comic-book-future-where-...

bko 10y ago
Some would equally argue that use of recreational drugs is harmful to the user, harms relationships and undermines society in a lot of respects. These things can all be true but it's not necessarily enough grounds to use the power and resources of the state to actively ban a substance.
- hx87 10y ago
  > it's not necessarily enough grounds to use the power and resources of the state to actively ban a substance It's not enough grounds because the cost of enforcement is so high that it is equal to or surpasses the cost of the drugs themselves. That isn't the case with antibiotic soap--it's not an addictive productive, so it's unlikely that there will be dealers slinging triclosan on street corners.
- Eric_WVGG 10y ago
  One could argue that recreational drugs harm families and communities, sure. Maybe even nations, if you are talking about drug enforcement. Antibiotic abuse could wind up affecting human civilization. It could make plague-level events possible. This is a whole different league, and it's ludicrous to turn this into some kind of libertarian talking point.

bko 10y ago

Some would equally argue that use of recreational drugs is harmful to the user, harms relationships and undermines society in a lot of respects. These things can all be true but it's not necessarily enough grounds to use the power and resources of the state to actively ban a substance.

hx87 10y ago
> it's not necessarily enough grounds to use the power and resources of the state to actively ban a substance It's not enough grounds because the cost of enforcement is so high that it is equal to or surpasses the cost of the drugs themselves. That isn't the case with antibiotic soap--it's not an addictive productive, so it's unlikely that there will be dealers slinging triclosan on street corners.
Eric_WVGG 10y ago
One could argue that recreational drugs harm families and communities, sure. Maybe even nations, if you are talking about drug enforcement. Antibiotic abuse could wind up affecting human civilization. It could make plague-level events possible. This is a whole different league, and it's ludicrous to turn this into some kind of libertarian talking point.