> IIRC, general antibiotics have never lasted more than 18 months before we found a bacteria that became resistant to them. This does not seem to be correct.

> IIRC, general antibiotics have never lasted more than 18 months before we found a bacteria that became resistant to them. This does not seem to be correct. With the most recently introduced antibiotics—Levoflaxacin, Linezolid and Ceftaroline—resistance has developed very rapidly. But that didn't used to be the case; old antibiotics lasted much longer before resistance developed. [1] I am not sure why this is---are these newer antibiotics more fragile (i.e., easier to resist), or are they being misused more broadly? If it is the latter reason, then perhaps we should stop developing new antibiotics until better usage practices are enforced. It is stupid to spend a lot of money developing antibiotics, only to throw it away by misusing them. [1] http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v509/n7498_supp/fig_tab/509S2a_G2.html http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v509/n7498_supp/fig_tab...