3 ms·

To me, the really scary thing about antibiotic resistance is not necessarily random infections in the hospital (as bad as that is) but the fact that antibiotics

To me, the really scary thing about antibiotic resistance is not necessarily random infections in the hospital (as bad as that is) but the fact that antibiotics are what made surgery possible, and if they don’t work, all these medical procedures we’ve gotten used to as harmless suddenly carry a very serious risk-reward tradeoff. Imagine C-sections, biopsies, hip replacements, etc. all having a one-in-four chance of death. That’s what we’re heading back to.

est31 8y ago
For operations, sterilizations are carried out with a mixture of means like chemical disinfectants, subjecting instruments to extreme heat (Autoclaving), etc. but they don't rely on antibiotics. Instruments can be put into environments toxic to both human and bacterial cells. The big difference of antibiotics is that they are toxic to bacteria but not to human cells so they can be put directly into the system. Some bacteria are also developing resistance against chemical disinfectants but here we have a much larger choice.
- wl 8y ago
  It's defense in depth. Yes, sterile technique is used to minimize the occurrence of surgical site infections. Sterile technique, when performed 100% correctly, isn't perfect and prophylactic antibiotics are standard to help mitigate any remaining risk.
  - est31 8y ago
    Oh, TIL. Thanks for the info! It won't throw us back to the pre-semmelweis era though only to the pre-fleming area.
  - Fomite 8y ago
    The field uses "Swiss cheese" as a term for a reason - you can have holes in each layer (and will), but if you have enough layers you'll be okay.
HillaryBriss 8y ago
agree. and my next fear is that all of the medical establishment, suppliers, and practitioners who depend upon surgical procedures for their profitability downplay the additional risks and continue to encourage all of us to undergo surgery
- Fomite 8y ago
  Surgeons are already the bane of many infection control specialists.

est31 8y ago

For operations, sterilizations are carried out with a mixture of means like chemical disinfectants, subjecting instruments to extreme heat (Autoclaving), etc. but they don't rely on antibiotics. Instruments can be put into environments toxic to both human and bacterial cells. The big difference of antibiotics is that they are toxic to bacteria but not to human cells so they can be put directly into the system. Some bacteria are also developing resistance against chemical disinfectants but here we have a much larger choice.

wl 8y ago
It's defense in depth. Yes, sterile technique is used to minimize the occurrence of surgical site infections. Sterile technique, when performed 100% correctly, isn't perfect and prophylactic antibiotics are standard to help mitigate any remaining risk.
- est31 8y ago
  Oh, TIL. Thanks for the info! It won't throw us back to the pre-semmelweis era though only to the pre-fleming area.
- Fomite 8y ago
  The field uses "Swiss cheese" as a term for a reason - you can have holes in each layer (and will), but if you have enough layers you'll be okay.

HillaryBriss 8y ago

agree. and my next fear is that all of the medical establishment, suppliers, and practitioners who depend upon surgical procedures for their profitability downplay the additional risks and continue to encourage all of us to undergo surgery

Fomite 8y ago
Surgeons are already the bane of many infection control specialists.