5 ms·

The orignal statement was actually "antibiotic resistance issues we are facing due to dishing out antibiotics left and right", which is pretty clearly not "use

The orignal statement was actually "antibiotic resistance issues we are facing due to dishing out antibiotics left and right", which is pretty clearly not "use of vaccines will contribute to antibiotic resistance".

spywaregorilla 4y ago
But that is the point being made. These two are not similar. Antibiotics are a general purpose thing. Using them on trivial cases can increase antibiotic resistance which is bad for the cases where we really need antibiotics. Vaccines are specific. You can't accrue "vaccine resistance" as a catch all thing by applying vaccines to everyone. You may create pressure for a virus to work around specific vaccines, but the only risk is that we will need to adjust the vaccine. Unlike with antibiotics where we really just need to try and find a new alternative.
- Izkata 4y ago
  They are in that the net effect is the same: Antibotics make a given person more resistant to the current version of the bacteria. Bacteria with a mutation that survives against that antibiotic will then become the dominant version because it massively out-competes the rest. Vaccines make a given person more resistant to the version of the virus the vaccine was for. Viruses with a "vaccine escape" mutation will become the dominant version because it massively out-competes the rest. Personally I think this is what happened with Delta. It was first identified in Oct 2020, but didn't become dominant until the vaccine rollouts, which it was better able to survive against.
  - spywaregorilla 4y ago
    No this is not the same. Antibiotics kill bacteria, across the board, indiscriminately. Bacteria can evolve protection from antibiotics. It is not clear that this will help out compete the rest. Taking antibiotics for a minor cold can cause antibiotic resistance to appear in OTHER bacteria unrelated to the cold. Vaccines are specific to the thing they prevent.
    - generalizations 4y ago
      > Antibiotics kill bacteria, across the board, indiscriminately. That is not true. You're probably thinking of broad-spectrum antibiotics, which are not the only kind. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broad-spectrum_antibiotic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broad-spectrum_antibiotic
      - spywaregorilla 4y ago
        This is the second time you've posted a link to wikipedia that you don't seem to really understand. Yes, it is true that there are narrow spectrum antibiotics. However, it is normative to assume that broad spectrum antibiotics are the things we refer to when we refer to antibiotics in the context of overuse fostering antibiotic resistance. You can't blindly give narrow spectrum antibiotics and expect it to do anything. It's the broad spectrum stuff that you see everywhere. Things like cattle especially. The fact that there are other more niche types of antibiotics doesn't materially change anything about the argument being made here.
    - Izkata 4y ago
      > Vaccines are specific to the thing they prevent. Exactly. Have you not heard all the stuff about "vaccine-escape" variants of sars-cov-2? This is what we're talking about.
      - spywaregorilla 4y ago
        And that is not really a big deal at all. We can just adjust the vaccines for the next dominant strain. We cannot simply adjust antibiotics when we facilitate antibiotic resistance by using them for trivial cases.
- generalizations 4y ago
  I don't really understand the point you're making. You made an objectively false assessment of the original comment. > You can't accrue "vaccine resistance" as a catch all thing by applying vaccines to everyone. Actually, you can. It's just evolutionary pressure after all, and that's something both bacteria and viruses are subject to. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimicrobial_resistance#Viruses https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimicrobial_resistance#Virus...
  - spywaregorilla 4y ago
    Read more carefully. You can accrue resistance to a specific vaccine. You cannot accrue resistance to vaccines, generally. The rate of people taking the Flu vaccine has no bearing on the efficacy of the Covid vaccine (in terms of vaccine resistance). Also, you have linked to a section on antivirals. These are different from vaccines.
    - generalizations 4y ago
      > You cannot accrue resistance to vaccines, generally. You're the only one who suggested this, and I assumed you knew enough to give your ambigious statement the benefit of the doubt. I'm guessing your were confused due to the misunderstanding about general-purpose antibiotics.
    - Izkata 4y ago
      > the Flu vaccine There are many, not just one, for the different strains of flu. The yearly shots include only a small subset, the ones predicted to be most prevalent in the coming flu season, because of manufacturing costs/limitations and compatibility.
      - spywaregorilla 4y ago
        I'm aware of that. Does this change anything about what I said? No.

spywaregorilla 4y ago

But that is the point being made. These two are not similar. Antibiotics are a general purpose thing. Using them on trivial cases can increase antibiotic resistance which is bad for the cases where we really need antibiotics. Vaccines are specific. You can't accrue "vaccine resistance" as a catch all thing by applying vaccines to everyone. You may create pressure for a virus to work around specific vaccines, but the only risk is that we will need to adjust the vaccine. Unlike with antibiotics where we really just need to try and find a new alternative.

Izkata 4y ago
They are in that the net effect is the same: Antibotics make a given person more resistant to the current version of the bacteria. Bacteria with a mutation that survives against that antibiotic will then become the dominant version because it massively out-competes the rest. Vaccines make a given person more resistant to the version of the virus the vaccine was for. Viruses with a "vaccine escape" mutation will become the dominant version because it massively out-competes the rest. Personally I think this is what happened with Delta. It was first identified in Oct 2020, but didn't become dominant until the vaccine rollouts, which it was better able to survive against.
- spywaregorilla 4y ago
  No this is not the same. Antibiotics kill bacteria, across the board, indiscriminately. Bacteria can evolve protection from antibiotics. It is not clear that this will help out compete the rest. Taking antibiotics for a minor cold can cause antibiotic resistance to appear in OTHER bacteria unrelated to the cold. Vaccines are specific to the thing they prevent.
  - generalizations 4y ago
    > Antibiotics kill bacteria, across the board, indiscriminately. That is not true. You're probably thinking of broad-spectrum antibiotics, which are not the only kind. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broad-spectrum_antibiotic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broad-spectrum_antibiotic
    - spywaregorilla 4y ago
      This is the second time you've posted a link to wikipedia that you don't seem to really understand. Yes, it is true that there are narrow spectrum antibiotics. However, it is normative to assume that broad spectrum antibiotics are the things we refer to when we refer to antibiotics in the context of overuse fostering antibiotic resistance. You can't blindly give narrow spectrum antibiotics and expect it to do anything. It's the broad spectrum stuff that you see everywhere. Things like cattle especially. The fact that there are other more niche types of antibiotics doesn't materially change anything about the argument being made here.
  - Izkata 4y ago
    > Vaccines are specific to the thing they prevent. Exactly. Have you not heard all the stuff about "vaccine-escape" variants of sars-cov-2? This is what we're talking about.
    - spywaregorilla 4y ago
      And that is not really a big deal at all. We can just adjust the vaccines for the next dominant strain. We cannot simply adjust antibiotics when we facilitate antibiotic resistance by using them for trivial cases.
generalizations 4y ago
I don't really understand the point you're making. You made an objectively false assessment of the original comment. > You can't accrue "vaccine resistance" as a catch all thing by applying vaccines to everyone. Actually, you can. It's just evolutionary pressure after all, and that's something both bacteria and viruses are subject to. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimicrobial_resistance#Viruses https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimicrobial_resistance#Virus...
- spywaregorilla 4y ago
  Read more carefully. You can accrue resistance to a specific vaccine. You cannot accrue resistance to vaccines, generally. The rate of people taking the Flu vaccine has no bearing on the efficacy of the Covid vaccine (in terms of vaccine resistance). Also, you have linked to a section on antivirals. These are different from vaccines.
  - generalizations 4y ago
    > You cannot accrue resistance to vaccines, generally. You're the only one who suggested this, and I assumed you knew enough to give your ambigious statement the benefit of the doubt. I'm guessing your were confused due to the misunderstanding about general-purpose antibiotics.
  - Izkata 4y ago
    > the Flu vaccine There are many, not just one, for the different strains of flu. The yearly shots include only a small subset, the ones predicted to be most prevalent in the coming flu season, because of manufacturing costs/limitations and compatibility.
    - spywaregorilla 4y ago
      I'm aware of that. Does this change anything about what I said? No.