3 ms·

> that is no longer true, the standard treatment protocol is multiple doses now, and it's the exact same treatment for chlamydia which is very common Incorrect

> that is no longer true, the standard treatment protocol is multiple doses now, and it's the exact same treatment for chlamydia which is very common Incorrect. The standard treatment protocol for uncomplicated gonorrhea is a single IM ceftriaxone shot. The standard treatment protocol for chlamydia is a one-week oral doxycycline regimen. They are completely different treatments. Treatment adherence is an potential issue for the chlamydia course, but not for gonorrhea, because it is administered as a single shot. > and would lead to the same "spillover" development of resistant strains of both. On the contrary, the treatment protocols were specifically constructed to avoid this. > if you are re-exposing yourself with varying half-lives of the antibiotics in your body, you are conducting experiments. That's technically true, but thankfully not particularly relevant, as most people aren't re-exposing themselves to gonorrhea within a few hours after being treated for it.

fsckboy 4y ago
>> if you are re-exposing yourself with varying half-lives of the antibiotics in your body, you are conducting experiments. >That's technically true, but thankfully not particularly relevant, as most people aren't re-exposing themselves to gonorrhea within a few hours after being treated for it. It doesn't matter what most people do, it only matters what the petri dishes for gain-of-function gonorrhea are doing. Resistant gonorrhea didn't appear quickly, and it didn't appear magically, it appeared after a sufficient number of people had both the pathogen and the antibiotic in their bodies, and the more times the better. We simply need to explain the behavior of those people.
- chimeracoder 4y ago
  > It doesn't matter what most people do, it only matters what the petri dishes for gain-of-function gonorrhea are doing. We simply need to explain the behavior of those people. Researchers have been tracking gonorrhea for decades, and they understand very well how resistance develops. Reinfections during treatment is not how. Nor is treatment adherence, because - as I pointed out - you were mistaken about the basic facts of the treatment protocol. Regardless - between referring to people as "petri dishes" and your other ad hominem comment about me in this thread, it seems you're less interested in understanding the science here than you are in moralizing about other people's behavior. I share the attitude of most public health officials and sexual health professionals, which is that moralizing rhetoric is counterproductive, so I have no interest in engaging in that, and therefore there's no point in discussing further.

fsckboy 4y ago

>> if you are re-exposing yourself with varying half-lives of the antibiotics in your body, you are conducting experiments. >That's technically true, but thankfully not particularly relevant, as most people aren't re-exposing themselves to gonorrhea within a few hours after being treated for it. It doesn't matter what most people do, it only matters what the petri dishes for gain-of-function gonorrhea are doing. Resistant gonorrhea didn't appear quickly, and it didn't appear magically, it appeared after a sufficient number of people had both the pathogen and the antibiotic in their bodies, and the more times the better. We simply need to explain the behavior of those people.

chimeracoder 4y ago
> It doesn't matter what most people do, it only matters what the petri dishes for gain-of-function gonorrhea are doing. We simply need to explain the behavior of those people. Researchers have been tracking gonorrhea for decades, and they understand very well how resistance develops. Reinfections during treatment is not how. Nor is treatment adherence, because - as I pointed out - you were mistaken about the basic facts of the treatment protocol. Regardless - between referring to people as "petri dishes" and your other ad hominem comment about me in this thread, it seems you're less interested in understanding the science here than you are in moralizing about other people's behavior. I share the attitude of most public health officials and sexual health professionals, which is that moralizing rhetoric is counterproductive, so I have no interest in engaging in that, and therefore there's no point in discussing further.