3 ms·
I’ve heard for years that antibiotic resistant bacteria don’t really seem to be a threat because they tend not be very successful in the wild. Like it’s going t
by jncfhnb 2y ago
I’ve heard for years that antibiotic resistant bacteria don’t really seem to be a threat because they tend not be very successful in the wild. Like it’s going to be, at best, a very localized outbreak because competitive pressures don’t reward the trade offs. That’s still true?
- sva_ 2y agoThey are a problem for people who are immunocompromised. In particular they spread in hospital settings.
- whatever1 2y agoMy close relative almost died from one. He caught it in the hospital after a routine surgery. His condition deteriorated dramatically, was in a comma for a couple of days but thankfully survived. After he recovered they could still detect the bacteria dormant in the liver for three years, at which point he re entered the hospital to start a heavier multi-antibiotic treatment plan that could potentially evict the bacteria but could also cost his liver. He won after all, but his health condition overall never returned to the original.
- etiam 2y agoMaking extra genetic material and their resistance products can be a liability if they're useless (and so would slowly be lost), but there's all sorts of chemical combat between microbes in lots of environments and you can't be sure the resistance adaptations aren't good for other things too, potentially something different.
- bluGill 2y agoHospitals are an environment where they have the advantage and where humans who are most vulnerable are. Outside of a hospital they don't do as well, but the local environments they do well in are still important even if they are a minority. Also, if the bacteria targets humans or things humans treat (cats...) anything not resistant will not survive as well because when we detect sickness we treat it and select for anything resistant.
- scotty79 2y agoMaybe hospitals is a bad idea then and healthcare should be more distributed, given sufficient resources. Auto doc in every crew quarters.
- bluGill 2y agoUnfortunately that doesn't work either as a large concentration of experts in one place is a useful feature of large hospitals. If something goes wrong you want the right expert available to help. An expert who is currently doing surgery on someone else isn't available to jump in on your problem. When things go per routine you only need the small team, but having a larger team for if things go wrong is helpful. At least today robots are not ready for general hospital needs. time will tell if the future works out.
- scotty79 2y agoMaybe expertise should be more widespread and communication less reliant on physical proximity? Although I agree that I'm some scenarios teaming up is unavoidable. But there's a spectrum between private doctors and clinic of a billionaire and huge warehouse you put sick or wounded people in mostly so they have a place to die.
- bluGill 2y agoDo you know how long it takes to become a brain Surgeon? How about a Heart surgeon? Now imagine someone was both - how much more time would that take? Now if that person existed, would you want them operating on your - knowing that they have less real world experience? Specialization is a good thing. In a complex field like medicine it is a must. There is too much for anyone one person to be an expert in it all, and experience is very valuable so again we want someone to specialize and get a lot of experience in a narrow field.
- inglor_cz 2y agoResearch indicates that using copper or copper alloys in hospitals reduces nosocomial infections [0], but people seem to prefer stainless steel because it looks cleaner. [0] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36842712/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36842712/