Minor rant about being sick and the assholes who MUST comment

[AdminAssistant]

Our student health clinic has a policy where they don't give out antibiotics unless there is a known bacterial infection. Lots of signs up about it, too...I guess they get complaints? I dunno.

My mom was one of those who would yell that I not only needed antibiotics, but that I needed them in shot form. *grumble*

ETA: Feel better, Lupo. Hopefully it was just the last remnants of the "back to school" bug that always goes around.

[linguist]

And, I'm sorry, but this is case and point about what I'm griping about. I tell people I have a cold, I don't NEED an antibiotic,and I've had at least 10 people tell me I should get one because I don't know what other stuff is lurking under the virus!! I have to take other meds becuase ZOMG!! A bacteria might have snuck through!

i didn't say anything about what you should or shouldn't do. i was just refuting your point about antibiotics being of no use when you have a viral infection.

[HYHYBT]

It may be that I was just too tired and ranty, but that was actually supposed to be reversed, more along the lines of "If I know it's viral based, I can take OTC stuff and just alleviate the symptoms." Oops.

Whew! That's good to know. But I *had* to say something, as the converse would be a dangerous thing to believe.

I often get something similar, though not as bad, around this time of year: starts as a head cold, or maybe an allergy (though I've never found anything I'm allergic *to*), then after a few days that goes away and I wind up coughing, but feeling perfectly fine otherwise, for weeks. Once I tried spitting out what came up instead of swallowing it; filled a cereal bowl in about an hour and gave that up.

As for doctors who write antibiotics when there is no evidence of a bacterial infection (except, perhaps, in relatively rare situations where you cannot risk it), well, they're not quacks, just irresponsible.

Bacteria not only evolve, they can pass traits to bacteria other than their own decendants, including different species. That's why antibiotics gradually become useless, and the more they're used without due cause, the faster bacteria become immune to them. And newer antibiotics are not only always more expensive than their predecessors, but also tend to have more or worse side effects.

[Kaylyn]

Antibiotics may be useful, but only if there is evidence of some bacterial problem. I hate that doctors randomly give antibiotics just in case. Does more harm than good, as the bacteria get stronger and stronger, till they're even becoming resistant to vancomycin. This is how MRSA became a problem.

Edit: LOL, me and HYHYBT have the same mindset!

[BlaqueKatt]

I really wish BlaqueKatt would respond to this thread. I've noticed many times in her posts that she always has info and links to back up what she's saying. I think she could give us a lot of info on this.

Hmmm-I think that's a compliment...ask and ye shall receive....sometimes-My google-fu is strong(I know what to type to find what I'm looking for quickly)

Every time me or my kids had a viral infection the Dr always prescribed antibiotics to us. So far it has always worked. So if you went to the Dr.and he prescribed antibiotics to you for a viral infection, would you take them? Or tell him he was a quack?

I admit I don't know much about this. I only know that it has worked for us.

sorry to say-you're doctor is probably in the camp of-"if this person has a sick child and I tell them it's a virus and let it run it's course-they'll yell and scream at me to give them some antibiotics, so I may as well just do that"(EW at the doctor's office have taken their toll). One of my co-workers had a child with an ear infection(95% of ear infections in children are viral-usually appearing after a cold or other viral illness), Doctor diagnosed it as viral-said give child tylenol and fluids it will get better in a couple days. She screamed and threatened to sue him for malpractice if he didn't give her a prescription for amoxacillin, he did, the child developed an allergy to it, she didn't go back in because the VIRAL ear infection had resolved on it's own in 2-3 days just as he said it would.

A common example is the prescription and use of antibiotics to treat viral infections such as the common cold that have no effect. One study on respiratory tract infections found "physicians were more likely to prescribe antibiotics to patients who they believed expected them, although they correctly identified only about 1 in 4 of those patients". Multifactorial interventions aimed at both physicians and patients can reduce inappropriate prescribing of antibiotics. Delaying antibiotics for 48 hours while observing for spontaneous resolution of respiratory tract infections may reduce antibiotic usage; however, this strategy may reduce patient satisfaction.

Antibiotic misuse

More than likely the antibiotics did nothing(well nothing good anyway), a viral infections symptoms usually last around 3-7 days until your immune system destroys it. A bacterial infections symptoms usually last about 3-7 days after you start the antibiotics.

Mayo clinic article about antibiotic misuse

And the CDC as well

and just for fun-a slideshow on Mononucleosis caused by a virus-

Our student health clinic has a policy where they don't give out antibiotics unless there is a known bacterial infection. Lots of signs up about it, too...I guess they get complaints? I dunno.

very few illnesses are actually caused by bacterial infections-80-90% are viral

[lupo pazzesco]

i didn't say anything about what you should or shouldn't do. i was just refuting your point about antibiotics being of no use when you have a viral infection.

And so were those other 10 people. It comes out along the same lines, which I, personally, find frustrating.

"Oh, well antibiotics are useful even if you have a virus, because you don't know what else may be wrong" and other variations on the same thing. Is that not what was said/implied? That's one of the main points of my rant. Yes, ok, FINE! Antibiotics are WONDERFUL, and even if I very clearly have a VIRUS, something else may be wrong, so an antibiotic MIGHT be useful? Ok?

The 10 people I mentioned? They were just refuting my point, too. And were just as quick to jump in with real life examples. THAT'S one of the key problems that irk me, which was the basis for the rant. I do not need an antibiotic. I know I don't. End of story. Why tell me "Oh, well, you never know when you might need one, why I remember just last year blah blah blah blah etc, etc, etc."? Seriously? Why? If I've already said I KNOW it's a virus. And I know how to treat it?

No, I honestly want to know. Maybe that can help me understand why so many people feel the need to tell me I should consider antibiotics, because of secondary bacterial infections that are waiting to strike.

The reason I pointed out your quote is because I said earlier:

I know enough how to identify what ailment is causing problems, and how to treat it. <snippy snippy> it's viral based, and nothing the doctor prescribes is going to help anyway!! I'm not dropping a chunk of money to be told I have a chest cold that there is no prescription for!

2. And speaking of medications...
I am NOT going to take an antibiotic for a VIRAL infection

And you immediately responded along the same lines of what I was ranting about when you said:

it's not true that antibiotics do nothing when you have a viral infection. they may not do anything for the virus, but they can prevent opportunistic bacterial infections or wipe out those you already have been infected with but may not know it because the symptoms may be the same as those of the viral infection.

case in point, a couple of weeks ago i had a cold (viral). the cold ran its course, but i was still coughing a week later. i went to the doctor and found out that while my body was fighting off the cold i'd developed (bacterial) bronchitis. a short course of antibiotics and i was better within two days. had i gone to the doctor and taken antibiotics from the beginning, i could have prevented myself an additional week of sickness.

Emphasis mine. My exact point is antibiotics do nothing for a virus. Period. Yeah, they'll alleviate symptoms, but again, what I have is a virus. I can alleviate the same symptoms with Mucinex-D. For less. Can you see what I'm trying to point out? I was initially ranting because again, while ranting against people telling me about meds I don't need, once again, I'm getting someone saying that antibiotics are useful as a just-in-case solution, which was essentially the crux of my initial rant. Maybe I didn't word it right, and I was too tired and incoherent in my OP, but that's where I stand.

As BlaqueKatt said, 80-90% of infections are viral. linguist had bacterial bronchitis, which while not unheard of, is not the norm. 9 times out of 10, when I get bronchitis, it's viral. About the only thing I'll go to a doctor for is an inhaler to help me breathe, because I know nothing else will help, and it has to run its course. Period. The end.

[linguist]

Seriously? Why? If I've already said I KNOW it's a virus. And I know how to treat it?

with all due respect, you've by your own admission not gone to the doctor, so how do you know with 100% certainty that it's a virus? have you performed your own blood tests? do you have some medical training that you haven't disclosed?

[lupo pazzesco]

with all due respect, you've by your own admission not gone to the doctor, so how do you know with 100% certainty that it's a virus? have you performed your own blood tests? do you have some medical training that you haven't disclosed?

Yes, actually, I do have some. I was pre-med/pharmacy for a while before I failed 2 necessary courses, and decided to switch to something else to do in life. (Chemistry. Ugh)

I've also got a long history of viral bronchitis, plus, as I've mentioned before, my doctor has pointed out the key things to look for to determine whether it's viral vs. bacterial, and there were no indicators of a bacterial infection or signs of such indicating I should go to a doctor. I've also got a few doctors as friends/family, all of whom point out that if you don't need an antibiotic, don't take it, so...yeah...

[Ree]

I think the reason people get concerned is because a NORMAL cold should only last about a week in a healthy person.

You claim to have had this for over 2 weeks, so obviously, people will be concerned that there must be an infection of some type that's hanging on.

I'm sure nobody means to question your incredible medical expertise when it comes to your own health, and they probably don't mean to offend by expressing concern for you.

Perhaps, if you send out enough "STFU and leave me the hell alone" signals, people will not make the mistake of caring about you in the future, nor plague you with unsolicited and well-meaning advice.

[Dreamstalker]

My pediatrician/GP (he left the general practice 15 years ago and we still miss him sometimes) was also trained in homeopathy/holistic medicine and while he was reluctant to give an antibiotic for a simple cold, he also knew when to invoke 'traditional' medicine.

Yes, mom used homeopathy with me but she also listened to the doctor (as well as him listening to both of us).

I sometimes sneeze in bright sunlight. No idea why. If this happens on the train, invariably I'll catch a few people making a show of moving to the other end of the car--hello, it's just a sneeze! Do I actually look sick? No. If it's during creeping crud season, I might get a lecture on 'zomg how dare you leave the house when you're sick' (depending on what brand of crazies are taking public transportation that day).

[blas87]

I think lupo just wanted to vent. That used to be one of my favorite past-times here, until experts and people who knew more than me would nitpick at my posts or attempt to give me unsolicited advice, or just nitpick at something totally unrelated to the issue at hand, or just look up tons of facts and fun little things to prove me wrong, or some even went back to things I posted a year or more ago on either site just to discredit me. That, and constant reminders that this is a debate site and nitpicking is totally ok. It's discouraging, but not worth quitting posting over.

It gets a little old hearing "You need to go to the doctor!" I heard it a lot before I had insurance. Another poster already mentioned that insurance constantly screws up. My own doctor screwed up and I was almost charged full price for my Depo shot (now nearly $150) because she listed herself as an out of network provider (well, her or an office worker). I'm sure I'm not even the only person with health insurance who will avoid the doctor until it's absolutely life or death or something really uncomfortable. It's just too expensive and sometimes not even helpful.

[BlaqueKatt]

I'm sure I'm not even the only person with health insurance who will avoid the doctor until it's absolutely life or death or something really uncomfortable. It's just too expensive and sometimes not even helpful.

nope Blas you're not alone, I have awesome health insurance-I still don't go unless it's one of the following things:
my physical
something has been "wrong" for over 5 days
I have a kidney infection

Then again I only go to the ER if I'm in danger of losing life, limb, or eyesight, and urgent care is closed...