Posted on 06/18/2014 6:27:26 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Oh. I see. In your world no one ever takes most of a course of a single antibiotic. Interesting. Good to know. Thanks.
Wow! You mean people will actually have to read the warning labels?
What a burden!
How unreasonable!
Of course, untreated reflux leads to erosion of the esophagus and the vomiting that comes with the reflux is not only bad for your teeth but leads to unbalanced electrolytes which can lead to death.
Well now again, is that really fair? A single antibiotic does indeed supply a single threat. And it does (often) have a a beneficial effect. But it is precisely because of the singleness of the effect that bacteria can evolve outside of the effects of a single antibiotic, and the resulting "conditioning" of the bacterial populations is the big fat problem with regular (and even statistically predictable ) antibiotic failures. OUTSIDE of single antibiotics, however, bacteria naturally deal with multiple simultaneous attacks all the time, and so develop - naturally - a simultaneous multi-phasic defense system to deal with it.
Geez Louise, this is the entire problem of the antibiotic approach in a nutshell! That's why it's presumable - IMO - that continuing the same strategy on a different front will inevitably result in the same kinds of conditioning responses from the bacteria. I don't know, maybe this particular approach will last longer or be more effective. But to claim it's the be-all, end-all, game-over for bacterial infections, given that it IS the same general strategy, seems absurd for a scientific declaration. Media, advertising, yeah. But scientists should know better.
Yes, but might peg them back for a while.
And that WOULD be a valid scientific claim, IMO.
Well, I guess scientists have to sell ideas like everyone else these days. I don’t suppose “peg the bacteria back for a couple of decades, tops” has as much appeal as “end bacterial immunity for all time completely.”
No, it doesn't. But while they were at it, why not add "viagra replacement allows you to walk on water and burn fat at the same time" as well?
There is (nominally) something called scientific ethics. And when that fails there's at least scientific believeability.
Or there was, before global warming.
Oh look, this announcement is coming out of East Anglia, ground zero of the global warming hoax. What a coincidence.
And I didnt even go to UEA!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.