Why doesn't someone tell the GP's?

Wibbs

Canis Lupus wrote: »

It's called the immune system.

+1. Well it is if it's not compromised. Lifelong anti biotic usage will compromise it. Plus if you keep getting repeated chest infections might it not be better to ask why? Better than constantly patching up the result of the why.

That said CL some people just have a crappy immune system, that in the past may have meant they died young(especially as children). With modern medicine and antibiotics they thankfully don't have to face that, but overuse of these near miracle drugs will reverse this trend if we're not very careful and campaigns like this will help and hopefully patients will cop on too, even get some sort of basic education to understand that these drugs do NOT affect viruses(there are antivirals but these are a different class of drugs). It frankly shocks me how few realise this simple fact.

x_Ellie_x

theg81der wrote: »

The point the person was making was he would not have been in hospital at all but for the doctors negligence in treating his chest infection-is a chest infection generally something you can fight off? only had one once and took 3 go`s of antibiotics to shift it.

Thank you! Exactly my point. If the doctor had give him the antibiotics in the first place, the chest infection might not have developed into pneumonia and he wouldn't be in hospital to catch the MRSA! He would have spend Christmas at home with his family & friends instead of lying sick and possibly dying in a hospital bed!

There's a reason why we have antibiotics. Who wants to go back to the way things were in the 19th Century when people died of easy to treat bacterial illnesses?

And I know its called the immune system. Notice I wrote that in quotes. That's the way the doctor described it to my neighbour.

booboo88

Andrea B. wrote: »

A rant. Maybe I am missing the obvious?

You need a perscription for antibiotics.
Doctors prescribe them based on their educated judgement and symptoms displayed.

Then why is the HSE driving an ad campaing to tell the rest of us not to take antibiotics for cold and flu?

See link.

Could they not, ..............perhaps, just tell the doctors?

My doctor would give antibiotics for a broken flaming leg.:rolleyes:

uberwolf wrote: »

Most patients perceive that they need antibiotics. The doctor is wrong or negligent if they don't prescribe. They will change doctors to one more likely to give them what they think they need

I usually dont fill the prescription, just need to go doctors when Im out of work for a cert, even though I dont get paid for any sick days

Anita Blow

x_Ellie_x wrote: »

Thank you! Exactly my point. If the doctor had give him the antibiotics in the first place, the chest infection might not have developed into pneumonia and he wouldn't be in hospital to catch the MRSA! He would have spend Christmas at home with his family & friends instead of lying sick and possibly dying in a hospital bed!

But a doctor cannot dole out antibiotics to everyone who asks for one on the pretence that they will all be sent to hospital if they aren't given one. Doctors go through years of training to ensure their diagnosis is correct and informed and I'm sure his was at the time, but in rare cases these things can take a sudden turn for the worst.

x_Ellie_x wrote: »

There's a reason why we have antibiotics. Who wants to go back to the way things were in the 19th Century when people died of easy to treat bacterial illnesses?

You say you don't want us to go back to a time where we had no antibiotics, yet you're advocating antibiotics to be prescribed even if a doctor doesn't see it to be necessary. It's that attitude that is leading to overuse of antibiotics and as such, antibiotic resistant infections. That very MRSA you're talking about is an example.

Even on an individual level, antiobiotics may get rid of an infection but they do a number on your whole body. It'd be irresponsible of a doctor to give out antibiotics if he/she doesn't believe the patient really needs them.

desertcircus

x_Ellie_x wrote: »

Thank you! Exactly my point. If the doctor had give him the antibiotics in the first place, the chest infection might not have developed into pneumonia and he wouldn't be in hospital to catch the MRSA! He would have spend Christmas at home with his family & friends instead of lying sick and possibly dying in a hospital bed!

There's a reason why we have antibiotics. Who wants to go back to the way things were in the 19th Century when people died of easy to treat bacterial illnesses?

And I know its called the immune system. Notice I wrote that in quotes. That's the way the doctor described it to my neighbour.

And unless the doctor had a specific reason to assume that he had bacterial pneumonia rather than viral, or a simple bad cold, it would still have been irresponsible of him to prescribe antibiotics. If the doctor doesn't think you have a bacterial infection, then he shouldn't prescribe antibiotics. I feel bad for your neighbour, but what you've described is misdiagnosis, which is unfortunate but not the subject of the thread.

saa

theg81der wrote: »

So I have an extremely negative view of doctors.

A doctor misdiagnosed me with cushings (pituitary brain tumour) waited 18 months to see a specialist.. That was a lovely year and a half..

But I don't have a negative view of doctors just some, I'm always just weary and just because a lot of doctors can't diagnose someones condition doesn't mean that doctors are bad. Some cases are complex and medicine isn't that advanced [yet!]

Bottle_of_Smoke

Wibbs wrote: »

Personally I've never had an antibiotic. Have had infections alright, but have been lucky and fought them off without them. Though have been offered them numerous times. In my experience some docs do over prescribe. A good friends doctor hands antibiotics like smarties and has done for years. Said friends immune system seems wrecked at this stage.

I wonder is this changing a bit. I was in the docs over getting quitting smoking pills recently and whilst waiting for the appointment developed a phlegmy chest. Doctor said just deal with it lol. He was oldish/ definitely from a generation where anti-biotics were given out for anything. Maybe he's the exception of course.

Another area I would be personally concerned with is IMHO over prescription of SSRI and other mental health drugs. Given that several studies have shown that placebo is as effective as these drugs for low to mid level depression, but obviously without the sometimes very dodgy side effects from the active drugs, it would seem to me that more care should be taken and not hand these out as a first response. This does seem to be a trend of late. Again some docs are worse than others. One quite local to me seems very excessive. An ex of mine went to her with a (real)chest infection and came out with a script for a well known SSRI and not the lower dose either, plus sleeping tablets. Why? Well in the course of the visit, she mentioned that she was worried and not sleeping well and was anxious over her situation. She was unemployed at the time, so naturally was showing those kind of reactions. A completely situational and expected emotional response. Answer? Get her onto a long term course of mental health drugs. Daft. Of course she did get a job a month later and all good after that. Needless to say she chucked the script in the bin. Now I may be concerned over nothing, but I say check back in a couple of decades and the issues we are now facing with antibiotics may well be mirrored with some of these mental health drugs. Daft? Maybe, but if this website had been around in say 1970 and I said the same about antibiotics I'll put money I'd have people, including qualified and learned people saying I was daft then.

Yeah this really concerns me. The thing is for most people SSRIs are going to be a short term thing - but I reckon many will get addicted or at least be far more open to stronger and more addictive anti-depressants.

And they're initially prescribed to people who would get more benefits out of mild exercise. I guess doctors see it as "well they won't do any exercise" - and maybe they are right. Still I wish they would just be mildly ideological about this. ie at first recommend diet change/exercise/counselling. If that doesn't work well then consider the chemicals.

CookieMonster.x

Antibiotics are used to treat bacterial infections eg chest infection. A cold or flu is a virus and can be prevented by vaccination. Antibiotics will not cure a cold or flu. Taking them unnecessarily ie to try to cure a cold or flu builds resistance and means that they won't work as well or at all when you really need them.

booboo88

CookieMonster.x wrote: »

Antibiotics are used to treat bacterial infections eg chest infection. A cold or flu is a virus and can be prevented by vaccination. Antibiotics will not cure a cold or flu. Taking them unnecessarily ie to try to cure a cold or flu builds resistance and means that they won't work as well or at all when you really need them.

I get alot of chest infections, its better to let your immune system fight it, its what its there for.

happyfish

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Yeah this really concerns me. The thing is for most people SSRIs are going to be a short term thing - but I reckon many will get addicted or at least be far more open to stronger and more addictive anti-depressants.

And they're initially prescribed to people who would get more benefits out of mild exercise. I guess doctors see it as "well they won't do any exercise" - and maybe they are right. Still I wish they would just be mildly ideological about this. ie at first recommend diet change/exercise/counselling. If that doesn't work well then consider the chemicals.

I totally agree with the concern here about anti depressants. Doctors seem keen to hand them out in some cases rather than looking at the cause of the problem in the first place imo. A cousin of mine was put on anti depressents at 13 because she was upset , understandably, over her mothers death. Now at 20, she's totally dependant on a massive cocktail of tablets, but how is this surprising ? She should never have been given anti depressants in the first place as a child who lost her mother. Maybe if she'd been given counselling to deal with this at the time, she would have been able to move on and grieve normally.
But again I see a lot of people in work who want anti depressants because they think it'll make their problem go away. You can't blame people for this, but a decent doctor will prescribe and diagnose based on their own education and experience, not what their patients want .

byhookorbycrook

My gp does not dole out any drugs like Smarties. she has lost lots of patients due to her not doing this and she has told people I know not to waste her time with chest infections if they continue smoking. My kinda gal!

SAHMOM

Antibiotics can not treat a virus...they treat infections Taking antibiotics lower your immune system so if you have a cold (not full blown influenza) you will not need one though Docs will prescribe one to treat unlying infections that can prolong your symptoms like swollen glands due to coughing too much etc.. The less you can use antibiotics the better it will be for you in the long run.

Wibbs

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Yeah this really concerns me. The thing is for most people SSRIs are going to be a short term thing.

Well that would be another issue for me. Certainly in my personal experience of people I know and have known, these drugs were in the vast majority of cases not a short term thing. They were considered a long term maintenance thing. Basically a label of mental illness was made and considered chronic. Like type two diabetes of the mind. Actually there may be some parallels with the latter. IMHO I would say with mental illness there could be some comparisons that could be made. IE with diabetics you have type 1, people who are genetically marked for the illness and you have type 2, people who are that way because of lifestyle. With mental illness one might make a similar delineation. "Type 1" folks are genetically prone to and likely candidates for the condition. "Type 2" folks are prone, but it's down to lifestyle and can be reduced or even "cured" by a lifestyle reversal. I've known people to get the early stage(and mostly reversible) type 2 diabetes diagnosis, who when given the choice between a major lifestyle change or a minor one with lots of pills, just took the latter choice. I have to say and of course IMHO out of laziness and the quick fix mentality. With someone afflicted with mental illness this would be a much bigger issue.

I suppose it even depends on what one considers short term too. In the first place, these drugs may take weeks, even a month or two to work(with well dodgy side effects while they're doing so) and all learned and good advice suggests you don't stop them suddenly.

happyfish wrote: »

I totally agree with the concern here about anti depressants. Doctors seem keen to hand them out in some cases rather than looking at the cause of the problem in the first place imo. A cousin of mine was put on anti depressents at 13 because she was upset , understandably, over her mothers death. Now at 20, she's totally dependant on a massive cocktail of tablets, but how is this surprising ? She should never have been given anti depressants in the first place as a child who lost her mother. Maybe if she'd been given counselling to deal with this at the time, she would have been able to move on and grieve normally.

Well that example seems beyond daft. That kinda thing does go on. It especially goes on in the US, where natural grief and other normal emotional reactions are too often seen as something that requires intervention and medication(an ex pat Irish psychiatric doc I know working in the US was actually shocked by this mindset). Yes if you pull a Queen Victoria and wear black for more than a year game ball, but normal grief? Daft to try and medicate for that IMHO. It labels the person and then plugs them into a long term treatment protocol which may not be required, nor advisable. Studies after 9/11 showed that those who "bottled it up" were actually mentally and emotionally better off than those who plugged into the current medical protocol. They're not the only studies either when it comes to PSTD that showed similar. IMHO Labeling someone as in need of intervention alone can set the scene and make things more long term than they may need to be. Hell I know people who've been given such drugs for the normal grief that follows a relationship breakup. A pill for every ill indeed.

But again I see a lot of people in work who want anti depressants because they think it'll make their problem go away

+1. Just like the "I have a sniffle, give me an antibiotic. I want a pill goddammit!!" mentality. Hence my concern. Moreso given that too many doctors do plug into that.

You can't blame people for this, but a decent doctor will prescribe and diagnose based on their own education and experience, not what their patients want .

+1000

Do NOT get me wrong. I am NOT saying these drugs aren't useful, even life saving in a clinical setting. They CAN make a huge difference to people's lives and the course of their illness, but they IMHO are NOT a catchall pill for every ill panacea. Sound familiar? Yep and that's why I worry. We know a magnitude more about bacteria and bacterial infection and how to fight it than we know about the mind and emotions.