←back to thread

103 points pseudolus | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0.397s | source
Show context
like_any_other ◴[] No.45601073[source]
Another source of antibiotic resistance (which the article forgets to mention) is their routine use in livestock, preventatively and to accelerate growth. I would wager that is the far more significant contributor, since there's simply much more of it - compare the total number of cattle in places where such use is allowed (meaning cattle are exposed to antibiotics for most of their lives), versus the number of people being treated with antibiotics (i.e. a very limited population, for a very limited period):

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12029767/

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6017557/

replies(4): >>45601101 #>>45601288 #>>45601307 #>>45601695 #
dwd ◴[] No.45601288[source]
Something else unmentioned is that 70-80% of hospital acquired infections are related to medical devices that are susceptible to the formation of biofilms where the bacteria create a protective layer that antibiotics can't penetrate.

For example antibiotic resistant urinary tract infections caused by the use of catheters. Effective antibiotics simply don't work when they can't reach the infection.

replies(2): >>45601496 #>>45601892 #
1. amatecha ◴[] No.45601496[source]
Oh, that's messed up. Aren't catheters supposed to be air-tight, sterile and single-use? Or do they reuse them?! >__>
replies(2): >>45601708 #>>45601774 #
2. cyberax ◴[] No.45601708[source]
Nothing can be _completely_ sterile all the time. Urinary catheters also tend to move a bit when inserted, so they tend to slowly transport bacteria from the outside into the inside.
3. notarget137 ◴[] No.45601774[source]
Sure. But the lubricant they use usually contains antibiotics. Go figure.