In article <32A50031.3BAB at nol.net>, bionet.immunology wrote:
> Who cares? Anyone?
>> Antibiotics kill the bad germs. (The ones that don't become antibiotic
> resitant). Antibiotics also kill the good germs that help prevent the
> spread of bad germs. (loss of the good germs makes open season for
> antibiotic resistant bad germs) "Antibiotics" that do not kill yeast
> (open the season) and promote their growth. The yeast C. albicans can
> catalyze nitrosamine (a carcinogen) that causes cancer.
>> Wide spread usage of antibiotics gained momentum in the 1950's. The
> incidence of cancer has been rising yearly since then.
>> Who cares anyway?
>> More cancer, more money for doctors, more money for research, more new
>> The FDA approved them, doctors fear loss of customers($money) if they
> don't prescribe them and the patients (victoms)feel cheeted if they
> don't get them. Patients THINK antibiotics cure everything and then
> come to rely on the wolves (capitalism) to guard their health while the
> system herds them like sensless sheep into human petrie dishes to test
> their latest and greatest kill everyting antibiotic.
> etc, etc (blah, blah blah....)
You fail to understand a number of principles in medicine. Medical
therapy in general is a balance of risk and benefit. ALL treatments carry
some finite risk of adverse effect. A therapy is endorsed when its
benefits out weigh the risks. The risk of antibiotics causing cancer is
miniscule compared to the huge benefits of appropriate antibiotic use. I
do not disagree that in some cases antibiotics are used inappropraitely.
This does not represent a conspiracy on the part of physicians and
pharmaceutical companies. (sorry, I cannot support your unfounded
delusions). You conclusions are based on paranoia, not facts. It is easy
to see this based on the loose association of your rhetoric.
Louis Alarcon, MD
University of Pittsburgh
Department of Surgery