Violent California police chase ends with 3 dead

[Expat1 971]

Jeez, can you not stick to one argument at a time? The overuse of antibiotics is a problem period. You don't fix that problem by allowing easy access for antibiotics at point of use based on want though, do you?

Yes, indeed, using antibiotics to ensure animals kept in unsanitary conditions because Americans want cheap meat in Costco is not a good use of antibiotics either, I am totally against it. Nor is it a good thing if a US doctor oversubscribes the use of antibiotics because of some insane Americans who insist on self diagnosis via internet - surprise, surprise I am against that too. However, the fact that antibiotics are over used and are therefor no longer working in all areas that we need them to be used in is not going to be fixed by adding yet another layer of abuse into the system and saying to oneself, well, at least I can tell my girlfriend/wife that 'big govmint' no longer interferes in my right to get antibiotics over the counter whenever I want to. That just makes zero sense. Antibiotics need to be more regulated and in ways that are rational and effective, not less.

Again. Let. Me. Type. This. Slowly.

THERE.

IS.

NO.

RELATION.

SHIP.

NONE.

BE.

TWEEN.

ACCESS.

AND.

OVER.

USE.

Edited July 21, 2014 by Expat1

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Again. Let. Me. Type. This. Slowly.

THERE.

IS.

NO.

RELATION.

SHIP.

NONE.

BE.

TWEEN.

ACCESS.

AND.

OVER.

USE.

What's the rationale for this then?

At least from what I understand, quite a few governments recognise the overuse of antibiotics as being a public health problem with serious implications for the future. So yes, it seems reasonable to restrict access to them.

That people in the US have to pay to see a Dr. Well that kind of sucks, but it doesn't mean antibiotics should be available over the counter.

Edited July 21, 2014 by Hail Ming!

[Expat1 971]

What's the rationale for this then?

At least from what I understand, quite a few governments recognise the overuse of antibiotics as being a public health problem with serious implications for the future. So yes, it seems reasonable to restrict access to them.

That people in the US have to pay to see a Dr. Well that kind of sucks, but it doesn't mean antibiotics should be available over the counter.

Well they are. Deal. I do not miss the BS I used to have to go through to get them.

http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archive/S40/49/22E65/index.xml?section=topstories

The study found that India was the single-largest consumer of antibiotics in the world in 2010, followed by China and the United States.

The study also found that antibiotic consumption has flattened in the United States, compared with the five BRICS countries. But U.S. citizens per capita still account for far more antibiotic consumption than any other population, with a rate of more than twice that of India.

NOTE: In India they available over the counter. In the United States they are regulated and require a prescription. Here's the website where you can contact your congressmen to beg for more regulation so that you can reduce consumption to levels in India. I'm off this topic of misuse and over-use as it doesn't apply to me.

Best of luck!

http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Well the issue of supply and demand (and how much it costs) is different to the public health issue that antibiotics are becoming less effective through overuse and resulting in bacteria that are resistant to traditional treatment.

As far as I'm aware the consensus view of healthcare professionals is that drug resistant bacteria are likely to be a significant public health threat in the future. If that's not the case, I'd be interested in hearing it.

[Expat1 971]

Well the issue of supply and demand (and how much it costs) is different to the public health issue that antibiotics are becoming less effective through overuse and resulting in bacteria that are resistant to traditional treatment.

As far as I'm aware the consensus view of healthcare professionals is that drug resistant bacteria are likely to be a significant public health threat in the future. If that's not the case, I'd be interested in hearing it.

Overuse of antibiotics leading to resistant bacteria is a particular and imminent health threat, which you should exercise your freedom to write your congressman about.

Unfortunately for you and the other poster and according to the data the overuse of antibiotics leading to drug resistant bacteria has nothing to do with having them readily available when you need them.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

How do you figure? Surely if they are becoming less effective through overuse then logically that's the reason why access to them should be restricted. You keep saying the one has nothing to do with the other - but you haven't really explained why.

[Expat1 971]

How do you figure? Surely if they are becoming less effective through overuse then logically that's the reason why access to them should be restricted. You keep saying the one has nothing to do with the other - but you haven't really explained why.

I shared a refreshing difference in healthcare access. According to research the shared difference in healthcare access does not lead to over-use. In fact the opposite is true and regulated countries, in addition to higher costs and difficulty of access, also have higher levels of abuse.

Since I do not fall under that umbrella there is nothing for me to answer.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Well I just did a quick search and found a poll that said that 1/3 of Americans believed that antibiotics could cure colds and the flu. I'd say that illustrates why people shouldn't be in the business of self-medicating.

[slim 1,533]

Got more firepower than most of you (NOT that dude Gary holy smokin barrels batman). When I get back, IF I go back, I'll dust them off, renew the permit, and jump right back in the game. In the meantime, in addition to being out from under the weight of the tax man, bank man, and insurance companies I also don't have to lock my doors.

So what's your plan while you're over there in paradise? Ask nicely? Hope that 401k means something? Oh, I know, you'll have your servants protect you!

Tax man, bank man and insurance man are all choices we make here. It's not hard to break even on any of those or eliminate them completely if you desire.

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

That's what I hear. I'm grateful for the opportunity to be doing my part in the decline of our society

+1, and me too! Thanks to mine, I no longer prey on unsuspecting spoiled overbearing... well, nvm, I'm sure you know how nice it is.

[GandD 5,966]

I know who said it.

You forgot to point out that those women who aren't free to drive cars all have personal drivers who take them anywhere they wish to go. The city and the malls and the shops are full of them. Deliberate omission? Did you forget about that? Did you just not get out much? Try to hire a personal driver. I can. I already have a gardener. I have a maid. Try to hire one. Are you free to? Can an average family in the US do it? Why? Are you free to hire the staff you wish? That is the norm here for an average, middle class family. Try to exercise your "freedom" to do that and you'll be so tangled in rules and regulations you'll throw up your hands and do it yourself.

If you think you're free you're deluded. When I look at my bank accounts, college funds, 401K, and pension balance I always tell myself I sure wish I could trade my and my children's futures (and our personal safety) to "argue about politics". That's way more critical.

On the other hand the right to work for ourselves and keep what we work for and do what we wish with it is a level of freedom that most Americans cannot comprehend and a life where we really don't check the price of anything is sure more free than paying an obscene amount of taxes and THEN buying everything we want twice because we have to buy it once from where it was sold and once again from an insurance company because you're not actually free to own or buy a home or a car unless you insure it too.

If I need to see a doctor I just have to go see him, no cost. If I need an inhaler or a round of antibiotics I just go to the pharmacy and buy it, no rules, regulations, or prescription needed. That's freedom. Going to a doctor, paying a copay and insurance claim, then going to a pharmacy, paying another copay and insurance claim is not freedom to take care of oneself. Driving down to the pharmacy, buying it, and coming home is freedom.

You think you're free but you're a slave to the tax man, the medical system, the banks, and insurance companies all wrapped into a tight set of regulations that you have to follow. Freedom is: Writing a check every semester for my daughter's college tuition. What you call freedom is: A government program that will loan the money that you paid in taxes back to him or her so that they start their life buried in higher debt than the degree can pay for because the took the money that could have educated your children and squandered it in the first place.

I know the deal there. Got more firepower than most of you (NOT that dude Gary holy smokin barrels batman). When I get back, IF I go back, I'll dust them off, renew the permit, and jump right back in the game. In the meantime, in addition to being out from under the weight of the tax man, bank man, and insurance companies I also don't have to lock my doors.

Who drives your maid around?

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

Between Florida sinking into the oceans and antibiotics wiping out all of America, they should take care of the illegal immigration problem all by themselves.

You know, kind of like how Thailand, Philippines, Saudi Arabia, India, etc. etc. were all wiped out because antibiotics could be bought at your local pharmacy as OTC drugs. I feel sorry for all those millions of people who will all die soon...