Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

How Norway Fought Staph Infections

Posted by timothy on from the they-fired-adrian-monk dept.

eldavojohn writes "Studies are showing that Norway's dirtiest hospitals are actually cleaner than most other countries', and the reason for this is that Norwegians stopped taking antibiotics. A number of factors like paid sick leave and now restrictions on advertising for drugs make Norway an anomaly when it comes to diseases like Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). A Norwegian doctor explains, 'We don't throw antibiotics at every person with a fever. We tell them to hang on, wait and see, and we give them a Tylenol to feel better.' Norway is the most MRSA free country in the world. In a country like Japan, where 17,000 die from MRSA every year, 'doctors overprescribe antibiotics because they are given financial incentives to push drugs on patients.'"

10 of 595 comments (clear)

  1. Stop with the drugs already by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Endure non-life-threatening illnesses without drugs, it helps you build an immune system. Taking drugs means your body never learns to fend for itself, like a spoiled brat.

    1. Re:Stop with the drugs already by dexmachina · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Er, preventative medicine is entirely different from treatment medicine. Vaccinations and antibiotics are entirely different compounds. The article is about letting certain illnesses run their course naturally, not saying, "Well, screw it let's just not bother with the whole medicine thing." Unless of course you'd like to see a resurgence in polio.

      It appears that years of media scaremongering and anti-vaccine lobbies have gotten through the youth crowd quite effectively.

    2. Re:Stop with the drugs already by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not all non-life-threating illnesses help build your immune system. I'm sick and tired of this idea that the immune system is like a muscle that you can build up over time or weaken by taking antibiotics. This is a failure on the public's part for understanding how the immune system actually works.

      MRSA would have exsited with or without antibiotics. It is all just a matter of time. Things evolve, get use to that fact. So do immune systems. If I could point to a large contribution to the flood of antibotics, it would be peoples lack of understanding of how medicine works. People walk into a doctor's office and say, "fix me, fix him, fix her, fix us..." They want instant results, not results that take 24, 48, or 72-hours to take effect. Doctors, as much as they would love to tell you, can't say you're over reacting go home and call me in a week. That's an awsome way to get sued in the US. The moment that people come to the understanding that the only medication that develers instant results is used in leatal injections, will be the opprtunity to educate people to just, "take it easy, stay home, get rest, drink plenty of fluids, and go to the hospital or follow up with your doctor if your symtomps presist or get worst."

      People and the "instant get better" thought process are the real problem of over medication. If no one shows up to the hospital, how do we over medicate? MRSA is just another evolving part of nature, nothing can be done about that. And I dare say that antibiotics do not work the way that you so claim them to work. I would like to see the person who has acquired immunity to something that is treated with antibiotics like Gengreen.

    3. Re:Stop with the drugs already by Galactic+Dominator · · Score: 5, Insightful

      MRSA would have exsited with or without antibiotics.

      Do you even know what MRSA means?

      --
      brandelf -t FreeBSD /brain
    4. Re:Stop with the drugs already by crmarvin42 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Please do explain to me what you mean by "anti-vaccine lobbies." A lobby or lobbyist is a representative of a monied interest. What monied interest out there profits from NOT selling something? Because the anti-vaccine idea is all about not purchasing vaccines. Please tell me who these lobbyists are.

      I'm not the OP, but I can probably answer that question for you. There are several "Anti-vaccine" groups that have a lot of money and could be considered "Lobbyists".

      1. The well meaning, but ultimately wrong, "Vaccines cause Autism" group. I don't know that they actually have a formal lobbying group, but they are numerous, vocal, and have several politicians at least paying lip service to them.

      2. The "Anti-modern Medicine" folk. They are a sub set of the "Anti-modern Science" population that don't trust what they don't understand and have made an emotional (thus irrefutable) decision to go back to old style medicine. That old medicines either didn't work, or worked becuase of chemical compounds that are the basis of many "Modern" drugs is a fact lost on them based on the origin of their decision (Emotion vs. Reason).

      There is a lot of overlap between the groups, and collectively there is a lot of money involved. Many of those that vocally espouse either view point are not actually believers, but cynical con-men who are selling all of their dupes vials of distilled water and passing it off as a better "Safer" alternative.

      I'm not saying I disagree that the case for Swine-Flu was overblown. I go the vaccine, but only because I have a 4month old at home, who's immune system isn't developed enough to handle any flu (I got the seasonal flu vaccine as well). However, before this year I'd never gotten a flu vaccine, and I've seen some pretty convincing explanations on why we shouldn't bother giving it to the elderly, the group that everyone says needs it most (Hint: rates of flu fatalities in the elderly have not changed since before the existance of the flu vaccine).

      More on what the OP said. Vaccines and antibiotics are different. Vaccines exercise the immune system while minimizing the risk of severe problems, whereas antibiotics fight infection on behalf of the immune system potentially reducing the immune systems effectiveness on repeat challenge in the future. I've been of the opinion that antibiotics are abused by human medicine, and the cause of MSRA like "Super-Bugs" and not any of the usual scape goats. However, I have to admit that I'm involved in animal agriculture and understand why and when antibiotics are fed to animals, one of the popular whipping boys in the EU and increasingly in the US.

      [Soapbox]That direct administration of antibiotics in a reckless manner to humans cuts out several degrees of separation between potential antibiotic resistance gene appearance, and the human population seems to be lost on anyone involved in policy. That the complete ban of antibiotic use in animal agriculture in the EU almost a decade ago hasn't resulted in any changes in the prevalence of antibiotic resistance gene prevalance or rate of spread in either the livestock or human populations is very telling, but being ignored for the most part by the legislator both in the EU (who'd have to admit they were wrong in order to reverse there knee-jerk decision) and to a lesser extent the US (who are simply ignoring the science so that they can jump on the bandwaggon being driven by the EU). Hopefully they'll see this as further confirmation that HUMAN use of antibiotics like candy is the primary problem and legislate accordingly, but I doubt it.[/soapbox]

      --
      Bureaucracy expands to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy.-Oscar Wilde
  2. The People Problem by LtCol+Burrito · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While the doctors writing out scrips for antibiotics does play a role, one of the major factors should be patient education. A lot of people think that antibiotics should be used for minor complaints, such as colds. In addition, one major cause of superbugs is the failure of patients to complete a course of antibiotics. They feel better, so they simply stop taking the medications.

    1. Re:The People Problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And why do you think they act like that ? I don't know about the US but here TV ads for antibiotics where everywhere a couple years ago, pretty much telling you to take some even when you weren't sick because hey ANTIBIOTICS ARE GOOD FOR YOU. The whole idea of allowing medical companies to run ads and pay doctors to promote their stuff is a recipe for disaster.

    2. Re:The People Problem by trollebolle · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Norway's answer to the people problem is to ban ads for medicine that are regulated in any way, like antibiotics. Medicine must be prescribed by a doctor (you can't by antibiotics in a convenience store), and the doctor don't get patients that want a certain medicine after watching a TV ad. Advertisement for medicine is considered to be too dangerous to be allowed, as the decision regarding medical treatment should be left to the doctor, not the pharmaceutical companies through aggressive marketing.

  3. Tip for USA by spectrokid · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In Scandinavia, most doctors are government employees. They have no incentive for prescribing anything and can freely tell their patients to bugger if they ask for useless drugs. Yes, there are disadvantages to "communist" healthcare, but this story shows there are also some clear advantages. A Belgian Doctor once told me he believed antibiotics should be given as a prevention to all kindergarten kids. A Danish study showed you can cut sick days in kindergartens by half by forcing all children to wash their hands twice a day.

    --

    10 ?"Hello World" life was simple then

  4. Re:The plural of anecdote is not data... by Mr.+Freeman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Of course, it could be random coincidence or that you just happen to have a stronger immune system than the average person, but I guess your nonsense rationale sounds better. Also, remind me never to have dinner with you. You might enjoy the taste of your own shit, but I don't.

    --
    -1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.