Opinion
 

Unnecessary drugs often harmful

Joshua Curry

I burned my arm pretty badly a month ago. My forearm bloomed into a single huge blister, and someone suggested that I not expose my arm to sunlight for two years. After the fact, I was set in the hallway of the emergency room in a wheelchair, waiting shirtless for some time. A nurse came by to wash and wrap it, and after what seemed like an eternity, a doctor came by with my prescriptions. Antibiotics were on the list. I asked why I needed oral antibiotics for a burn and was given some spiel about the importance of taking everything prescribed.

Of course I don't take recommendations based purely on "expertise," but I was clueless as to the treatment of burns. I took my first pill and immediately regretted it. I almost went so far as to send my finger down my throat after it. You may ask what the deal is with antibiotics. Well, I've got this nagging suspicion that they prevent my immune system from doing its job and divert its attention while pestilence reigns free in my poor little body.

I was assigned a follow-up visit, and a new doctor confirmed my suspicions, immediately telling me to stop taking them. He gave me the layman's terms -- the antibiotics only knew how to kill one type of infection and made it easier for other infections to persist. So antibiotics have been pushed on me anytime I've gone to the hospital for anything, and I assume the same for anybody else. I urge people to individually weigh the pros and cons of any medication given to them. Pharmaceutical companies send doctors out to health spas for their seminars and constantly bombard them with free samples. They are also among the most effective lobbyists in the country. No wonder these companies have managed to duck serious questions about morality when hogging the patents on drugs needed around the world. These are most often drugs that are unprofitable to produce within the United States or unaffordable to the countries that need them.

This all came back to me when I read an article in the Journal of the American Medical Association last week. It was about a study of the use of antibiotics among women, and the conclusion is a bit scary. Those women who took 25 or more prescriptions of antibiotics in the past 17 years, as well as those who took antibiotics for a period of 500 days or more, have double the risk of contracting breast cancer. This doesn't mean antibiotics cause cancer, but they certainly can have a negative effect on one's health.

We're even given antibiotics for viral infections, which might as well be treated with an orange, but there's a bigger part to this story. Antibiotics are a great asset to the beef industry. They make fatter cows that have antibiotic-resistant bacteria in their bodies. Not even milk is free of the bacteria, particularly with hormones like rBGH, which is specifically linked to residual antibiotics in the milk, being injected into cows to promote milk output. Don't think milk and beef haven't been associated with disease in humans -- quite the contrary. And fish and chicken are fed the same stuff as cows. Antibiotic-resistant strains of Salmonella has been found in chicken, so you should cook it well done.

Most of us figure we're going to contract cancer sooner or later. I propose, what with America's new-found love for reality, some philanthropist create a reality show where 10 attractive women take antibiotics in a race for the prize -- first one with breast cancer wins a million dollars. Throw in a fortune to jump in a volcano, and we've got ourselves a hit.

Curry, a columnist for The Daily Cougar, 
can be reached at barelyafloat@hotmail.com.