| | | |

Norway gets it: antibiotics cause disease

For evidence that overuse of antibiotics and other drugs is causing more health problems than they cure, one need look no further than Norway.~

Antibiotics and MRSA


That country embarked on a campaign 25 years ago to eradicate MRSA (antibiotic resistant staph infection) which has proven remarkably successful. A key component of that campaign: cutting back severely on the use of antibiotics.

This doesn’t surprise me one bit. I have read so many accounts of the damage caused by many pharmaceutical drugs, especially antibiotics and ARVs (anti-retroviral drugs) to the gut, a major player in our immune systems.

I am not surprised, because I have experienced antibiotic abuse and an infection with MRSA myself, before I became aware of the dangers of western medicine’s love affair with all things pharmaceutical. I have spent months at a time on antibiotics earlier this decade, battling an infection that didn’t have to happen in the first place, according to the AP report linked above.

MRSA infections are taking far more lives in the US, Japan and Europe than AIDS and unlike “HIV-infections”, MRSA rates are growing at truly epidemic proportions, up from 2 percent in 1974 to 63 percent in 2004. MRSA is also lethal, causing 19,000 deaths each year in the U.S. alone.

 

MRSA on the rise

Obstacles to stopping a killer disease


There is so much more information in this article that I’d like to just copy and paste, but I leave it to you to go and read it for yourself. I’ll simply post this one snip:

But can Norway’s program really work elsewhere?

The answer lies in the busy laboratory of an aging little public hospital about 100 miles outside of London. It’s here that microbiologist Dr. Lynne Liebowitz got tired of

seeing the stunningly low Nordic MRSA rates while facing her own burgeoning cases.

So she turned Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Kings Lynn into a petri dish, asking doctors to almost completely stop using two antibiotics known for provoking MRSA infections.

One month later, the results were in: MRSA rates were tumbling. And they’ve continued to plummet. Five years ago, the hospital had 47 MRSA bloodstream infections. This year they’ve had one.

It’s unlikely that we in the U.S. will ever see similarly spectacular results for some very obvious reasons.

Our medical system is disproportionately influenced by the large amount of money spent by the pharmaceutical industry; profit that is earned by inflating the costs of drugs beyond reason. Money that is shoveled out to medical schools, doctors and media marketing campaigns as part of a blatant campaign to influence, if not control medical decisions that benefit the corporate ledger, rather than the consumer’s health.

Secondly, the government agency responsible for oversight, the FDA, has become a haven for former pharma staffers who have become rubber stamp clerks, rather than the vigilant guardians we need.

Finally, we have become obsessed with curing disease with pills and injections. “Norwegians”, on the other hand, “are sanguine about their coughs and colds, toughing it out through low-grade infections,” according to the article.


Disease as markers of a broken medical system and the AIDS connection


MRSA is just one of many marker diseases that indicate a problem with our medical system’s misplaced faith in pharmaceutical drugs to treat illness.   I can’t resist highlighting a couple of more points that are especially relevant to the AIDS debate.

One of the most commonly cited diseases associated with, and probably misdiagnosed as, AIDS in Africa is tuberculosis. Treatment resistant TB is frequently blamed on the HI virus (HIV), yet:

The World Health Organization says antibiotic resistance is one of the leading public health threats on the planet. A six-month investigation by The Associated Press found overuse and misuse of medicines has led to mutations in once curable diseases like tuberculosis and malaria, making them harder and in some cases impossible to treat.

We have also seen similar problems with the use of ARVs in healthy people who test “positive” on vague antibody tests used to detect HIV.  Long term treatment leads to failure, which is dismissed by calling it “drug resistance” and additional drugs are imposed onto an already over-burdened  body and immune systems until the patient dies of systemic organ failure, especially of the liver and heart.

ARVs are also known to have strong antibiotic properties.  It is not unreasonable to assume there are similarly dangerous consequences associated with their use.

Many people with failing immune systems, especially gay men, have been victims of antibiotic abuse, one of the factors suspected of causing their illness.Those who were first diagnosed with immune failure in the early 1980s were the so-called “fast track” gays who lived dangerously close to the edge, pre-emptively popping antibiotics before stepping out to the baths and the bars.

When I first came out as a gay man, testing for STDs and treating them with antibiotics was just one piece of the rite of passage into the urban gay culture.

One plausible alternative explanation for what is now call AIDS, among gay men especially, has been offered by Tony Lance, who coined Gay Related Intestinal Dysbiosis, a must read for any gay man concerned about his health and probably good information for others with “poz” diagnosis as well.

If intestinal dysbiosis plays a causative role in AIDS, the obvious question is why in
the late ‘70s and early ‘80s would sizable numbers of gay men suddenly become afflicted with the condition to the point of becoming seriously ill and dying. In his papers Koliadin points to the widespread and sometimes prophylactic use of broad-spectrum antibiotics which destroy bacteria indiscriminately. Although these drugs undoubtedly played and continue to play a big role, there are other factors that deserve serious consideration.

I think next time I get an infection I will just have to pass on the doctor’s treatment of choice.

(hat tip to my sisters Merrilee and Diana for sending the AP article to me.)

~

~

Wait... there's more!

  • 97

    97. That’s my latest CD4+ count, less than half the count from six weeks ago.

    That’s it. I have tried as many alternative treatments as I can think of to reverse the decline. I will be starting my third round of pharmaceutical ARVs as soon as I can get a prescription and fill it.

    This decision has been a long time coming, and in hindsight, I probably should have restarted a few months ago. There’s nothing magical about 97, or being below 100, but it’s as good a breaking point as any. I’ve long argued that there are two things to keep in mind about CD4 counts: one is the long-term trend; the other is single- or low double-digit counts.

  • Reduce AIDS drug toxicity and side effects

    I embarked on my third course of ARVs since 1998. For ten of the sixteen years I have been HIV-positive, I was able to manage well enough without ARVs and I continue to believe there is no reason for otherwise healthy HIV-positive—let alone negative—gay men to take these drugs. To those who want to wave a recent study about the benefits of early intervention in my face, I would ask them why they put so much faith in a science that has utterly failed us to date.

  • The truth about Truvada: PrEP won’t stop AIDS

    I’m willing to grant that gay men are entitled to use PrEP… provided they have access to all the information they need to make an informed decision. Informed consent has been a hallmark of the HIV and AIDS research and prevention efforts for three decades, and that shouldn’t be waived for the campaign favoring PrEP.

    Gay men deserve to know that all the claims for Truvada reducing the risk of acquiring HIV-positivity  are based on trials—funded by Gilead—that emphasized the importance of using condoms…

  • Confessions of a heretic AIDS dissident

    You might not know it from reading the comments left here on my blog, but there are more than a few AIDS dissidents who really don’t like how I think or what I write about.

    There’s a whole thread on a very popular Facebook page called “Rethinking AIDS”, discussing my open letter to Dora. Last I looked, that thread had nearly 100 comments, and very few of those comments were about Dora, Ruggiero or the defense of academic freedom.

    No, the gist of the thread was whether or not I am in “the AIDS Zone.” It seems that because I did not use “air quotes” around the term “HIV disease”, I’m not really an AIDS dissident. Others took issue with my post for daring to publish that some AIDS Rethinkers hold a very narrow view about “HIV” and “AIDS”, while others of us are merely “questioning” the whole affair. None of them chose to comment directly to me here.

    Some of the most visible and vocal Rethinkers seem intent on imposing their own “beliefs” (another loaded term that deserves quotes) on the entire movement. There has long been a tendency to try to impose a sort of litmus test to determine whether or not one is a true “AIDS dissident”.

    Since I first met the AIDS dissident community via the AIDS Myth Exposed forums—since renamed Questioning AIDS—several years ago, I’ve become aware of several of the various factions, distinctive personalities and divisions within that broad group. Now I’m finding it ironic just how guilty some of these people are at their own version of “bone-pointing”.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *