I just have to say poor Jim. I am sitting laughing my a$$ off. This young adult (obviously not a kid ) Is still around after all the flack ETSer’s have give him. He has stuck to his guns (no pun intended) through all of this. I have to say kudos to Jim for showing us your mature side. You have earned my respect and admiration.

Interesting... I've often wondered about our healthcare systems willingness to push drugs for the pharmacorps at obvious cost to our long term health. We always think that the next great antibiotic is just around the corner, but we've painted ourselves into that corner (or had it painted for us!).

After reading that antibiotics are present in drinking water all over, I found this article to be of interest: http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-04/idso-lau041706.php

yes, but coffee-shops can legally sell drugs, but can't legally purchase it

I'm very happy you do.

So, the argument is that the reason for the infrequent spread of MRSA in Dutch hospitals is because there's naturally little MRSA in the general Dutch population. We're getting into a chicken-and-egg situation here, but I would say that the general consensus is that there is little MRSA in Dutch hospitals (and therefore in the general population) because they have worked hard to block transmission of MRSA between patients and to cure the few who have it. MRSA is an increasing problem in many countries throughout Europe, so it's unlikely that the Dutch are somehow spared from exposure to it. The UK's rate is not far below the US, and Germany and Austria have seen a rapid rise recently.

Like I said, limiting antibiotic use is just a part of their overall strategy and not the main reason for their success. The part that the British wish they could emulate is the Dutch screening, isolation, and treatment strategy, usually referred to as "search and destroy". More than anything, that's the reason why Holland has been able to keep their hospitals relatively free of MRSA. A large proportion of the MRSA they see are in patients who originally acquired it in in a non-Dutch hospital, so their hospitals are being exposed to it, but they've been able to identify it, contain it and keep it from becoming endemic. Once a hospital has become thoroughly colonized with MRSA, it's pretty tough to get rid of and continues to infect more and more patients.

Xterior, although you can legally buy "soft drugs", we have one of the lowest amount of "soft drugs" users per 1000 persons, compaired to other western country's.
Trying to make something very hard to get, appears to make them more attractive to experimenting young people.

Arney,

Yes, your explanation supports my theory that social/medical protocol practices are in part responsible for the reduction/prevention of MRSA in entering the Dutch Hospital environment. As you state, many other European countries have higher rates then Holland. This, in part is not necessarily due to the restrictive use of antibiotics, but the thoughtful identification and isolation of patients with MRSA.

Once an organism develops antibiotic resistance, the best way to deal with control (not on an individual basis but the population as a whole), is not necessarily developing additional drugs to which the organism is sensitive, but to institute practices to prevent spread.

As you know, one main problem with the development of antibiotic resistant organisms is not only over prescribing and inappropriate treatment (giving antibiotics for viral infections), but incomplete or inappropriate treatment regimes by a patient’s actions. Many will discontinue to take a full course of antibiotics because they either “feel better’ or are unable to afford a complete course of treatment. Many also fail to take the meds at the proper time; ensuring therapeutic thresholds are maintained or are they are taken inappropriately (sometimes with meals sometimes without or with drugs/supplements that inactivate the drug).

Many of these factors are social-economically based. Populations, who are not given the proper education or for whatever reason do not follow proper treatment regimes or demand treatment when no treatment is appropriate, are just as guilty as the medical community for the development of antibiotic resistant organisms.

Pete

In a discussion, I once heard the following argument :

" If you want to stop mafia/gangs/criminals' monopoly on drugs (and all the profits they make on that market), just make the selling of drugs a state's monopoly (like tabacco).
Then you can :
- control the quality of the products,
- control the conditions under which they are bought and -somewhat - used (medical controls),
- control and lower the price,
- prevent the criminals to make a lot of money,
- make some money anyway and use it to (try to) cure drugs user's and/or cure drugs' related illnesses, (money you will have to spend, one way or another... anyway...)
- etc... "
....

There were other benefits listed, but I don't remember them all...


OTOH, I think this thread is going way off of it's initial subject ... <img src="/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />
BTW, nice kit !

Same in France : I have not been able to find any !!

and before some of you guys ask, no, AFAIK, there is no law preventing breast milk bags carry, concealed or not ! <img src="/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Ah, the Dutch population and their behavior, like medication compliance. I see where you were going with your original post now. Yes, I would agree with your reasoning.

Funny, now we've got a couple Dutch themed subthreads going now. The other one is on drug use. Umm, what were we originally talking about? Oh, yes, JIM's survival tin. Nice kit, by the way! <img src="/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />