Saturday, December 2, 2017

The Ethics Behind Antibiotic Prescriptions

Since the early 1940s and the debut of penicillin into the medical world, society has relied heavily on antibiotics as a “cure-all” for every type of ailment. Antibiotics greatly altered the public’s view of medicine and shunted away the shame often associated with incurable infectious diseases of the time, such as gonorrhea and syphilis. The culture around infection and the pain associated with it, underwent a massive change during this period. Specifically, the relationship between the patient and the physician. The production of penicillin and other strains of antibiotics that came after caused an influx in patients seeking treatment for their newly-curable illnesses. The physician was no longer seen as the trained professional who cured you, but rather, the person who prescribed you medicine that would cure you. Antibiotics are an incredible advancement in their ability to cure fatal infections, however, recent years have seen an adverse effect stemming from their widespread accessibility, namely, antibiotic resistance.
            Antibiotics generally interrupt cell wall or protein synthesis thus rendering bacteria ineffective. This is all well and good, until natural mutation takes place in bacterial cells. Natural selection favors bacterial cells with mutated DNA that protects them from the attacks of antibiotics.  With nonresistant chains of bacteria dying off, more room and resources are available for resistant bacterial strains to proliferate. An example of such a strain would be MRSA (Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus), which underwent a genomic mutation that allows the protein that antibiotics target in the cell to be regenerated, and thus impenetrable.  MRSA is incredibly dangerous, with a casualty rate from 30-50%.
            The issue of antibiotic resistance is not one we should take lightly, nor is it an issue we should dismiss as inevitable. In fact, we are greatly contributing to this issue, and it circles back to the patient physician-relationship that was so greatly altered when antibiotics were introduces in the 1940s. Our mindset around illness changed, and the act of receiving an antibiotic prescription became therapeutic in itself. In many developing countries, such as Indonesia, Pakistan, Ghana, and Uzbekistan, 60% of consultations with a physician end in an injection, often of antibiotics. Similarly, the CDC (Center for Disease Control and Prevention) estimates that 1 in 3 antibiotic prescriptions are unnecessary. The question must be asked, what can be done to stunt the multiplication of resistant strains of bacteria? First, the mindset around antibiotic resistance must be changed, and physicians should exhaust other forms of treatment before prescribing antibiotics. To ignore this issue is to allow more people to be effected by illnesses such as MRSA. We should not shy away from calling physicians out on the careless nature of their prescribing. This issue transcends medical convenience and becomes a serious matter of medical ethics.


Tone, A. (2007). Medicating modern America: prescription drugs in history. New York: New York            Univ. Press.

1 comment:

  1. As someone who has volunteered in an emergency department, I've seen hospitals take bacterial infections very seriously. Patients with such infections are quarantined and sanitation methods are increased. However, you raise an interesting point about the distribution of antibiotics, especially in developing countries. It is true that a decrease in antibiotic distribution in non-bacterial infections, but my question is what should be done about the distribution of antibiotics to livestock. Is it important enough to add antibiotics to livestock feed and risk the development if increased resistance?

    ReplyDelete