Reply
Thu 6 Oct, 2011 01:15 am
Context:
Essentially, even as we are forced to revisit treatments that are more than 30 years old while waiting desperately for new research to bear fruit, we sense a pervasive belief in the scientific community that increasing resistance is the new norm. This is a misleading and costly attitude, both in human and economic terms.Some action has been taken in response to the mounting crisis. For example, the Infectious Diseases 17Society of America, US Centers for Disease Control and18 19Prevention (CDC), European commission, European 20Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC), and other expert groups and non-governmental organisations have worked hard to raise awareness and provoke action by government and industry.
new norm = new threshold?
it's more like the usual status or the usual state of affairs. Instead of antibiotics killing most sickness- and disease-causing organisms, we're seeing more and more of them developing resistance to the drugs or outright immunity--resistance is now the new norm, the condition we usually see. The article seems to say that that is in fact somewhat of a misperception, why it is is not made clear in this snippet.
@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:
it's more like the usual status or the usual state of affairs. Instead of antibiotics killing most sickness- and disease-causing organisms, we're seeing more and more of them developing resistance to the drugs or outright immunity--resistance is now the new norm, the condition we usually see. The article seems to say that that is in fact somewhat of a misperception, why it is is not made clear in this snippet.
Thank you.
I suspect the "norm" here means "threshold."
The whole context:
http://thelancet.cn/dnn1201/lancetcncampaignarticle.pdf
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace