Eh. She said it's still infected. That it's likely that the infection is viral, or maybe it's resistant. We agreed that there was no point in changing or upping the antibiotics right now.
If it's viral, it should be getting better by friday, if not then it's drug resistant and I should change antibiotics.
She DID say that I was probably infectious and should take pains to keep my hands clean (purell).
So. I have no excuse not to go back to work, medically. I still can hear little, feel woozy and am totally disoriented.
Quote:I still can hear little, feel woozy and am totally disoriented.
3 good reasons in my book
NOT to go back to work yet...
Back when I was a beginning lab technnologist in the sixties I worked in a non-specialized clinical lab (as opposed to the immunology labs I worked in later), and in that capacity did a lot of Bacterial Culture and Sensitivies. That was a long time ago, but sometimes I wish they'd bring the cultures back into more use. I know they take time, and if the infection is viral, they're effectively a red herring. But, I remember a variety of differences in how an antibio worked on a given plated colony. Aside from the differences of some not working at all and some very well, there were more subtle differences. I've thought it was a question of money and resources, but don't know, maybe there is another med reason.
why do they send contageous people to work in this country? and why does it take 4 1/2 weeks to see a specialist? i thought health care in slovakia sucked, but both of those would be a big NO-NO over there. geeze louise!
Osso, people with ear infections are in a lot of pain. I guess that's why the antibiotics got so over-used. By the time the results are in the pain is gone. But, by the time the antibiotics kick in, the pain is gone too. Maybe?
Osso, I do believe that they should check the fluids. Wouldn't they be able to tell if it was bacterial or viral by checking under a microscope? Do you have to do a culture? Why?
Oh, I'm not all so against the antibiotic right away. Pros and cons, even many cons, I'm sure, as Sozobe has noted re Sozlet's care. But in your situation I'm not against it. It's just that I'd like them to do a culture and sens as well, as a back up. Silly me.
On what they see with a slide from a swab, well, there are other bacteria running around, and you don't see viruses... They plate the swab, then look at/maybe stain the different bacterial colonies, then plate the apparent offender on blood agar and see what hemolysis happens around a variety of antibio discs - and this all takes time.
I dunno, my bacti lab time was, eek, four plus decades ago. Maybe there are new ways...
Osso, I'm with you on that. I'm sure the medical community sees it as a waste of time.
ossobuco wrote:Back when I was a beginning lab technnologist in the sixties I worked in a non-specialized clinical lab (as opposed to the immunology labs I worked in later), and in that capacity did a lot of Bacterial Culture and Sensitivies. That was a long time ago, but sometimes I wish they'd bring the cultures back into more use. I know they take time, and if the infection is viral, they're effectively a red herring. But, I remember a variety of differences in how an antibio worked on a given plated colony. Aside from the differences of some not working at all and some very well, there were more subtle differences. I've thought it was a question of money and resources, but don't know, maybe there is another med reason.
In most State- operated microbiology labs used in Veterinary medicine, the culture of bacteria and fungi is all automated and the turn around time is very short. Why this system is not applied in human micro labs, is beyond me!
It's beyond me, too. Shouldn't a swab be the first thing to do in ear infections? Throat, too, for that matter.
In our impoverished healthcare that's running on peanuts and good will, that is indeed the first thing they do. You're able to get results the same day. At worst, when they're swamped, the next day. Surely that would help in determining what kind of treatment is best suited and not waste money on antibiotics if they don't work as well as making people and bacteria more resistant to them. Plus they send you to the specialist right away, not only for follow up in four weeks. Surely there must be a way how to organize it more effectively in the U.S.?
Maybe there are known bacteria that count for most ear infections, and they are all responsive to a particular antibiotic - unless they're resistant. So, maybe they don't do the culture and sens unless they it appears resistant when the antibio doesn't work. Still...
That could be. Though in my own not-yet-that-long life i've had ear and throat infections that had various origins, whether viral or bacterial. Strikes me like that would be the case all around.
It's also odd that they're just guessing whether or not it's contageous. Wouldn't that be something rather important to establish in general? Sort of for public health sake? There are flu epidemics everywhere, but I think they are far more pronounced in the U.S. No wonder if people are encouraged to just suppress the symptoms and go to work. And they do the same with kids. Stuff them with pills, and off with them to school. Of course not always and not everybody, but enough people to make it a problem.
Yes, I seem to remember different bacteria can be involved - but perhaps broad spectrum antibiotics may work for all of them to one moderate degree or another. I assume they think it's cheaper and faster to just prescribe one of those, and they may also think it's better medicine. I've also seen articles about a lot of the prescriptions for antibiotics are written because of patient pressure to get them.
I think Sozobe has given us links from reputable sources on antibiotics for ear infections being quite problematic, at least for children. I sort of wonder if this broad spectrum business has anything to do with increased resistance, but I'm really talking from ignorance on that.
There are a few different issues with children and antibiotics. One is that they're thrown around with great abandon. Before I lit our current ENT, who I like a lot, sozlet kept getting prophylactic prescriptions. That means she had fluid in her ear but no infection (by the way that's what "effusion" means, fluid in the ear, not the drainage per se, sorry), but the doctors thought she should have antibiotics just to prevent an infection from beginning.
Since we started with the ENT we like, she's had fluid in her ear many, many times, without progressing to infection. It's just fluid -- sits there for a while, then goes away, no particular ill effects.
Then there is a whole separate issue that ear infections in children tend to clear up, on their own, within (I forget, a week or so -- less than the standard 10-day run of antibiotics). So a kid has an ear infection, goes on antibiotics, and gets better in a week or so; but it's very likely that the kid would have gotten better in that same time period without antibiotics, too.
Then there is the issue of people just not finishing the run. When antibiotics are so freely prescribed, and so many people have them, you're also going to have people who don't do it correctly. "Junior's fine now, and he hates the medicine, I'll stop giving it to him."
Oh and then the problem of antibiotics being thrown at viral ear infections...
Hmmm. It's not cheap either.
I am now resistant to 22 different kinds of antibiotics. But that's different. They knew what kind of bacteria I have when they were prescribing them. It's just that I had some really resistant strain of bacteria and nothing worked. Boy I was so slim that summer!
The ear infection diet, sign up now! Sozobe, thank for the recap.
littlek, Glad you got to see a doctor today.
I worked for 3 hours today, came home, crawled onto the couch and fell asleep for 2 hours. I had my coat on.
Aww.... Poor littlek.
You just can't stay home? Completely I mean?
How are you doing now?
