In 1989, Timothy Sullivan had an ear infection, and he was urged to take antibiotics. After popping a giant tablet of amoxicillin one summer afternoon, he jumped up to celebrate “after confirming that [he] had not asphyxiated and died.” Unfortunately, his celebration ended rather quickly when he realized that he still had 41 tablets of amoxicillin left to take. His doctor told him to take all of these tablets, even if his ear infection was already resolved — he must finish the course.
While some doctors still urge patients to finish lengthy antibiotic treatments for simple infections, the evidence for this recommendation has largely been debunked.
Actually, the evidence never really existed. Traditional antibiotic prescriptions, often written for seven, 10 or 14 days weren’t based on science—they might well have come instead from associations with familiar numbers, such as the number of days in a week or toes on our feet. But for many infections, recent research has shown that shorter antibiotic durations are just as effective, often with fewer harmful side effects.
More details about this over at Scientific American.
(Image Credit: qimono/ Pixabay)
The article does cover several of those, but they mix it in with a push to abolish the "complete the course" advice from the doctor's instructions. What they really mean is that the "standard" course of antibiotics should be reviewed and adjusted to a shorter period of treatment, if it is appropriate to do so. Unfortunately, the hodgepodge of causes for overuse of antibiotics causes the article to lack the focus it needs to make a solid argument for their main talking point.
It's not the worst article ever, but it just comes across as a piece from a journalist instead of a useful review of medical practices that need reevaluating. A shame really since it's not a bad idea.