Why antibiotics are no longer as effective as they were inthe 1950's?
927254
Bacterias and virus's are evolving, new antibiotic's are being created. We have over used these antibiotic's over the years and they no longer are as effective. \n\nSome times it is healthier to just not take the antibiotic and let the virus run its course.  You kill everything good and bad in your body when you take antibiotic's.  Try asking the doctor for local, topical treatments when ever possible when you have an injury and tell the doctor you do not want to take an antibiotic if you can help it.  It is to your benefit.
1111981
Consider, a hundred years ago medicine was practiced completely differently, it is an evolving practice.  Personally I would prefer to take homeopathics that have been used for thousands than an antibiotic that has been used for less than a hundred years.  Yes, each doctor has his or her own idea of how to treat an ailment, however there are certain socio-economic conditions affecting treatment.  Antibiotics are cheap, commonly accepted and easily prescribed, they are monitored to be the same in each dose and the individual only has to understand to take the medication as prescribed whereas an individual trying to take a more natural route has to understand when, how in what combination to take herbal supplements, dietary needs and changes and possibly the finances to see a doctor that is less likely to prescribe antibiotics.  I, like your sister took many antibiotics as a child (perhaps girls are prescribed more antibiotics than boys, generally men go to the doctors less than women do) was freguently sick and as a result have worked hard to improve my immune system with the assistance of an excellent holistic healer and get sick rarely.
702611
Your body will adapt to antibiotics, prevention however, is easy, wash your hands (alot), avoid anti-bacterial soap (they will also kill the good bacterias that we need), eat right and take vitamins. Simple, yet affective.
726223
Possibly the antibiotic had the effect you describe. You should get in to see an OB/GYN. They can advise you on the cause and all/if any treatment.
860305
I believe it has something to do with the fact that, viruses such as pneumonia affect  the older (and very young) moreso than an adult in his/her prime because the immune system is weakened.  Either by age or because it is premature (as in with children)  As you grow older, your body weakens and is once again more susceptible to disease/sickness.
901147
I've never heard of such a reaction with antibiotics.  It doesn't even make sense for such a reaction to occur.  It's weird.
923643
Did you take alot of antibiotics as a youngster??
639327
1) They can decrease your liver and kidney function over prolonged periods of use\n2) As susceptible bacteria are killed off & the resistant ones survive, the resistant strains will divide & multiply. Hence the population of resistant bacteria will increase. (the chance of this is greatly increased by not completing a course of antibiotics & by adding low doses to animal feed as growth promotants)\n3) World-wide overuse of many antibiotics can and has led to increased multi-resistant strains which are hard to treat (eg. MRSA & VRE)\n4) Ultimately can lead to treatment failure (ie. no more antibiotics left to use that will treat some infections)
622586
Of course! When people can't understand why constant intake of antibiotics is bad for your future health prospects and why there's no use in taking ampicillin to cure a cold, there's plenty of ignorance about science.  And people won't even take the time to know extremely simple stuff that would save their lives.  \n\nThen again, meh, less competition for my genes; read Dawkins.
576689
Cancer existed well before 1950.  It goes back to 1500bc (at least) with the term cancer being coined about 1000 years later.  In general public, cancer was not talked about as much in mixed/polite company.  Diagnosis have become more accurate over the years.  And I wasn't around in 1950..\n\nCancer rates have also increased s life spans have increased.  If someone dies at age 40 of small pox, they never had the chance to get prostate cancer (typically a late in life cancer).\n\nWe were healthier in the late 1800s?  In some respects, yes.  People were way more physically active.  I suspect diabetes rates were lower.  And I don't know about things like smoking.\n\nBut in other respects, no.  Pneumonia had a significant death rate.  Small pox.  Scarlet fever.  Cholera.  Gangrene. Child birth was a fairly risky proposition for the mother. Polio.   None are huge health risks in the USA as they were 100 years ago.\n\nHeart disease has been around a long time.  As has cancer.  And they are likely more prevalent.  Are they getting worse?  Perhaps -- but life spans have gone up by more than 50% in the last 100 years (49.2 in 1901, 77.6 in 2003).\n\nIn other words, I'll take those extra 28 years...
587674
just go to wikipedia and search antibiotics.
864144
It is so the bacteria can become stronger and more resistant.  I believe studies have shown that babies that have not been exposed to bacteria are actually sicker when they get older because the have not built up any immunities.
687700
i would  have to say since you have been on a antibiotic it is good to always make sure you are drinking enough water' this may help to dilute the medication that is  still in your system' i hope this helps you can also check out a drug and medication  sight on the net'' they may be able to give you some advice
450796
companies describe expiry dates on medicines including antibiotics. What they mean is that one or more chemicals or rather we say ingredients lose their effectiveness. So when you return the medicines to the store they give it back to the company where they add the chemicals which lose their effectiveness and then again sell those.\n\nSo it is better to return the medicines back to the store rather than flushing or throwing in garbage which is harmful for the soil.
1108763
It's to be certain that all the germs have been killed by the antibiotic.  If you stop the drug after a few days, the remaining germs can mutate and develop a resistance to the drug, and come back to make you sicker than you were before.
848383
Not as of yet, the problem is that it has been mutating to quickly for an effective vaccine to be developed.  It is a virus, so it can't be killed with antibiotics.  It has to be prevented with vaccination and since it has shown a high mutation capacity it may be some time before anything is discovered to inhibit its mutation capabilities and then kill it.
490824
hi my name is Geeth Prajwal from India i hope this will help you\n\n\n\nIn order to be useful in treating human infections, antibiotics must selectively target bacteria for eradication and not the cells of its human host. Indeed, modern antibiotics act either on processes that are unique to bacteria--such as the synthesis of cell walls or folic acid--or on bacterium-specific targets within processes that are common to both bacterium and human cells, including protein or DNA replication. Following are some examples. \n\nMost bacteria produce a cell wall that is composed partly of a macromolecule called peptidoglycan, itself made up of amino sugars and short peptides. Human cells do not make or need peptidoglycan. Penicillin, one of the first antibiotics to be used widely, prevents the final cross-linking step, or transpeptidation, in assembly of this macromolecule. The result is a very fragile cell wall that bursts, killing the bacterium. No harm comes to the human host because penicillin does not inhibit any biochemical process that goes on within us. \n\nBacteria can also be selectively eradicated by targeting their metabolic pathways. Sulfonamides, such as sulfamethoxazole, are similar in structure to para-aminobenzoic acid, a compound critical for synthesis of folic acid. All cells require folic acid and it can diffuse easily into human cells. But the vitamin cannot enter bacterial cells and thus bacteria must make their own. The sulfa drugs such as sulfonamides inhibit a critical enzyme--dihydropteroate synthase--in this process. Once the process is stopped, the bacteria can no longer grow. \n\nAnother kind of antibiotic--tetracycline--also inhibits bacterial growth by stopping protein synthesis. Both bacteria and humans carry out protein synthesis on structures called ribosomes. Tetracycline can cross the membranes of bacteria and accumulate in high concentrations in the cytoplasm. Tetracycline then binds to a single site on the ribosome--the 30S (smaller) ribosomal subunit--and blocks a key RNA interaction, which shuts off the lengthening protein chain. In human cells, however, tetracycline does not accumulate in sufficient concentrations to stop protein synthesis. \n\nSimilarly, DNA replication must occur in both bacteria and human cells. The process is sufficiently different in each that antibiotics such as ciprofloxacin--a fluoroquinolone notable for its activity against the anthrax bacillus--can specifically target an enzyme called DNA gyrase in bacteria. This enzyme relaxes tightly wound chromosomal DNA, thereby allowing DNA replication to proceed. But this antibiotic does not affect the DNA gyrases of humans and thus, again, bacteria die while the host remains unharmed. \n\nMany other compounds can kill both bacterial and human cells. It is the selective action of antibiotics against bacteria that make them useful in the treatment of infections while at the same time allowing the host to live another day.