Apologies for the OT post from a non-regular here but Talk Origins is
down and I'd like to get an answer to this before I see my doctor
tomorrow.

I have a recurring health issue, nothing major but it ends up in me
getting antibiotics about every 6 months. I am conscious of the
growing issue of antimicrobial resistance evolving due to the
widespread use of antibiotics. If I understand properly, however, this
is a *population* issue rather than an *individual* one, and the risk
of me personally developing such resistance is probably quite low.
Have I got that right?

I do understand that my using antibiotics does contribute to the
widespread use but I regard all these things as about balance.

On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 7:33:41 AM UTC-4, Martin Harran wrote:
> Apologies for the OT post from a non-regular here but Talk Origins is
> down and I'd like to get an answer to this before I see my doctor
> tomorrow.
>
> I have a recurring health issue, nothing major but it ends up in me
> getting antibiotics about every 6 months. I am conscious of the
> growing issue of antimicrobial resistance evolving due to the
> widespread use of antibiotics. If I understand properly, however, this
> is a *population* issue rather than an *individual* one, and the risk
> of me personally developing such resistance is probably quite low.
> Have I got that right?
>
> I do understand that my using antibiotics does contribute to the
> widespread use but I regard all these things as about balance.

Unfortunately, you have it wrong, maybe, somewhat.

There are myriad things which affect the situation. So details matter.
Discuss them with your physician, although be prepared that not all
physicians are educated equal.

Some background. Not all antibiotic resistance comes about the same
way. It can evolve spontaneously, but that's pretty rare. The best way(worst?)
for this to happen is under a low dosage regimen where the drug concentration
of some populations of bacteria are exposed to are only partially inhibited in
growth and reproduction. In such populations, minor changes in pathways
that reduce the impact of the antibiotic can produce significant competitive
advantages. You can play out the classical natural selection schemes where
multiple small advantages accumulate. Moreover, the population of bacteria
that now have a higher tolerance for the antibiotic can colonize parts of the
organism that had slightly higher concentrations of active antibiotic giving
another population boost. All of this argues against half measures with lower
concentrations of antibiotics and prolonged use.

That said, the problem of greater significance is that there's a far more common
route of acquiring antibiotic resistance. And that's sloppy bacterial sex. Okay,
most don't consider it actual sex but bacteria can share DNA with each other
as small little independent circles of DNA called plasmids. Plasmids have discovered
that carrying genes for antibiotic resistance is a very effective survival strategy.
I'm indulging in some poetic license.

The take home point is that our modern world has evolved through enough of
a history of antibiotic use that the slow method of inventing antibiotic resistance
has left a legacy in the populations of plasmids that are out there. It's sadly
common to find plasmids that contain multiple genes that afford resistance
to multiple disparate antibiotics. There's more to the story as the use of antibiotics
in agriculture is way over done, maintaining populations of bacteria that carry
multi-antibiotic resistance plasmids. Feed lots are especially notorious.

For your particular case, again, consult your physician. But if you undergo a
two week or 10 day course of antibiotics twice a year, then you will be renewing
your personal population of antibiotic resistant plasmids. By theory, when you
finish your course of antibiotics, the bacteria supporting the added plasmids
will have a slight competitive disadvantage to those that don't, so they ought
to be outbreed. But the advantage is slight. And not to attack you personally,
you have many reservoirs of bacteria, so after 6 months it's likely you still have
some enhanced levels of resistance conferring plasmids.

Some will suggest that you can help yourself with probiotics. If you're taking an
oral antibiotic, it will likely have a significant effect on your gut microbiome.
Some probiotic yoghurts are often a good choice. And as a numbers game,
giving yourself some good bacteria (most are good) can help dilute away those
with the nasty plasmids.

Your physician might hedge, as our broader environment is mostly out of your
control. If you volunteer at a hospital, or have young relatives in daycare, you
will be exposed to places where antibiotic resistant bacteria are endemic. Or
if you're exposed to the 'fragrances of nature" near a feed lots, or a neighbor
likes to spread fresh manure on their flower beds, or some further hundreds of
aspects of modern life, the specter remains.

But as a final note, you probably don't need to worry much about it.
Most of the anti-bacterials you would be prescribed are fundamentally bacterio-
static, as opposed to bactericidal. They mostly stop the bacteria from growing
rather than outright killing it. Your immune system will finish the job for bad
infections, or your body will come back into a balance where the little critters
aren't taking over. Whatever particular reason you are being prescribed antibiotics,
in this semi-regular basis, the level of resistance in you is unlikely to confound
the therapeutic needs. And the chance that you will be the critical incubator
that spawned a scourge predicted by a certain expert on the subjective/objective
divide is next to zero.

PS. If you want to mess with your MD, tell him you read something on WebMD
and want to talk to him about it.

On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 4:33:41 AM UTC-7, Martin Harran wrote:
> Apologies for the OT post from a non-regular here but Talk Origins is
> down and I'd like to get an answer to this before I see my doctor
> tomorrow.
>
> I have a recurring health issue, nothing major but it ends up in me
> getting antibiotics about every 6 months. I am conscious of the
> growing issue of antimicrobial resistance evolving due to the
> widespread use of antibiotics. If I understand properly, however, this
> is a *population* issue rather than an *individual* one, and the risk
> of me personally developing such resistance is probably quite low.
> Have I got that right?
>
> I do understand that my using antibiotics does contribute to the
> widespread use but I regard all these things as about balance.

Balance? Evolution is defined as any change in allele frequencies in a population over time. There are tons of bacteria and viruses in and on your body from childhood on.
Sufficient knowledge does not yet exist to answer your question about probabilities. Maybe statistics, but even then much is assumed and not known. Hell, most of the time
doctors don't even bother to look for bacteria, they just compare your symptoms with others in the area and give you antibiotics for a certain bacteria.

Watch "Life on Us: A microscopic safari" and get some smarts.

On Tue, 15 Aug 2023 16:30:24 -0700 (PDT), Glenn <GlennSheldon@msn.com>
wrote:

>On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 4:33:41?AM UTC-7, Martin Harran wrote:
>> Apologies for the OT post from a non-regular here but Talk Origins is
>> down and I'd like to get an answer to this before I see my doctor
>> tomorrow.
>>
>> I have a recurring health issue, nothing major but it ends up in me
>> getting antibiotics about every 6 months. I am conscious of the
>> growing issue of antimicrobial resistance evolving due to the
>> widespread use of antibiotics. If I understand properly, however, this
>> is a *population* issue rather than an *individual* one, and the risk
>> of me personally developing such resistance is probably quite low.
>> Have I got that right?
>>
>> I do understand that my using antibiotics does contribute to the
>> widespread use but I regard all these things as about balance.
>
>Balance? Evolution is defined as any change in allele frequencies in a population over time. There are tons of bacteria and viruses in and on your body from childhood on.
>Sufficient knowledge does not yet exist to answer your question about probabilities. Maybe statistics, but even then much is assumed and not known. Hell, most of the time
>doctors don't even bother to look for bacteria, they just compare your symptoms with others in the area and give you antibiotics for a certain bacteria.
>
>Watch "Life on Us: A microscopic safari" and get some smarts.

Note to self: Don't get drawn into one of Glenn's pointless
pseudo-debates which are bad enough on TO without contaminating a
different newsgroup.

On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 8:04:33 AM UTC-7, Martin Harran wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Aug 2023 16:30:24 -0700 (PDT), Glenn <GlennS...@msn.com>
> wrote:
> >On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 4:33:41?AM UTC-7, Martin Harran wrote:
> >> Apologies for the OT post from a non-regular here but Talk Origins is
> >> down and I'd like to get an answer to this before I see my doctor
> >> tomorrow.
> >>
> >> I have a recurring health issue, nothing major but it ends up in me
> >> getting antibiotics about every 6 months. I am conscious of the
> >> growing issue of antimicrobial resistance evolving due to the
> >> widespread use of antibiotics. If I understand properly, however, this
> >> is a *population* issue rather than an *individual* one, and the risk
> >> of me personally developing such resistance is probably quite low.
> >> Have I got that right?
> >>
> >> I do understand that my using antibiotics does contribute to the
> >> widespread use but I regard all these things as about balance.
> >
> >Balance? Evolution is defined as any change in allele frequencies in a population over time. There are tons of bacteria and viruses in and on your body from childhood on.
> >Sufficient knowledge does not yet exist to answer your question about probabilities. Maybe statistics, but even then much is assumed and not known. Hell, most of the time
> >doctors don't even bother to look for bacteria, they just compare your symptoms with others in the area and give you antibiotics for a certain bacteria.
> >
> >Watch "Life on Us: A microscopic safari" and get some smarts.
> Note to self:

Nope.
Don't get drawn into one of Glenn's pointless
> pseudo-debates which are bad enough on TO without contaminating a
> different newsgroup.

On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 11:04:33 AM UTC-4, Martin Harran wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Aug 2023 16:30:24 -0700 (PDT), Glenn <GlennS...@msn.com>
> wrote:
> >On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 4:33:41?AM UTC-7, Martin Harran wrote:
> >> Apologies for the OT post from a non-regular here but Talk Origins is
> >> down and I'd like to get an answer to this before I see my doctor
> >> tomorrow.
> >>
> >> I have a recurring health issue, nothing major but it ends up in me
> >> getting antibiotics about every 6 months. I am conscious of the
> >> growing issue of antimicrobial resistance evolving due to the
> >> widespread use of antibiotics. If I understand properly, however, this
> >> is a *population* issue rather than an *individual* one, and the risk
> >> of me personally developing such resistance is probably quite low.
> >> Have I got that right?
> >>
> >> I do understand that my using antibiotics does contribute to the
> >> widespread use but I regard all these things as about balance.
> >
> >Balance? Evolution is defined as any change in allele frequencies in a population over time. There are tons of bacteria and viruses in and on your body from childhood on.
> >Sufficient knowledge does not yet exist to answer your question about probabilities. Maybe statistics, but even then much is assumed and not known. Hell, most of the time
> >doctors don't even bother to look for bacteria, they just compare your symptoms with others in the area and give you antibiotics for a certain bacteria.
> >
> >Watch "Life on Us: A microscopic safari" and get some smarts.

That last clause was uncalled-for, but the rest was an objective supplement to what Lawyer Daggett wrote.

> Note to self: Don't get drawn into one of Glenn's pointless
> pseudo-debates

You didn't register any criticisms to any specific objective statement that Glenn made.
And nothing he wrote was pointless. So your "note to self" was a non sequitur.

> which are bad enough on TO without contaminating a
> different newsgroup.

As one of the two people who brought sci.bio.paleontology back from
the brink of extinction in 2011, and have been a regular here since,
I can assure you there was no contamination by any of the three of you,
until this last comment of yours.

For one thing, everything that went on before this post of mine,
including Glenn's one word reply to what you wrote here,
came while Beagle was still down, and there was no way of knowing
how much longer it would be down.

Every time Beagle (and before it, Darwin) went down, sci.bio.paleontology
has taken on the role of a kind of "talk.origins in exile" in addition to its customary role.
There was only one time that one of our regulars voiced opposition to this status,
and that was for a purely personal reason: unlike in the many earlier downtimes,
Glenn showed up here.

More importantly perhaps, while what the three of you wrote was technically OT,
similar posts have been tolerated in the past here, when on-topic participation was
at an ebb. The reason is that sci.bio.evolution became defunct about a decade ago,
and we know of no other newsgroup that could substitute for it as well as this one.

Peter Nyikos
Professor, Dept. of Mathematics -- standard disclaimer--
University of South Carolina
http://people.math.sc.edu/nyikos