The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention wants hospitals to issue fewer prescriptions for antibiotics. Why? Because the drugs that are supposed to make people feel better are being abused, actually causing illness, and hastening the arrival of infections for which medicine has no cure.
That’s not to say the CDC wants to cut the drugs from treatment entirely. A bacterial infection still requires antibiotics. Rather, the CDC wants to stifle the approximately 30 percent to 50 percent of antibiotic treatments that the organization deems unnecessary or inappropriate. The CDC also want doctors to make smarter dosing decisions when antibiotic use is appropiate.
Antibiotics can cause CDI (C. difficile infection), a diarrhea “that often recurs and can progress to sepsis and death,” as the CDC report released Tuesday reads. CDI occurs when antibiotics throw off the natural balance of healthy bacteria in the digestive tract.
In the study, the CDC predicted that decreasing antibiotic use by 30 percent would lead to a 26 percent decrease in CDI. By the CDC’s estimate, that would improve the outcomes of 65,000 people. Furthermore, the center found that one in three prescriptions for urinary tract infections contained a potential error (“given without proper testing or evaluation, or given for too long”), and some hospitals prescribe antibiotics at rates three times as high as others.
But those problems seem small when you consider the looming threat of the overuse of antibiotics — the rise in diseases that do not respond to the drugs at all.
As reported in September, the CDC estimates that 23,000 people a year die of such diseases. And barring innovation in pharmaceuticals (which is lagging far behind advancements in other categories of drugs) or reduction efforts as outlined in this current report, that number is likely to rise.
The CDC is heading up an effort to better track the spread of antibiotic resistance, and the Obama administration’s 2015 budget provides $30 million over the next five years to set up regional laboratories to monitor outbreaks.
There’s an inevitability to drug-resistant bacteria, even with new advances in the science. “Nature will take its course wherever antibiotics are used,” Jean Patel, a researcher in microbial resistance at the CDC, told me in September.
But the pharmaceutical industry is not even producing those new drugs that could buy some time.
As The Atlantic demonstrates in its March issue, approvals of new antibiotic drugs are at their lowest levels in 30 years.
What We're Following See More »
"The Obama administration on Tuesday called on U.S. states to ban agreements prohibiting many workers from moving to their employers’ rivals, saying it would lead to a more competitive labor market and faster wage growth. The administration said so-called non-compete agreements interfere with worker mobility and states should consider barring companies from requiring low-wage workers and other employees who are not privy to trade secrets or other special circumstances to sign them."
House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz plans to spend "years, come January, probing the record of a President Hillary Clinton." Chaffetz told the Washington Post: “It’s a target-rich environment. Even before we get to Day One, we’ve got two years’ worth of material already lined up. She has four years of history at the State Department, and it ain’t good.”
Hillary Clinton's transition team has in place strict rules to limit the influence that lobbyists could have "in crafting the nominee’s policy agenda." The move makes it unlikely, at least for now, that Clinton would overturn Obama's executive order limiting the role that lobbyists play in government
Federal employees from 14 agencies have given nearly $2 million in campaign donations in the presidential race thus far, and 95 percent of the donations, totaling $1.9 million, have been to the Clinton campaign. Employees at the State Department, which Clinton lead for four years, has given 99 percent of its donations to the Democratic nominee.