Hacker News Reader

Comment by hyperpape | Hacker News Reader

You say this is necessary, the author says it's not. Why should I believe you (and same question for him)? Has the argument about the risk of reinfection been evaluated in the medical field?

View on HN

I studied microbiology at university (over 20 years ago admittedly), but that was pretty much what they taught us. People often don't take the full course because they feel better, then the infection reestablishes itself.

They also taught us that vaccines are a good thing, yet plenty of people seem to be questioning that as well these days. Reading the replies here feels very like some of the smart sounding yet ignorant comments that some antivaccers make. :/

This guy says the conventional wisdom in the medical profession is wrong. I don't know if he's right, but just repeating the conventional wisdom seems like an unenlightening response.

Problem is, that's all the columnist does as well. He states, over and over, that the conventional wisdom is wrong, but he never seems to get around to explaining why.

Incredibly weak article, IMO, regardless of the merits of what he's saying.

There's more than one medical authority and article cited (the 2007 piece, the more recent one, the WHO). It could be more detailed, I agree, but it's not like there's nothing there.

Unrelated. There's a growing body of science backing up the idea that antibiotics are very often way over-prescribed, and that over-prescribing does NOT prevent bacterial resistance.

This was also taught to us over 20 years ago. Patients will often demand antibiotics for viral infections.

Actually author links to only one article from 2007 by Louis B. Rice, backing his point. Some meta-analysis would be more convincing.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com