It’s easy to say “ just stop it,” but we need to consider why this happens in the first place.Ī general principle of antibiotic stewardship and good medicine is that antibiotics should be available only by prescription (human or animal). At the individual level, it’s a small risk, but the more it’s done, the more that risk becomes relevant at a population level. Resistance: Anytime an antibiotic is used, there’s pressure to select for antibiotic resistant bacteria. People using it themselves have to know the right drug, the right dose and the right duration. Inadequate/ineffective treatment: Some reviews I’ve seen talk about use for things where there’s not much hope of the antibiotic working. I’m not going to have much confidence in quality control for a product that’s being produced for dodgy or illegal sale. It could contain more or less (both potentially being an issue) or contain contaminants. Product safety: Who knows what’s actually in these products? A 500 mg ciprofloxacin tablet for fish might contain 500 mg of ciprofloxacin. Some situations and some drugs pose higher risk, which is just part of the reason to always get medical advice before taking antibiotics. There’s always some risk of adverse effects. Who knows? However, there are a number of potential issues.Īdverse effects: Antibiotics are not innocuous. Is the ability to buy and divert fish antibiotics actually causing harm? A larger percentage probably bought them for use in their dogs or cats. That’s presumably an underestimate, since most people who buy fish antibiotics to use on themselves or their kids likely don’t write that in a review. One study of internet reviews reported that 2.4% of reviews suggested they were purchased for use in people (see screenshot below). Websites are smart enough now not to explicitly say you can use them on yourself or in other species, but that’s pretty well known so they don’t have to, and product reviews show other people what’s being done.ĭo many people actually use fish antibiotics on themselves? If you look at websites that sell fish antibiotics, you’ll often find the same drugs and same formations (even the same tablet sizes and shapes) as are used in other species. They’re marketed that way to try to keep them under the regulatory radar (even though it’s still illegal in some countries where they are sold this way). They’re the same antibiotics we use in people and other animals, but with “fish” slapped on the label. The more antibiotics are used without medical (human/veterinary) advice and control, the more risks and the fewer benefits there are. So, when antibiotics are used, we need to make sure we maximize the benefits and minimize the risks/costs. Why is diversion of fish antibiotics an issue?Īnytime an antibiotic is used, in any species (including humans) there are risks: adverse effects, treatment failure, emergence of resistance, etc. However, even small potatoes need to be addressed when we’re dealing with a problem like AMR. In some ways, this issues is small potatoes in the grand scheme of the “silent pandemic” of antimicrobial resistance (AMR), something that impacts millions of people and costs billions of dollars every year, but it flies largely under the radar. I guess it was a poorly programmed bot, or someone who didn’t carefully read even the title, let alone the content of my previous posts. Usually such posts are followed by a deluge of nasty emails along with a bunch of curious requests for links to fish antibiotic sellers (8% kickback available!).Īnother sponsorship request came in this morning, prompting this rant. I’ve written (ranted?) about this before – namely the misuse of antimicrobials intended for treatment of aquarium fish in other species.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |