Steroids and antibiotics

msu16366 · Jul 4, 2005

Hello,
I am in the middle of my sustanon and EQ cycle ( 6 weeks)taking injections every other day. I woke up this morning with a sore throat, stuffed up nose and no strength. I have a perscription for the z-pack, zithromax.
I dont want it to kill the steroids but I dont want to feel like shit either. Does anyone know if I can take the antibiotics or should I just wait the cold out.
Thanks

FRKNHUGE · Jul 4, 2005

id say dont do any inj till abt a week post antibiotics myself
thats the protocol ive gone with over the years and its worked good for me
frk

MikeS · Jul 5, 2005

Unless I heard good reasoning to stop, Id stay on.

msu16366 · Jul 5, 2005

There is no way I am stopping after doing shots every other day for 6 weeks.
I will save the antibiotics unless I get worse. Thanks for the help, If anyone knows If I can start them with no problems please let me know. thanks.
Might just be the test flu for all I know

wostok · Jul 5, 2005

msu16366 said:
Hello,
I am in the middle of my sustanon and EQ cycle ( 6 weeks)taking injections every other day. I woke up this morning with a sore throat, stuffed up nose and no strength. I have a perscription for the z-pack, zithromax.
I dont want it to kill the steroids but I dont want to feel like shit either. Does anyone know if I can take the antibiotics or should I just wait the cold out.
Thanks

i dont UNDERSTAND you people takin antibiotics for a little flu!!! you are DESTROYING it for everyone else... dont you know that when people use antibiotics all the time for little shit (that would be gone if you just eat garlic and c vitamin for a week...) all the bacterias and viruses eventuelly will get immune to antibiotics... and then we have nothing... in the future we could die from small infectiones, just because the antibiotics doesnt work anymore, and its all just because of people like you that use it for a sore throat! Here in sweden the doctors dont allow you to take antibiotics if you dont have anything serious. And it should be like that in every country... but some people just dont give a shit... and it sucks for the rest of us

Coopie · Jul 5, 2005

wostok - Not true...

Antibiotics are not for the treatment of viral infections, only bacterial. And, it's extremely hard - nearly impossible - for bacteria to become resistant to antibiotic therapy. If it were easy, we'd all be al lot sicker more often.

And, no - we would not die from small infections. We all have immune systems built in, and our immune system is capable of destroying tens of millions of bacteria a day without the use of antibiotics. So, hopefully you can sleep better at night knowing that a killer bacteria is not coming for you.

As a footnote - bacteria that can mutate (less than 1/10 of 1% of all bacteria) does so when exposed to antibiotic in a less than optimal dose. So, if you are supposed to take antibiotics for 10 days, but you stop after 7 days and the bacteria has not been destroyed then it is possible that the bacteria can assimilate the antibiotic and become resistant to THAT PARTICULAR ANTIBIOTIC. But, chances are the body will kill the remaining bacteria before it even gets a chance to be passed along to a friend.

The hype about "drug resistant bacteria" was spread by the pharmaceutical indistry a few years ago as a means to - guess what - SELL MORE DRUGS. Their research showed that the only way to stop bacteria from mutating was to take more drugs for a longer period of time. The CDC, as well as the Pasteur Clinic, researched the issue and found that it's mostly bullshit.

Johan · Jul 5, 2005

boatload on vitamins. Especialy vitamin c(15-20grams/day) instead of using antibiotics. Antibiotics fucks upp the bacterial fauna in the intestants and it can take up to 6 months!! for everything to get back on track. Many of those bacteria is anti cancerogenic.

Garlic, mega dosage vitamin c, 45-60mg zink, some extra vitamin a and I bet you will feel like a million bucks within a few days without fucking anything up.

Antibiotics has as many sides as advantages and should only be used when its realy needed.

Dad · Jul 5, 2005

Ok...

I've got to weigh in on this one a bit.

While a bit hysterical, Wostok's views are essentailly correst, and a great concern for the medical community in most countries, even the U.S.

Coopie,
While you are right about antibiotics not being effective for viruses, it IS very possible for bacteria to become resistant to antibiotics. One of the best examples of this is Methacillin-Resistant Staph Aureus, which continues to be a growing problem. There are other numerous examples, as well. This is NOT drug industry bullshit.

Bottom line:
Most docs are beginning to be much more hesitant about prescribing antibiotics unless absolutely necessary precisely because of the increased incidence of resistant bacteria.

Coopie · Jul 5, 2005

dad - I hear yout with the staph. But would you draw that the next logical step in that process is the resistance of localized bacterium to broad spectrum antibiotics?

In other words, I learned that most bacteria are not "systemic", rather they are localized, i.e. ance. By using a broad spec or even a targeted antibiotic - periostat, minocyc, tetracyc - you are destroying most of a bacteria that has no capacity to become resistant. It lacks the advanced genetic components to do so. If not, wouldn't we all be walking around covered in acne?

It is my contention that the "hype" stems from two necessary components;

1. That drug therapy decreases immune response, and;
2. Drug therapy hastens the mutation and resistance rate in the pathogen.

I have seen no evidece to conclude either component to be true. If anyone has, please pass it along. I've been on antibiotice for about 20 years w/out a break. First tetracycline, now minocycline to control acne. I had acne since I was 12 years old. My dad still takes antibiotics.

With the medication I am pimple free - same with my dad. And, I don't think either of us has taken a sick day in years (except for my food poisoning). So I really want to believe what I'm saying here too!

Johan · Jul 5, 2005

coopie any problem with digestion or intestants? Isnt all your digestive bacterias totaly screwed over?
That is linked to colon cancer and alot of other not so plesant things.

Dad · Jul 5, 2005

Well...

The body's own mechanisms have a great deal to do with keeping bacteria, infections, etc localized, as this is part of the immune response in general. This is a large part of the reason bacteria are not able to spread, and become systemic, because if that happens, you have septicemia. And that can happen in cases of massive infection, burns which remove large area of skin, etc.

Most antibiotics work on bacteria by interfering with the multi-step process, and/or components bacterai use to build cell walls. Could this bacteria spread to other areas, and become systemic? Possibly under the right conditions as mentioned above. This is not at all the same as saying they don't have the capacity to become resistant, and recent experience seems to suggest they have a greater capacity than was previously thought.

While certain drugs may reduce immune response, to make a blanket statement that "drug therapy decrease immune response" is simply incorrect. Theoretically, exposure to drugs could well hasten resistance and mutation, as the drug would be the stimulus for such.

Not real sure what the point you're making about the antibiotics, pimples, and your dad is, but am gald to hear you're all doing well, which is, after all, the goal!

Coopie · Jul 6, 2005

The point I was making about my dad (a doc), was the he has been on antibiotic therapy since he was a teenager, now he's well into his 50's. He's never had any issues with infections, digestion, or otherwise. To this day, neither have I.

So, by just using the two of us as a barometer - it would seem that long term low-dose antibiotic therapy is rather benign but effective against (in our case) acne.

It sucks that I inherited his "acne genes" though!

Snarf · Jul 7, 2005

I guess I will add a few comments as a "pharmaceutical industry insider".

Yes, basically we have made up the antibiotic resistance issue to make more money - no really, we have.

Seriously though, Coopie you can't use your experience or your father's to dispel the idea that antibiotic resistance is a real issue. You are right that most bacteria do not have a high potential for mutation resulting in resistance (thankfully). However, there are situations where this can happen and can be quite problematic. If a bacteria with a high replicative capacity is under selective pressure from an antibiotic at sub-therapeutic doses, then there is a possibility for resistance to develop. This is a possibility, not a certainty. Your body's own immune system impacts this issue as well.

Typically, your physician will (or should) start with a first line antibiotic and only progress to broader spectrum agents if the first line agents are not effective. However, docs tend to want to get rid of it on the first try and take advatnage of the easier dosing regimens associated with the newer agents (Z-paks for example). So, they prescribe what we pharmaceutical companies want them to prescribe - the newer, higher priced, still under patent drug. However, if you want a good old fashioned painful penicillin shot for $3 then just tell your doc.

Now, viruses are a whole other animal (literally). Resistance issues are huge with viruses, specifically with retroviruses (HIV being the most famous). This has to do with the retrovirus replication process that allows for it to mutate very easily. But, that is a topic for another day as I am sure I have put most folks to sleep already. The HIV retrovirus happens to be my specialty so I will spare you the thrilling details.