Brewer's Droop #277
ATISHOO, ATISHOO, WE ALL FALL DOWN.
It’s been a while but I’ve had so many things to write about, then the world kept changing so quickly it’s been hard to keep up. And I’m really getting tired of hearing about the Corona Virus.
But (sigh) there was one thing I heard today that I just had to comment on.
No big deal and I expect you all know this anyway.
I heard someone saying they needed some antibiotics because they thought they might be getting the flu – to protect them from it.
That sort of talk really makes me irritated.
So I googled a few sources and copied some quotes out for those who actually do believe this to be true (or think the earth is flat).
Here they are.
Influenza vaccines prevent or mitigate infections. They are designed to induce a protective immune response in the body against the viruses represented in the vaccine. … Antibiotics are medicines that interfere with the reproduction of bacteria and are, therefore, only useful for treating bacterial infections.
Antibiotics are strong medicines that treat bacterial infections. Antibiotics won’t treat viral infections because they can’t kill viruses. You’ll get better when the viral infection has run its course. Common illnesses caused by bacteria are urinary tract infections, strep throat, and some pneumonia.
Antibiotics are medications that fight infections caused by bacteria, but the flu is caused by a virus. Taking antibiotics when you have a virus may do more harm than good. Taking antibiotics when they are not needed increases your risk of getting an infection later that may resist antibiotic treatment.
Why Won’t Antibiotics Cure Cold or Flu?
Antibiotics only cure certain infections due to bacteria — and if taken carelessly, you may get more serious health problems than you bargained for.
With any illness, it is critical to address the underlying cause, whether it’s bacterial or viral. Antibiotics will not kill cold or flu viruses.
THINK ABOUT IT
I don’t want to drone on about this bug thing but I sometimes wonder if our government has really thought this through properly.
I know they reacted quickly and that’s very good. Commendable. I even think that extending it was probably sensible.
But there are a couple of things I don’t understand.
Alcohol and cigarettes (you knew I was going to say that didn’t you).
Let me first say that the alcohol ban doesn’t bother me (much) because I have a big cellar. Secondly I don’t smoke cigarettes.
But why these bans?
For the poor sods who look forward to a beer and a fag at the end of the day it’s the final insult.
But it’s worse than that.
If any government officials or ministers are reading this (and I know there are a few of you) I’d like to explain the basics of “Action and Reaction” – you know, like they teach 10 year olds, you stupid people.
Now, let’s take cigarettes as an example. Your “action” is to close down the plant and stop shops from selling them. The “reaction” is that in one of the shops a staff member loses his/her job (won’t mention customers yet) because 18% of sales come from tobacco.
The snowflakes will say “ah, but that’s good – he or she will be healthier”.
But “reactions” don’t work like that you see. That man/woman probably has a family – say 4 or 5 people in total (mother, father, grandmother and two kids) all of whom are now hungry because there’s no money coming into the house.
That’s happening all over the country. People are going hungry. The Exchequer is losing tax revenue. What for? And I’m waiting still to hear Cyril explain how cigarettes spread Covid-19.
This kind of response will have much more serious consequences.
Unemployment will soar. Businesses will close. The Rand will plummet further. Crime will increase. Rioting will be commonplace. Domestic violence will increase. Divorce rates will rise. Death from poison will increase (from home brewing) and hunger will be rampant.
The black marketers are already revving their motors – all because you didn’t think it through, Cyril.
More wine, I think.
Cheers all – keep your distance and stay safe.