Anecdata, but I always ask if I really need them, and 100% of the cases the doc says: we can probably wait a few days. In my life of 30years, never had to take antibiotics...not even once! My case might be special, but at least shows that most of the time (in our times at least) we can easily do without them.

I think you probably are fairly special. Most people I know have had some pretty intense infections that could have been fatal, though only two of them would have certainly been fatal. As for myself, I've had a jaw infection that actually got into the bone, meningitis, lyme disease, and walking pneumonia twice. Compared to some of my peers, I actually consider myself pretty healthy.

That being said, I have definitely been prescribed antibiotics a few times that it wasn't necessary.

I always ask questions too, but by the time I go to the doc it's usually something that requires more than just waiting a few more days.

I rarely take antibiotics (can think of once in the last 25 years), and it's at least partly because I always push back. I do this partly because I know they're overprescribed, and partly because in my youth I had a bad reaction to one.

I've been asked (UK) do I "want antibiotics" (scratched cornea IIRC), a question I didn't understand.

"Well is that the treatment you recommend?"

I mean, the NHS are spending millions and having hundreds of doctors and researchers look at these questions ... why am I, completely uninformed, being asked to make a judgment??

Beggars belief.

The doctor presumably considers that you need the treatment otherwise they wouldn't recommend it. If they would recommend a treatment they know you don't need then they should have their license revoked. The only answer a doctor should be able to give is "only if you want to get better".

It's not that simple. In most cases, you'll be fine without antibiotics, it will just take longer to get rid of the disease. But as avoiding antibiotics in general is a good thing, the question is basically about how much you value getting better sooner. If you actually needed antibiotics they would not ask you that.

Never happen universally.

Of course there are already lots of people that would rather not take antibiotics in cases where they aren't needed and especially in cases where they won't do any good.

What is the benefit of taking an antibiotic you don't need? Even if people are perfectly selfish, they should want to not bother with useless medicine.

It's hard to be sure it's a viral infection unless you have a positive test for a specific virus.

I see. Benefits for the individual and costs for the collective is a recipe for a tragedy of the commons.

But antibiotics have some individual costs too. They are bad for your gut flora, and I think you can't drink alcohol while you are on antibiotics.

Maybe these individual costs should be raised. Perhaps via a special tax on antibiotics for people who don't have a positive test for a specific bacteria.

Plus viral infections can cause bacterial infections. Sinus infections from a cold are a common one.

I used to get those all the freaking time. And it really sucks, because you start to feel a bit better, and then it drags on and on and on and you don't want to take antibiotics, but you don't want to feel shitty and drained and not do anything either.

the only times i have ever taken antibiotics is only for strep. the unfortunate thing is that i get strep at least once a year. it really sucks.