Epidemiology Survey of Antibiotics Use in Hospitals and Veterinarian Practices in Northern Regions o

Epidemiology Survey of Antibiotics Use in Hospitals and Veterinarian Practices in Northern Regions of Cameroon | International Journal for Research in Applied Sciences and Biotechnology

Antibiotics are used in veterinary practice as growth promoter to improve animal production and to control animal diseases. Routine antimicrobials consumption led to resistant-strains selection an spread within animals, their environment, farmers and animal products consumer. As for animals, antibiotics are widely recommended for bacterial infections in human medicine. By the same process, antibiotic-resistance emergence in human is current event. This is why in our study the aim was to assess antibiotic use frequencies in human and veterinary practices without previous antibiogram or species identification. We focused on cocci gram prositif infections in Cameroon northern regions. Our results revealed high rate of ceftriaxone (24%), amoxicillin (29%) and cloxacillin (14%) prescription by health practitionner for cocci gram positif and Staphylococci infections. In livestock Penicillin-streptomycin (42%) and oxytetracyclin (38%) are the most use for mastitis, penicillin-diclofenac mix and penicillin-streptomycin were frequently indicated for dermatosis. Antibiotics are widely prescribed in northern regions either in human or in veterinary medicine and may lead to antibiotic-resistance.
  • niseno

Career is more important than science

This smells rat: do you know who was Jean Pierre Flourens, by the way?
He didn't agree with Darwin. What if he was right to some extent?
Modern synthesis had seriously modified classical Darwinism anyway: Darwin had no ideas about genes, he believed in gemmules.

Since then questioning Holy Darwin (or modern synthesis: let's be honest, some of its stances are not entirely confirmed, speaking softly) became so dangerous that career sharks with potential research misconduct are so afraid of other approaches?
Yes, they are prone to research misconduct because they'd do anything to satisfy peer reviewers to please them: those publication sharks know that peer reviewers are rather loyal to orthodox version of evolution than are able to follow any math pointing to controversy or inconsistency in modern synthesis approach. 

  • niseno

Career in science is more important than science itself

This smells rat: do you know who was Jean Pierre Flourens, by the way?
He didn't agree with Darwin. What if he was right to some extent?
Modern synthesis had seriously modified classical Darwinism anyway: Darwin had no ideas about genes, he believed in gemmules.

Since then questioning Holy Darwin (or Modern Synthesis: let's be honest, some of its stances are not entirely confirmed, speaking softly) became so dangerous that career sharks with potential research misconduct are so afraid of other approaches?
Yes, they are prone to research misconduct because they'd do anything to satisfy peer reviewers to please them: those publication sharks know that peer reviewers are rather loyal to orthodox version of evolution than are able to follow the math pointing to any controversy or inconsistency in Modern Synthesis approach.