My understanding is the development of antibiotics was considered a landmark, a revolution in medicine. But on the other hand, what about common alcohol? That kills germs and bacteria, right? Doctors swab alcohol on your skin before they give you an injection.
So two questions:
Why was the discovery of antibiotics considered so ground-breaking when we already had ordinary alcohol that did the job fine?
You often hear about antibiotic-resistant bacteria, and the so-called “super-bug”. But if bacteria is able to evolve to resist antibiotics, then why aren’t we worried about them evolving to resist alcohol too? Are doctors overusing rubbing alcohol every time they swab it on your skin before an injection?
In the sense that it kills bacteria, yes, it’s an antibiotic. But if introduced inside your body in concentrations that would make it an effective disease cure, it would also kill you. That’s why it tends to be limited to usages on the outside of the body.
It’s easy to find things that kill bacteria. In most cases a good hot fire would do the job. Things that kill bacteria and not you when taken internally are rarer.
ETA: My understanding is that most antibiotic-resistant bacteria are still killed by high-concentration alcohol.
A good antibiotic is one that kills the bacteria without killing the patient. Penicillin was not the first antibiotic; prior to that, compounds of mercury and arsenic were used, with some degree of success. The problem, of course, is that these compounds are highly toxic and the therapeutic index (the difference between the therapeutic dose and the toxic dose) is quite low. Arsenic compounds are still used for a few things in oncology, but I don’t think mercury is used clinically anymore. There’s plenty of compounds that’ll kill bacteria dead as Dickens if given internally, but the trick is to find compounds that’ll kill bacteria selectively without killing the patient. 95% ethanol isn’t one of those compounds. It’s a good antiseptic, but a poor antibiotic.
To clarify, antiseptics are substances that basically kill bacteria locally and immediately, so they’re useful on things like cuts and scrapes.
Antibiotics are drugs that primarily inhibit bacterial growth, allowing your own immune system to catch up and defeat the infection. Some antibiotics are bacteriocidal, but most aren’t.
Ethyl alcohol is a moderately effective antiseptic, but not an antibiotic.
I used regular Vodka to treat a tooth abscess that had caused my face to swell up horribly on one side. It worked. It didn’t cure it (that took a root canal) but it cured the swelling and brought it under control. The dentist laughed when I told him about it, and said yes, it’s effective.
I’ve got into the habit of drinking about 2/3 of a shot of neat spirits of an evening, before bed. I just had my nightly nip of gin. I consider it medicinal.
It’s easy to understand why the names “antibiotic” and “antiseptic” would be confused, though. You’d think from the names that an “antibiotic” would kill living things in general, and an “antiseptic” would kill things responsible for disease, but it’s pretty much the other way around.
