How can I get Zithromax?

Theoretically, the argument about community-associated antibiotic resistance holds water. But here’s the real question: do you actually want to undergo a thousand different tests just to determine if you specifically need Zithromax or if something milder will suffice, all while you sit there suffering through symptoms and pain waiting for the results? At the very least, that kind of approach feels inhumane. You’re sick, you came in for medication, not an endless diagnostic odyssey.

I don't know who would volunteer to be holier than the Pope by refusing Zithromax, especially when so many doctors prescribe it left and right, which arguably does more to fuel antibiotic resistance than anything else. It’s like being told the public needs to conserve water by skipping daily showers, while meanwhile, industrial farms growing cotton for export are using hundreds of times more water than any household ever could, consuming whatever they want regardless. Who is actually going to endure personal discomfort for a marginal benefit to the community? Very few people.

Honestly, the easiest route is to just visit a doctor who writes prescriptions and get the Zithromax; I'm fairly certain it isn't hard to find, and someone mentioned seeing Zithromax available via online retailers as an alternative.

In any case, I wouldn't put up with a condescending doctor. I’d take my medical records elsewhere to find someone who treats me with respect and communicates with me like an intelligent human being. If you let people walk all over you, you're basically signaling that you're fine with being treated like a second-class citizen with no say in the matter.

George Fox3 said:Hi everyone.

My girlfriend has been stuck in bed for over five days now with a high fever of 100.4, feeling completely wiped out, and dealing with a nasty cough.

I went through the exact same thing just two weeks ago. I saw my primary care physician, he listened to my lungs, and handed me a prescription for Zithromax. Within two days, I was back on my feet.

But things are going differently for her. We went to see her doctor—who, if you can believe it, is incredibly rude and short-tempered—and she basically told us to head straight to the infectious disease clinic without even performing an exam. It drove me crazy! I really don't want to drag her to some specialized clinic when I know from experience that Zithromax would have cleared this right up.

So, my question is: how can I get some Zithromax since her doctor didn't actually write a prescription? She basically did nothing for us.

It’s hard watching my girl suffer like this. We’ve already tried lowering her fever with Advil, then Votarena, and now she's taking ibuprofen. Nothing seems to be working, and I just know that... Zithromax would solve everything in a couple of days.😠

Thanks in advance for any help.

Look, just take her by the hand and head straight to the local county health department or a clinic to get a throat swab. It shouldn't take more than a day or two to get results, and then you'll actually know if she needs antibiotics or not. If you ask me, the doctor did exactly what she was supposed to do...

Alexander Lewis said:Theoretically, the argument about community-associated antibiotic resistance holds water. But here’s the real question: do you actually want to undergo a thousand different tests just to determine if you specifically need Zithromax or if something milder will suffice, all while you sit there suffering through symptoms and pain waiting for the results? At the very least, that kind of approach feels inhumane. You’re sick, you came in for medication, not an endless diagnostic odyssey.

I don't know who would volunteer to be holier than the Pope by refusing Zithromax, especially when so many doctors prescribe it left and right, which arguably does more to fuel antibiotic resistance than anything else. It’s like being told the public needs to conserve water by skipping daily showers, while meanwhile, industrial farms growing cotton for export are using hundreds of times more water than any household ever could, consuming whatever they want regardless. Who is actually going to endure personal discomfort for a marginal benefit to the community? Very few people.

Honestly, the easiest route is to just visit a doctor who writes prescriptions and get the Zithromax; I'm fairly certain it isn't hard to find, and someone mentioned seeing Zithromax available via online retailers as an alternative.

In any case, I wouldn't put up with a condescending doctor. I’d take my medical records elsewhere to find someone who treats me with respect and communicates with me like an intelligent human being. If you let people walk all over you, you're basically signaling that you're fine with being treated like a second-class citizen with no say in the matter.

But honestly, if we're still talking about what happened with the guy who started this thread... I can't really say his girlfriend's doctor was being rude. Based on how he described it, there's zero evidence for that—absolutely nothing.

To me, it sounds like she went in, the doctor checked her out, listened to what was going on, and decided it was just the flu or some virus—so she told her to rest, drink tea, and take some Advil for the fever. In my opinion, a GP most of the time is more than capable of figuring out when it’s just a virus versus when someone actually needs antibiotics.
Then, the girlfriend probably started pushing for Zithromax because "that's what helped her boyfriend." In that scenario, it makes total sense that the doctor would just send her away with a referral to an infectious disease clinic instead.😉

So, we’re looking at a potential bacterial throat infection, which most often turns out to be Group A beta-hemolytic strep. This typically responds perfectly to natural penicillins like Penicillin G or V, while Macrolides serve as a second-line option for patients with penicillin allergies. In any case, you should probably avoid taking Zithromax 😁
...

Sam Hall15 said:So, we’re looking at a potential bacterial throat infection, which most often turns out to be Group A beta-hemolytic strep. This typically responds perfectly to natural penicillins like Penicillin G or V, while Macrolides serve as a second-line option for patients with penicillin allergies. In any case, you should probably avoid taking Zithromax 😁
...

Macrolides, man, 😉

wanderingcanyon3 said:The doctor who prescribed Zithromax to the kid while he had the flu might actually be spot on here. If you're dealing with a brutal strain of the flu and those nasty high fevers—we're talking 104 or 105 degrees Fahrenheit—that lasts more than four days, sometimes Zithromax is given as a preventative measure. Especially if the patient is coughing like crazy and their respiratory system is totally irritated. It’s simple, really: that kind of state is basically an open invitation for pneumonia to move in. Your immune system takes a massive hit, and then some little bacterial bastard just settles in without any fight. That would be the logic behind giving someone with the flu Zithromax. At the end of the day, risk assessment is up to the doctor based on how hard the virus is hitting and the patient's overall condition.

No, people with the flu (if we're strictly talking influenza) do not get Azithromycin as a preventative. Actually, they don't get *any* antibiotic preemptively. Sure, secondary bacterial infections like pneumonia are possible, but that's why you run targeted diagnostics. You don't just guess; you do a standard exam, check the blood work, and get a chest X-ray (at least, that's what I was taught, and it aligns with the guidelines from the Infectious Diseases Society of America). Only if there's actual suspicion of bacterial pneumonia—which is the most common complication with the flu—do you go for targeted therapy. In those cases, a Macrolide is used (provided the outpatient hasn't taken a Macrolide in the last three months), like Zithromax (Azithromycin). So, look, maybe Dr. 1 did the right thing, but honestly, it feels to me like she gave the Zithromax for a different reason entirely. As for Dr. 2? Doesn't seem right to me. She failed because: a) she didn't give the girl a proper exam, and b) she didn't even order basic lab work before just sending her off to an infectious disease specialist. A primary care physician should do everything within their power and knowledge first; you only refer to a specialist when you've hit a wall or when things are serious enough that hospitalization is on the table.

Anyway, that's just my two cents.🙂

Sorry, if I slip up and they actually listen to someone like Tom Brady, they’d probably have my head :P
Macrolides
mistyhound2, I'm with you on that one...

wanderingcanyon3 said:When you're dealing with severe flu strains and fevers hitting 104 or 105 degrees that linger for more than four days, Zithromax is usually prescribed as a preventative measure...

Sure, that's technically true, though it's hardly necessary or even logical when we're talking about young, healthy people, but technically correct nonetheless...
but that’s not really the issue here, because judging by the original post, it sounds like the person was hovering just above 100 degrees for maybe two days before they finally decided to see a doctor...

Jose Miller3 said:But honestly, if we're still talking about what happened with the guy who started this thread... I can't really say his girlfriend's doctor was being rude. Based on how he described it, there's zero evidence for that—absolutely nothing.

To me, it sounds like she went in, the doctor checked her out, listened to what was going on, and decided it was just the flu or some virus—so she told her to rest, drink tea, and take some Advil for the fever. In my opinion, a GP most of the time is more than capable of figuring out when it’s just a virus versus when someone actually needs antibiotics.
Then, the girlfriend probably started pushing for Zithromax because "that's what helped her boyfriend." In that scenario, it makes total sense that the doctor would just send her away with a referral to an infectious disease clinic instead.😉

Jose Miller3, you might be a moderator, but you aren't paying attention. Please, actually read what the person wrote here:

George Fox3 said:...and she just sent her straight to infectious disease without even examining her.

So, it’s perfectly clear that his girlfriend's primary care physician didn't examine her, didn't do her job, and did nothing except refer her to a specialist without a proper checkup.
From my perspective, this isn't about "maintaining order." It's about a GP treating a patient inhumanely, failing to perform basic duties, and wasting Medicare funds by charging for her own negligence and sending patients to specialists unnecessarily.

Jose Miller3 said:But honestly, if we're still talking about what happened with the guy who started this thread... I can't really say his girlfriend's doctor was being rude. Based on how he described it, there's zero evidence for that—absolutely nothing.

To me, it sounds like she went in, the doctor checked her out, listened to what was going on, and decided it was just the flu or some virus—so she told her to rest, drink tea, and take some Advil for the fever. In my opinion, a GP most of the time is more than capable of figuring out when it’s just a virus versus when someone actually needs antibiotics.
Then, the girlfriend probably started pushing for Zithromax because "that's what helped her boyfriend." In that scenario, it makes total sense that the doctor would just send her away with a referral to an infectious disease clinic instead.😉

Sorry, but you're just leaning on a narrative you've constructed in your head that doesn't align with the actual facts of the original post.

Alexander Lewis said:Jose Miller3, you might be a moderator, but you aren't paying attention. Please, actually read what the person wrote here:

So, it’s perfectly clear that his girlfriend's primary care physician didn't examine her, didn't do her job, and did nothing except refer her to a specialist without a proper checkup.
From my perspective, this isn't about "maintaining order." It's about a GP treating a patient inhumanely, failing to perform basic duties, and wasting Medicare funds by charging for her own negligence and sending patients to specialists unnecessarily.

Sorry, but you're just leaning on a narrative you've constructed in your head that doesn't align with the actual facts of the original post.

Yeah, exactly—the whole point is that I don't buy what the person in the original post is selling... 😉

And whether or not I'm a moderator has absolutely nothing to do with my take on this topic, you know?

mistyhound2 said:No, people with the flu (if we're strictly talking influenza) do not get Azithromycin as a preventative. Actually, they don't get *any* antibiotic preemptively. Sure, secondary bacterial infections like pneumonia are possible, but that's why you run targeted diagnostics. You don't just guess; you do a standard exam, check the blood work, and get a chest X-ray (at least, that's what I was taught, and it aligns with the guidelines from the Infectious Diseases Society of America). Only if there's actual suspicion of bacterial pneumonia—which is the most common complication with the flu—do you go for targeted therapy. In those cases, a Macrolide is used (provided the outpatient hasn't taken a Macrolide in the last three months), like Zithromax (Azithromycin). So, look, maybe Dr. 1 did the right thing, but honestly, it feels to me like she gave the Zithromax for a different reason entirely. As for Dr. 2? Doesn't seem right to me. She failed because: a) she didn't give the girl a proper exam, and b) she didn't even order basic lab work before just sending her off to an infectious disease specialist. A primary care physician should do everything within their power and knowledge first; you only refer to a specialist when you've hit a wall or when things are serious enough that hospitalization is on the table.

Anyway, that's just my two cents.🙂

Look, I'm telling you, medical practice *does* involve giving antibiotics preventatively when there's a high, lingering fever paired with a cough and a totally trashed immune system.

And honestly? I think taking that course of meds preventatively is a better bet than jumping straight to a chest X-ray.

Alright everyone, let's just look at this from a different perspective... While the doctor might have skipped a thorough physical exam, you can actually learn quite a bit just through targeted medical history. I'm not making excuses for a lack of examination, but I do think they are pushing Zithromax a bit too hard. I know from my own experience how demanding patients can be when they demand specific prescriptions or referrals, and unfortunately, some overworked doctors eventually just give in to avoid the hassle. However, I believe sending the patient to an infectious disease specialist was a much more responsible move than simply handing out Zithromax or any other antibiotic... There is far too much empirical prescribing happening these days.

Sam Hall15 said:Alright everyone, let's just look at this from a different perspective... While the doctor might have skipped a thorough physical exam, you can actually learn quite a bit just through targeted medical history. I'm not making excuses for a lack of examination, but I do think they are pushing Zithromax a bit too hard. I know from my own experience how demanding patients can be when they demand specific prescriptions or referrals, and unfortunately, some overworked doctors eventually just give in to avoid the hassle. However, I believe sending the patient to an infectious disease specialist was a much more responsible move than simply handing out Zithromax or any other antibiotic... There is far too much empirical prescribing happening these days.

and it happens constantly... my wife told me about this one time she was at the ER with our little girl because of a high fever and a cough—they went in on a Friday afternoon and didn't get seen until Sunday—just so the doctor could listen to her lungs, and once he realized nothing was wrong, he immediately started going into this whole long-winded explanation about why he wouldn't prescribe an antibiotic anyway, but when my wife just laughed and told him she wasn't even there asking for one, the poor guy sighed like a massive weight had finally been lifted off his chest...
people clearly don't understand the concept, but apparently, Peter from next door said antibiotics are great and now everyone wants his specific brand of magic pills...

though, in one sense I'm with Alexander Lewis, doctors often fail to explain things the way they really should, and unlike Jose Miller3, I fully believe it's possible that the doctor in the original post was actually just handing over a referral to infectious disease without offering any real reasoning at all...

It’s true that patients can be demanding and ask for things that make absolutely no sense, but we often overlook a fundamental reality: patients are the consumers, and doctors are the service providers. In many ways, physicians are essentially being paid by the people they treat.

Because of that dynamic, they need to exercise patience and take the time to walk patients through their treatment recommendations. Now, look—their explanation might not change the underlying physiology of the condition, but they are dealing with human beings, not livestock. They ought to treat people with a baseline level of respect. And let’s be clear: at the end of the day, the doctor provides the recommendation, but the final call belongs to the patient. If someone isn't on board with what their doctor suggests, they should simply find another provider for a second opinion. A physician can’t guarantee a miracle cure or a painless experience.