Chocfish- I don't have MRSA- mind you it would not make any difference. I probably have a normal SA- not the multiresistant one. MRSA is often less virulent than the more common and more serious methicillin sensitive Staph Aureus. (Methicillin is the US name for the antibiotic Flucloxacillin). There is a lot of media and governmental hype about MRSA. Blame is given to doctors, long sleeves, not enough infectional control nurses (god, we don't need more of them interfering) and not washing hands etc etc. Really, the only proven association is % bed occupancy and proximity of beds. Lets guess who is responsible for the closure of wards and causing the bed occupancy to get to as near 100% as possible?
The link was interesting. I never believe private hospitals' claims (especially european and north american)- their responsibilty is to their shareholders. The NHS , if anything, is probably one of the most honest healthcare systems in the world.
I face losing my foot- is that my doctor's fault or bad luck due to my disease? No-one achieves 100% success with 0% complications. Some patients need to vent their frustration and anxiety in derogatory ways. If Austria is so good, why have they got such vast experience in bone and joint infections (where many will have had a surgical cause)?
Anyway, my foot is better. On intravenous daptomycin (£88 per day and does cover MRSA) and having another MRI scan next week. Here's hoping.
Marty B