Ian Roe wrote: > Here we go, putting words in people's mouths. I did not claim it did > not kill germs. I said it was not an "antibiotic". > > That is the definition of antibiotic. No words put in anyones mouth > here. Look it up, I did. > > See http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary: > > Main Entry: 1an·ti·bi·ot·ic > Pronunciation: "an-ti-bI-'ä-tik, -"tI-; > "an-ti-bE- > Function: adjective > Date: 1894 > 1 : tending to prevent, inhibit, or destroy life > > > Is not "Antibiotic" a term, spawned by the drug companies, that > refers to a class of drugs that work in a specic way to destroy > bacteria, virus and fungi? > > Huh?? There were no drug companies in 1894, at least not like there > are now. The only antibiotics back then were silver, quinine, > alcholol and other chemicals. Nothing like penicillian. Just what > "way" are you talking about? > Calling it germicide would be better if a name is needed but it > doesn't work like an antibiotic and it's really misinformation to say > that it is one. > > > Why do you make this claim? I see nothing about how it kills in the > definition of antibiotic, just that if it kills. And silver > definitely kills, meeting the strict definition of antibiotic. Heck > even chlorox is an antibiotic, but certainly not one that can be taken > orally.
Marshall
