Antimicrobial agents are essential components in the treatment of various bacterial infections as they help to kill or prevent the growth of microbes such as bacteria, fungi, and protozoans. Prior to the discovery of antimicrobial agents, treatment options for patients with bacterial infections were limited. For many patients, treatment often resulted in the amputation of limbs or even death. Today, treatment options for bacterial infections typically have a more positive prognosis. Due to the various types of infections presented in patients, it is essential to be able to identify the underlying cause of the infection—whether bacterial or viral—before recommending drug treatments. This will help you identify whether or not an antimicrobial agent would be appropriate and which specific agent would target the infection. In this Assignment, you consider the appropriate use of antimicrobial agents for infections.
Consider the categories of antimicrobial agents.
Think about differences between viral and bacterial infections.
Reflect on why proper identification of the infection is key to selecting the proper antimicrobial agent.
By Day 7
Write a 2 pages paper that addresses the following:
1.Describe the categories of antimicrobial agents.
2.Describe differences between viral and bacterial infections.
3.Explain why proper identification of viral and bacterial infections is key to selecting the proper antimicrobial agent.
Arcangelo, V. P., Peterson, A. M., Wilbur, V., & Reinhold, J. A. (Eds.). (2017). Pharmacotherapeutics for advanced practice: A practical approach (4th ed.). Ambler, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
The Rights of Transgender Americans: An Examination of the Conflict among Religion and the State Research question: How and to what degree do religiously traditionalist on-screen characters impact state approaches that oppress the privileges of transgender individuals in the United States today? In the United States, most trans individuals face separation in the work environment, courts, schools, military, and other open spaces. While mainstream society and religious gatherings alike are captivated in this open discussion, the victimization the privileges of trans individuals that exists today is determinedly because of the connection of two pivotal components: the principal factor is an absence of satisfactory strategies which explicitly ensure the common and human privileges of trans individuals on nearby and government levels; the subsequent factor is considerate society's harmful enemy of trans talk in open talk, which frequently emphatically impacts the primary factor. What the two variables share practically speaking is an inseparable association with common and religious conservatism. Today, traditionalist religious entertainers, overwhelmingly Christians, can viably campaign conservative political authorities and agents to dispute against the privileges of trans individuals on nearby and government levels. Between the religiously moderate convictions of the two lobbyists and government authorities themselves, the state is rendered one-sided when shaping laws that influence the privileges of trans individuals. In this manner, the idea of partition of chapel and state isn't constant as a general rule and, without secularization of the express, the counter trans talk of religious moderates proceeds to strongly oppress the privileges of trans individuals in policymaking. Furthermore, a huge segment of common society freely scatters a one-dimensional talk against trans individuals when examining how trans individuals ought to be treated in state strategy and society. This enemy of trans talk in common society bears a critical connection with the qualities that religious and mainstream preservationists straightforwardly express, and frequently has for all intents and purposes no premise in the truth of the lived encounters and mistreatment of trans individuals. The result of this association between preservationist religion, traditionalist common society, and a non-mainstream, conservative state is that most of laws in the United States victimize the privileges of trans individuals. In the interim, in this progressing open discussion, trans individuals are encountering genuine, significant mental disturbance because of exploitation and endure: today, trans individuals face an exceptional battle to obtain all out approval of their character and equivalent rights as natives of the state and individuals from common society, in both religious and mainstream spaces over the United States. As the perceivability, acknowledgment, and consideration of trans individuals ascends in religious and mainstream spaces crosswise over common society, trans individuals and their partners campaign the state to be incorporated into and secured by approaches at nearby and government levels, since most of enactment rejects and disappoints trans individuals. On a government level, trans individuals don't have legitimate assurances from separation in light of the fact that the Equal Protection Clause of the constitution fails to expressly and reliably incorporate trans individuals in its denial of uncalled for and biased treatment dependent on sex and sexual orientation (Oakes 298). In like manner, no government law assigning trans individuals as an ensured class or explicitly requiring equivalent treatment for them exists, and all states with the exception of one preclude lawful acknowledgment from securing non-twofold and sexual orientation non-acclimating individuals (O'Hara, The Daily Dot). In open talk, the presence of trans individuals will in general conflict with the customary, traditional convictions of religious moderates, especially Christians, who base their cisnormative origination of sex and sex in a fundamentalist translation of the creation story inside sacred texts. By practicing the privilege of religious opportunity, numerous moderate Christians vocalize their enemy of trans talk so as to influence the state to shape strategies that maintain their religious convictions. For example, as later as August 2017, unmistakable individuals from the Trump-Pence Administration's Evangelical Advisory Board took an interest in the national gathering of the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission that discharged "The Nashville Statement": "We certify that self-origination as a male or female ought to be characterized by God's blessed purposes in creation and reclamation as uncovered in Scripture. We deny that receiving a gay or transgender self-origination is predictable with God's sacred purposes in creation and recovery… We deny any commitment to talk in such ways that shame God's plan of his picture bearers as male and female" (www.cbmw.org). While the partnership between moderate Christian consultants and the official part of government disregards division of chapel and express, the prominent scattering of this unequivocally religious proclamation prevents the sheer presence from securing trans individuals by referencing the scriptural sections as proof of a male-female sex and sexual orientation parallel. Additionally, most of the state enactment that as of now manages open spaces supports and mirrors this enemy of trans talk from Christian preservationists in this national talk, causing trans individuals to be additionally deceived because of underestimation and disappointment in common society. Inseparably connected, religious and mainstream moderates alike illuminate the manner in which common society sees sex as a non-navigable double, which thus worsens oppression trans individuals in state approaches. In the United States, overwhelming Christian convictions have empowered courts to decide that "God made a man that neither the law nor the therapeutic network could transform into a lady" and the other way around (Greenberg 66). Various wards and states have passed alleged washroom bills to limit the utilization of transgender individuals' entrance to open bathrooms, compelling them to utilize ones that match their sex relegated during childbirth (Gerstenfeld 65). For instance, North Carolina's restroom bills denies the privilege to sue under a state antidiscrimination law and Mississippi enables organizations to refuse any assistance to trans individuals based on religious convictions (Green, The Atlantic). In the open discussion on this questionable issue of restroom charges, Republican presidential applicant Mike Huckabee, who self-recognizes as Christian, declared, "Presently I wish that somebody revealed to me that when I was in secondary school that I could have felt like a lady when it came time to clean up in P.E. I'm almost certain that I would have discovered my ladylike side and stated, 'Mentor, I think I'd preferably shower with the young ladies today'" (Bradner, CNN). In spite of the fact that there is no proof that trans-comprehensive and unbiased open spaces represent any dangers to cisgender individuals, trans individuals are physically and mentally damaged and defrauded by washroom bills. This enactment uncovers how hostile to trans talk from religious preservationists and mainstream entertainers quite often revolves around the unfair over-sexualization of trans individuals, and this extremism renders the presence of trans individuals as naturally unseemly and unreasonable due to their flighty and non-accommodating sexuality and sex personality. By taking advantage of common society's uninformed nerves that trans individuals bring forth sex bedlam and ungrounded fears that defenseless kids and ladies are in danger of rape, religious traditionalists can successfully shape state arrangements that deny trans individuals access to an assortment of open spaces. A long way from an issue of protection or a security chance, these restroom charges deliberately eradicate trans individuals' characters from open spaces, which avoids trans individuals from getting the help, assets, and administrations they have to completely exist and flourish as equivalent individuals from common society and natives of the state. As a foundationally persecuted minority, trans individuals are decreased to helpless residents of the United States, yet their minimization empowers religious preservationists to openly prevent the rights from securing trans individuals for the sake of ensuring their religion. In open talk, American minister Neil Cazares-Thomas comprehends "the establishments of outreaching Christianity in the United States as a purposeful vital endeavor to guarantee that Christians were at each degree of government. With that in mind, they have been very effective. Yet in addition thus, the congregation has turned into a portrayal of the way of life and not a portrayal of Jesus… Isn't there detachment of chapel and state here? What's more, in the event that it was valid, for what reason would you have a Christian clergyman or any pastor open a state occasion? There is this hazy line between the partition of chapel and state and the significance of God and religion in municipal life" (Dart, The Guardian). As preservationist Christians hold the most impact on the present organization, their convictions are fundamentally pertinent in the development of strategies that victimize trans individuals. Rather than this position in open discussion, the Texas Pastor Council asserted, "It's truly is an ethical issue… It's an open tolerability issues, it's an open security issue… It's not plainly religious by any stretch of the imagination. Tragically, it appears as though the main critical voice left that has any structure of contradicting such a law has originated from the congregation" (Caballero, Christian Daily). In light of this enemy of trans talk, there have been cases in which a trans parent's tyke guardianship and appearance rights are now and again surrendered in light of the fact that their sex character is ventured to be innately unfit for a tyke's prosperity according to preservationist Christianity (Cooper 9). Hushed by a mainstream society that weights them to endure trans individuals, traditionalist Christians look to campaign policymakers with an enemy of trans talk that interests to national,>GET ANSWER