Possibly a little goof :-)

[Rarebit]

Anyone notice what may have been a goof in the scene in which Dr. Soames is telling Nick about the symptoms of Captain Trips? Dr. Soames says to Nick, "They are the symptoms of the common cold, of influenza, of pneumonia. We can cure all of those things, Nick. Unless the patient is weakened by a previous illness, antibiotics will knock them out. But not this.... Nothing seems to help."

Actually, in 1978, when the novel was originally published, and even today, there is no known cure for the common cold. Antibiotics are often highly effective against bacterial infections, but, with a few exceptions, they are still not very helpful for most viral infections. And the common cold is, unfortunately, usually the result of a viral infection, so antibiotics are pretty much completely useless for the common cold.

There are some antiviral medications that can fight influenza virus today, but they are marginally effective, and they weren't even available in 1978.

So Doc Soames should have told Nick that they could treat (as opposed to cure) all of those conditions, and that antibiotics would usually knock out serious bacterial infections, like bacterial pneumonia.

(Ok, maybe a little too pedantic lol)

 

[skimom2]

Anyone notice what may have been a goof in the scene in which Dr. Soames is telling Nick about the symptoms of Captain Trips? Dr. Soames says to Nick, "They are the symptoms of the common cold, of influenza, of pneumonia. We can cure all of those things, Nick. Unless the patient is weakened by a previous illness, antibiotics will knock them out. But not this.... Nothing seems to help."

Actually, in 1978, when the novel was originally published, and even today, there is no known cure for the common cold. Antibiotics are often highly effective against bacterial infections, but, with a few exceptions, they are still not very helpful for most viral infections. And the common cold is, unfortunately, usually the result of a viral infection, so antibiotics are pretty much completely useless for the common cold.

There are some antiviral medications that can fight influenza virus today, but they are marginally effective, and they weren't even available in 1978.

So Doc Soames should have told Nick that they could treat (as opposed to cure) all of those conditions, and that antibiotics would usually knock out serious bacterial infections, like bacterial pneumonia.

(Ok, maybe a little too pedantic lol)

Maybe a little

 

[Pucker]

I don't want to discourage attention to detail, but . . .

Yikes!

; )

 

[AnnaMarie]

You are right Rarebit .

That's actually the kind of thing I would usually notice. It's been such a long time since I read The Stand, I don 't actually remember if I caught that or not.

 

[danie]

 

[GNTLGNT]

...he was simply reflecting the times in which he wrote the novel...MD's then would pretty much throw antibiotics at everything, because their patients demanded them....that's why we have so many resistant strains of infections now....

 

[mal]

Well spotted, but hardly offputting.

 

[not_nadine]

I loved that Doctor. Make me laugh straight out with what he said after Nick had to take his shirt off.

This is why I love SK so . Can be something horrible going on, then bust up over a random sentence.


Just go with it.

 

[Chazel1972]

I can live with minor goofs when you compare tiny errors to the actual number of written words -we're talikng about an insignificant number of errors. One element that always drove me batty though was from IT.
When the Losers go to visit Eddie and they are all recounting how many cans they hit with the BullsEye slingshot....he never mentions Stan's.

 

[Linus Van Helsing]

Another goof - King refers in several passages to soldiers carrying "recoilless rifles" as if it's an infantry weapon, but I believe this term strictly refers to a light artillery piece. I've noticed in many of King's novels that his editorial team does not seem to be much for fact checking.

 

[Dana Jean]

Another goof - King refers in several passages to soldiers carrying "recoilless rifles" as if it's an infantry weapon, but I believe this term strictly refers to a light artillery piece. I've noticed in many of King's novels that his editorial team does not seem to be much for fact checking.

The way I look at these things, it's his story. His world. He can write whatever the hell he wants, even if someone else thinks it's wrong. i just lose myself in the tale, knowing all things are possible in an SK book. Even glocks with safeties.

 

[muskrat]

King has never been good with guns. Heh heh. But, you know, on THAT level of the Tower, yadda yadda...

 

[Neesy]

King has never been good with guns. Heh heh. But, you know, on THAT level of the Tower, yadda yadda...

You're such a little goof

Spoiler

referring to thread title

Yes - the story really should just grab us so that we don't have to think about little insignificant details (like danajean says above)

As far as a 'team of editors' Linus Van Helsing - maybe back in the day he did not have such a team
That's a pretty old book!
Welcome to SKMB, Linus

Spoiler: The Stand

 

[GNTLGNT]

Another goof - King refers in several passages to soldiers carrying "recoilless rifles" as if it's an infantry weapon, but I believe this term strictly refers to a light artillery piece. I've noticed in many of King's novels that his editorial team does not seem to be much for fact checking.