ApolloHoax.net
Off Topic => General Discussion => Topic started by: LionKing on November 15, 2014, 08:13:36 AM
-
Dear all,
I want to ask what are home remedies followed in your culture to get rid of flue.
Thanks
-
Alcohol. Doesn't cure the flu, but makes you feel less bad about having it.
Personally, I get the vaccine each autumn.
-
Alcohol. Doesn't cure the flu, but makes you feel less bad about having it.
Personally, I get the vaccine each autumn.
thnx for sharing. i try a method that is predictable as gravity. it is sweating..wrap yourself and dress heavily..u might want to put your feet in a bucket of hot water..and sweat..sweat..sweat..iAlways felt a lot better afterwards..also drink tea with lemon or boil lemon after cutting it to four pieces with its peel..and boil with crystallized sugar..and drink..
-
Personally I would sweat it out but with plenty of fluids taken in.
But now I have the flu jab and it is getting on ten years with one case where as before I was prone to the issue.
-
i try a method that is predictable as gravity. it is sweating..wrap yourself and dress heavily..u might want to put your feet in a bucket of hot water..and sweat..sweat..sweat..iAlways felt a lot better afterwards..
Hmmm, maybe it's like hitting yourself on the head with a hammer -- it feels so good when you stop. ;D
-
Personally I use a steam inhaler with a strong decongestant in the hot water (Karvol). At first symptoms, two such treatments and I'm normally ok.
-
Vaccine here as well. When I have a cold, I take NyQuil or similar and suffer.
-
Steam inhaling was suggested to me as well..
Gillian what do you mean you take the medicine and suffer? does it cause u side effects?
Luckmeister
no its not like that..the phlegm reduces a lot
my mom insistes that I take panadol flu .. I take it but I don't feel good until I sweat
the idea is that I hate medicines..I prefer to try traditional methods and not enter medications to my body.
Is it common that you use lemon?
-
Luckmeister
no its not like that..the phlegm reduces a lot
I know. I was kidding.
-
Flu vaccine.
If I do get the flu, it is milder and less difficult. Then I treat the symptoms, usually with individual medicines, rather than things like Nyquil. They mostly have pseudoephedrine in them which gives me bad dreams, even when awake. When you have the flu, acetaminophen is your best friend.
-
It doesn't cause me side effects, but it doesn't always take all the symptoms away, either. However, I don't often get sick.
-
so i might conclude that there is always medical interference rather than trying first "natural" products and methods.
-
I'd prefer something that works a little rather than something that doesn't work at all.
-
so i might conclude that there is always medical interference rather than trying first "natural" products and methods.
What, like aspirin?
-
so i might conclude that there is always medical interference rather than trying first "natural" products and methods.
What, like aspirin?
I was comparing how different people react to flu. from the replies, there is use of medication rather than trying home remedies of natural products
-
The point being made, LionKing, is that most common medicines are natural products. Just because something has been refined in a factory and packaged in pure form does not alter its origin. Aspirin, paracetamol, and similar commercially available cold and flu remedies are as much 'natural' products as sugar is. You don't find the sugar you put in your tea in crystalline form in nature, but it still is just a natural product refined and packaged.
-
I was comparing how different people react to flu. from the replies, there is use of medication rather than trying home remedies of natural products
What is "natural" about any home remedy? What is "natural" about "is sweating..wrap yourself and dress heavily." What is "unnatural" about acetaminophen, cough syrup, or pseudoephedrine? The vague and arbitrary way most people use the word "natural" is a strong indication it is a marketing term to convey an emotional connection rather than a science term that relates to the actual natural world.
-
In addition to what Jason has said, I'd like to point out that "natural" does not necessarily mean "good" or "effective".
After all, arsenic is natural - although I suppose you wouldn't need to suffer with the flu for much longer if you consumed enough of it...
-
from the replies, there is use of medication rather than trying home remedies of natural products
Aspirin IS a "natural" remedy. Salicylic acid, the active ingredient of aspirin, was first discovered from the bark of the willow tree in 1763 by Edward Stone of Wadham College, University of Oxford. It makes absolutely no difference if the compound was synthesised in a plant cell or in an industrial process. Its the same compound!
I don't suppose you have a tattoo of a pixie secreted anywhere about your body, do you? ;D :o
-
Andromeda
I am talking about the effective known methods
for the rest,
yes medicines are composed of natural products but some synthetic issues might not be good for the liver and have adverse effects
Yes, certain natural remedies are available and packaged and might have side effects. what I wanted to compare is the interference of the synthetic chemicals and pharmaceuticals so-to-speak in remedies rather than trying available home products that don't have side effects
-
Andromeda
I am talking about the effective known methods
for the rest,
yes medicines are composed of natural products but some synthetic issues might not be good for the liver and have adverse effects
Yes, certain natural remedies are available and packaged and might have side effects. what I wanted to compare is the interference of the synthetic chemicals and pharmaceuticals so-to-speak in remedies rather than trying available home products that don't have side effects
"Synthetic chemicals"??? Compounds are compounds. It makes not one jot of difference where they are synthesised.
I'd best walk away from this thread as the pseudo-science and "chemicals bad, natural good" is making my brain want to escape via my ears....
-
harmful synthetic chemicals .. you know that medicine has those
at any rates I am not trying to enforce anything on anyone .. you are free to choose what you want. I was just comparing what is done in different cultures . I couldn't see drinking tea with lemon or boiling lemon and sweating as traditional methods used as is done here, although people are moving more towards Panadol Flu. I am just against certain drugs used that might have side effects and certain reactions with other medicines while the alternative is available.
-
"Synthetic chemicals"??? Compounds are compounds. It makes not one jot of difference where they are synthesised.
harmful synthetic chemicals .. you know that medicine has those
. <My point
You>.
::) ::) ::)
-
harmful synthetic chemicals .. you know that medicine has those
Can you say which word in the phrase "harmful synthetic chemicals" you are talking about? Is it the "harmful, " "synthetic" or the "chemicals" part that concerns you? I ask this because there is no scientific difference between "natural" and "synthetic." It is an artificial distinction. As long as you make these vague questions, you will never get a satisfactory answer from anyone.
at any rates I am not trying to enforce anything on anyone .. you are free to choose what you want.
Ya, we got that, and it is a dodge of a response.
I was just comparing what is done in different cultures . I couldn't see drinking tea with lemon or boiling lemon and sweating as traditional methods used as is done here, although people are moving more towards Panadol Flu. I am just against certain drugs used that might have side effects and certain reactions with other medicines while the alternative is available.
Is this a sociological query or a medicine question? Please clarify. If the former, are you just interested in old folk remedies? If the latter, as is implied by your query, then tradition is irrelevant and safety and efficacy are what matter. If a folk remedy has no efficacy then the absence of side effects are irrelevant, are they not? So please tell us which traditional methods you think are effective and why? Why do you think sweating out a fever is either effective or has no deleterious effects?
-
Andromeda
I am talking about the effective known methods
http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/557094-i-m-sorry-herbal-medicine-oh-herbal-medicine-s-been-around-for
-
My grandmother's recommended cure for a cough was to crush up eggshells, soak them in brandy overnight, and then strain and drink the brandy. Possibly there might be some helpful protein or calcium compound that leaches out. Or it might be the brandy that does the trick by itself.
I find putting a dollop of Vicks into a pot of water taken off the stove and inhaling the steam (or even just putting it into a sink of hot water), does a good job of decongestion.
Of course, neither of these "cure" influenza, they just make the symptoms of the infection easier to bear.
My grandmother had an interesting book of remedies from the early 1900s. Apparently, a good cup of beef broth was helpful, if not a perfect cure, for all ailments up to and including Black Death. (I cannot explain the authors' criminal disregard of chicken soup.)
-
My grandmother's recommended cure for a cough was to crush up eggshells, soak them in brandy overnight, and then strain and drink the brandy. Possibly there might be some helpful protein or calcium compound that leaches out. Or it might be the brandy that does the trick by itself.
I find putting a dollop of Vicks into a pot of water taken off the stove and inhaling the steam (or even just putting it into a sink of hot water), does a good job of decongestion.
Of course, neither of these "cure" influenza, they just make the symptoms of the infection easier to bear.
My grandmother had an interesting book of remedies from the early 1900s. Apparently, a good cup of beef broth was helpful, if not a perfect cure, for all ailments up to and including Black Death. (I cannot explain the authors' criminal disregard of chicken soup.)
That is just it, home remedies address the symptoms. Just as taking most over the counter medicines do. But for knocking down a fever, nothing works for me as well as ibuprofen. Even if it doesn't come with the extra dose of a grandmothers love.
When in need of a home remedy, I make matzo balls. Then throw a few veggies in fully salted chicken broth while the matzo cooks. Then add the matzo and feel better. In fact I may have this for dinner tonight as flu season is coming on. You can't be too prepared.
-
what I wanted to compare is the interference of the synthetic chemicals and pharmaceuticals so-to-speak in remedies rather than trying available home products that don't have side effects
Home remedies DO have side effects. The only difference is that they are not as well-documented as those in commercial remedies. Regulations require side effects to be documented and listed on pack information for all commercial products. Because something is natural does not mean it has no side effects.
Deliberately increasing your body temperature by wrapping yourself up so you sweat does far more than deal with the flu. It is artificially giving you a fever, and heating up your system has a LOT of effects. Just because they weren't listed in a leaflet doesn't mean they were not there.
-
harmful synthetic chemicals .. you know that medicine has those
There is NO difference between a synthetic and naturally occurring form of a chemical. Home remedies also have harmful natural chemicals. If I mash up a plant product known to contain a good remedy for a sore throat and ingest it I take in EVERYTHING that plant contains. Not everything in a herbal remedy is good for you, it's a balance of the therapeutic products and the harmful ones.
There is also the point that 'chemicals' can be harmful in certain quantities but very beneficial in others. Or it could be related to the combinations. Try ingesting sodium or inhaling chlorine and you'll be dead in a short period. Try going without salt, which is sodium chloride, and you'll be just as dead. You simply cannot say 'natural' remedies are good because they are natural, and commercial ones are bad because they contain synthetic chemicals.
-
I have a lot of friends who would be dead without "harmful artificial chemicals." Heck, to the idiots who lump vaccines into that label, I might be, too. We live in a much healthier world because of the existence of "harmful artificial chemicals."
-
harmful synthetic chemicals .. you know that medicine has those
Can you say which word in the phrase "harmful synthetic chemicals" you are talking about? Is it the "harmful, " "synthetic" or the "chemicals" part that concerns you? I ask this because there is no scientific difference between "natural" and "synthetic." It is an artificial distinction. As long as you make these vague questions, you will never get a satisfactory answer from anyone.
at any rates I am not trying to enforce anything on anyone .. you are free to choose what you want.
Ya, we got that, and it is a dodge of a response.
I was just comparing what is done in different cultures . I couldn't see drinking tea with lemon or boiling lemon and sweating as traditional methods used as is done here, although people are moving more towards Panadol Flu. I am just against certain drugs used that might have side effects and certain reactions with other medicines while the alternative is available.
Is this a sociological query or a medicine question? Please clarify. If the former, are you just interested in old folk remedies? If the latter, as is implied by your query, then tradition is irrelevant and safety and efficacy are what matter. If a folk remedy has no efficacy then the absence of side effects are irrelevant, are they not? So please tell us which traditional methods you think are effective and why? Why do you think sweating out a fever is either effective or has no deleterious effects?
Hi Echnaton,
I am talking here ONLY about FLU, comparing ONLY Lemon AND Tea, boiled lemon, and sweating.
I am concerned about Panadol Flu and the like, that have harmful side effects versus those mentioned above.
I am not talking about alcohol for instance , that is clearly natural and found I nature but might have side effects.
about easing symptoms, I can't speak for everyone, but for me, the easing of symptoms after sweating is instant, and after it in two days or three the disease is mostly gone altogether.
Now coincidently I am at home because of tendonitis. the doctor prescribed an anti-inflammatory that I think was behind my feeling of uneasiness in my side. My grandmother prescribed rubbing heated olive oil (known of anti-inflammatory benefits) on the tendon and wrapping it. I did and afterwards I felt pain and I said to myself that I bruised myself and shouldn't have listened to her. Nonetheless, the second day I felt much much better. I can't say, however, that it was because of olive oil because it might be of resting also.
the idea behind some traditional medicines is treating diseases with opposite of what caused them. Diseases that came from cold, are treated with heat. Flu , at least to me, is successfully treated by heat.
-
the idea behind some traditional medicines is treating diseases with opposite of what caused them. Diseases that came from cold, are treated with heat. Flu , at least to me, is successfully treated by heat.
What's next? Blood-letting? Homoeopathy?
Flu is caused by a virus not cold. And believe me, if you had flu, you'd know about it.
I think that you are confusing flu with the common cold.
-
A cold =/= flu, LionKing.
Furthermore, there are no "diseases that come from cold".
I have had no end of colds, but I have only had flu twice. The last time, I had a temperature of 39.9. Wrapping myself up to hold in heat would probably have finished me off.
-
Ah yes, sorry for the English confusion..I am talking about common cold. excuse my english
-
I am talking here ONLY about FLU, comparing ONLY Lemon AND Tea, boiled lemon, and sweating.
You may like to look up the chemical composition of tea some time. It has a variety of chemicals in it, many of which are substantially more harmful than a lot of things you find in off-the-shelf pharmaceuticals like Panadol. Quantity is the key, as well as the metabolism of the individual consuming it.
I am concerned about Panadol Flu and the like, that have harmful side effects versus those mentioned above.
I have taken medicines with extensive listed side-effects and suffered none at all. It have drunk tea from a certain brand and felt very sick. I'll say it again in the hopes you will get it, but so-called 'natural' remedies DO have side-effects. They're just not listed in an information leaflet like the ones on pills you buy from a chemist, and as a result people don't make the connecton quite so readily between adverse reactions to things like tea as they do those to a pill.
about easing symptoms, I can't speak for everyone, but for me, the easing of symptoms after sweating is instant, and after it in two days or three the disease is mostly gone altogether.
Yes, that's called inducing a fever, increasing the temperature to try and kill the organism causing the illness. The body does that on its own, which is why you have a high temperature when you are sick. All you are doing is accelrating what your body is already doing. It is just as risky as a normal fever, since elevated temperature will damage the cells in your body also after long enough.
the idea behind some traditional medicines is treating diseases with opposite of what caused them. Diseases that came from cold, are treated with heat.
Which is about as sound scientifically as homeopathy, i.e. not at all. Colds do not 'come from' cold. You get them most likely because in the cold your extremities have blood diverted from them to preserve your core temperature, leaving them vulnerable to invasion by viruses and bacteria due to localised compromising of the immune system. The illness is caused by a virus.
-
after it in two days or three the disease is mostly gone altogether
Most colds are pretty much cleared up within 2 or 3 days of hitting the worst of it, without any intervention.
Whatever works for you LionKing, that's great, fine. It hurts no-one else that you prefer to sweat it out when you catch a cold. However, your posts here are coming across as trying to shame anyone who uses anything other than what you deem "natural" (and haven't yet defined). Furthermore, it is the nature of this board that anyone making assertions must be prepared to back them up with evidence.
-
http://www.theecologist.org/green_green_living/behind_the_label/268787/behind_the_label_lemsip_max_cold_flu_capsules.html
perhaps this article explains better what i mean
-
No, that article is pure fearmongering. No-one disputes that many of the contents of off-the-shelf remedies can have harmful effects, but you'll note that the article makes no mention whatsoever of the doses at which those things have harmful effects and how much is found in the average does taken by a person suffering the symptoms. That is disingenuous to say the least and outright dishonest at worst.
Many drugs themselves are harmful in certain quantities but have undeniable beneficial effects at lower doses. This is absolutely NOT the 'natural vs. synthetic' argument you are trying to present it as.
And again I will draw your attention to the many harmful contents in things such as tea, a perfectly natural infusion.
Try this for what I mean:
http://io9.com/what-if-natural-products-came-with-a-list-of-ingredient-1503320184
-
Treated, a cold will last about 7 days. Untreated, it'll be gone in a week.
Not to be confused with the 'flu. That's a whole different kettle of fish. You'll know when you have 'flu. Someone once described to me a test for 'flu. If there was £100 (or dollars/shekels/groats) on the ground in front of you then if you feel too ill to care (much less pick it up) you've got the 'flu.
-
I have had the flu once.
began 26/12/1994
27,28 and 29 are gone.
there are no home remedies for flu. there is a reason why it kills people.
if someone phones you and says they have the flu, well, you cant lift your head never mind a phone.
-
I was at work. The symptoms came on around 4pm.
I couldn't read the prescription sheet so phoned in someone to relieve me. There was 2" of snow outside, I was in short sleeves and drinking iced water, yet my temp was 41.
The next three days disapeared.
Thank you to my wife, who poured water down my neck.
-
Note.
I called for help before I became disabled.
-
Now coincidently I am at home because of tendonitis. the doctor prescribed an anti-inflammatory that I think was behind my feeling of uneasiness in my side. My grandmother prescribed rubbing heated olive oil (known of anti-inflammatory benefits) on the tendon and wrapping it. I did and afterwards I felt pain and I said to myself that I bruised myself and shouldn't have listened to her. Nonetheless, the second day I felt much much better. I can't say, however, that it was because of olive oil because it might be of resting also.
Hope you get better soon.
The plural of anecdote is anecdotes, not evidence. Humans are simple no good at determining cause and effect relationships from among multiple inputs and variable results. That is why folk medicines are typically useless.
Everyone should take all medicines with care. Many are very powerful but have potentially bad side effects. However you have more information available about standardized pharmaceutical's than folk remedies, such as tea, because tea can be made from practically anything.
-
However you have more information available about standardized pharmaceutical's than folk remedies,
And there's the critical point that's worth repeating over and over again. Because pharmaceuticals have to go through rigorous trials before marketing, and regulations require all potential effects ot be listed, this information comes packaged with them. However, a lack of provided information does not mean there is a lack of effects. Because folk remedies don't come with a list of side effects doesn't mean they don't have any, it just means they have never been rigorously tested, catalogued and listed.
-
Ah yes, sorry for the English confusion..I am talking about common cold. excuse my english
In that case, my answer is that I just treat the symptoms - non-prescription painkillers for the sore throat, decongestants for the blocked nose, pastilles for the cough.
As I said, I now get the vaccine each year to prevent flu, which I last had in 1991.
-
However you have more information available about standardized pharmaceutical's than folk remedies,
And there's the critical point that's worth repeating over and over again. Because pharmaceuticals have to go through rigorous trials before marketing, and regulations require all potential effects ot be listed, this information comes packaged with them. However, a lack of provided information does not mean there is a lack of effects. Because folk remedies don't come with a list of side effects doesn't mean they don't have any, it just means they have never been rigorously tested, catalogued and listed.
It is more than just rigorous trials. Products made with known ingredients provide a tracking mechanism for information about their use. If dangers get through the initial tests, public health practitioners have the ability to relate adverse effects back to products and their ingredients. Problems from folk remedies are untraceable and "supplements" may be so poorly labeled that the ingredient information is useless. Many are known to have adverse interactions with other substances that cause side effects or diminish the potency of medicines. Proper homeopathy at least has no active ingredient, but not everything that is labeled as homeopathic is lacking active ingredients.
Lionking, it is your body and you may ingest or apply what you choose, but don't get fooled by marketers. People that sell remedies are no different than people that sell any other product. They are looking for a way to connect customers to their product, nothing more.
-
There is, for example, a huge list of known drug interactions with St. John's wort. Including reducing the efficacy of oral contraceptives.
-
the idea behind some traditional medicines is treating diseases with opposite of what caused them. Diseases that came from cold, are treated with heat.
Which is why the vast majority of folk remedies are ineffectual, as they are based on, in a lot of cases, superstition and nonsense and in most cases deliver either no benefit or no benefit over and above the placebo effect. Those that have been shown to be efficacious have been integrated into medicine. Aspirin, which I have previously mentioned, is one such case. Artemisinin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artemisinin) is another. Then they are properly packaged, marked, delivered in carefully controlled doses with "use-by" dates. This is in marked contrast to many "folk" remedies where there is little or no control over potency, cleanliness of preparation or age. Modern medicine, allied with access to better sanitation , is the reason why life expectancies across the world have increased from 31 years (early 20th Century) to 67 by 2010 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_expectancy).
The farcical idea that diseases are treated "opposite of what caused them" is probably related to the ideas that originated with Hippocrates, who tried to treat mania with small doses of Mandrake root, as a large dose causes mania. The phrase "hair of the dog that bit you" derives from this. It's snake-oil of the highest order, and one that Hahnemann perfected into the bull-turd that is homoeopathy.
And as for claiming that flu is caused by cold? Rubbish.
I also had the flu once. I have never felt so sick before or since. Even my skin ached, which was a first for me. It developed into a proper chest infection that had me in bed for 5 days, allied with a raging fever that caused pretty freaky hallucinations.
-
Well, I have a list of ailments that I treat with drugs. All prescribed and the only natural thing I do to contain one is carful eating (within limits, it is hard to avoid all pies!). That latter is gout. That has a powerful anti inflammatory on standby for when it rears its ugly toe. Would I trust olive oil to this? Not on your nelly.
Edit. I am happy with the flu jab, the one instance (??) I can remember in the last many years was probably the one they did not build into the vaccine. I can live with that, I understand it is based on the three main strains around that year that it is given so something can slip through. And time slips by, my recollection of 10 years is way off, getting on 15+ years I think.
-
Hi Echnaton,
I was reading a bit about the side effects of Panadol versus tea's.
"If any of the following side effects occur while taking acetaminophen, check with your doctor immediately:
Rare
•Bloody or black, tarry stools
•bloody or cloudy urine
•fever with or without chills (not present before treatment and not caused by the condition being treated)
•pain in the lower back and/or side (severe and/or sharp)
•pinpoint red spots on the skin
•skin rash, hives, or itching
•sore throat (not present before treatment and not caused by the condition being treated)
•sores, ulcers, or white spots on the lips or in the mouth
•sudden decrease in the amount of urine
•unusual bleeding or bruising
•unusual tiredness or weakness
•yellow eyes or skin"
http://www.drugs.com/sfx/panadol-side-effects.html
they didn't say that this needs overdose. although they are rare, but they are dire!
see this also http://www.mayoclinic.org/drugs-supplements/oxycodone-and-acetaminophen-oral-route/side-effects/drg-20074000
here are the tea's
http://www.healthmw.com/20/02/2012/mens-health/tea-side-effects-top-10-bad-effects-of-tea-on-health-49.html
they need big quantities to have this effect. In case of common cold, at least for me, I don't drink 5-6 cups day.
Best
-
"Check with your doctor immediately"
Because those side effects are rare and indicate something else is wrong.
I have a bad reaction to opiate-based painkillers. That does not mean I can point to my experiences of them and objectively say that therefore opiates are worse than any other painkiller.
Incidentally, as a Brit I do drink 5 or 6 cups of tea a day :)
-
they didn't say that this needs overdose. although they are rare, but they are dire!
And I'll say it again, these side effects are known because as a marketed pahrmaceutical Panadol has been subject to extensive research on its effects. It also happens to be taken by sick people rather than part of routine daily refreshment as in the case of tea. When people take medication and they notice odd effects straight after they report the fact. When they drink tea and they notice strange effects they don't, because they don't expect tea to be the cause. The result is a lot less information on the effects of something like tea in healthy versus sick people.
No-one is disputing that pharmaceuticals have side effects. No-one at all. There are medications that list 'sudden death' as a rare side effect. Why? Because during the course of its use over several decades maybe one person had reacted badly to it due to what turned out to be a previously undiagnosed metabolic disorder or allergy and died. That doesn't mean it's a deadly poison, and it's not enough to withdraw it from use, as its benefits were well documented, but it was enough to have to have that potential side effect listed on the pack insert according to the regulations that govern the sales of pharmaceuticals. Now, do you honestly think that in centuries of tea drinking by a population of billions not one person has ever reacted adversely to an infusion of tea leaves and gone into some kind of shock and died?
Alternatively, consider that apples and almonds contain cyanide and contrast that to the contents of some drugs. Or the therapeutic uses of botulinum toxin, which is also the most lethal natural toxin known....
-
I know someone who had Botox injections for migraine, interestingly.
-
If I took note of the side effects of my cornucopia of prescription medication I would not take any. Guess what, I have none of the "can induce...." etc ever showing up.
And my middle name should be Urn. Tea Urn.
-
they didn't say that this needs overdose. although they are rare, but they are dire!
And I'll say it again, these side effects are known because as a marketed pahrmaceutical Panadol has been subject to extensive research on its effects. It also happens to be taken by sick people rather than part of routine daily refreshment as in the case of tea. When people take medication and they notice odd effects straight after they report the fact. When they drink tea and they notice strange effects they don't, because they don't expect tea to be the cause. The result is a lot less information on the effects of something like tea in healthy versus sick people.
No-one is disputing that pharmaceuticals have side effects. No-one at all. There are medications that list 'sudden death' as a rare side effect. Why? Because during the course of its use over several decades maybe one person had reacted badly to it due to what turned out to be a previously undiagnosed metabolic disorder or allergy and died. That doesn't mean it's a deadly poison, and it's not enough to withdraw it from use, as its benefits were well documented, but it was enough to have to have that potential side effect listed on the pack insert according to the regulations that govern the sales of pharmaceuticals. Now, do you honestly think that in centuries of tea drinking by a population of billions not one person has ever reacted adversely to an infusion of tea leaves and gone into some kind of shock and died?
Alternatively, consider that apples and almonds contain cyanide and contrast that to the contents of some drugs. Or the therapeutic uses of botulinum toxin, which is also the most lethal natural toxin known....
we haven't heard about people dying from tea but we heard about those dying from Panadol. PERHAPS it is safer to go with tea
-
If I took note of the side effects of my cornucopia of prescription medication I would not take any. Guess what, I have none of the "can induce...." etc ever showing up.
And my middle name should be Urn. Tea Urn.
I understand that we should carry risks when we have to and take medications. I just don't think this is the case with common cold, that is vey common.
-
Echnaton can you please direct me to the natural versus synthetic argument, or rather lack of, you are speaking about?
-
we heard about those dying from Panadol.
Only from overdose - that's not the same thing at all!
Tea may be safer, but it is less effective at relieving symptoms.
-
we heard about those dying from Panadol.
Only from overdose - that's not the same thing at all!
Tea may be safer, but it is less effective at relieving symptoms.
to me I have felt better from tea and lemon, but mostly from sweating.
no rare reactions are not from overdose. this is what I am saying
-
we heard about those dying from Panadol.
Only from overdose - that's not the same thing at all!
Tea may be safer, but it is less effective at relieving symptoms.
to me I have felt better from tea and lemon, but mostly from sweating.
no rare reactions are not from overdose. this is what I am saying
You didn't say "rare reactions", you were referring to death. I quoted you.
-
we heard about those dying from Panadol.
Only from overdose - that's not the same thing at all!
Tea may be safer, but it is less effective at relieving symptoms.
to me I have felt better from tea and lemon, but mostly from sweating.
no rare reactions are not from overdose. this is what I am saying
You didn't say "rare reactions", you were referring to death. I quoted you.
"Taking acetaminophen causes rare but potentially deadly skin reactions in some people, the Food and Drug Administration warned Thursday"
http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2013/08/01/208005942/acetaminophen-can-cause-rare-serious-skin-disorders-fda-warns
-
direct me to the natural versus synthetic argument
There is no argument. It exists only in your head.
-
direct me to the natural versus synthetic argument
There is no argument. It exists only in your head.
"there is no argument" would have sufficed.
i'm afraid not. put natural versus synthetic medicine and see what u get on google
And, "there is no argument" would have sufficed. "it exists only in your head" is unnecessarily mean
-
i'm afraid not. put natural versus synthetic medicine and see what u get on google
Medicine is medicine. Your differentiation is just that- your differentiation.
As for something being on Google? So what? It's a search engine, not a qualitative measure of truth or accuracy. Search for "Moon landing" on Google...it will return plenty of hits about hoax beliefs. That does not make them any more real.
-
i'm afraid not. put natural versus synthetic medicine and see what u get on google
Medicine is medicine. Your differentiation is just that- your differentiation.
As for something being on Google? So what? It's a search engine, not a qualitative measure of truth or accuracy. Search for "Moon landing" on Google...it will return plenty of hits about hoax beliefs. That does not make them any more real.
I am not saying about right or wrong, but about its mere existence. that this argument exists is true, proven by the internet.
-
i'm afraid not. put natural versus synthetic medicine and see what u get on google
The non-argument is not about natural vs synthetic medicine but the arbitrary distinction you and others make between natural and synthetic chemicals. A chemical is a chemical, whether found naturally or made in a lab. Labs exist that can synthesise amino acids and join them up to make peptides. They are no different at all to peptides found in nature. Similarly, the synthesised acetylsalicylic acid that is found in marketed aspirin pills is no different at all from the natural acetylsalicylic acid found in willow bark where it was originally found.
-
we haven't heard about people dying from tea but we heard about those dying from Panadol. PERHAPS it is safer to go with tea
False dilemma. As I have said before, and maybe you'll eventually get it, you have heard about people dying in rare cases from Panadol precisely because it is a regulated marketed drug and such adverse reactions are required to be reported and listed, and because people do take overdoses and die from them. No such regulations exist for tea, or for herbal remedies, or for homeopathy, etc. That's the key difference: with marketed pharmaceuticals you have a record of their risks; with herbal remedies you don't. That doesn't mean herbal remedies are any safer just because their risks are not rigorously reported and documented.
I have not heard of any deaths associated with tea drinking either, but I have heard of people dying from water consumption. Should I conclude it is safer to drink tea than water on the basis of that?
-
i'm afraid not. put natural versus synthetic medicine and see what u get on google
The non-argument is not about natural vs synthetic medicine but the arbitrary distinction you and others make between natural and synthetic chemicals. A chemical is a chemical, whether found naturally or made in a lab. Labs exist that can synthesise amino acids and join them up to make peptides. They are no different at all to peptides found in nature. Similarly, the synthesised acetylsalicylic acid that is found in marketed aspirin pills is no different at all from the natural acetylsalicylic acid found in willow bark where it was originally found.
http://www.watchmojo.com/video/id/7811/
the argument, or the idea, EXISTS. Here they are saying like you say. this is different than the matter being debatable among people or no. he didn't need to say it exists only in my head..pheeww
-
That link does the opposite of backing up your position. I'm confused as to what your point is now.
-
That link does the opposite of backing up your position. I'm confused as to what your point is now.
I know. I am just saying that the debate exists and it is not just in my head.
OK as I have been reading, the chemicals are natural, but I am still interested in the common cold treatment between the commonly used home remedies , sweating and tea and lemon, versus the panadol which are truly less dangerous
-
Well, only if by "debate" you mean
Person: "Synthetic chemicals are completely different in structure to their natural counterparts!"
Scientist (eg chemist): "No, they're not, they have exactly the same chemical structure. Here, take a look. See?"
"which are truly less dangerous" - I'm not sure any of us can say if that is true or not. I'm not sure a study of Panadol v tea could ever be properly carried out, as I don't see how it could be made double-blind. Panadol v placebo has certainly been done, though.
-
There are too many variables to say one way is 'truly less dangerous' than another. Forcing yourself to sweat is dangerous in different ways from taking a pharmaceutical product with known side effects, and both are dependent on the individual circumstances.
-
"Allow inflammation. The body reacts against viruses with inflammation and the result of inflammation is either directly toxic to the virus, or helps to physically expel virus from the body. For example, viruses are very temperature sensitive – for the body to run a fever is a good thing – fever kills viruses (and bacteria). A good snotty nose helps to wash out virus from the nose and a hacking cough blasts the bugs from the lungs. Symptoms may be uncomfortable but should be welcomed as an appropriate way to get rid of virus. This is why I hate to see symptom-suppressing cold remedies such as paracetamol, antihistamines, alcohol, decongestants, cough mixtures which interfere with the body\’s natural mechanisms of killing and expelling virus. SO DO NOT SUPPRESS SYMPTOMS – THEY ARE NATURE\’S WAY OF EXPELLING INFECTIONS. "
http://www.drmyhill.co.uk/wiki/Viral_infections_-_avoid_them_and_treat_them_aggressively
maybe we can make at the end of the debate a list of all the discussed with their pros and cons..
-
Please stop shouting.
Also, please note that some people cannot regulate their body temperature properly. A fever from a cold or flu could end up being damaging or even fatal, but that can be prevented by taking paracetamol.
As we have repeatedly said, there is no method which is absolutely best for everyone for getting over a cold (although many "herbal remedies" have been shown to be ineffective). I have my preference, based on the knowledge I have of my own body and health, and you have yours. So be it.
-
There are too many variables to say one way is 'truly less dangerous' than another. Forcing yourself to sweat is dangerous in different ways from taking a pharmaceutical product with known side effects, and both are dependent on the individual circumstances.
do you have an article I can red about dangers of sweating? thanks
-
Please stop shouting.
who is shouting? the authors that I quote. not me
Also, please note that some people cannot regulate their body temperature properly.
why?
A fever from a cold or flu could end up being damaging or even fatal, but that can be prevented by taking paracetamol.
As we have repeatedly said, there is no method which is absolutely best for everyone for getting over a cold (although many "herbal remedies" have been shown to be ineffective). I have my preference, based on the knowledge I have of my own body and health, and you have yours. So be it.
You know, I think we need an expert physician here.. if there are any on the board, please take part in the debate and give us answers for all this
-
do you have an article I can red about dangers of sweating? thanks
No, I have my own knowledge. Sweating requires elevating the body temperature, which is risky, and causes loss of fluid, which is also risky. This is why saunas have lists of instructions on their walls advising limiting your exposure and keeping hydrated when using them, for example.
-
do you have an article I can red about dangers of sweating? thanks
No, I have my own knowledge. Sweating requires elevating the body temperature, which is risky, and causes loss of fluid, which is also risky. This is why saunas have lists of instructions on their walls advising limiting your exposure and keeping hydrated when using them, for example.
so why is elevating the body temperature risky when you take fluids?
-
Please stop shouting.
who is shouting? the authors that I quote. not me
But you C&P'd their shouts into your post. Please, don't do it.
Also, please note that some people cannot regulate their body temperature properly.
why?
A variety of reasons. For example, people with fibromyalgia often have this issue.
I just googled "sweat out a cold". I got pages and pages of results showing quotes and advice from doctors saying it is an old wives' tale, a bad idea, it is a myth, it accelerates dehydration, it is ineffective etc.
-
Because the proteins, among other things, that make up your body and drive your metabolic processes are sensitive to temperature. All chemical reactions are, and your body depends on chemical reactions to function. A sustained increase of only a few degrees in your core temperature can be potentially fatal.
-
I'm not sure a study of Panadol v tea could ever be properly carried out, as I don't see how it could be made double-blind.
Yes, that would indeed be tricky to make double-blind.
-
I'm lucky, I've never had flu. I've had some very heavy colds, but never flu. Until recently I have never taken anything for a cold other than paracetamol to alleviate the headache symptoms. I have resorted to cold remedies in recent times, but that is mainly because they contain decongestants.
I tend to go to bed early when I have a cold, but that is simply because I am run down and tired. I drink lots of sweet tea, but again that is because I feel run down and the glucose gives me a lift; but this feeling is very much a personal perception. I don't think taking glucose speeds up the recovery process as I find sweet tea only really makes a difference to how I feel towards the end of the cold when I probably feel quite low and am in need of energy.
As for sweating out the cold/flu, I think the process of getting warm just makes people feel better when they are run down and actually does not help to speed up the process of getting well.
My own experience of having a cold is about making myself feel comfortable rather than speeding up the body's immune response. The latter, my body does in its own time, and all the sweating, sweet tea and keeping warm make no difference to how quickly I can fend off the virus.
-
I know. I am just saying that the debate exists and it is not just in my head.
When an argument comes to this, it is time to back away and reconsider that you are probably be wrong. I'm just sayin'.
-
"Allow inflammation. The body reacts against viruses with inflammation and the result of inflammation is either directly toxic to the virus, or helps to physically expel virus from the body. For example, viruses are very temperature sensitive – for the body to run a fever is a good thing – fever kills viruses (and bacteria). A good snotty nose helps to wash out virus from the nose and a hacking cough blasts the bugs from the lungs. Symptoms may be uncomfortable but should be welcomed as an appropriate way to get rid of virus. This is why I hate to see symptom-suppressing cold remedies such as paracetamol, antihistamines, alcohol, decongestants, cough mixtures which interfere with the body\’s natural mechanisms of killing and expelling virus. SO DO NOT SUPPRESS SYMPTOMS – THEY ARE NATURE\’S WAY OF EXPELLING INFECTIONS. "
http://www.drmyhill.co.uk/wiki/Viral_infections_-_avoid_them_and_treat_them_aggressively
maybe we can make at the end of the debate a list of all the discussed with their pros and cons..
The idea that you could cough away enough viruses to eliminate the disease in your own lungs is ridiculous. These viruses are not like some sort of litter lying on top of the cells. They are *in* the cells. You can't cough them away. You can only spread them to other people by "blasting" your body fluids around the environment.
-
"Allow inflammation. The body reacts against viruses with inflammation and the result of inflammation is either directly toxic to the virus, or helps to physically expel virus from the body. For example, viruses are very temperature sensitive – for the body to run a fever is a good thing – fever kills viruses (and bacteria). A good snotty nose helps to wash out virus from the nose and a hacking cough blasts the bugs from the lungs. Symptoms may be uncomfortable but should be welcomed as an appropriate way to get rid of virus. This is why I hate to see symptom-suppressing cold remedies such as paracetamol, antihistamines, alcohol, decongestants, cough mixtures which interfere with the body\’s natural mechanisms of killing and expelling virus. SO DO NOT SUPPRESS SYMPTOMS – THEY ARE NATURE\’S WAY OF EXPELLING INFECTIONS. "
http://www.drmyhill.co.uk/wiki/Viral_infections_-_avoid_them_and_treat_them_aggressively
maybe we can make at the end of the debate a list of all the discussed with their pros and cons..
The idea that you could cough away enough viruses to eliminate the disease in your own lungs is ridiculous. These viruses are not like some sort of litter lying on top of the cells. They are *in* the cells. You can't cough them away. You can only spread them to other people by "blasting" your body fluids around the environment.
it doesn't matter how..it matters that it works for me and other people as they report.
here is how I found out it kills viruses http://naturalsociety.com/how-sweating-fight-infection-illness/
my friend is a physician and she once told me that white blood cells work better in warmer body
at any rates, sweating is good also for getting out arsenic and other poisonous materials . there is a meta-analysis of articles in this regards that recommends regulating sweating in guidelines as a measure for detox.
-
it doesn't matter how..it matters that it works for me and other people as they report.
here is how I found out it kills viruses http://naturalsociety.com/how-sweating-fight-infection-illness/
my friend is a physician and she once told me that white blood cells work better in warmer body
at any rates, sweating is good also for getting out arsenic and other poisonous materials . there is a meta-analysis of articles in this regards that recommends regulating sweating in guidelines as a measure for detox.
That has no relevance to viruses, the link states there is a anti-bacteriological element to sweating. The link mentions that it has an effect on viruses, but that is simply not borne out in fact. Which would lead me to suspect the legitimacy of the complete article, without cross-referencing it. Which I can't be bothered with atm. :)
-
Sweating, in itself, may not be bad (if you remain hydrated, of course), but maintaining a high fever to do so is definitely a very bad, and dangerous, idea.
-
it doesn't matter how..it matters that it works for me and other people as they report.
here is how I found out it kills viruses http://naturalsociety.com/how-sweating-fight-infection-illness/
my friend is a physician and she once told me that white blood cells work better in warmer body
at any rates, sweating is good also for getting out arsenic and other poisonous materials . there is a meta-analysis of articles in this regards that recommends regulating sweating in guidelines as a measure for detox.
Really, Lionking. Your reflexive desire to believe against-the-mainstream stuff is getting you into trouble. Personal anecdote and random web links are no replacement for a an education about the actual way nature works.
"Detox" is yet another marketing term with no meaning designed to separate the ignorant and gullible from their money. Do you think your body is harboring excess arsenic without eliminating it? Do you think your normal perspiration is insufficient to do it normal functions?
What does this have to do with the flu virus anyway?
Nothing. You are just doing a gish gallop (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop) to avoid the question and the fact that you cannot support what you say.
-
Really, Lionking. Your reflexive desire to believe against-the-mainstream stuff is getting you into trouble. Personal anecdote and random web links are no replacement for a an education about the actual way nature works.
"Detox" is yet another marketing term with no meaning designed to separate the ignorant and gullible from their money. Do you think your body is harboring excess arsenic without eliminating it? Do you think your normal perspiration is insufficient to do it normal functions?
What does this have to do with the flu virus anyway?
Nothing. You are just doing a gish gallop (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop) to avoid the question and the fact that you cannot support what you say.
^^This^^
Citing a woo-woo "health" page that seriously portrays bunkum such as homeopathy as evidence, is the equivalent of using Bart Sibrel to back a hoax argument.
Get real Lionking. You are going nowhere with this ridiculous line of "debate"
-
it doesn't matter how..it matters that it works for me and other people as they report.
here is how I found out it kills viruses http://naturalsociety.com/how-sweating-fight-infection-illness/
my friend is a physician and she once told me that white blood cells work better in warmer body
at any rates, sweating is good also for getting out arsenic and other poisonous materials . there is a meta-analysis of articles in this regards that recommends regulating sweating in guidelines as a measure for detox.
That has no relevance to viruses, the link states there is a anti-bacteriological element to sweating. The link mentions that it has an effect on viruses, but that is simply not borne out in fact. Which would lead me to suspect the legitimacy of the complete article, without cross-referencing it. Which I can't be bothered with atm. :)
Known as Dermcidin, the protein becomes active when it encounters slightly acidic and salty environments—sweat being the perfect solution. Once activated, it funnels harmful bacteria, viruses, and fungus through its structure, destroying the cells in “fractions of a second,” according to Medical News Today - See more at: http://naturalsociety.com/how-sweating-fight-infection-illness/#sthash.o8FrBkXi.dpuf
this http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/11/111101130200.htm supports what my dr. friend told me about fighting of the immune system in elevated body temperatures
-
Really, Lionking. Your reflexive desire to believe against-the-mainstream stuff is getting you into trouble. Personal anecdote and random web links are no replacement for a an education about the actual way nature works.
"Detox" is yet another marketing term with no meaning designed to separate the ignorant and gullible from their money. Do you think your body is harboring excess arsenic without eliminating it? Do you think your normal perspiration is insufficient to do it normal functions?
What does this have to do with the flu virus anyway?
Nothing. You are just doing a gish gallop (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop) to avoid the question and the fact that you cannot support what you say.
^^This^^
Citing a woo-woo "health" page that seriously portrays bunkum such as homeopathy as evidence, is the equivalent of using Bart Sibrel to back a hoax argument.
Get real Lionking. You are going nowhere with this ridiculous line of "debate"
https://www.hoffmancentre.com/assets/files/pdf/articles/Arsenic,%20Cadium,%20Lead%20and%20Mercury%20in%20Sweat.pdf
this is not any article. it is published analyzing many articles. this is re detox
re sweating and common cold, I know that it always works for me. I like to read about how and the different theories around, but I know it works, so trying to convince me that it is not scientific is the ridiculous thing
-
it doesn't matter how..it matters that it works for me and other people as they report.
here is how I found out it kills viruses http://naturalsociety.com/how-sweating-fight-infection-illness/
my friend is a physician and she once told me that white blood cells work better in warmer body
at any rates, sweating is good also for getting out arsenic and other poisonous materials . there is a meta-analysis of articles in this regards that recommends regulating sweating in guidelines as a measure for detox.
Really, Lionking. Your reflexive desire to believe against-the-mainstream stuff is getting you into trouble. Personal anecdote and random web links are no replacement for a an education about the actual way nature works.
"Detox" is yet another marketing term with no meaning designed to separate the ignorant and gullible from their money. Do you think your body is harboring excess arsenic without eliminating it? Do you think your normal perspiration is insufficient to do it normal functions?
What does this have to do with the flu virus anyway?
Nothing. You are just doing a gish gallop (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop) to avoid the question and the fact that you cannot support what you say.
really echnaton. I am in no mood for discussing back your scornful attitude
-
LionKing - I suggest you leave the biological processes to somebody who has been educated in their causes and effects.
A fever is the immunesystems response to an infection, because it stresses the bacteria into changing their cell membranes viscosity and thereby slowing their growth. A virus is not susceptible to this increase in temperature. The body reacts with a fever nonetheless, but it is not as high, and it is not a vital part in the response to the infection.
What you do is mistaking cause and effect, and also contributing certain effects to other effects and not to their cause. It's like people who flash their high beams at a traffic light because "it makes it go green" when the actual sensor is an induction spool embedded in the road.
One who studied cell biology and chemistry for 5 ½ years.
-
Allan, I cited the sciencedaily http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/11/111101130200.htm
as I previously said, incase of common cols, it has never failed me. I don't care a lot how it works, but it should have a scientific explanation. The scientists in the article above are trying to understand and have an open mind, and this is the right path to understand rather than dodging it away. even animals move to higher temperature areas when they are sick as the article says
-
Allan, I cited the sciencedaily http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/11/111101130200.htm
as I previously said, incase of common cols, it has never failed me. I don't care a lot how it works, but it should have a scientific explanation. The scientists in the article above are trying to understand and have an open mind, and this is the right path to understand rather than dodging it away. even animals move to higher temperature areas when they are sick as the article says
The "open mind"-thing is a dead giveaway - once that concept is on the table, you should know somebody is throwing all serious research away, and inventing their own results.
-
Allen, please type "high body temperature kill virus" on google..u can read plenty of articles in this regards. plus, my friend is a physician and she told me that immune system works better in higher body temperature
-
https://www.hoffmancentre.com/assets/files/pdf/articles/Arsenic,%20Cadium,%20Lead%20and%20Mercury%20in%20Sweat.pdf
this is not any article. it is published analyzing many articles. this is re detox
re sweating and common cold, I know that it always works for me. I like to read about how and the different theories around, but I know it works, so trying to convince me that it is not scientific is the ridiculous thing
And what, exactly, has that to do with your original topic? It is a bibliographical collection of research on the excretion rates of heavy metals via the sweat glands. What relevance has that to do with your claim?
You are doing nothing more than hand-waving and gish-galloping. Uou started off with wanting to know home-remedies for the flu, then decided that you mixed up the flu with the common cold, then went on to ramble about the difference between "synthetic" and "natural" chemicals, from there to some rubbish about the dangers of medicine versus tea, then claimed that the flu is caused by cold and then on to that favourite of the media "detox". It's a gish-gallop of epic proportions.
-
https://www.hoffmancentre.com/assets/files/pdf/articles/Arsenic,%20Cadium,%20Lead%20and%20Mercury%20in%20Sweat.pdf
this is not any article. it is published analyzing many articles. this is re detox
re sweating and common cold, I know that it always works for me. I like to read about how and the different theories around, but I know it works, so trying to convince me that it is not scientific is the ridiculous thing
And what, exactly, has that to do with your original topic? It is a bibliographical collection of research on the excretion rates of heavy metals via the sweat glands. What relevance has that to do with your claim?
You are doing nothing more than hand-waving and gish-galloping. Uou started off with wanting to know home-remedies for the flu, then decided that you mixed up the flu with the common cold, then went on to ramble about the difference between "synthetic" and "natural" chemicals, from there to some rubbish about the dangers of medicine versus tea, then claimed that the flu is caused by cold and then on to that favourite of the media "detox". It's a gish-gallop of epic proportions.
I meant common cold not flu, it is bcz English is not my first language. here we have different words to distinguish them too. I just didn't know the English term and thought it is the same. the difference between natural and synthetic I debated and learned what I have been told. medicine do have side effects we here about as you know, it turned out tea has, but not if not heavily consumed. it has to be researched if they have rare effects in case of low consumption, unlike medicine that for sure has some rare but dangerous effects. I mentioned detoxing marginally alongside benefits of sweating but was dismissed this is why I put the article
-
really echnaton. I am in no mood for discussing back your scornful attitude
Fair enough.
Let me try to restate without the tude.
Since your first venture here with claims of a moon hoax, you have never supported your assertions with anything beyond personal opinion and random links. I remember the support for your Apollo Hoax claim based on the fact that a flag was taped to the side of the LM in a disrespectful way. From that time to now, your discussions have followed the same trend of providing little more than scattered anecdotes and overlaying personal beliefs, as facts, onto whatever is under discussion. With a decided tendency to accept whatever is against what can be shown through actual scientific or historical inquiry. You have an agenda, methodology, reason or something that drives your beliefs but you keep it hidden from the discussion.
The reason I get exasperated with you is that you never change. You never learn that this approach does not lead to learning.
-
really echnaton. I am in no mood for discussing back your scornful attitude
Fair enough.
Let me try to restate without the tude.
Since your first venture here with claims of a moon hoax, you have never supported your assertions with anything beyond personal opinion and random links. I remember the support for your Apollo Hoax claim based on the fact that a flag was taped to the side of the LM in a disrespectful way. From that time to now, your discussions have followed the same trend of providing little more than scattered anecdotes and overlaying personal beliefs, as facts, onto whatever is under discussion. With a decided tendency to accept whatever is against what can be shown through actual scientific or historical inquiry. You have an agenda, methodology, reason or something that drives your beliefs but you keep it hidden from the discussion.
The reason I get exasperated with you is that you never change. You never learn that this approach does not lead to learning.
it is not anecdote when there is a scientific explanation being proposed by scientists. It is your inability to learn about new things ..
-
I meant common cold not flu, it is bcz English is not my first language.
This is another reason I am confused/exasperated. Because you were so insistent about a discussion for the flu earlier.
Hi Echnaton,
I am talking here ONLY about FLU,
Most of this discussion has been about Flu. Because as we all know there is nothing to do for a cold than treat the symptoms till you feel better. If tea comforts you then drink tea. My only comment about tea, is that is is a nonspecific term. Tea is a drink that can be made with anything. So if one wants to discuss medicinal benefits beyond "makes me feel better", one needs to specify the plant, the processing and the active chemicals.
-
it is not anecdote when there is a scientific explanation being proposed by scientists. It is your inability to learn about new things ..
Let me address this with information from one of your links.
http://www.theecologist.org/green_green_living/behind_the_label/268787/behind_the_label_lemsip_max_cold_flu_capsules.html
perhaps this article explains better what i mean
As doctors can tell you, the best remedy for colds and flu is the traditional one: rest, warmth, fluids – and time. Drug manufacturers want you to believe otherwise. But, as Pat Thomas reports, pharmaceutical ‘cures’ may be more than just a waste of money
This article does what you do, confuse the issue between cold and flu. Which are in reality very different diseases. Also notice the " 'cures' " portion. It is well know that acetaminophen, the active ingredient in Paracetamol is not a cure for anything. It is a NSAID that is used to treat fever and is very good at treating joint pain.
The article goes on to complain about over the counter medicines, "however, most have been found – through objective, scientific studies – to be useless."
Well we know through scientific studies that acetaminophen is in fact quite useful. So the article is flat wrong on this point, at least as it applies to its initial topic.
"So, in spite of the fact that nothing you can buy will cure your cold," something that is not in dispute, "a huge number of us have succumbed to the hit-it-hard-and-hit-it fast remedies such as the Lemsip ‘Max’ range."
Do you see what they are doing here? Taking a point that is not in dispute and connecting it to a straw man position. People take acetaminophen to relieve symptoms of a cold, something it does very well.
The article goes on to say people should just rest and everything will get better in time. But if you have kids to care for, a job that needs your attention, and an income that is needed to pay the rent, then a few days off work can be far more than an inconvenience. For many many people it is just not realistic.
Many of us are lucky and can telecommute on sick days, but most folks still have to be at the jobsite and need safe and effective drugs to ease the symptoms of illnesses they must bear up under. Drivel like this stuff from theecologist.org is not very helpful and certainly not scientific.
-
I just googled "sweat out a cold". I got pages and pages of results showing quotes and advice from doctors saying it is an old wives' tale, a bad idea, it is a myth, it accelerates dehydration, it is ineffective etc.
I'm going to repeat myself, as I have addressed this point and been ignored.
-
it doesn't matter how..it matters that it works for me and other people as they report.
here is how I found out it kills viruses http://naturalsociety.com/how-sweating-fight-infection-illness/
my friend is a physician and she once told me that white blood cells work better in warmer body
at any rates, sweating is good also for getting out arsenic and other poisonous materials . there is a meta-analysis of articles in this regards that recommends regulating sweating in guidelines as a measure for detox.
You are confusing sweating and elevated body temperature. The dermicidin in your sweat will not protect you from a virus that is already inside your body giving you a cold, since it is in a totally different place (the quote about it 'funelling viruses and bacteria through its structure' is utter bunk, since the protein dermicidin is much smaller than any virus or bacterium). The elevated temperature may indeed help your immune system work better, but as the sciencedaily article says, that is what your body does naturally in response to an infection.
The point, as always, remains that whether you take pharmaceuticals or 'natural' remedies, ALL have side effects.
-
I just googled "sweat out a cold". I got pages and pages of results showing quotes and advice from doctors saying it is an old wives' tale, a bad idea, it is a myth, it accelerates dehydration, it is ineffective etc.
I'm going to repeat myself, as I have addressed this point and been ignored.
(I know Lionking is the reason for this but if I may add.....)
I would like to reconsider my earlier reply (page 1).
As someone who has done this, I think the reason for was more the comfort and something to do and getting better reinforced the idea it was working. I had never considered it the right thing, just never considered it if that makes sense. You hear about it as you grow up from family members etc. It is the done thing. It is like asking someone why an item carries such an odd name, no one knows but it is what it has always been called.
That said the flu jab is a marvellous thing so if I ever suffer this malady again, I shall just be grumpy, not hot and grumpy.
-
Another data point in favour of vaccination.
This week, the number of cases of measles in LA County went up by one. He was a four-month-old boy whose parents were scrupulously following the vaccination schedule. However, MMR is a twelve-month vaccine, and he was too young for it. Now, he's fine--he's recovering, and I think today is even the day he and his dad (who was vaccinated but is unsure of his immunity, and the test wouldn't have gotten back until today anyway) get out of quarantine. But he very well might not have been. In the four days between when he became contagious and when he started to show symptoms, he might potentially have exposed a lot of other babies too young to vaccinate. Because that's how measles works; you aren't showing signs of it when you first become contagious. Get vaccinated if you haven't; his mother is begging people after having seen what her son went through.
-
You don't need any pharmaceuticals. All you need is some essential oils. They cure everything don't you know. From cancer to warts to diverticulitis. They are really good at 'balancing' your body. At $10,000 a litre for some of them it's a good job you only need a drop or two.
Throw in a magnetic bracelet and some crystals and you will live sickness free forever.
They even have a hand biorhythm analyser which tells you which oils you need. You can't use it again straight after though because it throws the system out and gives you a different reading, which may be wrong. ::)
-
Everyone, this is Mobius.
http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2015/02/09/pasadena-family-upset-after-4-month-old-baby-contracts-measles/#.VNlyds7oILk.facebook
-
Precisely the point of immunisation.
My cousin is deaf because her mother, who wasn't immunised (not standard practice in her country of birth) contracted rubella during pregnancy in the 60's.
The anti-vax groups are infinitely more dangerous than other CT's because what they promote has an effect on peoples health.
-
I also had a cousin born deaf in the mid 1960s to a mother who contracted rubella. I said "had" because he died suddenly a few years ago of a heart problem. Apparently rubella often damages fetal hearts as well as inner ears.
But no, the MMR vaccine is just a scam...