jimtron
Illuminator
Ullman on Huffpo: "Why fever is your friend"
- Thread starter jimtron
- Start date
portlandatheist
Illuminator
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2007
- Messages
- 3,725
Jesus Christ. How disappointing.
jimtron
Illuminator
Mojo
Mostly harmless
I see that he's replying to comments on this one.
For example:
"fls327" had written, "In particular, review of the four randomized controlled trials for oscillococcinum found that the data was not strong enough to recommend its use in the treatment of influenza." The review he cites stated in its conclusions, "Though promising, the data were not strong enough to make a general recommendation to use Oscillococcinum for first-line treatment of influenza and influenza-like syndromes."
It is not for nothing that Dana has been described as "Hahnemann’s cognitively impaired bulldog".
For example:
"fls327" had written, "In particular, review of the four randomized controlled trials for oscillococcinum found that the data was not strong enough to recommend its use in the treatment of influenza." The review he cites stated in its conclusions, "Though promising, the data were not strong enough to make a general recommendation to use Oscillococcinum for first-line treatment of influenza and influenza-like syndromes."
It is not for nothing that Dana has been described as "Hahnemann’s cognitively impaired bulldog".
Mojo
Mostly harmless
Well, I'm actually in the mild fever is probably beneficial camp. Sorry.
There are numerous caveats to this, though. They include, among other things, people with brain injury or other metabolic issues that would render fever - high fever - dangerous. I certainly wholeheartedly dispute and refute all of the other homeopathic garbage Mr. Ullman spews out in that piece.
~Dr. Imago
There are numerous caveats to this, though. They include, among other things, people with brain injury or other metabolic issues that would render fever - high fever - dangerous. I certainly wholeheartedly dispute and refute all of the other homeopathic garbage Mr. Ullman spews out in that piece.
~Dr. Imago
Mojo
Mostly harmless
One of the posters there already made it into the Homoeopaths say the darndest things thread for one of his comments on Dana's previous HuffPo article, BTW.
Dana Ullman ("Hahnemann's cognitively-impaired bulldog"): http://scienceblogs.com/whitecoatunderground/2009/10/an_envious_fever_of_pale_and_b.php
I looked at the comments at HuffPo, it seems fls (Linda) either didn't understand or deliberately misrepresented the information in her reply. The rest of the comments range from sublime to ridiculous. The latter demonstrate that HuffPo has a seriously disturbed readership.
They have buttons to click so one can register a one word reaction to the post; but none of them seems appropriate. They need a button labeled "The Stupid, It Burns."
I looked at the comments at HuffPo, it seems fls (Linda) either didn't understand or deliberately misrepresented the information in her reply. The rest of the comments range from sublime to ridiculous. The latter demonstrate that HuffPo has a seriously disturbed readership.
They have buttons to click so one can register a one word reaction to the post; but none of them seems appropriate. They need a button labeled "The Stupid, It Burns."
Mojo
Mostly harmless
My mistake - it wasn't on Dana's article, just someone else recommending Oscillococcinum on HuffPo.
dlorde
Philosopher
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2007
- Messages
- 6,864
Interesting that I see so much medical work recently on reducing the natural inflammatory response to speed healing of soft tissue injuries and minimise the knock-on effects of brain injury... if the natural response was to be encouraged so much would we see any of this work continuing? - would sports persons spend so much time in ice baths?
No, but the lead-in posts up to the point where I posted on this very thread, which contain sparse comment, intimates (at least the way I read it the first time) that all fever is bad. This reflects "old" thinking. Fever is probably a normal, healthy, physiologic response in most people. I just wanted to make sure that was clear. I don't disagree with Ullman on that point, and it does appear that he is likely, unwittingly or not, misrepresenting current best clinical opinion to serve some agenda.
That was my only point.
~Dr. Imago
Wouldn't that simply harass the moderators? Bad idea.
paiute
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2004
- Messages
- 1,394
Like sweat on socks
R.I.C.E.
Ice it first to reduce pain and minimize swelling. Later, heat it to increase local blood supply.
R.I.C.E.
Ice it first to reduce pain and minimize swelling. Later, heat it to increase local blood supply.
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
Huffpo ,frankly is wrecking it's creditbility with the amount of Woo friendly articles that show up there. We are not talking about posts in the forums, but feature articles that we have to assume were approved by the moderators.
I never had a good opinion of Arianna Huffington, and that she is so welcoming to this kind of crap makes it even lower.
I never had a good opinion of Arianna Huffington, and that she is so welcoming to this kind of crap makes it even lower.
MervinFerd
Thinker
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2008
- Messages
- 176
Doctor,
I've seen standard Biology textbooks state that increased body temp speeds up the immune system more than it speeds up the bugs. But, I've never seen any actual data. There ought to be some controlled studies out there somewhere. Although they might be old and stuck on the back shelves of the Medical Library.
Bacteria might be adapted to lower temperatures or have less effective mechanisms for dealing with heat damage. For a viral infection, the virus is using your own cellular machinery to reproduce, so it should be a wash.
Fever seems to be an evolved physiological response. Which suggests that it might have some survival benefit. Teleologically speaking.
jimtron
Illuminator
Another Huffpo article, this one on "how to age naturally."
One of the five ways to do this:
"How can healing be effective if harm is created alongside the cure?" This straw man really bugs me. As if there are 100% safe AND effective natural cures, while evil Western Medicine would prefer to give you an expensive and dangerous treatment. Obviously, with any kind of treatment, you need to weigh the risks and potential benefits. And clearly healing CAN be effective with some adverse side effects. It would be fantastic if we lived in a world where every illness could be treated effectively and with zero side effects, but that certainly isn't the case.
One of the five ways to do this:
Hmm, "first do no harm." It sounds strangely familiar...
"How can healing be effective if harm is created alongside the cure?" This straw man really bugs me. As if there are 100% safe AND effective natural cures, while evil Western Medicine would prefer to give you an expensive and dangerous treatment. Obviously, with any kind of treatment, you need to weigh the risks and potential benefits. And clearly healing CAN be effective with some adverse side effects. It would be fantastic if we lived in a world where every illness could be treated effectively and with zero side effects, but that certainly isn't the case.
Last edited: