CRAZY PREPARED

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Are you seriously going to be that much of a bitch over me not wanting to do any more research for you over a days-old conversation that I'm bored of?

I mean, the information is out there... if I found it so can you. Or you could call me names because I didn't post the links in the first place and don't feel like looking it up again.

It might require more delving and reading than you feel like doing, but that's not my problem.

No, I'm going to swear at you because you pull the 'go look it up' schtick on me every time I claim you're wrong.  Then when i come back with citations that *also* say you're wrong you tell me to look it up, if you're going to make claims that the evidence really exists but I'm not trying hard enough, then fuck you.

Eat a dick and learn to research.

Most of the info you posted was wrong, which I've already cited enough sources for. If you want to hang onto the last glimmering hope that you might possibly not be misinformed about this one last little thing because I didn't cite my source and don't feel like searching again, go to fucking  town, champ.

And get some fucking books or something and educate yourself about health and medicine before you go spouting bullshit about it, ignorant little baby twat.

[Requia ☣]

You have not cited a single fucking study that says anything you're saying is correct.  Just claimed that the studies exist.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

What more do you want from me? It's a boring, stupid conversation. You were flat wrong about almost everything, which is easily verifiable with a modicum of research (especially if you bother, you know, owning books) and now you are clinging to one thing you think you might just be right about, just because I don't feel like finding the studies again. Fucking look it up or don't, I could give a shit. I've already seen enough misinformation from you to know that you don't know what you're talking about, and my only suggestion is that you educate yourself before spouting off. In the meantime, I know to dismiss anything you claim.

Where did you get your information on alternative medicine? It's terribly flawed, as well as being incomplete.

Some studies show that Echinacea does indeed act as an immunostimulator and, in 3-gram doses of the root, cut both chances of infection and the duration of a cold. Other studies that showed it does not, either used much smaller doses, or aerial parts of the plant.

Organic may or may not be healthier to consume, depending on what it is. The higher on the food chain, the more unwanted/potentially harmful constituents can be avoided by eating organic.

Capsicum is a coagulant. Use to prevent flu is questionable, but it does thin mucous and increase circulation, so it may provide some relief of symptoms.

Garlic actually helps kill viruses, as well as being an immunostimulant and an antibacterial. Eating a lot of garlic makes your body less hospitable to viruses.

From http://www.umm.edu/altmed/articles/willow-bark-000281.htm

Willow bark is used to ease pain and reduce inflammation. There is good evidence that it does just that. Researchers believe that the chemical salicin, found in willow bark, is responsible for these effects. However, studies have identified several other components of willow bark that have antioxidant, fever-reducing, antiseptic, and immune-boosting properties. Some studies have shown willow is as effective as aspirin for reducing pain and inflammation (but not fever), and at a much lower dose. Researchers think that may be due to the other compounds in the herb. More research is needed.

Eucalyptus oil isn't that expensive, and how are you supposed to use the whole plant in a vaporizer? Besides that, the damn stuff doesn't even GROW in most places.

[Requia ☣]

A) Thats not a study
B) That site recommends homeopathy
C) Thats about Willow bark, we were discussing Echinacea

[Thurnez Isa]

because I can't write out an entire chapter in a book - but this gives a good summery and also gives my own personal opinions on herbal medicines

Consider an example from The Genie in the Bottle, in which Schwarcz discusses the original "snake oil." Echinacea, the extract of purple coneflower, was marketed in the 1870s as "Meyer's Blood Purifier," and was claimed to be, among other things, a cure for snake bite -- hence known as snake oil. However, as it wasn't very successful at that particular application, the term came to designate a bogus medication. But echinacea did seem to work on some things -- like the common cold -- and through the 1930s was the highest selling plant medication on the market. Its popularity waned with the dawning of the age of penicillin, but has increased again as consumers have become anxious about the over-consumption of antibiotics and are generally feeling friendlier to natural therapies.

While echinacea is an "interesting substance," notes Schwarcz, the products marketed in health food stores vary wildly in their make-up and thus in their effectiveness. Much depends on the type of plant used as well as the quota of active ingredients -- and which of many ingredients might be most crucial remains uncertain.

http://www.mcgill.ca/news/2002/winter/schwarcz/two/

My main problem is it's a very much a buyer beware market, and I would say almost everyone I know is just not qualified to be expected make proper decisions.
What this is at it's heart is chemistry - biochem of that - which anyone who took a biochem course would agree it's basically a bunch of seemingly random C's and H's that drives most people crazy.

Also never buy product from China. There has been several deaths in Canada due to a diet herb, not cause of the herb but because it was contaminated due to Chinese lack of any regulations.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

A) Thats not a study
B) That site recommends homeopathy
C) Thats about Willow bark, we were discussing Echinacea

I didn't say it was a study, I reposted it to reinforce my opinion that you're having a hissy because you were wrong about a bunch of stuff and then you decided to get super-cunty and call me names because I also disagreed with you about Echinacea, and your poor little pride is all bruised and shit. 

Fucking look it up your own damn self, because I no longer care, you stupid vapid cunt who doesn't know how to research.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

A) Fuck you
B) Did that already, guess what?  Google says you're full of shit.

Try again.

Retarded, lazy little snitpitcher.

Seriously, do you REALLY want to do this?

http://www.webmd.com/cold-and-flu/news/20070626/study-echinacea-cuts-colds-by-half
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/29145.php

The study referenced: http://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(07)70160-3/fulltext

If you are incapable of doing incredibly simple research, you should really reconsider escalating the level of conflict because, unlike you, I was not talking out of my ass, and also, unlike you, I was conducting the conversation with the assumption that we were all competent adults who didn't need to be condescended to by posting links to studies which are easily checked out with a couple of keywords. Also, again apparently unlike you, I was not posting to "win", but merely to provide correct information.

In summary:

Try again.

[Thurnez Isa]

The study referenced: http://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(07)70160-3/fulltext

In their meta-analysis on preventive and therapeutic effects of echinacea, Sachin Shah and colleagues 1 conclude that "the current evidence in the literature suggests that echinacea has a benefit in decreasing the incidence and duration of the common cold". We believe, however, that this conclusion could be flawed because of several weaknesses in the analysis.

http://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(08)70107-5/fulltext

I agree with Andreas von Maxen and Peter Schoenhoefer that the studies on echinacea included in our meta-analysis 1 are heterogeneous in their methodological quality. We attempted to cast a broad net to see whether or not a difference in the incidence or duration of cold was evident when the whole of the literature on echinacea was summarised, but as described in our paper's conclusions, 1 we too suggest caution in over-emphasising the results before they can be confirmed with more rigorous, larger

http://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(08)70108-7/fulltext

I wish I had an account on the lancet 

As far as I know as well the effects of echinacea is still largely unknown. There seems to be some preventive effects, but to what extent is very hard to determine, as there so many factors, including where the plant is grown, how it is grown, harvested, ect. to come up with any meaningful results. Right now I personally agree with Dr. Schwarcz's conclusion on my former quote.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Like I said in the horribly inflammatory statement that I am supposed to be backing up, here:

Some studies show that Echinacea does indeed act as an immunostimulator and, in 3-gram doses of the root, cut both chances of infection and the duration of a cold. Other studies that showed it does not, either used much smaller doses, or aerial parts of the plant.

There are about 4 billion articles discussing the methodology and validity of various studies, and the idea of wading through them again to find relevant quotes seems preposterously tedious, tiresome and unnecessary since it's kind of summed up in that Lancet article which already analyzes and summarizes a significant number of recent studies.

[Thurnez Isa]

Ya I know... and to that statement I do tend to slightly agree
I just wanted to point out that the one study seems a bit dubious - but then again Im only going off the summaries and the summaries of the peer reviews...

just like I said I would defiantly advise that
Don't buy herbal medication from China... Ever... there has been several deaths in Canada due to contamination, and imported herbal medications is even less regulated in the States...
Im not trying to discourage, just be careful and check things like healthwatcher.com before you take unlicensed medication - which I'm sure you already know, but others might not

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

You're spot-on about that... also, being aware that while there *are* good ones, many naturopaths and other "alternative" health practitioners are basically quacks, and may prescribe dangerous or ineffective treatments. I've seen that first-hand more than once.

And, of course, to keep in mind that the reason some herbal medicines are effective is because they are drugs, and should be used under the guidance of someone who genuinely knows what they're doing.

[Cainad (dec.)]

This thread used to be awesome.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

It could easily become awesome again if we steer away from the "alturnuhtive meduhsinn is BAAAAAD" pissing match and back to practical information for surviving in a low-tech world. One which, being low-tech, will not likely include ready access to synthetic medicines.

[the last yatto]

23 should be a better page

[bds]

Posting on page 23.


EDIT: Goddamnit.