 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Asthma / May 2007Could the ability to expel worms lead to a future asthma treatment?
Novel research: http://www.physorg.com/news85331417.html Wow, this seems a little over the top, but I'm open to anything that might work. unfortunately asthma is not caused by a virus. For the vast majority of people with respiratory disease and onset asthma, this will do nothing. The same people who say they are waiting for a cure for lung cancer will never happen. Cancer is often but not always a condition brought on by lifestyle and slow consistent changes and with pollution toxin and poison. There is no undoing it. You might get drugs that can help unconstrict lungs or different vasuculate reactions but some things that people think will eventually come are not going to have and some cancers are un curable. unless transplants or embryos hold promise to grow new organs. > Novel research: > > http://www.physorg.com/news85331417.html > unfortunately asthma is not caused by a virus. For some it most certainly is. Your statement reminds of the nay-sayers to bacteria causing ulcers years ago. Pollution is an aggravator for certain ailments. Many cancers have been cured. Is your blanket statement of 'never' intended to hold indefinatly? >> unfortunately asthma is not caused by a virus. > > For some it most certainly is. Your statement reminds of the nay-sayers > to bacteria causing ulcers years ago. Pollution is an aggravator for > certain ailments. Many cancers have been cured. Is your blanket > statement of 'never' intended to hold indefinatly? Can you show me a link to asthma caused by a virus? I am open to information. I mean I can see a virus shutting down a body and hence asthma, but for the vast majority of people a virus was not a main factor. Incidentally there are many causes for asthma from heredity and genes to sensitivity and perhaps for some bacteria and virus. I will clear up why I think though for the vast majority of people who are affected by onset asthma and for people who just have asthma , many dont' know how the environment aggravates or even caused their asthma, for them I want to reach and I believe are a greater number then people who will ever be helped by worms or anti bacteria or virus meds. The extent in which people are affected by environment even via bacteria or virus ( I will give the possiblity) by environment is way way underestimated and seldom written about or aired on tv. Thats the main points I want to get out and its one of the greatest causes of illness and premature death going.Incidentally Niles your statements reminds me of the cig makers who made ten thousand studies and eventually could show that smoking didn't cause cancer 100 percent of the time. Your good at trying to twist the numbers. I just read for many it (virus) might cause asthma, cold, viruses etcs. there is a difference between those and those with sensitivity with allergens. I stand corrected and I am most interested in those whose reactions are based on disease from environment.. Its totally amazing those are ignored int he study or what aggrevates asthma.. I think its also unbelievable that allergens and virus are the two causes given. I don't personally think any virus or anti virus is going to cure the vast majority of asthma.. the link i read said 80 percent of asthma cause of virus.. I doubt that. >>> unfortunately asthma is not caused by a virus. >> [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > studies and eventually could show that smoking didn't cause cancer 100 > percent of the time. Your good at trying to twist the numbers. > Its totally amazing those > are ignored int he study or what aggrevates asthma. What amazes me is that you believe they are ignored. Every Dr. I've ever had starts right out with looking into my environment and it's effect on my asthma. >the link i read said 80 percent of asthma cause of virus.. I > doubt that. For years many said the exact same thing when 1 groups of Dr's said that most ulcers were caused by bacteria. The worlds medical profession for the most part called these Dr's lunatics. Yet they continued their work and proved it. For many types of ulcers they are now curable. It very well could be for asthma as well. >> Its totally amazing those are ignored int he study or what aggrevates >> asthma. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > and proved it. For many types of ulcers they are now curable. It very > well could be for asthma as well. No way, the mechanism that causes my asthma to even exist (!) is pollution, without it I would not have it! This is one reason I write about it. The process in which I get asthma is completely correlated to the environment. I might have trouble breathing moderately at other times ( rare) but for the most part the only thing causing it is moderate particulate pollution. Now if that moderate isn't causing the most asthma in other cities like it does mine, Its only because what they call particulates are different. When my air filter turns black after 28 days, no virus is causing the reaction , the same with smoking. The people most affected are the people who breathe the air .Plus a host of other conditions affect people downwind from the most lethal pollution. as stated by American Lung Association. . I am not a scientist to know exactly what is happening only to know when its happening and at what readings in our areas. For the vast majority of people who are affected to this pollution they are affected even if its not from respiratory disease. I have urged every scientist in the land to compare the health of our people who live in this to the health of people who don't . The complete and utter disinterest in this shows they must know of the consequences and don't care to further show what would be the real differences. thus a conspiracy and I truly believe that. Again to show if this particulate pollution when it reaches moderate is a slow holocaust or not is important, but to show more information to better deduct what causes disease from different levels of pollution is not an interest and it suggest that the powers of be dont' care to show any pattern or test how damaging it is and why . This is more important then most any fight against a terorrist because more people effected and more things can be done to stop it if conclusion to damages were more forthright so again the interests of energy companies come before the consequences of health. People have suggested the consequences could be univerasal why am I blaming us ? Cause we have the ability to use our intelligence to get past adversity not keep conspiracies to hurt its people going so I thought. The damages and comparisons between people who live and work in highly congested streets and near coal and diseel compared to people who don't could be the most important things people need to know to better their life, but yet the dangers for the most part is better left for a few generalizations , like particulate pollution can lodge in peoples lungs and kill , who ? when ? most likely? is not a concern and for this I am outraged because many people it could be shown are in harms way and could be protected if the gove cared , if politicians cared. > No way, the mechanism that causes my asthma to even exist (!) is pollution, > without it I would not have it! Prove it. More likely the pollution aggravates your asthma but theres some other reason why. Otherwise everyone who lived near you would have the same issue. > but for the most part the only thing > causing it is moderate particulate pollution. You seem to confuse cause with triggering. Now if that moderate isn't > causing the most asthma in other cities like it does mine, Its only because > what they call particulates are different. When my air filter turns black > after 28 daysu Standard practice to have to change your filter at least once a month. You're lucky. I have to change mine twice a month. >> No way, the mechanism that causes my asthma to even exist (!) is >> pollution, without it I would not have it! > > Prove it. More likely the pollution aggravates your asthma but theres > some other reason why. Otherwise everyone who lived near you would have > the same issue. wait a second, cigarette smoking is the leading cause of cancer but not everyone who smokes gets cancer. Just because I said my asthma is at the very least preicpitated by moderate or worse particulate pollution don't mean everyones is. I mean if you can't prove it by our number 1 rating in the entire US as having more asthma and respiratory illness then any city in the US and have practically every day reach moderate or worse in late spring or summer ( over 60 percent) nothing else I can think of proves it better either. > You seem to confuse cause with triggering. > Now if that moderate isn't >> causing the most asthma in other cities like it does mine, Its only [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Standard practice to have to change your filter at least once a month. > You're lucky. I have to change mine twice a month. really what filter do you use ? > wait a second, cigarette smoking is the leading cause of cancer but not > everyone who smokes gets cancer. There are more health effects attributed to smoking than cancer. The vast majority of smokers do end up with health problems, heart, lungs etc. as well as a reduced immune system. It effects almost all of them in rather major ways one way or another. > Just because I said my asthma is at the > very least preicpitated by moderate or worse particulate pollution don't > mean everyones is. You make it seem as though the number one reason why people have asthma is areas with high particulates. Sorry but there are too many cities around the world where no such correlation exists. You backing away from that argument now? I mean if you can't prove it by our number 1 rating in > the entire US as having more asthma and respiratory illness then any city in > the US and have practically every day reach moderate or worse in late spring > or summer ( over 60 percent) nothing else I can think of proves it better > either. > You seem to confuse cause with triggering You have zero interest in looking at what else might be contributing factors. Especially since other high particulate cities do not have high numbers of asthmatics. That tells me there must be another reason. Why are you not looking for any and all reasons? >> You're lucky. I have to change mine twice a month. > really what filter do you use ? I use one of the higher end 3M filtrete filters. > Can you show me a link to asthma caused by a virus? I am open to > information. http://www.dean.org/research_asthma_bib.html > I mean I can see a virus shutting down a body and hence asthma, > but for the vast majority of people a virus was not a main factor. Asthma is a disease for which very little is really understood. There are thought to be numerous causes. However, there is a growing trend towards infection as a leading cause and what today is considered a cause may in reality be an aggravator of a condition whose source is still unknown. > I will give the > possiblity) by environment is way way underestimated and seldom written > about or aired on tv. Enviroment plays a HUGE role in a pulmonologists treatment. For decades they have told asthma patients to move to areas with less pollution, pollens, molds etc. It is one of the 1st things Dr.'s are concerned with in treatment. Understanding the patients environment and factors that would contribute to their asthma. It is WIDELY known contrary to your assumption that nobody knows about environment and asthma. American L ung Association w hich is s upose to protect people does not r e co o men d people to move. I never ever heard an y doc from this area tell people to move but I do agree that should be the message. You certainly don't see the ads we have which is almost more then car commercials for three lung centers, nebulizers and asthma meds all day and night. I get upset because there is no warnings, there is no reality. But they will come back and say its often impractical because people can't affords to move and the places with good air can't be guaranteed to have it once more people move in. I agree thats lame but your going over one of the major reasons I get upset. there is nothing you can do virtually. Can you suggest where I move if they don't accept 500 a month rent and have diversity in population? so what you assume others know is just not the case. I tried to go over this with American Lung Association and they never answered. Obviously there are draw backs in telling some people who are really more in need in knowing to move to move. Which to me is why its a conspiracy. If they told people to move or they should move , its probably not a long stretch to have gov or industry responsible for policies you say everyone knows about to pay for them to do that. I doubt there is this univeral belief that everyone knows. smart people know and its one of the reasons smart and professionals don't move into our area but there is nothing good by doing nothing. >> Can you show me a link to asthma caused by a virus? I am open to >> information. [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > would contribute to their asthma. It is WIDELY known contrary to your > assumption that nobody knows about environment and asthma. > American L ung Association w hich is s upose to protect people does > not r e co o men d people to move. I never ever heard an y doc from this > area tell people to move but I do agree that should be the message. Just because you do not know something doesn't mean much! Dr's for decades have suggested asthmatics move to the dry, mold and pollen free southwest. That practice was stopped about 10 years ago. People who moved from the east and midwest brought with them their native vegitation. Non-native trees such as Olive, Mulberry, Oleander etc. are all over the southwest. Phoenix is no longer devoid of asthma inducing pollens. The message to move as you feel should be told is no longer. If there were a better place to live asthmatics and people with high allergies would move enmass to that area. Don't try your lack of knowledge excuse as to why they may not. You're the only one who thinks that pollution being a bad thing is a secret. http://www.webmd.com/news/20060207/worst-100-us-cities-for-asthma vast majority are from east coast. If virus caused 80 percent of asthma, one would think it would be distributed equally but its not even close. This is why I don't buy intoany study that doesn't take into account pollution. Asthma might be more prone in areas with particulate pollution and soot from coal...much more then just virus if these cities have any indication. > Novel research: > > http://www.physorg.com/news85331417.html > http://www.webmd.com/news/20060207/worst-100-us-cities-for-asthma > vast majority are from east coast. If virus caused 80 percent of asthma, > one would think it would be distributed equally but its not even close. This > is why I don't buy intoany study that doesn't take into account pollution. > Asthma might be more prone in areas with particulate pollution and soot from > coal...much more then just virus if these cities have any indication. This list has one major fault. Phoenix is somewhat high on the list. It has for several decades had a high number of asthmatics. You are assuming that being high on the list means a direct link to environmental reasons. In Phoenix's case this simply does not hold true. The high number of asthmatics in Phoenix have little to do with enviroment and everything to do with population migration especially where asthmatics are concerned. thats arguable and typical . I remember seeing a link showing particulate pollution high in Phoneix. i have not followed the cities rating as I have followed others. I also had saved a link showing dust causing asthma in that area. So combine the number of people growing , exhaust and diesel fuel emissions and dust, and its very logical. >> http://www.webmd.com/news/20060207/worst-100-us-cities-for-asthma >> vast majority are from east coast. If virus caused 80 percent of asthma, [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > asthmatics in Phoenix have little to do with enviroment and everything to > do with population migration especially where asthmatics are concerned. > thats arguable and typical . I remember seeing a link showing particulate > pollution high in Phoneix. i have not followed the cities rating as I have > followed others. I also had saved a link showing dust causing asthma in that > area. So combine the number of people growing , exhaust and diesel fuel > emissions and dust, and its very logical. You are forgetting that dust particulates were far worse 20-30 years ago in Phoenix than they are now. Yet per capita the number of asthmatics has climbed. You forget that from the 1950's through the 1980's Dr's routingly recommended that asthmatics move to the dry, pollen free southwest. That is exactly why the southwest states especially Phoenix have a high number of asthmatics today. You read into reports what you want and make conclusions based more on opinion than on fact. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.