Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Inflammation: Medicine's burning question

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 160 posts

Re: Inflammation: Medicine's burning question

#151

Post by bigfudge »

carbocation wrote: post #38
bigfudge wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's hard to take the evidence at face value though, given the historically malevolent influence of big pharma on accurate publishing of trial data (SSRIs, vioxx etc), the significant links between the key trialists and the drug developers, and the lack of transparency in the data. At this point the argument about statins can only be solved by opening the data.

What you are saying is true to the same extent that it is true about any drug. Statins are unexceptional in this regard, except that they have a lot more lines of evidentiary support than most drugs due to the importance of coronary artery disease. Even ignoring statins, again, the genetic evidence paints a clear picture of the causal role of LDL cholesterol in coronary disease. The jury is largely still out on infla…

Agreed. However in the case of statins, the benefits for an individual are very slight, even if the population benefit is large. This means that this sort of uncertainty about side effects can make it rational for an individual to abstain from taking statins.

Re: Inflammation: Medicine's burning question

#152

Post by LordKano »

Alyoshi wrote: post #123
LordKano wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had an issue a few years ago. I was having frequent acid reflux and 2-3 nights a week, I'd wake up choking on it. This lead to issues with difficulty breathing and shortness of breath. My doctor treated me with an inhaled steroid for the breathing difficulty and a PPI for the reflux. This helped but it didn't fix the problem. I'd wake up choking once every couple of weeks and this was not acceptable to me. I starte…

You still probably have sleep apnea if you are ever waking up fully without the ability breathe. The human mind can wake up from deep sleep to stage 1 sleep in order to breathe better dozens of times an hour without you perceiving a thing. It only wakes up all the way when it's really bad. In fact, the acid reflux is often a symptom of sleep apnea, attempted inspiration with a sealed off airway literally sucks acid o…

You are correct. I do have sleep apnea. I have been postponing it for a while but I do need to have a sleep study.

Re: Inflammation: Medicine's burning question

#153

Post by tertius »

coldtea wrote: post #131
tertius wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree here, though I personally wouldn't trust a single doctor to him/herself be able to parse, as you say, the research. Research is written at a peer level and most doctors are not trained or don't care to know how to interpret the results of research. Not to mention that the vast majority of research is extremely specific.

> Research is written at a peer level and most doctors are not trained or don't care to know how to interpret the results of research. Not to mention that the vast majority of research is extremely specific. Most research (the vast majority) is also bogus too. Until it's distilled to common practice, people shouldn't really touch it with a bargepole. See my other lengthier comment on this.

I read your larger comment and I don't agree with most of what you're saying as a generalization.

This though:

> Until it's distilled to common practice, people shouldn't really touch it with a bargepole.

I can agree with. Most research if it's not done in the clinic and proven, has parameters so specific that it is impossible to apply to a single member of a population without that member having the exact parameters that the original research had.

Even then, the original research was probably done on some animal and not a human.

Then we do translational testing/research which gets done on a more human like animal and if we're lucky some human samples (given a disease). Then the clinical trials etc.

Though a review of the current literature can be beneficial. But you'd still need to have training to be able to interpret what you're reading.

Re: Inflammation: Medicine's burning question

#154

Post by tertius »

coldtea wrote: post #128
calebm wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've got some friends who do medical research, and from what they say, "translational research" (getting the latest research into the hands of the doctors actually practicing medicine) is a HUGE problem. I have been advised that if I (or a family member) ever gets some medical condition, that if I do a few hours of reading up on the latest research on that condition, chances are that I will be better informed on that…

> I've got some friends who do medical research, and from what they say, "translational research" (getting the latest research into the hands of the doctors actually practicing medicine) is a HUGE problem. That's a good thing too. Unless the "latest research" actual distills down to common practice, it's usually unproven junk, even if it managed to get published in "peer reviewed journals". In fact several meta-studi…

> In fact several meta-studies have found over 80% of the papers that are published in such journals are wrong and/or non-reproducible.

And are you able to interpret these studies to see their flaws? What I would focus on more is to look at something called Retraction Watch.

> As for research results that made it to Nature or similar pop science magazines those are usually even more journalistic than scientific.

I'm excluding the articles written by journalists here. But I don't think you know how hard it is to get a paper published in Nature.

> Think of a research "getting into the hands of the doctors actually practicing medicine" as a filtering process to weed out the BS.

Rather, weed out the danger. And this control, though also flawed to a degree, is very good in my opinion.

> Here's how it works:

There are many things wrong with the whole process, but your view described here is a little too patronizing to actually get your point across.

> Not that the reviewers will go into much bother checking it out, unless the paper is evidently crap.

The reviewers, depending on the quality of the publication, should be experts in the field that the paper is being published from.

And finally:

> Several months/years later, 3-4 other papers will tear down that one, and the cycle continues.

Yes, this is called scientific progress.

Re: Inflammation: Medicine's burning question

#155

Post by QSIITurbo »

boothead wrote: post #149
QSIITurbo wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

About assessing the risk of not taking statins: As I said, the exam you're about to take is only able to give you positive answer (yes, your carotid is sclerotic), not negative (won't say: no, your coronaries or the rest of your arteries are not sclerotic), so it's sort of useless. What I'm still wondering is how a familial hypercholesterolemy would have been missed during earlier blood tests? It's a pretty standard…

Interesting point on the CIMT test, I hadn't considered that. I'm not sure I've ever had a cholesterol test before, so that might be why it wasn't picked up. :-) My GP seems to be saying the because I'm fit and healthy, there's no other possible diagnosis than FH given the high numbers. I was kind of hoping for a bit more investigation and perhaps some corroboration. I'm not sure what form that should take though - g…

Probably there is no other possible diagnosis if your thyroid is ok. You can go do tests, but also the treatment probably remains the same (statins, etc.).

Re: Inflammation: Medicine's burning question

#156

Post by satx »

beagle3 wrote: post #125
satx wrote: post #23

statins-for-cholesterol is a hugely profitable business pushed hard for decades by BigPharma, going back to a single faulty "study" in the 1950s, after Eisenhower's heart attack. My opinion is that statins-for-cholesterol, obsession with cholesterol is as big of a medical scam, a BigPharma misdirection-for-profit, as BigFood's "low-fat" and "whole grain", and gluten scams. Cholesterol is essential, so much so 90% is…

> An alkalizing, anti-inflammatory diet is key Can anyone cite a peer reviewed study / documentation of "alkalizing" diets? I've attempted to trace this idea back to anything scientific, and always eventually came up with "well, someone I trust once told me ...".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acid%E2%80%93base_homeostasis

one of the nasty results of a acid diet (sugar, mammal/fowl products, etc) is that the body will buffer the serum pH on the low side to stay within the body's healthy pH range by robbing calcium from bones and teeth.

Re: Inflammation: Medicine's burning question

#157

Post by beagle3 »

satx wrote: post #156
beagle3 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> An alkalizing, anti-inflammatory diet is key Can anyone cite a peer reviewed study / documentation of "alkalizing" diets? I've attempted to trace this idea back to anything scientific, and always eventually came up with "well, someone I trust once told me ...".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acid%E2%80%93base_homeostasis one of the nasty results of a acid diet (sugar, mammal/fowl products, etc) is that the body will buffer the serum pH on the low side to stay within the body's healthy pH range by robbing calcium from bones and teeth.

Thanks, but that's not what I'm after - let me rephrase my question.

Acid/Base homeostasis is obviously important, and the body works hard to maintain it, no question about it. However, there is a claim (e.g. the one you made) that an "alkalizing diet" is healthier in some way than a "common" diet -- and I'm looking for a reference for that.

I have found references saying that ingesting sodium bicarb (the ultimate alkalizing agent) was shown to help with very controlled amounts and strenuous exercise, and was otherwise either useless or harmful. I have found many claims, but not one properly supported by an experiment, that an "alkalizing diet" (which often includes acids like lemon juice or apple cider vinegar in those descriptions with some hand waving) is good for you.

So, my question is: I am trying to understand the origin of the "alkalizing diet" argument, and see whether it is science, pseudo-science or myth; can you help me with that?

Re: Inflammation: Medicine's burning question

#158

Post by noondip »

DrScump wrote: post #140
noondip wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's quite apparent you didn't actually look through the website, or you are just a low-carb shill (if so, please see http://www.atkinsexposed.org - the same dietary nonsense seems to be repackaged by each generation). The NutritionFacts website is literally about published peer-reviewed research, not the author's own personal opinion, nor some "agenda" (pushed by whom, Big Broccoli?) In case you aren't trolling, try…

If you can figure out the actual studies from those sites, please provide links to them or their abstracts, at least. Otherwise, all that is being provided are two websites pushing books, and their failure to even give usable locators to the claimed studies in text footnotes on the pages (if not clickable links) is suspicious.

Like I've already said, the studies in each video on NF are linked directly. I don't see how they're "pushing books" on anyone - having read both of them, I can tell you the information they offer isn't much different than the free site content anyway.

Re: Inflammation: Medicine's burning question

#159

Post by satx »

Inflammation can fan the flames of depression

"In the health area of psychology at Rice, we're very focused on the intersection of health behavior, psychology and medicine," said Christopher Fagundes, an assistant professor of psychology and co-author of the paper. "One thing that we're particularly interested in is how stress affects the immune system, which in turn affects diseases and mental health outcomes, the focus of this paper."

The authors found that in addition to being linked to numerous physical health issues, including cancer and diabetes, systemic inflammation is linked to mental health issues such as depression.

Among patients suffering from clinical depression, concentrations of two inflammatory markers, CRP and IL-6, were elevated by up to 50 percent.

Fagundes said chronic inflammation is most common in individuals who have experienced stress in their lives, including lower socio-economic status or those who experienced abuse or neglect as children.

Other contributing factors are a high-fat diet and high body mass index.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/12/151218110253.ht...

Re: Inflammation: Medicine's burning question

#160

Post by satx »

Inflammation can fan the flames of depression

"In the health area of psychology at Rice, we're very focused on the intersection of health behavior, psychology and medicine," said Christopher Fagundes, an assistant professor of psychology and co-author of the paper. "One thing that we're particularly interested in is how stress affects the immune system, which in turn affects diseases and mental health outcomes, the focus of this paper."

The authors found that in addition to being linked to numerous physical health issues, including cancer and diabetes, systemic inflammation is linked to mental health issues such as depression.

Among patients suffering from clinical depression, concentrations of two inflammatory markers, CRP and IL-6, were elevated by up to 50 percent.

Fagundes said chronic inflammation is most common in individuals who have experienced stress in their lives, including lower socio-economic status or those who experienced abuse or neglect as children.

Other contributing factors are a high-fat diet and high body mass index.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/12/151218110253.ht...

Post reply on HN