Eos of the Eons
Mad Scientist
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2003
- Messages
- 13,749
I think it was the unskeptical thread title that prompted the reaction 
Having a moderate infection is preferable to a severe one, yes. Also, it's nice to have as many lines of defense as possible/reasonable/rational. Just as long as "a little" is kept in mind in much the same way that one might suggest eating healthy foods or exercising regularly isn't going to be helpful after one is sick.
Like all research of novel ideas, it has only a small chance of leading anywhere, but if researchers don't probe new areas, little progress would be made in science.
Generally speaking, maybe.
And I wasn't assuming that you "believed" the article. Without getting into whether it's a matter of "belief", the fact that you began with "I wonder if..." suggests that you do not. But there is suddenly a plethora of this sort of thing, and at some point it does get a little annoying.
As for the matter of the seasonal vaccine providing protection against the pandemic strain, the general consensus is that it does not, but there have been some studies that reached conflicting results (one even suggesting the possibility that the seasonal vax may increase susceptibility to the novel strain, results which, it has been argued, some public health officials in Canada may have been a bit hasty in accepting).
As far as I can tell, the answer to your second question is no. From the WHO web site: http://www.who.int/csr/disease/swin...preparedness/seasonal_influenza/en/index.html
I think it was the unskeptical thread title that prompted the reaction![]()
I think the article writers need to be mocked for that title. The antivaxxers are going to take it totally the wrong way.Ok good point. I was merely pointing out the tittle of the article...
Yes, it is good to not be malnourished in any way. A good diet will get you a mound of antioxidants daily.
Are they really good protection against the main effects of being infected by viruses? No. Will they help you survive? Not really.
I think the article writers need to be mocked for that title. The antivaxxers are going to take it totally the wrong way.
They were working with frog eggs and lung proteins, not human lung cells in humans. They aren't putting things in context with this study, since eating antioxidants won't prevent flu viruses from setting up shop and causing illnesses in lungs. They haven't proven that people who don't have low levels of antioxidants don't get lung damage from flu bugs at all.
Yeah, I'm frustrated too. Especially since I have 3 kids in 3 different schools, I work in a community college and for another company, and hubby works with the public in a grocery store! That is why we needed the vaccine back in October, before we got sick! I'm so mad that we can't get it! We are exposed to practically everyone in this city and practically half the dang population of this province by association, and are of course sick since the vaccine is not available. This is my greatest fear, that the antivaxxer lies and misinformation causes vaccine shortages by suing vaccine makers with frivolous lawsuits, making them not want to mass produce them no matter how safe and tested they are.Far many factors are involved here, granted, but I wouldn't go as far as to blindly buy this assertion. Why? because every factor counts, and because it is unknown (so far) why some organisms react FAR better than others when having the H1N1 (some cases are so mild that it appears to be a simple cold).
And because so much is not know, having my hands washed after touching anything on the street, keeping my distance from people visible sick, eating a diet rich on antioxidants and maybe even getting the seasonal vaccine shot (might) help, and I will do all this... of course I would also LOVE to have the vaccine.. but that seems VERY implausible, at least for a few months..![]()
Again, non sequitur. I'm not distracted I want the vaccine, can you get it for me?
If not, what's wrong in informing oneself with any possible good measure one can take?
I read the paper, it never mentions anything about the flu,
so I wonder, if I can't get the vaccine, but eat healthy, maybe have a couple of antioxidant complements, and get the seasonal flu vaccine, I guess my organism will be better prepared. That's all. Will you say that this is reasonable?
I wouldn't care so much about crazy lies about vaccines or stupid theories that if only we dosed ourselves with antioxidants when we already do, if I could get access to the darn vaccine instead of getting sick. I could sit back and not worry, but instead there are mountains of lies and people thinking diet alone will keep them from ever getting sick.
That's a disingenuous interpretation of the issue.
...
Disingenuous? Have you read my mind?
Why all the irrelevant provocation and petulance? You would be better served to make your comments in a straightforward manner without the useless personal jibes.
You didn't, but many posters here prefer to respond in a disparaging manner when non-conventional questions are asked.
I see. How sad is that the JREF is so full of overreacting people. Not everyone asking some question is a scientologist, or a believer on voodoo... if you are assaulted even before your intentions are known, what's the purpose of the forums.. to learn.. or to automatically bash???![]()
As long as we are unable to get the vaccine, any line of protection seems reasonable for me. No matter how small the protection is.