thats not really even gore, you cant even see any blood
You need to use saline when you're doing that. Those nettie pots usually come with salt packets to add to the water.
If you have allergies, those things are just short of a cure for nasal inflammation![]()
The packets don't kill that brain-eating bacteria. Which is why you use distilled water just to be sure.
And it does work. I've had allergists and other mostly non-scam doctors recommend them.
That brain eating thing only happened once or twice. The stories said the people used "municipal water", which should mean it was disinfected, but something just doesn't seem right.
Regardless, I stopped snorting tap water up my nose to clean out my nasal passages.
The bacteria is harmful only if it gets into your nose, therefore most all of its cases are from people swimming in freshwater lakes. You don't hear about outbreaks from drinking water because the bacteria gets killed in your stomach without a problem. The CDC says neti pots are perfectly safe and effective at clearing sinus problems as long as the water used is distilled, boiled (and then cooled lol), bottled, or otherwise purified.
Yet you're claiming that it works, without the same proof you're saying they have to have to claim it doesn't. :biggrin:
The people that appear to be questioning it aren't using it, so their opinion is irrelevant.
The bacteria is harmful only if it gets into your nose, therefore most all of its cases are from people swimming in freshwater lakes. You don't hear about outbreaks from drinking water because the bacteria gets killed in your stomach without a problem. The CDC says neti pots are perfectly safe and effective at clearing sinus problems as long as the water used is distilled, boiled (and then cooled lol), bottled, or otherwise purified.
It wasn't bacteria, it was an amoeba that is normally found in deep well water.
![]()
And Shepherds we shall be. For thee, my Lord, for thee...
Is that Daryl from Walking Dead on the right?
yes, both are from the boondock saints
Actually there is no such thing as proof of a theory in science. There are only ever-growing mounds of evidence based on failed attempts to disconfirm a theory.
The underlying theory that compression, lymphatic drainage, and mussel-movement-limitation can at times help reduce pain/improve health has has not been disproven. Does this particular method attain salient results? That's a matter for scientists, though since it isn't regulated there's little reason for high quality studies: thus the reason there is "no evidence."
My trust levels go as follows:
Physical Therapists > orthopedic-doctors working for insurance companies > non-magical-thinking chiropractors > orthopedic doctors* > real ancient chinese medicine > self-diagnosis and treatment via wikipedia and web MD > shit you can buy in the supplements section of Walmart > an idea that came to me in a dream> magical-thinking chiropractors > first few responses to any thread in ATOT.
BTW, I had GURD and it was cured by ox-bile supplements I purchased at Walmart because of a thread on ATOT, so it's legit!
![]()
huh?
i'm saying that it helps muscles activate or relax as well as decrease pain and, also, promotes faster superficial tissue healing. i've seen it and felt it firsthand. i've even done it to myself when i got cleated in a soccer game and my leg swelled up and bruised up real bad because of it... the swelling and bruising was almost completely gone after three days and was no longer painful to touch. that's pretty significant.
Having recently used the tape on a shoulder injury, I think it works. I don't see why you'd doubt it either. The people that appear to be questioning it aren't using it, so their opinion is irrelevant.
There's a big difference between applying a theory to a novel context and having having no justification for spouting off. I think Etis presented his theoretical argumentation well; he explained the mechanisms by which he feels a well-defined process works and why it works to a limited extent within a limited context.He's saying it definitely works while also saying that evidence is inconclusive after reprimanding someone for saying its a scam, while also pointing out how it definitely is with the way its done in the pics.
While i'm unqualified to assess the quality of the theoretical argument presented by Etis, I can sure as shit tell you that I don't see anyone making a better (or any) honest theoretical argument against functionality. Except for "that looks stupid"their opinion is irrelevant.
