From: Tim Campbell on
On Jan 28, 9:20 pm, f...(a)mauve.rahul.net (Edward A. Falk) wrote:
>
> I suppose.  What ways do you suggest?  Other than "I think it works,
> and a couple of family members think so too", that is.

Well, let's see how a prominent physician from earlier in our history
might have made such an evaluation:

"The paragraph below is from a 1924 booklet, published by the Arm &
Hammer Soda Company. On page 12 the company starts off saying, “The
proven value of Arm & Hammer Bicarbonate of Soda as a therapeutic
agent is further evinced by the following evidence of a prominent
physician named Dr. Volney S. Cheney, in a letter to the Church &
Dwight Company:

“In 1918 and 1919 while fighting the ‘Flu’ with the U. S. Public
Health Service it was brought to my attention that rarely any one who
had been thoroughly alkalinized with bicarbonate of soda contracted
the disease, and those who did contract it, if alkalinized early,
would invariably have mild attacks. I have since that time treated all
cases of ‘Cold,’ Influenza and LaGripe by first giving generous doses
of Bicarbonate of Soda, and in many, many instances within 36 hours
the symptoms would have entirely abated. Further, within my own
household, before Woman’s Clubs and Parent-Teachers’ Associations, I
have advocated the use of Bicarbonate of Soda as a preventive for
“Colds,” with the result that now many reports are coming in stating
that those who took “Soda” were not affected, while nearly every one
around them had the “Flu.”"


From: Tim Campbell on
On Jan 29, 6:50 pm, "Lou" <lpog...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:


> Once you've done all that, you can come to a reasonably reliable conclusion
> as to how effective your proposed treatment is. If anyone's done that for
> using bicarbonate to treat flu or colds, I've never heard of it.



So you're denying any degree of validity to the claims of a prominent
physician of the day, working day in and day out in the trenches of
the largest influenza outbreak of that era?

Especially regarding something that is so simply and easily
demonstrable for oneself. Most folks have a box of Arm & Hammer in
their kitchen or bathroom.



From: dr_jeff on
Tim Campbell wrote:
> On Jan 29, 6:50 pm, "Lou" <lpog...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> Once you've done all that, you can come to a reasonably reliable conclusion
>> as to how effective your proposed treatment is. If anyone's done that for
>> using bicarbonate to treat flu or colds, I've never heard of it.
>
>
>
> So you're denying any degree of validity to the claims of a prominent
> physician of the day, working day in and day out in the trenches of
> the largest influenza outbreak of that era?

Good, you're getting the idea. The plural of anecdote is not data.

> Especially regarding something that is so simply and easily
> demonstrable for oneself. Most folks have a box of Arm & Hammer in
> their kitchen or bathroom.

People are good at fooling themselves into thinking that something
works, even if it makes no difference. That is what the entire
conjecture-based medicine (aka, con-med or alternative medicine)
industry is based on.

Quite often, when one thing follows another, they have nothing to do
with each other. Like taking bicarb and getting better. One would have
gotten better on his own, anyway.

So, with bicarb, all one is doing is showing how easily fooled he is.

Jeff
From: Tim Campbell on
On Jan 30, 2:19 pm, dr_jeff <u...(a)msu.edu> wrote:

> Quite often, when one thing follows another, they have nothing to do
> with each other. Like taking bicarb and getting better. One would have
> gotten better on his own, anyway.

As this physician took note of a simple occurrence among those ill
with influenza following their ingestion of bicarbonate; such
evidence
was sufficient for him to draw conclusions.

Causal connections can be validly observed outside of a laboratory
setting; particularly when the pattern occurs repeatedly,
consistently.




From: Mark Probert on
On Jan 29, 3:03 pm, Tim Campbell <timc...(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> On Jan 28, 9:20 pm, f...(a)mauve.rahul.net (Edward A. Falk) wrote:
>
>
>
> > I suppose.  What ways do you suggest?  Other than "I think it works,
> > and a couple of family members think so too", that is.
>
> Well, let's see how a prominent physician from earlier in our history
> might have made such an evaluation:
>
>  "The paragraph below is from a 1924 booklet, published by the Arm &
> Hammer Soda Company. On page 12 the company starts off saying, “The
> proven value of Arm & Hammer Bicarbonate of Soda as a therapeutic
> agent is further evinced by the following evidence of a prominent
> physician named Dr. Volney S. Cheney, in a letter to the Church &
> Dwight Company:
>
> “In 1918 and 1919 while fighting the ‘Flu’ with the U. S. Public
> Health Service it was brought to my attention that rarely any one who
> had been thoroughly alkalinized with bicarbonate of soda contracted
> the disease, and those who did contract it, if alkalinized early,
> would invariably have mild attacks. I have since that time treated all
> cases of ‘Cold,’ Influenza and LaGripe by first giving generous doses
> of Bicarbonate of Soda, and in many, many instances within 36 hours
> the symptoms would have entirely abated. Further, within my own
> household, before Woman’s Clubs and Parent-Teachers’ Associations, I
> have advocated the use of Bicarbonate of Soda as a preventive for
> “Colds,” with the result that now many reports are coming in stating
> that those who took “Soda” were not affected, while nearly every one
> around them had the “Flu.”"

Did you quote Mercola for this? If so, you should realize that Mercola
has no credibility, since everything he writes is to promote sales in
his million dollar a year business.