Wednesday, September 21, 2011

Ice or Heat? Which is Better?

I get a lot of questions as a chiropractor about what to do when you get hurt, what exercises to do, what's the best posture, etc.  Probably one of the most frequent questions that I get is whether to put heat or ice on an area.  And I have to say, it's a very good question, and it basically boils down to one thing:

When in doubt, use ice.

In fact, I rarely tell my patients to put heat on an area unless it is a chronically tight muscle that needs a little coaxing into relaxation.  I know, heat usually feels better than ice, but the problem that I have with heating a general area is the effect that it has on swelling.

Now, don't get me wrong, swelling is an essential part of the healing process.  Without some swelling, your body would not be able to repair the damaged structure.  However, when you put heat on an area that is already swollen, it causes more fluid to go to that area which can increase the pressure and pain in the painful area.

If a patient and I find that ice is not working for the area, I usually tell them to do both.  You can put heat on the area (best form would be a hot bath or hot tub) but then put the ice on afterward, and always end with ice.  You will still get the relaxing feeling from the heat, but also the anti-swelling effect of the ice.  This alternating of heat and ice can actually help the flow of the fluid that is bringing healing components to the damaged area.

So why err on the side of ice?

It has to do with the swelling in the area.  When your body gets injured, it needs to send fluid (swelling) to that area to help it heal.  The issue with that is most people don't move correctly when hurt.  When this happens, that swelling stagnates in the area and can cause issues such as an increase in pain, irritation to nerves, and/or decreased mobility.  And correct mobility in an injured area has been shown to help in the healing process and help prevent issues down the road

It also helps that ice dumbs down and numbs the pain a little bit.

It boils down to this.  Anytime you injure your body, it's essentially like spraining your ankle.  I guarantee you will not see a coach or an athletic trainer put heat on that sprained ankle.  They put ice on it to keep the swelling at a manageable level so that they are able to prevent immobility to the injured joint.

So, the next time you get an injury, put some ice on it.  Just remember that 20 minutes should be plenty of time, but you will need to do it more than once.  Give yourself at  least a 40 minute break before you put the ice on again.  An BE SURE to have some sort of barrier between your skin and the ice.  For instance, a t-shirt works really well. 

And if you want to do a little gentle massage of the injured area while icing, fill up a little Dixie cup with water, freeze it, rip the bottom of the cup off so that the ice is exposed, and rub the hurt area with the exposed ice for about 10 minutes making sure to keep the ice moving at all times. 


(In this picture, they ripped off the top.  I find it easier to rip off the bottom, that way, the ice won't fall out, and you can put the leftover ice cup inside another Dixie cup and place in the freezer for later)

And as always, questions and comments are always welcome.  (If you have a question that you don't want seen by other people, feel free to e-mail Dr. Mike at mjenstaddc@gmail.com)

Wednesday, September 7, 2011

Why So Many Allergies to Peanuts?

I was reading an article last week by Dr. Tim O'Shea, a chiropractor who's big on educating people about vaccinations (you can find his website here), and I thought that I would share some of the main points.

photo

Dr. O'Shea goes into detail on his theory about why there are so many allergies these days to peanuts.  I won't go into all of the specifics, but he points out that peanut allergies, anaphylaxis, and death from peanut allergies has significantly risen since the mid 1900s.  His theory; the use of what is called excipients in vaccinations.

The thinking of the drug world is as follows: in order to get the best response from a vaccination, there needs to be a strong allergic response to the vaccine, which in their minds means a stronger immunity to whatever is being administered via the vaccine.  One way to get that stronger allergic response is to add an excipient, a molecule to increase the immune response.  The preferred excipient today; peanut oils.

Now, if you're a parent and have done any research on what to feed and what not to feed your baby, you'll know that you shouldn't feed peanuts to your child until they are at least 1 year old.  The main reason is that the digestive system of a baby is still being formed and small proteins can pass from the gut to the bloodstream.  Peanut proteins are capable of causing a higher immune response, which means that babies shouldn't eat peanuts due to the possibility of getting these inflammatory proteins into their bloodstream.

But what about the peanut oils in the vaccines?  It's been shown that even the most refined peanut oils contain inflammatory peanut proteins.  However, we all know that vaccines don't get ingested with the possibility of the peanut proteins getting blocked by the gut, vaccines are directly injected.  That means that the inflammtory peanut proteins go straight to the blood stream.

Now this isn't just the theory of a man trying to rid the world of vaccines, it's a shared theory by people in the medical community as well.  Helen Fraser, a researcher, agrees with Dr. O'Shea and even goes on to say, "The peanut allergy epidemic in children was precipitated by childhood injections" (her book can be found at Barnes & Noble). 

Children these days are getting an exorbitant number off vaccines by the time they turn 18.  And most of these vaccines contain peanut oils to increase the immune response, not to mention other poisonous chemicals.  For example, in 1980, a child was to receive 20 vaccines from birth to 18 years of age, today, that number has increased to 68!  And that doesn't even include the flu vaccine!

So I guess what I'm trying to say is this: Is it just coinicidental that there has been an increase in allergies and deaths due to peanuts at the same time as there has been an increase in vaccines?  I don't think it's coincidence.  But if you want to find out for yourself, more power to you.

(If you would like to read Dr. Tim O'Shea's full article, you can find it on his website here)