Constant colds!

Tigerandahalf

Ososlo wrote: »

On a separate note, I never used to get colds when I smoked 20 a day and didn't exercise. I get colds quite frequently now however.

Funny that a lot of people report outbreaks of mouth ulcers after giving up the fags. It seems something in the smoke kills them off.

Singer

Decent enough article in today's Financial Times (!) on this topic - some reasonable looking science and steps to take:
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/a70aed92-9f6f-11e5-beba-5e33e2b79e46.html

(I don't read the FT, there was a copy of it on table in a coffee shop near work and the article caught my eye )

rom

Singer wrote: »

Decent enough article in today's Financial Times (!) on this topic - some reasonable looking science and steps to take:
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/a70aed92-9f6f-11e5-beba-5e33e2b79e46.html

(I don't read the FT, there was a copy of it on table in a coffee shop near work and the article caught my eye )

Sure. The paywall gave you away.

Non paywalled at http://tinyurl.com/z73lud9

sideswipe

Timely thread bump. I'm on my 3rd dose of the year already:mad:

Only ever missed 1 or 2 days of running to sickness in previous years, I've already missed about 10 since september.

Not sure if it's the mild mucky weather or my first winter having a school going kid in the house- probably a bit of both.

Anybody recommend any supplements that can help...........please

ThisRegard

School going kid in the house! When my first started going to crèche and then school I was like a sponge in the house the picked up everything. I thought I was getting away with it this year but got walloped a week and a half ago. Today will be my first run since then.

Someone mentioned glutamine to me before but I found it didn't make much of a noticeable difference to me,

demfad

I'd look at the immune system. It should be able to fend off most infections easily. If someone is having a lot of infections then something needs to change to improve this.

Bring down weekly stress on immune system.
For a strong immune system, the weekly volume of running should feel very comfortable and sustainable. If it's not try:

Adding an extra day between sessions
Don't run sessions as hard
Run easy days easier
Look at diet
Look at sleep
Other reduceable stresses
Have a go to remedy for the first sign of infection*

I use a ginger/honey/lemon drink : crush ginger add to squeezed lemon and honey in boiling water I drink a jug of this...or if stuck i down a litre of orange juice/eat a load of oranges.

In running terms the average speed would be lower so you need to throw in some strides or short fast relaxed intervals. Start with a very comfortable sustainable week and just slowly crank it up. This should allow you to get your immune system strong, allow you to build and get consistancy in the training.

Not recommeneded for performing well in a XC season (early part anyway) but that aint gonna happen with constant infections anyway.

ultrapercy

I find First Defense nazal spray very good. You need to use it at the very first indication of a cold coming on. I have stopped a few colds coming on this autum and winter with it. Im not bad for picking up colds but I'm nearly gauranteed to get one in the weeks after a marathon because of more booze bad diet late nights etc this year I'm cold free so far.

RayCun

ultrapercy wrote: »

I find First Defense nazal spray very good. You need to use it at the very first indication of a cold coming on. I have stopped a few colds coming on this autum and winter with it.

How do you know you really did have a cold coming on when you used it?

You thought: "I think I'm getting a cold"
You used the spray
Next day, you didn't have a cold

Maybe that means the spray worked! Or maybe it means you weren't getting a cold!

Same question applies to dosing yourself with echinacea, or vitamin C, or lemon and ginger, or saying 10 Hail Marys before bed, or putting on your lucky pair of socks...

demfad

RayCun wrote: »

How do you know you really did have a cold coming on when you used it?

You thought: "I think I'm getting a cold"
You used the spray
Next day, you didn't have a cold

Maybe that means the spray worked! Or maybe it means you weren't getting a cold!

Same question applies to dosing yourself with echinacea, or vitamin C, or lemon and ginger, or saying 10 Hail Marys before bed, or putting on your lucky pair of socks...

You have the early symptoms of a cold. If you don't use the remedy that works, the cold comes on heavier. If you do use it, the cold is nipped in the bud and abates. Ergo, the remedy works (by minimizing the infection not preventing it.)

RayCun

demfad wrote: »

You have the early symptoms of a cold. If you don't use the remedy that works, the cold comes on heavier. If you do use it, the cold is nipped in the bud and abates. Ergo, the remedy works (by minimizing the infection not preventing it.)

or,
you experience something similar to the early symptoms of a cold (fatigue, headache, runny nose)
you decide it is a cold
you treat it with your remedy
the thing that wasn't a cold goes away as it was going to anyway - you declare victory!

or,
you have a mild dose
you decide it is a cold
you treat it with your remedy
you have only mild symptoms, as you were going to anyway - you declare victory!

or,
you have a cold
you treat it with your remedy
you still have a cold, but you've treated some of the symptoms - you declare victory!

ultrapercy

RayCun wrote: »

How do you know you really did have a cold coming on when you used it?

You thought: "I think I'm getting a cold"
You used the spray
Next day, you didn't have a cold

Maybe that means the spray worked! Or maybe it means you weren't getting a cold!

Same question applies to dosing yourself with echinacea, or vitamin C, or lemon and ginger, or saying 10 Hail Marys before bed, or putting on your lucky pair of socks...

I know some of these things can be about the faith you place in them but I get a small sore throat and an itchy ear that is 100% indicator for me of a cold coming on, but warded it off with First Defense. I found it worked for me and it might be worth a try. I'd be fairly sceptical of these things in general but have more faith in this one but as you say maybe it's the faith that did the job.

Maximus Alexander

corny wrote: »

Your immune system doesn't need to be depressed for the virus to spread. Complete myth that. Infect someones nasal cavity with a cold virus and good or bad immune response the vast majority of them will become infected.

Indeed. On the contrary, most cold symptoms are caused by your immune system rather than the virus. They represent your body's response to the virus and its attempt to combat it. It is theorised that people with more active immune systems may actually suffer worse symptoms.

Ososlo wrote: »

On a separate note, I never used to get colds when I smoked 20 a day and didn't exercise. I get colds quite frequently now however.

Gleedog wrote: »

Aye its strange that when people are unhealthy like that they never seem to get sick..until its something very serious.

The above is probably why - if you're unhealthy and your immune system is in rag order, it may not respond properly to the virus.

tailgunner

Interesting stuff. I get fewer colds since I took up running, but the symptoms seem to be much worse when I do. In fact I'm just about getting over what I'm calling calling The Great Plague Of '15. Can't wait to tell the grandkids all about it.

Ososlo

I haven't been sick and have boundless energy since I started taking these a few months back.

demfad

RayCun wrote: »

or,
you experience something similar to the early symptoms of a cold (fatigue, headache, runny nose)
you decide it is a cold
you treat it with your remedy
the thing that wasn't a cold goes away as it was going to anyway - you declare victory!

or,
.....

or,

you observe that these symtoms turn into full blown cold symtoms on many more occasions when a remedy is not taken than than then it is taken.
This could be chance but probability is against that. Apparently placebos can work well with cold symptom so maybe the fact that I think it works is what's relevant.
Concentrating on reducing stresses to strenghten the immune system is the best way to keep the infections away IMO.

RayCun

it could also be confirmation bias

demfad

RayCun wrote: »

it could also be confirmation bias

That could also hold true for your contrary belief though.

I actually got it from my Aunty when i was in college in Galway fado fado. She is an excellent doctor * (so there! :pac:) .....
Coincidently, she spent a large part of her doctorate researching early interventions to remedy the common cold. **

* This is very true
** May not be true

I do think reducing the intensity of training is key though. If most days are easy aerobic work this actually boosts the immune system instead of weakening it. Volume can then slowly and safely be increased as the way to consistant progression. If the main running focus is going to be the summer, this fits too.

RayCun

what is my contrary belief?

My point is, the evidence people provide for these remedies is the same evidence a homeopath could provide for their cold remedy - I took this thing lots of times, and on many of those occasions I did not have a cold the next day. Therefore, it works.
(Sure, sometimes I took it but still ended up with a cold, but those times I took it too late, or it was a really strong cold that overpowered my defences - hey, I never said it was 100% effective!)

If people want to keep taking them... whatever, none of the remedies suggested will do you any harm, and the worst thing that will happen is you get a cold anyway...

Maximus Alexander

Which is why medicine works off randomized controlled trials rather than anecdotes. \o/

demfad

RayCun wrote: »

what is my contrary belief?

My point is, the evidence people provide for these remedies is the same evidence a homeopath could provide for their cold remedy - I took this thing lots of times, and on many of those occasions I did not have a cold the next day. Therefore, it works.
(Sure, sometimes I took it but still ended up with a cold, but those times I took it too late, or it was a really strong cold that overpowered my defences - hey, I never said it was 100% effective!)

If people want to keep taking them... whatever, none of the remedies suggested will do you any harm, and the worst thing that will happen is you get a cold anyway...

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

Which is why medicine works off randomized controlled trials rather than anecdotes. \o/

The remedies I suggested at least seem to be backed by both.

This study looked at the effects of Vit C in over 11,000 cases of common cold duration:

"Twenty-nine comparisons examined the effect of prophylactic vitamin C on common cold duration (9649 episode s). In adults the duration of colds was reduced by 8% (3% to 12%), and in children by 13% (6% to 21%). The severity of colds was significantly reduced in the prophylaxis trials."

This would seem to confirm that remedies involving Vit C help minimize the duration and significantly reduce the severity of common colds.

I.e Take Vit C regularly and if you feel a cold coming on, nuke it with Vit C: can do no harm and will probably do a lot of good.

Maximus Alexander

Ah yeah, I'm not specifically doubting the efficacy of vitamin C. It does seem to have some clinical support and there may be something to it. I was more generally agreeing with Ray's point that the kind of reasoning "I did this yesterday and I feel better today, therefore it's because I did that yesterday" is both widespread and deeply flawed.

RayCun

demfad wrote: »

This would seem to confirm that remedies involving Vit C help minimize the duration and significantly reduce the severity of common colds.

I.e Take Vit C regularly and if you feel a cold coming on, nuke it with Vit C: can do no harm and will probably do a lot of good.

broken link? I presume you're pointing to the Cochrane review
http://www.cochrane.org/CD000980/ARI_vitamin-c-for-preventing-and-treating-the-common-cold

Seven trial comparisons examined the effect of therapeutic vitamin C (3249 episodes). No consistent differences from the placebo group were seen in the duration or severity of colds.

In other words, taking vitamin C when you feel a cold coming on has no effect.

and taking at least 0.2g of vitamin C daily will not stop you from getting a cold, it just means the cold doesn't last quite as long - a reduction of 8% in duration. First line of the summary?

The failure of vitamin C supplementation to reduce the incidence of colds in the general population indicates that routine prophylaxis is not justified.

thewolf_ie

Wheatgrass!

demfad

RayCun wrote: »

broken link? I presume you're pointing to the Cochrane review
http://www.cochrane.org/CD000980/ARI_vitamin-c-for-preventing-and-treating-the-common-cold



In other words, taking vitamin C when you feel a cold coming on has no effect.

and taking at least 0.2g of vitamin C daily will not stop you from getting a cold, it just means the cold doesn't last quite as long - a reduction of 8% in duration. First line of the summary?

He does not recommend that adults dose on Vitamin C year around because the average saving over a year (2-3 colds) is only a day. He does suggest it could be a good idea to try on an individual basis. We are talking about adults suffering constant colds on this OP and we are there fore in "good idea" territory.
There is also trials on people undergoing physical stress including marathon runners. Here the results indicate "significant benefit" of Vit C supplementation for these subgroups.
Regarding therapeutic benefits he references several studies which found vit C supplementation after infection reduced duration.
Significantly he referenced several studies which indicated the rapidity of taking Vit C after infection as significant. This is what I and others observe.
For example Asfora 1977 found that giving Vit C treating within 24 hours of infection reduced the average duration from 7.2 days to 3.9. Other trials back up that rapidity of initiation is essential. He also suggests Vit C affects different people differently.
Bearing all this in mind it does seem like a good idea for someone suffering constant colds to supplement with vit C and definitely a good idea to take a good quantity of Vit C in the first 24 hours after infection.
Im happy to quote from the study (im on a device which makes this difficult today), but anyone can read what I read from the link in my other post. Whether you agree with these studies or not, the evidence certaibly isint anecdotal. It looks like its certainly a good idea for runners experiencing common colds to give this a try with a lot more than a hail Mary chance of positive results.

RayCun

this is getting pointless
you said "Take Vit C regularly and if you feel a cold coming on, nuke it with Vit C" and the study authors concluded there is no point in taking vit C every day, and there is no consistent effect from taking vit C therapeutically. One study did show an effect - that study involved doses of 8g, which is far more than you're getting from ginger, lemons, or oranges. And, to repeat, across the range of studies examined the authors found no consistent effect from therapeutic Vitamin C.
The trials on marathon runners were on people "exposed to short periods of extreme physical stress" - which is not your day in, day out of training.

The conclusion of the report is - vitamin C is cheap and harmless, so if you want to give it a go, feel free. And it's worth investigating further.

demfad

RayCun wrote: »

this is getting pointless
you said "Take Vit C regularly and if you feel a cold coming on, nuke it with Vit C" and the study authors concluded there is no point in taking vit C every day, and there is no consistent effect from taking vit C therapeutically. One study did show an effect - that study involved doses of 8g, which is far more than you're getting from ginger, lemons, or oranges. And, to repeat, across the range of studies examined the authors found no consistent effect from therapeutic Vitamin C.
The trials on marathon runners were on people "exposed to short periods of extreme physical stress" - which is not your day in, day out of training.

The conclusion of the report is - vitamin C is cheap and harmless, so if you want to give it a go, feel free. And it's worth investigating further.

Really? (I'm sure Vit C was on your quack list?)
Cochranes trials on people after short periods of physical duress "reinforced the findings" of early trials on marathon runners by Peters 1996 and Moolla 1996. They were not the same studies.

Tyrell 77 found a 40% reduction in recurrent colds using therapeutic vit C on 3grams a day.
Anderson 75 found a reduction in duration on 1g per day.
Karlowski found a reduction of .75 day per cold on low dosage.
Cochrane acknowledged that these trails are complicated and can produce false negatives (his own trial results) especially if the trial lasts for 3 days or less.

When Vit C were taken within 24 hours of infection:
Asfora 77's study observed a reduction of 3.2 days in cold duration
Reigniers 68 study also concluded "the sooner the better" as did Andersons 74. Anderson did observe a larger affect with 8g dosage as opposed to 4.

Its not pointless as it demonstrates that studies have backed the use of Vit C as prevention, therapy and therapy immediately after infection on an individual basis which is very relevant to this thread. You may argue for one study against another, but you are defeating your own anti-anecdotal argument because you are already outside the realm of anecdotal evidence.

Cochrane himself concludes that "it does not seem unreasonable to test Vitamin C on an individual basis as a therapy for the common cold soon after the onset of symptoms" His own words.

paddy no 11

Id seriously reccomend the allergy test. Used to be the same until I dropped out a food group that I am strongly intolerant to and havent had a cold since. The other stuff helps but doesnt hit the underlying root cause or at least not in my case anyway.

ThisRegard

Aren't many allergy tests nonsense also? I can't see how any food you take is related to you getting a cold. Are you exhibiting confirmation bias?

RayCun

demfad wrote: »

Really? (I'm sure Vit C was on your quack list?)

I didn't say quack list - I pointed out that people were recommending treatments based on anecdotal evidence

demfad wrote: »

Tyrell 77 found a 40% reduction in recurrent colds using therapeutic vit C on 3grams a day.

Tyrell and co-workers reported treating 743 men and 758 women for 5 months as follows. Half received placebo pills daily. The others took vitamin C but only during colds at these dosages: 4,000 mg on the first and second days of a cold and 200 mg on the third day. There was no benefit from taking vitamin C. The incidence and duration of colds were the same for both men and women in the vitamin and placebo groups . Men in both groups missed an average of half a day's work while women missed about a day. The other study, reported in 1981, used 95 pairs of identical twins. One of each pair took 1,000 mg of vitamin C for 100 days while the other received a placebo The vitamin C group had slightly more colds but a shorter duration of colds (5 days instead of 6)

demfad wrote: »

Anderson 75 found a reduction in duration on 1g per day.

Anderson conducted three studies
1 a three month study, 800 volunteers. Half received 1,000 mg of vitamin C daily before colds and 4,000 mg per day during the first 3 days of a cold, while the other half received "equivalent" placebos. In the vitamin group, 74% had one or more colds during the study period while 82% of the placebo group had one or more colds. The difference, which amounted to "one-tenth of a cold per person," was judged by Dr. Anderson to be "of no practical importance."

2. Some 3,500 volunteers were divided into eight groups, six of which received various daily dosages of vitamin C while the others received placebos for 3 months. No difference in the incidence of colds was found among the groups taking no vitamin C, 250 mg, 1,000 mg or 2,000 mg daily. A possible slight reduction in severity of symptoms was found in the vitamin C groups, but volunteers taking dosages of 4,000 or 8,000 per day when a cold began did no better than those taking only 250 mg per day

3. covered 16 weeks and used 488 volunteers. The vitamin C dosage was 500 mg once a week (equivalent to about 70 mg daily) before colds, but 1,500 mg the first day of a cold followed by 1,000 mg on the second and third days. No reduction in the incidence of colds was observed, but those taking vitamin C averaged less time at home (1.62 vs. 1.12 days indoors)

Karlowski found a reduction of .75 day per cold on low dosage.

Karlowski and associates at the National Institutes of Health reported treating volunteers as follows: 25% received placebos; 25% took 3,000 mg of vitamin C daily before colds but placebos during colds; 25% were given placebos daily before colds and 3,000 mg of vitamin C daily during colds; and 25% got 3,000 mg daily before colds and 6,000 mg daily during colds. The experiment was supposed to be double-blind, but the doctors had failed to make the placebo taste the same as the vitamin C pills as is done in most trials. As a result, half of the volunteers correctly guessed which pill they were getting and therefore became unblinded. When the results were tabulated with all volunteers lumped together, the average number of colds per person was 1.27 colds for the vitamin group and 1.41 for the placebo group. But among those who remained blinded, no differences in the incidence or severity were found [20]. This fascinating result shows how many people who think they are taking a positive step (such as taking a vitamin) may report a favorable result even when none really exists!

Cochrane acknowledged that these trails are complicated and can produce false negatives (his own trial results) especially if the trial lasts for 3 days or less.

The point of the Cochrane study is that it was a review study. It looked at a set of other studies meeting certain criteria to see if they agreed on the effects. And there was no consistent effect across studies. In one study X worked, in another it didn't.

When Vit C were taken within 24 hours of infection:
Asfora 77's study observed a reduction of 3.2 days in cold duration
Reigniers 68 study also concluded "the sooner the better" as did Andersons 74. Anderson did observe a larger affect with 8g dosage as opposed to 4.

One way to test whether high-dosage vitamin C prevents colds is to inoculate the throats of volunteers with cold viruses. Two studies of this type found that everyone got colds whether they took vitamin C or not. Walker and co-workers in 1967 and Schwartz, Hornick and associates in 1972-73 gave half of their volunteers a placebo and the rest 3,000 mg of vitamin C daily for several days before inserting live cold viruses directly into their noses; and then continued 3,000 mg of vitamin C (or placebo) for seven more days. All of the volunteers got colds, which were of equal severity

Its not pointless as it demonstrates that studies have backed the use of Vit C as prevention, therapy and therapy immediately after infection on an individual basis which is very relevant to this thread. You may argue for one study against another, but you are defeating your own anti-anecdotal argument because you are already outside the realm of anecdotal evidence.

You're ignoring the importance of repeatability.
Take the third Anderson study above. 16 weeks and under 500 volunteers. How many people in that period are going to catch a cold. When you compare the duration of a cold in the vitamin C vs placebo groups, how much data do you have to work with? There's too much noise to place much weight on the findings. And when similar studies are carried out by other teams, they don't find the same results.

You could find one study that shows daily dosage helps prevent colds but therapeutic use has no effect. And another study that finds daily dosage has no effect but therapeutic use is effective.
And if you wanted, you could say, "Look this study shows that daily dosage is effective. And this other study shows therapeutic use is effective. See!"

Cochrane himself concludes that "it does not seem unreasonable to test Vitamin C on an individual basis as a therapy for the common cold soon after the onset of symptoms" His own words.

"is not unreasonable to test on an individual basis" is a long way from saying "it works", and Cochrane says this is not unreasonable "given the low cost and safety".
It won't hurt, so try it if you like.

demfad

pac_man wrote: »

What constitutes "short periods of extreme physical stress" or is this defined within the studies?

The trials on people after short periods of physical duress "reinforced the findings" of early trials on marathon runners by Peters 1996 and Moolla 1996. They were not the same studies.

The doses were not high .25g - 1g per day.