1 hour ago, Will B Good said:

 

Headache.....bacterial meningitis........no need for antibiotics.....just rest up awhile

 

Bad belly.......bacterial  diarrhoea (estimated deaths each year 500,000)........no need for intravenous antibiotics, fluid replacement or regular salts.....let nature take its course.

 

Is that what you mean?

You still don't get it do you Will.

 

Something is causing the complaints you mention in your post.

 

I would have thought it a good thing to investigate the root causes. Surpassing symptoms leads to bad outcomes in many cases.

11 hours ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Better to find out what is causing the problems that one has to take the medicine for. Get to the root causes and do something about it.

 

Indeed… rather like twisting an ankle – best avoid the root cause, right? Simple fix: never use stairs again.

 

The ibuprofen video is the usual internet cocktail of half-truths, wild exaggerations, and a few outright fabrications. Ibuprofen isn’t “toxic to everyone” – millions take it safely every day when used properly. But nuance doesn’t make for viral outrage, does it?

 

And as for this “root cause” sermon… please. By that logic, we should all stop playing sport, never sprint, never tackle, never ski, never wakeboard, never do anything remotely physical – just wrap ourselves in bubble wrap and wait for death to arrive pain-free.

 

Yes, there’s always a root cause behind pain or inflammation – it’s called life. Pretending that recognising it somehow makes pain relief unnecessary is spectacularly short-sighted. Sensible use of NSAIDs isn’t moral weakness; it’s pragmatism.

 

What’s next – stop driving altogether to avoid the root cause of car crashes? 

 

 

Of course, getting to the root cause of many issues is the correct approach - but your myopic implication that its the only approach is as flawed as nearly all your comments regarding medicine.

 

 

I’m all for caution when it comes to medication – anyone with half a brain knows that taking too much of anything, from NSAIDs to paracetamol, can be problematic. That’s not an indictment of medicine; it’s just common sense. The same applies to just about everything we consume.

 

After surgery from a sports accident a few years back, I was handed the usual post-op cocktail – heavy on the codeine, which I wasn’t thrilled about. So I was careful. I found that kratom can help, though it needs respect. Marijuana works too, in moderation. Even alcohol, in the right context, is a superb anaesthetic - but again, it’s all about restraint.

 

The idea of avoiding all “substances” to stay pure and untainted is absurd. When you’re in genuine pain, a little relief isn’t weakness - it’s sanity. The first two weeks after that surgery were not something I was going to endure stoically just to keep my “toxic-free” badge clean.

 

So what’s the proposed solution? Never play sport again? Never risk an injury?

Even swimmers get injured. The human body breaks, heals, and sometimes needs help along the way. Pretending otherwise isn’t health consciousness - it’s delusion.

 

 

 

52 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

The ibuprofen video is the usual internet cocktail of half-truths, wild exaggerations, and a few outright fabrications. Ibuprofen isn’t “toxic to everyone” – millions take it safely every day when used properly. But nuance doesn’t make for viral outrage, does it?

 

I knew you'd love it 

 

This guy provides information, and as rational individuals, we are to go and check it independently, possibly learning a thing or two along the way.

 

I personally have been wary of ibuprofen for a long time. I started researching it a few years ago when French regulators withdrew cold medicines containing ibuprofen and pseudoephedrine from over-the-counter sales channels, because of the increase in strokes and heart attacks (pseudoephedrine being the main culprit, but I found ibuprofen was definitely problematic too because of some of the mechanisms of NSAIDs).

 

Obviously, I didn't provide the video for the folk here who say things such as "careful who you take your medical advice from", thereby illustrating their own propensity to select "trusted" sources and then follow them unquestionably, which is something I would never do.

56 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

The idea of avoiding all “substances” to stay pure and untainted is absurd. When you’re in genuine pain, a little relief isn’t weakness - it’s sanity. The first two weeks after that surgery were not something I was going to endure stoically just to keep my “toxic-free” badge clean.

 

So what’s the proposed solution? Never play sport again? Never risk an injury?

Even swimmers get injured. The human body breaks, heals, and sometimes needs help along the way. Pretending otherwise isn’t health consciousness - it’s delusion.

 

A few years ago, I got a tooth pulled out and the pain was so bad I spent a couple of days alternating paracetamol and ibuprofen (within recommended limits). If I had known then what I know now, I would have grinned and bore it a little more instead of inflicting this level of toxicity to my body – which does not mean I would have gone painkiller-free either, balance and moderation is the way to go, and the more we know, the better.

15 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

1 hour ago, richard_smith237 said:

The idea of avoiding all “substances” to stay pure and untainted is absurd. When you’re in genuine pain, a little relief isn’t weakness - it’s sanity. The first two weeks after that surgery were not something I was going to endure stoically just to keep my “toxic-free” badge clean.

 

So what’s the proposed solution? Never play sport again? Never risk an injury?

Even swimmers get injured. The human body breaks, heals, and sometimes needs help along the way. Pretending otherwise isn’t health consciousness - it’s delusion.

 

A few years ago, I got a tooth pulled out and the pain was so bad I spent a couple of days alternating paracetamol and ibuprofen (within recommended limits). If I had known then what I know now, I would have grinned and bore it a little more instead of inflicting this level of toxicity to my body – which does not mean I would have gone painkiller-free either, balance and moderation is the way to go, and the more we know, the better.

 

I often wonder how many of us – and I include myself, being equally cautious with painkillers – carefully ration or even avoid them altogether, yet think nothing of drinking freely.

 

To put it in perspective, how does a bottle of wine truly compare with taking 1,200 mg, or even 2,400 mg, of ibuprofen in a day?

 

It could be argued that a standard dose of ibuprofen is, in fact, orders of magnitude safer than that single bottle of wine and still safer than half a bottle...  and for many of us, drinking is a regular thing. 

 

So, when viewed in perspective, are we not being a little hypocritical in showing such concern over a few tablets of pain relief, all while enjoying our steak and chips with a generous glass – or perhaps a bottle – of Malbec? (not at the same time of course) - for many of us, drinking is a perfectly ordinary, even habitual, part of life.

 

 

Of course, just because one thing isn’t good for us doesn’t justify the other. I merely wanted to highlight how fluid our perspectives can become when it comes to what we choose to consume.

 

32 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

I personally have been wary of ibuprofen for a long time. I started researching it a few years ago when French regulators withdrew cold medicines containing ibuprofen and pseudoephedrine from over-the-counter sales channels, because of the increase in strokes and heart attacks (pseudoephedrine being the main culprit, but I found ibuprofen was definitely problematic too because of some of the mechanisms of NSAIDs).

 

Somewhat ironically, I had a conversation with my wife about this very topic earlier today.

 

She’s currently nursing a ligament strain. Naturally, she wants to ease the discomfort and reached for ibuprofen, which is, of course, the appropriate choice for this kind of inflammation and pain. I simply cautioned her to be mindful of the dosage, for the very reasons we often discuss here: non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) like ibuprofen, while highly effective, can cause gastric irritation, kidney strain, or elevated blood pressure if taken excessively or for prolonged periods.

 

None of the concerns regarding medications such as ibuprofen, paracetamol, or aspirin the enemy mean they are the enemy. Used correctly, they’re enormously beneficial. The problem lies not in their existence but in their misuse. A little discretion goes a long way – certainly more than some commentators here seem to show when leaping to extremes and dismissing the value of these drugs outright, rather than advocating for their sensible and moderate use.

 

4 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

I often wonder how many of us – and I include myself, being equally cautious with painkillers – carefully ration or even avoid them altogether, yet think nothing of drinking freely.

 

To put it in perspective, how does a bottle of wine truly compare with taking 1,200 mg, or even 2,400 mg, of ibuprofen in a day?

 

It could be argued that a standard dose of ibuprofen is, in fact, orders of magnitude safer than that single bottle of wine and still safer than half a bottle...  and for many of us, drinking is a regular thing. 

 

So, when viewed in perspective, are we not being a little hypocritical in showing such concern over a few tablets of pain relief, all while enjoying our steak and chips with a generous glass – or perhaps a bottle – of Malbec? (not at the same time of course) - for many of us, drinking is a perfectly ordinary, even habitual, part of life.

 

 

Of course, just because one thing isn’t good for us doesn’t justify the other. I merely wanted to highlight how fluid our perspectives can become when it comes to what we choose to consume.

 

 

If we look at it in a binary way, i.e. 1 bottle of wine a day vs. 1,200 mg of ibuprofen a day, then yes, it's a valid question.

 

In my opinion, 1,200 mg of ibuprofen a day, in the long term, would be catastrophic for the liver, kidney and stomach because of the accumulated toxicity. Because that is the issue, accumulation, which causes many people's livers to fail.

A bottle of wine a day, in the long term, would be problematic and would eventually cause several ailments, it's definitely not a good idea, however I don't think it would be as harmful as the ibuprofen. Alcholics require liver transplants after decades of abuse, the timeframe is much shorter with people who chronically over-consume painkillers.

 

The context of the current debate on painkillers is that too many people don't realise how harmful they can be. Ask random people if drinking a bottle of wine a day is a good idea, and most of them will emphatically reply 'no'. Ask them if taking a 1,200 mg of ibuprofen a day is a good idea, I'm sure the reply will be less emphatic. Hence the need for awareness-raising.

 

Aspirin can be nephrotoxic to the kidneys.  It just needs to be taken sparingly.

7 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

 

If we look at it in a binary way, i.e. 1 bottle of wine a day vs. 1,200 mg of ibuprofen a day, then yes, it's a valid question.

 

In my opinion, 1,200 mg of ibuprofen a day, in the long term, would be catastrophic for the liver, kidney and stomach because of the accumulated toxicity. Because that is the issue, accumulation, which causes many people's livers to fail them.

A bottle of wine a day, in the long term, would be problematic and would eventually cause several problems, it's definitely not a good idea, however I don't think it would be as harmful as the ibuprofen. Alcholics require liver transplants after decades of abuse, the timeframe is much shorter with people who chronically over-consume painkillers.

 

The context of the current debate on painkillers is that too many people don't realise how harmful they can be. Ask random people if drinking a bottle of wine a day is a good idea, and most of them will emphatically reply 'no'. Ask them if taking a 1,200 mg of ibuprofen a day is a good idea, I'm sure the reply will be less emphatic. Hence the need for awareness-raising.

 

 

I do agree that we tend to be selective with our 'awareness' though, definitely.

4 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

 

If we look at it in a binary way, i.e. 1 bottle of wine a day vs. 1,200 mg of ibuprofen a day, then yes, it's a valid question.

 

In my opinion, 1,200 mg of ibuprofen a day, in the long term, would be catastrophic for the liver, kidney and stomach because of the accumulated toxicity. Because that is the issue, accumulation, which causes many people's livers to fail them.

A bottle of wine a day, in the long term, would be problematic and would eventually cause several problems, it's definitely not a good idea, however I don't think it would be as harmful as the ibuprofen. Alcholics require liver transplants after decades of abuse, the timeframe is much shorter with people who chronically over-consume painkillers.

 

The context of the current debate on painkillers is that too many people don't realise how harmful they can be. Ask random people if drinking a bottle of wine a day is a good idea, and most of them will emphatically reply 'no'. Ask them if taking a 1,200 mg of ibuprofen a day is a good idea, I'm sure the reply will be less emphatic. Hence the need for awareness-raising.

 

 

Valid points - when 'looking at it in a binary way'.... 

But... I'd assume a lot more people are consuming the equivalent of a bottle of wine per day than are consuming 1200mg of Ibuprofen a day....  

 

Or perhaps another comparable approach to this is...  taking 1,200 mg of ibuprofen a day for three days each week, every week, is still likely less harmful than getting drunk three times a week on the equivalent of a bottle of wine each time – though of course both are damaging.

 

Ibuprofen (1,200 mg/day, 3 days weekly):

- This is within the short-term recommended maximum (of course - this is the main point of this debate), but regular weekly use carries increasing risks. Over time, this pattern can strain the kidneys, raise blood pressure, and irritate the stomach lining, potentially leading to ulcers or gastrointestinal bleeding.

- In otherwise healthy adults, occasional use (a few days per month) is low-risk, but weekly repetition over months moves into a grey zone where medical monitoring is advisable.

 

 

Alcohol (≈1 bottle of wine, 3× weekly):

- Roughly 30 units per week, more than double the UK’s recommended limit of 14 units.

- Chronic intake at that level increases the risks of liver damage, hypertension, heart disease, various cancers, and cognitive decline.

- Health burden accumulates faster and more severely than with moderate ibuprofen use.

 

Net view:
Regularly taking ibuprofen three days per week is not harmless – it can erode gut and kidney health over time – but getting drunk on a bottle of wine three times a week is far more toxic and systemically damaging.

 

In a health risk hierarchy, the alcohol habit does much greater long-term harm.

 

 

Now, looking at it more realistically – alcohol consumption at this level is far more common than ibuprofen use at that level. I’m making an assumption, of course, but I think it’s a fair one in the interest of balance when comparing the two. That said, regular use of either to such an extent isn’t exactly a good situation - which is back to my original point.

 

 

4 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

A little discretion goes a long way – certainly more than some commentators here seem to show when leaping to extremes and dismissing the value of these drugs outright, rather than advocating for their sensible and moderate use.

 

 

Push the pendulum too far in one direction and it will swing back in the opposite direction with proportional force.

 

The gradual 'pharmaceuticalisation" of society, which culminated during Covid, has been excessive and has caused an equally excessive backlash which is sometimes devoid of nuance (I readily admit I have been guilty of it myself).

 

Hopefully we can reach a point where the pharmaceutical industry actually strives to pursue its initial mission, which is to take care of people, in an environment free of corruption and profit-seeking (the paracetamol industry alone is worth $15 billion and that might explain the lack of awareness-rasing over the past decades).

39 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

Valid points - when 'looking at it in a binary way'.... 

But... I'd assume a lot more people are consuming the equivalent of a bottle of wine per day than are consuming 1200mg of Ibuprofen a day....  

 

Or perhaps another comparable approach to this is...  taking 1,200 mg of ibuprofen a day for three days each week, every week, is still likely less harmful than getting drunk three times a week on the equivalent of a bottle of wine each time – though of course both are damaging.

 

Ibuprofen (1,200 mg/day, 3 days weekly):

- This is within the short-term recommended maximum (of course - this is the main point of this debate), but regular weekly use carries increasing risks. Over time, this pattern can strain the kidneys, raise blood pressure, and irritate the stomach lining, potentially leading to ulcers or gastrointestinal bleeding.

- In otherwise healthy adults, occasional use (a few days per month) is low-risk, but weekly repetition over months moves into a grey zone where medical monitoring is advisable.

 

 

Alcohol (≈1 bottle of wine, 3× weekly):

- Roughly 30 units per week, more than double the UK’s recommended limit of 14 units.

- Chronic intake at that level increases the risks of liver damage, hypertension, heart disease, various cancers, and cognitive decline.

- Health burden accumulates faster and more severely than with moderate ibuprofen use.

 

Net view:
Regularly taking ibuprofen three days per week is not harmless – it can erode gut and kidney health over time – but getting drunk on a bottle of wine three times a week is far more toxic and systemically damaging.

 

In a health risk hierarchy, the alcohol habit does much greater long-term harm.

 

 

Now, looking at it more realistically – alcohol consumption at this level is far more common than ibuprofen use at that level. I’m making an assumption, of course, but I think it’s a fair one in the interest of balance when comparing the two. That said, regular use of either to such an extent isn’t exactly a good situation - which is back to my original point.

 

 

 

True, but the people consuming 3 bottles of wine per week are aware that they shouldn't be – they still do for a variety of reasons, and probably convince themselves it's okay because humans are prone to denial, but ultimately, they know it would be better if they didn't do it. This isn't necessarily the case for the chronic painkiller consumer, hence the need for awareness-raising in all its forms (memes or X posts being – for better or for worse – a popular and effective communication channel).

21 hours ago, Stiddle Mump said:

You still don't get it do you Will.

 

Something is causing the complaints you mention in your post.

 

I would have thought it a good thing to investigate the root causes. Surpassing symptoms leads to bad outcomes in many cases.

 

 

I know.....bacteria

3 hours ago, Will B Good said:

 

I know.....bacteria

Bacteria are natures 'clean up' squad.

 

They don't harm us Will. We have billions of them all over our body; keeping us healthy.