• givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Bloodletting is pretty beneficial tho…

      I mean, not everyone donating does it out of the goodness of their heart, there’s a health benefit.

      But back when they just let it out… That’s still the treatment for lead poisoning and off the top of my head I can’t think of a reason it wouldn’t help with micro plastics in the same way.

      But when bloodletting was a big thing. So was lead poisoning.

      It wasn’t helping for the reason people thought, but it’s not up there with surgeons intentionally not washing their hands before surgery

      • ByteJunk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        30 days ago

        Bloodletting is definitely NOT a treatment for lead poisoning, or for anything that you can think of.

        Poisoning by metals is usually treated by using a chelating agent: a molecule that creates an ionic bond with that metal, and makes it easier for the body to excrete it or prevents it from being absorbed further, like dimercaprol or EDTA.

        Guys, we figured all this shit out in the 18th and 19th century. How are we going back to the days of the dumbdumb? This moronic concept of “me think so must be” is dead: we actually test hypothesis now.

      • SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        30 days ago

        Yes, like that. Good job, some idiots may actually believe that. Now post it on wherever those idiots are like instragram and tiktok or whatever.

      • Venus_Ziegenfalle@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        and off the top of my head I can’t think of a reason it wouldn’t help with micro plastics in the same way

        That’s not a replacement for research. Bloodletting was the subject of one of the first ever clinical trials and we’ve known since then that it’s not effective or even harmful. There’s a handful of exceptions where it’s still done but never without a solid reason.

      • Neuromancer49@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Scientist here. Microplastics in the body are too ingrained in our bodies for bloodletting to do much of anything. They’re even found in fetuses.

        The good news (?) is we don’t know enough about microplastics to conclusively say they’re horrible for our health. The bad news is, I’d bet a lot of money that they are.

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          Same with lead…

          When it builds up in the blood stream above a certain concentration it starts getting stored in organs.

          I know they can cross the bloodbrain barrier, I’m just not sure when/how it starts to accumulate in organs. If it’s just immediate, yeah, no gains.

  • xylogx@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    29 days ago

    I know the idea is to be snarky and calling them “new age” somehow makes them less than real science, but the reality is there is some amazing science that has been done that shows how these different chemicals influence our brains and our behaviors. Good video on the topic with in-depth explanations from real scientists:

    HAPPINESS: A Guide to the Drugs That Can Help You Get There -> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcAmgNoWzVk&t=29s

    The scientist in the video:

    https://www.archventure.com/team/axel-bouchon/

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esther_Odekunle

    • flamingos-cant@feddit.ukOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      29 days ago

      I mean the point wasn’t that these chemicals don’t exist or that they’re not important for our brain chemistry, but the way influencers just make up shit about them (like in the image).

      • xylogx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        29 days ago

        I get it. We should be skeptical of what we hear from influencers on social media. IMHO the way to debunk pseudoscience is with real science. There is some amazing scientific work done in this area and I wanted to highlight that.