Why don't you find something current to post about..this has already been hashed out last yearD.H. wrote: ↑Sat Mar 03, 2018 9:18 amFor now, I would not follow any recommendations from this study.
Also, this is an older population, which means those who died at a younger age are "weeded out" of the sample. Perhaps many of those who did not live to be in the sample would have been alive, participated in the study, and greatly changed the results, if they have been using CPAP at an early age!
This Article Contradicts Most Sleep Apnea Studies
Re: This Article Contradicts Most Sleep Apnea Studies
_________________
Machine: ResMed AirSense™ 10 AutoSet™ CPAP Machine with HumidAir™ Heated Humidifier |
Mask: Fisher & Paykel Vitera Full Face Mask with Headgear (S, M, or L Cushion) |
Additional Comments: Back up is S9 Autoset...... |
-
- Posts: 517
- Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2017 9:07 am
Re: This Article Contradicts Most Sleep Apnea Studies
Maybe, but D. H. does bring up a good point... those left after 65 with untreated moderate apnea could be those that are naturally resistant to heart attacks... The other ones already died before 65.... but the "non-apnea" group were still alive because of not having apnea... They died naturally... just like the non-treated under 65 apnea patients that weren't resistant to heart attacks... In other words this is complete junk science.
_________________
Machine: ResMed AirSense™ 10 AutoSet™ CPAP Machine with HumidAir™ Heated Humidifier |
Mask: AirFit™ N30i Nasal CPAP Mask with Headgear Starter Pack |
Instead of Sleep apnea it should be called "Sleep deprivation, starving of oxygen, being poisoned by high CO2 levels, damaging the body and brain while it's supposed to be healing so that you constantly get worse and can never get healthy Apnea"
- chunkyfrog
- Posts: 34405
- Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 5:10 pm
- Location: Nebraska--I am sworn to keep the secret of this paradise.
Re: This Article Contradicts Most Sleep Apnea Studies
Statistics mean nothing to the outlier.
And nobody is truly "average".
Too much "research" is done for the easy buck--not knowledge/understanding.
And nobody is truly "average".
Too much "research" is done for the easy buck--not knowledge/understanding.
_________________
Mask: AirFit™ P10 For Her Nasal Pillow CPAP Mask with Headgear |
Additional Comments: Airsense 10 Autoset for Her |
Re: This Article Contradicts Most Sleep Apnea Studies
And it means nothing, that's why I don't click on paper links, on the chance the writer will profit from it. Jimchunkyfrog wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 1:40 pmStatistics mean nothing to the outlier.
And nobody is truly "average".
Too much "research" is done for the easy buck--not knowledge/understanding.
Use data to optimize your xPAP treatment!
"The art of medicine consists in amusing the patient while nature cures the disease." Voltaire
"The art of medicine consists in amusing the patient while nature cures the disease." Voltaire
Re: This Article Contradicts Most Sleep Apnea Studies
Which is only fair, since outliers often mean nothing to the statistics, either.
I find that the average person is often above average, unless you grade on the curve.
Hey, come on, even the scientists that are stupid have to make a living too!chunkyfrog wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 1:40 pmToo much "research" is done for the easy buck--not knowledge/understanding.
-Jeff (AS10/P30i)
Accounts to put on the foe list: Me. I often post misleading, timewasting stuff.
Accounts to put on the foe list: Me. I often post misleading, timewasting stuff.
- chunkyfrog
- Posts: 34405
- Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 5:10 pm
- Location: Nebraska--I am sworn to keep the secret of this paradise.
Re: This Article Contradicts Most Sleep Apnea Studies
In academia, the principle "publish or die" only serves to dilute the pool.
Scholarly work requires WORK, and RESEARCH, not just the ability to operate a keyboard.
Freedom of the press ensures there is no quality control over what gets into print.
Anybody has the freedom to be a COMPLETE FOOL.
Scholarly work requires WORK, and RESEARCH, not just the ability to operate a keyboard.
Freedom of the press ensures there is no quality control over what gets into print.
Anybody has the freedom to be a COMPLETE FOOL.
_________________
Mask: AirFit™ P10 For Her Nasal Pillow CPAP Mask with Headgear |
Additional Comments: Airsense 10 Autoset for Her |
Re: This Article Contradicts Most Sleep Apnea Studies
Just for the record, the article was written up in the journal CHEST, a publication for doctors.chunkyfrog wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 1:51 pmIn academia, the principle "publish or die" only serves to dilute the pool.
Scholarly work requires WORK, and RESEARCH, not just the ability to operate a keyboard.
Freedom of the press ensures there is no quality control over what gets into print.
Anybody has the freedom to be a COMPLETE FOOL.
_________________
Machine: ResMed AirSense™ 10 AutoSet™ CPAP Machine with HumidAir™ Heated Humidifier |
Mask: DreamWear Nasal CPAP Mask with Headgear |
Humidifier: XT Heated Humidifier |
Additional Comments: My headgear varies (STILL!) |
Resmed S9 with humidifier and in need of the right mask.
- chunkyfrog
- Posts: 34405
- Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 5:10 pm
- Location: Nebraska--I am sworn to keep the secret of this paradise.
Re: This Article Contradicts Most Sleep Apnea Studies
The publication may be valid, but the author?
What about the author?
And who did he fool/bribe to get it in?
What about the author?
And who did he fool/bribe to get it in?
_________________
Mask: AirFit™ P10 For Her Nasal Pillow CPAP Mask with Headgear |
Additional Comments: Airsense 10 Autoset for Her |
Re: This Article Contradicts Most Sleep Apnea Studies
To me, the problem ain't the study itself. Good enough. Raises interesting points for further research. Frankly, I'd vote to print it if I were on the review board. It provokes thought. Few things do these days.
The problem is the interpretation of the meaning by journalists trying to grasp the study and grab the eyes/ears of the public.
One group of research docs prints something just to say to fellow docs: "Hey, fellas, look at this, whaddya think it means?" That's what scientific journals are for. But then the newspaper dudes, mainstream-magazine dudes, and TV personalities get a hold of it and twist it into some kind of pronouncement that it was never meant to be.
To make a very bad analogy of the "meaning" of the study: It may be that a guy who has got used to getting beat up a lot in life may have a better chance of surviving an especially life-threatening beating one day. That does NOT, however, mean that it is proper application to decide it must be a good idea for all of us to go around trying our best to get the snot beat out of us on a regular basis in order to help our chances of survival, just in case someone later decides to beat us within inches of our life one day.
It ain't the science. It's the application.
IMO.
The problem is the interpretation of the meaning by journalists trying to grasp the study and grab the eyes/ears of the public.
One group of research docs prints something just to say to fellow docs: "Hey, fellas, look at this, whaddya think it means?" That's what scientific journals are for. But then the newspaper dudes, mainstream-magazine dudes, and TV personalities get a hold of it and twist it into some kind of pronouncement that it was never meant to be.
To make a very bad analogy of the "meaning" of the study: It may be that a guy who has got used to getting beat up a lot in life may have a better chance of surviving an especially life-threatening beating one day. That does NOT, however, mean that it is proper application to decide it must be a good idea for all of us to go around trying our best to get the snot beat out of us on a regular basis in order to help our chances of survival, just in case someone later decides to beat us within inches of our life one day.
It ain't the science. It's the application.
IMO.
-Jeff (AS10/P30i)
Accounts to put on the foe list: Me. I often post misleading, timewasting stuff.
Accounts to put on the foe list: Me. I often post misleading, timewasting stuff.
Re: This Article Contradicts Most Sleep Apnea Studies
He works cheep, after all he lives rent free in mammies basement! Jimchunkyfrog wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 3:27 pmThe publication may be valid, but the author?
What about the author?
And who did he fool/bribe to get it in?
Food too, all he has to do is get away it from the Cats!
Use data to optimize your xPAP treatment!
"The art of medicine consists in amusing the patient while nature cures the disease." Voltaire
"The art of medicine consists in amusing the patient while nature cures the disease." Voltaire
Re: This Article Contradicts Most Sleep Apnea Studies
DH and good point is an oxymoron.
Get OSCAR
Accounts to put on the foe list: dataq1, clownbell, gearchange, lynninnj, mper!?, DreamDiver, Geer1, almostadoctor, sleepgeek, ajack, stom, mogy, D.H., They often post misleading, timewasting stuff.
Accounts to put on the foe list: dataq1, clownbell, gearchange, lynninnj, mper!?, DreamDiver, Geer1, almostadoctor, sleepgeek, ajack, stom, mogy, D.H., They often post misleading, timewasting stuff.
- ChicagoGranny
- Posts: 14493
- Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2012 1:43 pm
- Location: USA
Re: This Article Contradicts Most Sleep Apnea Studies
You have posted about a 10-year old (2008) study. Here is a followup study by the same medical researcher published in CHEST in February of 2018 - http://journal.chestnet.org/article/S00 ... 4/fulltext
The current study design cannot completely establish a clinically meaningful protective effect of IH in the setting of acute myocardial infarction. If confirmed, however, these findings may have profound clinical implications regarding our therapeutic approach to patients with sleep apnea. If OSA triggers positive adaptations, what should be our therapeutic approach to nonsleepy individuals who are generally considered to be at high risk for coronary events?
Clearly, more studies are needed to disentangle the complex and divergent effects of IH on the cardiovascular system. The data presented by Sánchez-de-la-Torre et al11 should encourage future investigation in larger studies with properly matched patients to obtain a more definitive answer to this important question.
Re: This Article Contradicts Most Sleep Apnea Studies
And he got paid for both! To bad for the world! JImChicagoGranny wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 2:41 pmYou have posted about a 10-year old (2008) study. Here is a followup study by the same medical researcher published in CHEST in February of 2018 - http://journal.chestnet.org/article/S00 ... 4/fulltext
The current study design cannot completely establish a clinically meaningful protective effect of IH in the setting of acute myocardial infarction. If confirmed, however, these findings may have profound clinical implications regarding our therapeutic approach to patients with sleep apnea. If OSA triggers positive adaptations, what should be our therapeutic approach to nonsleepy individuals who are generally considered to be at high risk for coronary events?
Clearly, more studies are needed to disentangle the complex and divergent effects of IH on the cardiovascular system. The data presented by Sánchez-de-la-Torre et al11 should encourage future investigation in larger studies with properly matched patients to obtain a more definitive answer to this important question.
Use data to optimize your xPAP treatment!
"The art of medicine consists in amusing the patient while nature cures the disease." Voltaire
"The art of medicine consists in amusing the patient while nature cures the disease." Voltaire