Please, please pardon me. I really am not being snarky or nit-picking.
The recommendations on this
thread are very good. But please keep in mind that they treat the symptoms. They do not treat the disease.
For examp,e, I have allergy-induced asthma (likely due to the 15 years I spent living in the southern San Joaquin valley in CA). Some of the suggestions posted here help me to manage symptoms. Must they do not treat the disease. I wish they did!
Why do I write about distinctions like these? I know it’s tedious and boring. But I unfortunately have known people who thought they could self treat a disease or condition. Their evidence was that their chosen treatment made them feel better. In the meantime the disease itself progressed until the disease itself was no longer treatable.
I also know that most everyone, including those on this thread, know the difference. I just try to be really careful with my language no matter my audience because it’s important.
I am a big fan of treating symptoms. I am a bigger fan of doing so using natural (non-toxic) methods. But being conscious of whether or not I am also treating a disease is another story.
Of
course with some diseases the point is moot. I have Multiple Sclerosis. Case in point. I have an arsenal of methods for treating symptoms. But there is as yet no way to treat the disease, natural or otherwise.
On the other hand, I have also had breast cancer. Again, an arsenal of methods for treating symptoms. But none would have treated the disease. For that I relied on my doctors. I am 7 years free and healthy.
Dang. The one or two line post has turned into s soapbox. I guess my best treatment for MS fatigue has started working (side effect:
soap boxing behavior). I better shut up and go outside now.