Это видео недоступно.
Сожалеем об этом.
Pyrotherapy: An Awful Nobel Prize for Infecting People with Malaria
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 19 авг 2024
- Malaria vs. Neurosyphilis: the story of an unethical experiment, and its mysterious conclusions.
We're conducting a survey of our viewers! If you have time, please give us feedback: www.surveymonk...
Hosted by: Olivia Gordon
----------
Support SciShow by becoming a patron on Patreon: / scishow
----------
Dooblydoo thanks go to the following Patreon supporters: D.A. Noe, Nicholas Smith,
سلطان الخليفي, Piya Shedden, KatieMarie Magnone, Scott Satovsky Jr, Bella Nash, Charles Southerland, Patrick D. Ashmore, Tim Curwick, charles george, Kevin Bealer, Philippe von Bergen, Chris Peters, Fatima Iqbal
----------
Looking for SciShow elsewhere on the internet?
Facebook: / scishow
Twitter: / scishow
Tumblr: / scishow
Instagram: / thescishow
----------
Sources:
blogs.discoverm...
www.freerepubli...
www.sciencefri...
www.jameslindli...
www.ncbi.nlm.n...
www.ncbi.nlm.n...
www.scielo.br/s...
www.cdc.gov/st...
www.ncbi.nlm.n...
www.acs.org/co...
medlineplus.go...
www.nobelprize...
Image Sources:
commons.wikime...
commons.wikime...
commons.wikime...
commons.wikime...
commons.wikime...
commons.wikime...
commons.wikime...
commons.wikime...
commons.wikime...
commons.wikime...
To be fair he did cure 50% of patients suffering from what was essentially a fatal disease. We use chemotherapy to treat cancer despite knowing how horrible chemo is. Maybe someday we'll look back on chemo the same way we look back on this. The only awful part of his treatments was the lack of consent.
not even CLOSE to 50% cure with chemo
50% survival rate is better than 0% right?
Pretty much. Neurosyphillis would be an eventual death anyways. So it's pretty much if you want to rot away slowly, or have a chance of curing the disease but potentially dying quickly. Probably would've been nice to give the first few patients that choice, though.
I think it'd be closer to 35% cause you gotta discount those who died from Malaria, still better than 0%. Still not ok to just infect them with no warning or consent tho
Hey, I'd consent to it. A low chance is better than zero, any day.
Mordirit
No. 50% recovery, 35% die as they would have, and 15% die faster.
If you think about it, that means that you have a 65% chance of not dying from syphilis.
WaterspoutsOfTheDeep
Like the Nobel Prize for it was lobotomys I think or eugenics.
Trading in a terrible neuro-disease that will definitely kill you for a 50% chance of cure and only a 15% mortality rate from malaria which was/is fairly easy to live with doesn't sound bad actually. Was it unethical? Yes. But was it worth the try? Yes.
I'd do it.
ikr. 50% chance to be cured sounds pretty good. Im sure there was alot of shadier medical procedure at the time than this.
Spiot on.
1/2 chance is like a dream come true for someone who is going to die.
I think the nobel prize was desrved, since if not for the world war the discovery and push of mass produced penicillin could have came decades later.
Yeah, I don't get stupid demonizing of the guy in the video. If there was real idiotic travesty with his work, it's the fact it was abandoned. Guy stumbles on good method of curing mental disorders in general, we have no idea how it works, but it's better than what we have, and instead of investigating we drop it and let afflicted suffer? Wut?
Kind of like the Milwaukee Protocol for rabies. Statistically it is terrible with only 5 of 36 patients (13.8%) surviving with the treatment but since untreated rabies is 100% fatal there is literally no other option at this point that is known to be more effective than that.
That is actually extremely ingenious. Not ethical as it may be, it saved many from a horrible fate.
RandomUmbrellaGuy its amazing.
The biggest problem that she points out is the lack of consent. Informed consent is the backbone of medical ethics. There is no excuse for medicine without informed consent.
Well, I think if he put the effort to start a clinic trial, maybe. However I don't see a good end for a covnersation starting with: Can I infect an already sick patient with a deadly disease to see if that cures him?
Exactly how do you get informed consent from a person suffering from dementia?
help8help it would legally fall of the next of kin or who ever had legal guardianship.
Better than the guy who got a Nobel prize for lobotomy
Waydog eeehh... lobotomy didn't have such a high death rate (15%) but it kind of helped much, much less and caused an array of different mental problems, so I'd probably rate them similarly bad. But since pyrotherapy saved half of the treated from death, it would probably be a *better* treatment, just like what you said.
Or a certain person who recently got a Nobel prize for nothing whatsoever.
@@teli6350 Death of personality is at least as bad. At least with pyrotherapy, patients had a real chance to recover from what would have otherwise killed them.
I'd say both were awful.
RUclips: AdrianTheGenuine 🌟
im not saying the guy was in the right....but... he DID help medical science...
He also actually cured 6 of the 9 people who were sick. He did it without their consent, but someone saving your life without your consent isn't too bad.
Pyroterapy works! Heat cured my hypothermia!
LOL
Hyperthermia to treat Hypothermia? Who woulda thunk it?
I'm an advocate... I light myself on fire regularly for that very reason. :o)
Hahaha!
This is the secret to surviving in antartica, guys! Just set yourself on fire, it'll prevent all hypothermia!
Something to consider:
IF there is a 100% certainty the patients will die if they don't get treated
AND the treatment will cure the syphilis completely,
AND the malaria will either kill or be cured completely (no middle option),
AND the patients give full, well-informed consent,
then I would say its a reasonable treatment.
Obviously, there are no 100% certainties and many of the patients did NOT give well-informed consent, and that's not cool. But if I have to choose between certain death and a slim chance of survival, I'm probably going to choose the latter.
Humans have a weird talent for making slim odds work, so I'd be in the hospital bed beside you.
50% is not a slim chance
thankfully we don't have to make that choice today.
I would risk my life to get healed instead of living a miserable and short life
pyrotherapy sounds like what a bunch of arsonists consider to be enlightening to them spiritually lol
Jackal Unleashed very well said xD
sees video, thinks covering people in gasoline and lighting them on fire to kill virus
I thought pyrotherapy might have been cauterizing wounds.
+sorenkair with malaria?
For arsonists to be enlightened they just need a flame thrower (but just one for all of them)
Strange how awful people can have a few good impacts. 1/2 saved compared to none; hell, I'd have taken that risk! But informed consent is obviously a must.
At least this guy wasn't evil! The discoveries made by the Japanese during WW2 have saved hundreds of millions of lives globally but were discovered by snuffing out tens of thousands of Chinese prisoners in the most barbaric ways you can imagine, from cutting people up without anaesthetic just to see how shock works or freezing a person's arm to the bone to see if gangrene is always fatal or if a person can re-animate a dead arm that has no blood supply.
Wrapping a burn in cellophane to stop an infection and wrapping a freezing person in tin foil to reflect heat back at them are just two of the countless discoveries made at Unit 731 between 1935 and 1945. The US found their notes so useful that they pardoned all the 'doctors' of any war crimes.
@@krashd oh and someone who supports eugenics is absolutely evil -a person who eugenics supporters would definitely kill.
I feel that Wagner-Jauregg did deserve his Nobel prize.
Sure what he did was by no means ethical, but the prognosis of his patients went from more or less guaranteed death to 50% chance of being cured (albeit with a 15% chance of dying to the cure); what he did SAVED lives, even if it did put the patients at risk, they would almost certainly have died (or further deteriorated mentally until they died) without it.
There are far worse things that have been done and rewarded by man than a few without consent experiments that might actually have saved the patients (and others) from a degenerative diseased induced death.
"Look: either you deal with your neurosyphilis or I set you on fire. Your choice." - Dr. Wagner-Jauregg
There have been a lot of awful Nobel prizes awarded, but we have to remember that hindsight is 20/20. As Olivia said here, they didn't have antibiotics, as far as they knew this was the only hope for neurosyphilis.
There are chemicals that trick the hypothalamus into raising the body's temperature without an associated infection. They're named pyrogens for similar reasons to the pyrotherapy discussed in the video. We could more closely tune the elevated temperature while avoiding significant harms if we administered a chemical instead of an infection. This seems like it has potential as a companion to other treatments rather than a sole treatment option. The character of the person who first investigated the tool (badly) should have no bearing on the potential a tool may have, especially if subsequent investigations are performed ethically.
The Nobel Prize is awarded for significant achievements. NOT as a reward for being ethical and "good" at all times, and should be treated as such. A Noble Prize in any science should never be considered "regrettable" because the scientist it was awarded to was "bad" or because their discovery turned out to be unnecessary. After all, we still hold Hippocrates and his humors in high standing but the medical treatments derived from his theories caused FAR more harm than good in the vast majority of cases. At least in the case of pyrotherapy, a more people were helped than harmed. Medical practices such as bleeding and inducing vomiting derived from Hippocrates almost always hurt or even killed more people than it helped.
In addition, he may not have gotten consent, and by today's standards that is morally reprehensible, but it certainly wasn't at the time. Consent, especially informed consent, was rarely, if ever, gotten from patients by their doctors for hundreds of years. It simply wasn't considered as important as it is today. You can hardly expect a physician from a hundred years ago to adhere to the medical standards of today. Many, or maybe even most, major breakthroughs in medicine were due to experiments performed on unwitting patients, this is hardly something unique to any particular scientist, nor does it make that scientist particularly amoral.
Honestly, this video seems completely ridiculous. It is admittedly informative on the basic techniques and origins of pyrotherapy, but in the process, it drags a perfectly good (for the time) scientist's name through the mud for no reason. Perhaps he wasn't the most moral scientist to have ever existed, but his medical discoveries seem to be valid, and honestly probably deserve to be researched further. With antibiotic resistance a growing threat and fevers relatively easy to safely induce today, pyrotherapy could be a viable treatment for some bacterial infections.
It is good historical practise to hold people to the moral standards of the day, not the present. I can't see this in this video (though I don't know what his contemporaries would have thought of it).
I also don't understand how him later joining the NSDAP makes his nobel prize regretable, it is awarded for a scientific discovery after all.
I am sorry. But this is one of the most igenous ideas of all time and its conclusions make perfect sense. However infecting someone with malaria is a bit far.
A bit far? Considering it was completely unwillingly on the patients side, I'd say that was atrocious.
Miguel Almeida it was a joke
This is a good meme
Miguel Almeida. I see youve never heard of dramatic understatement.
And my point was more about the idea than the ethics because as always Sci show treats immunology as woo.
Teacherino For Kripperinos Kripperino its not really a meme, unless you call being english a meme.
really? nobel prize for pyrotherapy?
Tell Me This yes because this before any chemotherapy, or immunology.
The Blank I love this. Ignoring the elephant in the room a second he saw the problem, saw how the body fought it and knew how malaria progressed and put two and two together all before cellular immunology was even a thought.
Daniel Oliveira that was the worst.
They give nobel prizes to anyone these days, it's not a prestigious award.
Professor Coldheart sure. But this was pre ww1
If lobotomy earned a Nobel, why this not? Science is the search for answers, so, this answer was good at his time, like to our parents hit us was a disciplinary act not brut violence.
Times change and let's be thankful to vaccines and antibiotics
superpapiringo lobotomy had no science what so ever. This has plenty.
And pyrotherapy helps people every day. Fevers keep people alive especially when combined with antibiotics.
I think it's the part where he infected people WITHOUT their consent that's the problem. How'd you like to find out that a doctor purposely infected you with a deadly disease without asking or even telling you so that they could "see what happens".
Jay Workman ehhh cool?! I am the wrong person to ask.
Sounds like the military medical system to me.
Pyrotherapy doesn't help anyone on a daily basis because it is never used, the closest we have to it is vaccination with live viruses but even that is a very slim connection.
Truth be told, Id want a terrible treatable disease, rather than a terrible untreatable disease.
quite a few medical discoveries were made using practices that we now consider unsafe or even unethical. But the goal of treating those people and helping them recover was clearly there. Its not cruel human experimentation just for the heck of it. And it seems it worked, with high risk and only half the time but it did work. A dangerous cure for a previously untreatable disease is still a possible cure. we cant judge people from the past with the moral standarts of today without considering the times. if we want to talk about an unethical and unjustified nobel price it would be the one for invention of lobotomy.
You should have mentioned that fever is the person's immune system's normal reaction to infection, to kill the infectious agent by burning it out. So all pyrotherapy is doing is helping the immune system to do what it normally does to other infections. The fact that it uses another infection is unfortunate, but that infection was curable.
Another thing: You said that 15% of his patients died after treatment, but how many patients died of neurosyphilis without treatment? The one number, by itself, means nothing.
This video is a poor example of how to present science.
Fully deserved nobel prize.
Andrei Ferariu Definitely not *fully*! Yeah, it helped some patients but the risk he took (not only for the patients) plus the unethical process aren't really adding arguments for the "fully part"...
Connor his science is good though
What you have to understand is that the medical ethics of the time was different.
He advanced science, that is why Nobel was given to him, so yes he fully deserved it.
Well, the guy who developed vaccines almost killed a kid and infected a ton of neighbourhood children and his own son, so...
"Imagine for a second it is the early 1900's"
Ok. . . Oh my word, who is this demon witch talking to me trapped in a magic box!
He's a good example of how people aren't simply good or evil.
Those are pretty good numbers for the 1920s
I know a person who has endured a debilitating undiagnosed chronic condition for decades. There were only two occasions on which the illness appeared to go into remission. In both cases, a high fever (close to 39 Celsius) that lasted a few days was followed by an extended symptom-free period, as long as 6 months in one case.
I just returned from a medical conference where this sort of therapy is being investigated in the treatment of refractory depression.
There's a reason that saunas and hot tubs are so popular in high-latitude winters, yah? A burst of all-body stimulation to jolt the system back into seeking balance (physically) and re-embracing the cold/dark as the cure (psychologically) until the season changes. You would get the same effect from aerobic exercise or martial arts classes.
In the northern midwest of USA, there's a tradition called "the polar plunge" in the winter where they sit in a makeshift sauna until they are roasting hot, then take a dip in an ice-cold lake to vent the heat. It renews enthusiasm for life and drives away "the winter blues."
A lack of survival pressure is erosive to a homeostatic system like life -- it needs to have a differential process/sensation or it gets lazy and dysfunctional and falls out of balance. You can try to dope someone into submission/functionality in the short run, but it's far better to get them into the "behavioral enrichment" that will get their system to balance itself. It's a feedback loop either way.
One of the best pop-culture examples of this is Brian Blessed. The only reason he didn't finish summiting Mt. Everest at 70yo was because he stopped and backtracked and used up his supplies to save a younger climber a ways behind him. He basically said the climb was to keep feeling vibrant, so he figured that saving another's life was a sufficient benchmark.
Regular physical challenges/ordeals have been used by traditional peoples since antiquity to sharpen motivations and perceptions. For those who can't climb Everest, it can be as simple as a daily walk in the park or a swim at the fitness club. Stagnancy is death, for life needs to move :)
Hello, SciShow! Do you think you could make a video explaining the current knowledge of cerebral aneurysms? I had one rupture at 19 and after learning so much about them, I would love for a bigger audience to learn of them!
phantasm1234 one day i hope they do so
I think you are proof that SciShow doesn't read their comments, unfortunately.
phantasm1234 yes but not through IODISING RADIATION THAT SPLITS MAMMALIAN ATOMS APART
fossilfighters101 They do but there are way too many for RUclips' notifications system to even update Hank on ALL that come through... RUclips glitches all the time
This video is biased.. towards what exactly I can't really tell.. I mean, he totally deserves his Award. He helped a lot of people.
I would be willing to file this guy under "necessary evil", since he raised a bit of data that could prove valuable should we find a way to ethically test it. Was it wrong? Yes. Did it help more in the long run? Yes. This falls in the grey area, if you ask me.
And they would have died anyways.
In order to discuss what is right or wrong, we have to look at the systems to determine morality. While there are other systems, lets look at consequentialism and deontological.
Consequentialism is easy. It is all about results, that moral good of an action is determined by the out-come of the action, and a pure consequentialist would infecting someone with a disease to drastically increase their chance to survive when there is no other way to be a good thing.
Deontologism is a bit more complicated. It is based on following a set of rules. The problem is if we use our modern rules, doing a dangerous treatment without consent is an immoral action. However, no such moral rule existed when the scientist did his experiment.
Also, Nobel price in science has nothing to do with "helping" or "harming" people. He made a groundbreaking discovery at the time, and he deserved that price for his scientific work. Science isn't good or evil, it's a set of facts discovered by people over time.
DoubleM55 I concur with you.
Well, this WAS the most effective treatment of a terrible, fatal disease at the time, so why wouldn't it deserve a Nobel prize? He saved many lives and now we're calling him an unethical quack? why?
Pyrotherapy is how I relax.. I melt things.. xD
Matt Jasa I like you videos
Thx, check out my latest one Critical Water
YES
Matt Jasa nah fam that's arson
Really shows you how awful neurosyphilis was: When patients ask to be treated with an highly experimental cure that works in 50% of cases it must be really shitty.
Hey look a new episode of scishow
Oh great we're making moral judgements in this episode
Hey, look I'm in the comment section
Like the knowledge, hate the personal, political biases.
Can't we technically test this on mice?
Sunil Jain I'm not sure syphilis/malaria affect (at least not in the same way) mice...
Noooooo
Unethical to mice
Ask 4 consent first
Testing on animals is only the beginning. Even if results were positive, the testing would need to continue onto humans before anything were released for use. This is beside the fact that not everything that afflicts humans will do the same to mice, pigs, etc.
They did a video on this in the past, only something like 35% of studies involving mice show any correlation when the animal studies are compared to human trials. It's an outdated practice, we should be testing on in vitro human organs and tissues by now. Stem cell research could have advanced us so much farther than we are now, but uninformed people thought it sounded "scary to play god".
I love this girl more every time she is on the show.
Yes, yes, let that virtue shine brightly...
She's improved so much with her hosting, cleaner speech and all-round information giving. So proud 😭
hiddengibo right? Like that double | k k | at 4:44, someone's been practicing! 👍
Don't care. Her gangly arms still gross me out
to be honest those every so trendy but hideous glasses look terrible, remove them and the bull ring and im sure she is beautiful
+blustulagu; maybe she isn't trying to be beautiful. Science might already be her husband.
Unethical? No comment, but it did save lives yes?
Then its better than nothing...
Boy do I love tuning in to a science show to learn about how a scientist was a bad person. Let us light the fires and signal our virtue to the heavens comrades.
Yeah right. This dude saved half the people who'd have died anyways. Penicillin took another 20 years to arrive. Imagine how many would've died. It's just modern internet culture to find something that can be viewed as unethical and drive the knife in. Just nerds on the internet.
The initial non-consensual thing was not good, but pyrotherapy was actually quite an ingenious idea. This Nobel prize was deserved (much more so than lobotomy for example), and the doctor's later regrettable political affiliations don't change this fact.
If I could get some syphilis I'd put them in a stable environment that mimics the human body, mostly the temperature. Then I'd raise the temp to the temperature a fever repeatedly and see what happens. Seems like an experiment that would be easy to replicate anyways...
Rdsrjr2 :D not really. The only way to do that is with mice or rats. We arent very good at multicellular tissue culture.
We can use mice, that's not an issue. I'll admit that I'm ignorant to many things but it seems like a good idea anyway haha
Rdsrjr2 :D no its a great idea.
Maybe we will see a scishow vid about this topic lol.
Rdsrjr2 :D if they stop treating immunology like woo.
I don't know if anyone has said this about the host (I'm sorry I forgot her name) but it's really nice seeing people talking about science who happen to have tattoos and piercings. It gives me hope for a future where people aren't judged more harshly or denied jobs because of body modifications
I really like her
This is weird. I mean, I knew about the malaria-syphilis thing, but not about the fever-mental illness thing. When I was 17, I almost died from sepsis. I was also very depressed at the time. After recovering from sepsis, I was no longer depressed. My doctor seemed very interested though. My depression had been very drug-resistant, and suddenly it was gone. I hadn't thought about it in a long time.
So, somehow, "pyrotherapy" is both not as bad and FAR WORSE than I thought it would be, based on just that name alone. Which is impressive.
It was a revolutionary idea that worked AT THE TIME. The first Olympic hole medalist sprinter wouldn't even qualify for the Olympics today. But he is the champion of his time and no one can take that away from him. Same with this guy.
We now know that brain chemistry/clean up/bog part of properly functioning relies heavily on the circulation of the limfatic system.
During episodes of fever this system gets a boost that might play a crucial role in improving the mental health via a combination of increased "cleaning" of the CRL and possibly an increased activity of the immune system that could eliminate diseased or otherwise faulty neurons.
The dude did good. These patients were goners anyway. He saved their lives.
Dear SciShow.... Could you please do a very basic but informative video on Anti-biotic treatments please?
Which is a roundabout way of saying 'I'm attracted to this presenter'.
My mother died from chemo not from cancer
Olivia you are a gem, thank you for being a wonderful part of the Sci show team. You all have so much passion with what you do it's inspiring.
My parents let a sketchy doctor trade me for a slightly better child
Can you blame them?
Get back to work slave, I paid 5 whole pennies for your worthless life!
yessir, sorry sir
Funny enough that in my hometown a big hospital was named after him until three years ago - Didn't expect to learn about him here on SciShow though.
Seems that the effect could potentially be worthy of investigation but instead of using dangerous agents to induce the hyperthermia perhaps a trial should be conducted using a set up not unlike that used to induce theraputic hypothermia except warming the blood instead of cooling it. That way it can be precisely controlled in both the temperature induced and the duration while the patient condition can be constantly monitored for the duration of the session which can be aborted if any symptoms of potentially harmful heatstroke present.
Seraphina S still not comfortable with taking heating out of the hands of the body like that. Especially as what you are trying to heat up the is the brain.
+Alistair Shaw True though as I say therapeutic use of external blood conditioning to lower temperature is used routinely in some surgical procedures these days, granted I'd have had as much trepidation about trying that before it was established as a safe and effective method myself. I would expect any study investigating this to begin just like with drug trials though the initial dosages are usually very tiny and not even expected to actually be sufficient to produce any effect merely to prove it is safe enough to try anything more. So I mean like the phase 1 trial might only use like 0.1C of warming for short duration and so on I believe it could be done though would have to be approached with extreme caution but lets face it that can be said about any new drug or treatment trial.
Seraphina S cooling is slightly different, if you cool a body its qutie diffcult to break anything internal to the cells, unless you go to like 10 degrees c rapidly. But heating is a different beast. It needs to be coordinated and the cells kind have to want to do it.
This is actually a plot point in a book I read, but not by name, and I couldn't find out the history behind it until now!
I'm wondering if the stress on the body caused by the fever, or some body mechanism that triggers in situations of fever, might result in a (temporary) change of brain chemistry - a kind of 'panic' response, sort of like the body saying "okay, we don't have time to play games, we need to focus on staying alive".
CircleTheSkies yes. It happens in all cells. It is called inflammation.
Ok so 50% had some remission of their neurosyphillis while 15 % died of the treatment so aproximmately 1/3 of the patients had an improved outcome. Considering the grim prognosis that neurosyphilis used to have and the dreadful side effects of the mercury compounds that were its only treatment at the time i can see why he got the prize.
Plus it was the first cure EVER of a mental illness.
Wasn't there a doctor who found you could treat some tumors by injecting infectious diseases at the tumor site?
Indeed, there was. I read a Scientific American article about 10-15 years ago.
Read the book Sharks Get Cancer, Mole Rats Don't, it's all about cancer immunotherapy
tonic water is named tonic water because it has quinine in it and was used to treat malaria for a while.
i worked at a grocery store and once had an older lady literally yelling at a coworker because she wanted "quinine water" and when they had told her that the tonic water was in aisle 3 she flipped out screaming (and i mean she was in line up front and i was in the back room when i heard her yelling) "TONIC WATER DOESNT HAVE ANY QUININE!"; we eventually just brought her a bottle and showed her the ingredients. surprisingly she felt absolutely no shame and just said "thats not normal".
ooooh customer service.....
Pyrotherapy, the definition of fighting fire with fire.
I'm not a doctor or anything...but the first thing I would try to study for as far as fever treating mental issues would be if the increase in metabolic rate which comes with the fever is leading to sped up timetables for brain damage which might be naturally reversible over a long period of time...only the heat increases reactions which speeds up the process. I'm thinking about it like if you want to dissolve sugar in water, the fastest ways to do it are to stir vigorously...or heat up the water.
Yet, another awesome video :D thanks for that!
though i have a little favor to ask for:
can you maybe stick to one way to display organic compounds?
jumping between the ball-stick-model and the structural formula?
Thanks in advance and keep on coming this quality content :)
Is having a fever different from being externally heated? Like in a sauna?
98Zai yeah its internal?
I think (could be wrong) if you are externally heated your body will try and protect important organs (brain, heart and lungs) from the heat. With this method you need the brain to heat up.
matt yeah basically you are causing a fever with malaria that is hotter than syphilis can do. For two reasons, 1 malaria is more complex and causes more extreme reaction than bacteria and two the brain is immunoprivilaged, kinda.
I also remember hearing that fever temporarily alleviates symptoms of autism. The science around this may be bad, but there's definitely something there. Fever effects the brain in an at least temporary, and positive way.
Yeah no I've never ever felt better while having a fever, if anything it makes me feel way more overwhelmed and overstimulated.
Interesting - I've always just felt sluggish with a fever.
I thought pyrotherapy was just starting a fire with primitive technology. Making a fire and watching it burn makes me feel like a real person. It's very therapeutic.
Trading diseases really doesn't sound that bad as long as it's done ethically. If you can't cure it, at least make it less awful.
What happened to Hank?
Hank is fine. He doesn't have time to host all the shows that he is involved in.
polkadottedpolak He used to make the show a lot more interesting.
His wife had a baby earlier this year. That tends to eat up a lot of time.
He died of Super Cancer
Aliens kidnapped him again
This video really highlights the ultra smug mentality of Modern scientists. Drs didn't routinely ask consent or consult back then, they acted accordingly to what they believed would be the best treatment. Not until lawsuits came into the picture did this practice change. His actions were completely in line with standards of that day. There was a point when Drs even faced disciplinary action for wasting time washing their hands between patients. Also Calling something awful that had a higher success rate than most modern treatments especially in its infancy of testing is beyond insane. These guys were pioneers.
I guess malaria is still better than slowly loosing your mind by syphilis
i love it how they say that the indigenous peoples had known the treatment for malaria LONG BEFORE europeans
It’s possible that the bacteria that causes malaria could produce a chemical byproduct that is harmful to the bacteria that causes syphilis, or the malaria bacteria could possibly directly predate on the other bacteria once in a humans body, similar to the species of viruses that infect other viruses except bacterial.
Did his methods save half of the people who went to him for help? 3:07 It did. Then in my book, how ever shady he is, he did a good job. For gods sake, he saved someones mother, brother, son etc. Every life is precious so don't judge him so harshly.
The high heat of a fever melts and re flows the solder connecting the synapses.
Girl, hold your arms and hands still. Yah look like you've got Parkinson's when the shot zooms in
I HAVE SEEN cases of Lyme Disease treated with SAUNAS. PyroTherapy, I suppose. It seemed to work. The folks I knew who went through that treatment had not been able to beat their long term Lyme with antibiotics and are still (two decades later) symptom free.
The technique was to bring the core temperature to 102 for at least 20 minutes every other day for two months with a slow cool down in a warm room. Do this twice a week for another two months and monthly for the rest of your life. The spirochete dies at 102 degrees. The lungs need to be hot as well as the rest of the body or they'll cluster in the cooler lungs. Do this in a sauna, not a hot tub. The reason not to burn it all out as fast as you can is because LOTS of dead bacteria in your system will make you sick, so you kill off 60%- 80% of it over and over while you own (previously overwhelmed) immune system kicks in to help.
There may be a reason so many cultures had traditions of taking a time off to visit "the baths" or hot springs, use saunas and sweat lodges.
I didn't realize there had been a Nobel Prize for it, only that the US Army was giving malaria to syphilitic soldiers at the beginning of WW2 based on that theory.
using a disease to treat a disease is like fighting fire with fire
I heard that's what Al Capone had done to him. He was infected with maleria but still died from syphilis !
Imagine being so sick you get metal boogars.
I swear this was supposed to be a nobel "peace" prize
First learned this from watching, "The Knick."
Pyrotherapy likely helps the neurosyphilis patients because the plasmodium virus caused such an intense influx in dendritic (specifically T cells and TKiller cells)
That, among with other immune cell production skyrocketing, that the dendritic cell count simply just got so off high that it went off the radar, and the cells stopped differentiating between plasmodium and treponema, or mistook treponema for plasmodium through the bedlam going on inside
"Since when did people start expecting science to be humane? To study the body, you cut it open. To study the mind, you isolate it by crushing the heart. Historically, that's how science has advanced" -evil dude from Digital Devil Saga
I've read (in New Scientist) that when antiseptics was introduced into surgery the survival rate of post-operational cancer actually decreased. And I seem to remember that fever has been used experimentally before being replaced by camfor-induced cramps and electro-convulsive therapy with some succes.
typograf62 in 2010 it was shown that bacterial infection survival rates dramatically fall upon antipyretics.
Their problem with this guy is not that he discovered something that worked. It's that he did all this WITHOUT CONSENT FROM PATIENTS! THAT IS A HUGE BREACH OF MEDICAL STANDARDS! He couldve easily done this with patient consent, and the fact that he didn't deserves to be condemned.
apart from pyrootherapy and all, I hated Olivia when she was first hosted the show,but gradually I like her day by day, now I feel happy when she's on, so mysterious!
Almost makes me wanna contract syphilis and malaria to see if it works.
I mean, the treatment itself is relatively fine. In our fight against cancer we've developed treatments with pretty terrible side effects, but we use them because it's usually better than dying of cancer. It's the fact that he tested all this on people who couldn't consent to his experiments that makes this so terrible.
Hmm. We *are* researching the cure for things from Cancer to Antibiotic-resistant bacterial infections with Viral infections these days, shadowing those results. Hopefully there's informed consent involved this time! :D
Please carry out any "unethical procedures" that exist on me if they would raise my chances of survival from 0% to 50% lol
stick to science don't go off on political tangents !!!
Can someone explain to me why this is a regrettable nobel prize? It helped a lot of people.
I thought it was called pyrotherapy because you're basically fighting fire with fire
Maybe the malaria parasite ate the syphlis bacterium
I have never understood medical consent. I did not go to medical school. If I am sick, I want to get better, it is as simple as that. I do not care if that means chicken soup, prayer, medication, blood letting or hypnosis. I want to get better. Part of the message of a show like House MD was that only results matter. Things like patient consent slow down the process. Being nice doesn't matter, being ethical doesn't matter. So, a hundred years ago, in 1917 this doctor cured 2/3 of his pts with neurosyphilis before ABTs were developed. Good. Can anyone else demonstrate a method with a 66% cure rate without using modern medicine. To compare his work using modern standards and methods is foolish. Medical consent, as we know it, wasn't even a thing until the last 40 years.
Your comment deserves so many more likes.
While patient consent and all the forms that need to be filled in for approval to conduct research on humans do slow things down, they are also the part of the system that ensures that the patient survivability is as high as possible.
Imagine if you had cancer, and were on chemo, with a survival chance of 50%. The doctor decides that he's gonna try a new chemo cocktail, to see if it makes a difference, as one of his colleagues suggested over lunch that maybe a certain chemical will work; your doctor thinks it's not a bad idea, and selects 10 of their patients, including you, to test the new chemo on. As it turns out the new chemical doesn't improve anything, and also leaves some permanent damage. In a world without consent forms the doctor wouldn't have to ask you if you'd like to switch to the experimental therapy, they'd just put you on it. If the scenario I described I can't imagine you'd be very happy.
The person who would be quite happy would be your lawyer, as you'd be able to sue the hospital for the damage the therapy has caused to you. This is another benefit of informed consent form; the doctors inform you that there are possible side effects, and by signing the form you acknowledge it.
One of the great controversies that played a role in the development of consent forms was the use of Henrietta Lacks cells in research (the HeLa cell line), but it's quite a long topic and I urge you to have a quick look online if you are interested
So if you came down with a mystery illness that caused your fingers to swell and a doctor said "I'd like to drill a hole in your head in the hopes that pressure from your fingers will exit from the hole." you'd be completely fine with that? Because after all even if it failed then it would be one less thing to try on the next patient after they've taken you to the morgue.
I think I'm with most people when I say I don't want to be a guinea pig to someone who might have got their doctor's certificate off ebay.
I am familiar with HeLa cells.
The above scenario about doctors making guesses and testing those guesses is called science. It happens everyday in every hospital. Sometimes the guesses work, sometimes not. You know what pisses doctors off? Defensive medicine. Running unnecessary tests and trying every possible thing before actually doing real medicine just so the lawyers back off. It is expensive and wastes everyone's time. Informed consent is a joke, a myth. Unless a patient actually has medical training the idea that they will understand all the effects of a medication is, at best, delusional.
Regarding the HeLa cells: There was no requirement at that time (or at present) to inform patients or their relatives about such matters because discarded material or material obtained during surgery, diagnosis, or therapy was the property of the physician or the medical institution. This issue and Lacks' situation were brought up in the Supreme Court of California case of Moore v. Regents of the University of California. The court ruled that a person's discarded tissue and cells are not his or her property and can be commercialized.
The HeLa cell line has benefitted millions of people and animals. HELa cells lead to the polio vaccine, parvo vaccine, hormone therapies, disease research, gene mapping, and effects of toxic substances and radiation on humans. Additionally, HeLa cells have been used to test human sensitivity to tape, glue, cosmetics, and many other products.
I am certain that Mrs.Lacks was a kind, nice little old lady, who made cookies for all the kids in the neighborhood. But she had cancer, she died. Her cancer cells saved, and continues to save, millions of lives every year. The good of the many outweigh the good of the one.
For the Lacks' family the issue was not patient consent, they didn't give a damn about that. They wanted money from the commercialization of their dead grandmother's tumor.
I say again, medical consent is stupid.
Here's me thinking that pyrotherapy is setting people on fire.
Maybe the body's/immune system's efforts to fight off Malria succeeded in fighting off the Neurosyphilis instead (in the 50% of cases that patients recovered). Like, the body/immune system developed a way of fighting off one disease when it meant to actually develop a way of fighting off the other - or something.
I read this and was hoping for a new kind mental health therapy for my cPTSD. Im not upset though, I love learning about neat stuff that isn’t what I thought.
This was done in the tv series The Knick as well
His science isn't bad. It's science look at WW2.