Oh, I didn't mean any of that to sound like annoyance. Just responding to what you said. I feel that I have responded to the specific things you have brought up and most of them more than once
.
However, I do have a hard time following some of your posts with all the underlining and such (not meaning to criticize) so if I'm missing stuff I didn't mean to. Use the quote function more and it will be easier to tell what you are saying and what you're quoting. It could be that you've acknowledged things and I've misunderstood.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Iron
don't see where your article shows any prove of how and why ice therapy works.
|
Iron, bro, please read more carefully the specific statement I make. You said there is no "reason" to use ice and have posted things debating whether the metabolic effects of ice are good or bad. So my purpose is to show the "theory" behind it, i.e. the reasoning. As I said, info. And this suggests the specific areas of further research which goes much more in depth than just one study saying the metabolic effect of ice is bad.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Iron
The self described Objective of the study had nothing to do with showing that icing works anyway.
|
Go back and read what I said. This article clearly delineates the reasoning behind ice and that is all I wanted to show. The reason I wanted to show it is because what has been posted so far could lead people to believe that there is no reasoning at all behind it, and, that is not a fair assumption. I never said it proved anything. But I repeat myself again!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Iron
few showed where icing actually hinders healing.
|
We haven't seen those studies. And the reviews both of us have posted didn't find enough info to go either way.
If someone can acknowledge that ice can limit further damage, and not just from swelling but from ischemic effects and others, then how is that not going to affect the ultimate outcome? My main point is that nobody has given valid reason why not either. And since we are supposed to make our own decision I like to consider those reasons. Now you know that I will continue to use ice, but I DON'T KNOW. My mind is not made up one way or another. I'll admit I have personal reasons to use ice since I've had lots of joint injuries. Including three bad ankle injuries, a knee ligament injury, and shoulder injuries. The times I didn't use ice when I was younger, I had to walk on cruthches for a week and a half to two weeks. The times I used ice I was on my feet sooner and return to activity definitely affects long term outcome. So yes I believe in ice.
BTW, no article is perfect and no author is completly unbiased. In the quotes you used above from the artcle, it said that the efficacy needs to be verified AND that it was efficacious. They were saying that the theory behind the modalitly of it's effectiveness has changed but that doesn't change the fact that it works. So clearly the author seems to think it IS efficacious despite his statement that more research is needed to prove it's effectiveness. And he sound's smarter than me so I'm pretty comfortable in using it
j/k
But again, I'm not trying to prove anything. Just showing what's out there, as you are.
At this point, neither one of us can prove or disprove it. I cetainly can see that.