[AF] Vicks Vaporub

[Ramon Diaz-Alersi]

Otro estudio con n diseño de risa... Léase tambien la carta publicada en el
mismo número:

*Vaporub is still not the answer*

"Dr. Paul's study (1) of the comparative effects of Vaporub, petrolatum and
placebo on cold symptoms has so many deficiencies that I was disappointed
there was no accompanying editorial; this article could be seriously misused
by many parents and pediatricians. First, Dr. Paul is a paid consultant for
Proctor and Gamble, maker of Vicks Vaporub. Second, the study was not
blinded; and 100% of parents guessed correctly they were giving Vaporub.
Third, the study was of only 44 children. Fourth, on a 7 point Likert scale
of symptom severity, one must question the clinical significance of a
difference of only 1-1.5 points between placebo and Vaporub. (i.e. on most
symptoms, placebo parents judged severity going from a baseline of 5 to 4,
and Vaporub from a baseline of 5 to 3). Is this worth the 46% adverse
effects Paul et al found? (Coming from the era of Vaporub 'attacks' as a
child, I remember the burning eyes and chest being worse than the cold). I
fear Paul's conclusions will get into parent magazines, and we'll again see
camphor poisonings; (40 cc being potentially fatal in a child < 6 years).
And if parents misuse it on their infants, as they do other cold medicines,
seizures can result, which Paul mentions only in passing.(2)"

Saludos.

---
Ramón Díaz-Alersi



> El 19 de febrero de 2011 20:17, Pedro del Río Pérez escribió:
> 
> En este artículo de Pediatrics, el Vicks Vaporub alivia más los síntomas