Hacker News new | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
Phenylephrine Is No More Effective Than Placebo for Nasal Congestion (2015) (jwatch.org)
91 points by DyslexicAtheist 14 days ago | hide | past | web | favorite | 100 comments

That's the "Sudafed PE" you can buy without going to the pharmacy, right? I always joked with my wife that he PE stood for Placebo Effect. That stuff is garbage.

I had chronic sinus headaches triggered by food. I've always found it effective.

It is a big misconception that the placebo effect must be ineffective — there wouldn't be an effect at all if that was the case. I hear it's sometimes even effective when you're told you're taking a placebo.

Definitely this needs to be pointed out more. My wife used to get upset if I suggested something might be a placebo because she thought I was telling her that she was fabricating the observed effects on her.

I think the placebo effect still working even if the person is told it is a placebo is a factor of whether or not you consider placebo to be "bad" or "ineffective". To me it just suggests a difference in the actual mechanism of how the placebo is effective. I'm curious to know if there are ways to increase the effectiveness of placebo by having a strong/pleasant smell or taste associated with it or some other sensory effect that is immediately noticeable.

I've always found it fascinating that naloxone (the drug administered to people who OD on heroin, since it counters the effects) actually does make the placebo effect go away (that is, placebos become ineffective). Makes me think that the placebo effect is very real and something like a self-induced opiate.

I've always wondered why placebo works for minor problems (a cold, nasal congestion, mild pain) but it does not for real diseases. For example, you never see chemotherapy treatments compared to placebo (because it is unethical to conduct such a study), but it could be done with "wait and monitor" cancers such as slow-growing prostate cancer.

If it were placebo I should have been perfectly happy taking acetominophen or ibuprofen for my sinus headaches (back when I didn't realize they were sinus headaches). Sudafed PE causes my nose to drain and sinus headaches to go away, I wish I knew about it sooner.

The placebo effect is particularly effective for simple pain like headaches (also anxiety, and nausea).

The sinus headaches are a physical reaction though. It's from constriction of the sinuses. When you take these it relaxes and the snot in your nose drains. I had sinus headaches for 23 years (not realizing they were sinus headaches), took all sorts of headache pills, they were ineffective. These are effective for me, I do not think it is placebo.

Psychology actually says this is because you're telling your brain that this simple pain should be handled by the meds you're taking so your brain considers that to be an error.

Manufacturers should start selling bottles of pills that contain a percentage of identical placebo pills at a discount - Perhaps you switch to Tylenol 50%, then Tylenol 25%, then end up at Tylenol Homeopathy version?

I would consider voting for a politician with a platform of eliminating phenylephrine and making it easier to obtain pseudoephedrine, i.e. not having to get it from behind a counter while showing ID and signing a logbook. Although perhaps I'm naive about the seriousness of the methamphetamine epidemic and the positive impact the additional restrictions have had to society.

Beware pseudoephedrine. People have been known to abuse it, and it has dangers especially for those with heart issues: People with heart disease or hypertension should watch out for any legitimate drug that contains pseudoephedrine. See, pseudoephedrine doesn't just constrict the blood vessels in your nose and sinuses; it can also raise blood pressure and heart rate, setting the stage for vascular catastrophe. Over the years, pseudoephedrine has been linked to heart attacks and strokes. "Pseudoephedrine can also worsen symptoms of benign prostate disease and glaucoma," http://www.nbcnews.com/id/24777955/ns/health-health_care/t/d...

If I recall correctly several studies have shown that phenylephrine has similar blood pressure risks. Combined with having lackluster (if any) impact on the condition it’s specifically designed to treat could actually lead to a worse impact on those with high blood pressure since you’ll take more of it, hoping it’ll finally work.

So yeah, people need to be aware that pseudoephedrine has side effects, but it’s arguably equal to if not better than the alternative that’s being pushed as “safe”.

I remember years ago I was at the gym with a work buddy and we decided to try one of the drinks offered there, since we forgot our water bottles. We had the most amazing workout. We both executed personal bests, and after the workout we felt great. Much less tired than normal. At that point, I turned to the empty bottles and found it was chocked full of pseudoephedrine. It was a little scary to us, so we never did that again.

Yes, it is a powerful drug.

That's interesting. I never gave much thought to the fact that pseudoephedrine is a stimulant and can be harmful/abused in its own right. I just know it helps me breathe when I'm congested.

I feel like the dichotomy between OTC and prescription medications tends to make me assume that prescription drugs are potentially dangerous while anything available OTC is harmless.

You used to be able to buy ephedrine at truck stops. It was widely abused as a stimulant.

Where can you buy beverages with pseudoephedrine added?

More common would be ephedra, though this has been mostly illegal to sell as a food/drink ingredient in the US since 2004. Ephedra contains ephedrine and pseudoephedrine.

This was in the early 00's. It was banned sometime after the episode discussed.

"Years ago" I'm guessing

OTC pseudoephedrine packaging makes it clear you should ask your doctor if you have high blood pressure, heart disease, enlarged prostate or several other conditions. I might prefer that it say why, but this is at least enough to get me to google it if I have reason to be concerned about any of those things.

I want to be trusted with medicine that actually works, and that means I need to take some responsibility for understanding the dosing and side effects before I take it.

You are trusted this way. Sudafed (and other pseudoephedrine meds) don't require prescriptions. You don't have to justify your purchase when you ask for them. The reason they're behind the counter is to prevent bulk purchase, since pseudoephedrine is basically a few household-chemical steps away from being methamphetamine. Despite that fact, you're still allowed to buy them for any or no reason, in quantities sufficient for any practical use.

The annoyance is that there's an ineffective medicine taking their place on the shelves in front of the counter, and no sign saying "don't bother, just ask the pharmacist for the real thing". But you know that now, so this isn't so much a problem for you.

The OP you're responding to is just saying, be careful with pseudoephedrine, independent of the law. And they're right; it's been linked to heart attacks and strokes.

Agreed. Had some irregular heartbeats with it as well that spooked me. I do love the energy boost it gives you though, it’s mildly nootropic

yes it definitely increases my vocabulary a little bit while I'm taking it heh heh. from the side effects though, it doesn't seem worth it. PPA (Phenylpropanolamine) was similar, but less speedy and spacier. Its is now banned bc it harms people with fragile vasculature.

The problem is: it actually works. Really really well. Unlike phenylephrine.

The biggest effect of the ban has been to largely push production from independent producers in the US to drug cartels in Mexico. It has been a failure at actually reducing usage.

Not just Mexico, but also countries in Africa with very sophisticated production facilities.

But I have to go begging for working cold medicine.

And the hostile suspicion of pharmacy techs when you ask for it!

I swear they all believe in phenylephrine and think the only reason someone would buy psueudafed is to do meth.

Hmm, I never get this reaction, I suspect it has to do with the thousand-yard stare that fairly clearly conveys, "I'm way too sick to care about your judgment cuz I ran out of Sudafed and now I'm dealing with you."

I can't imagine one giving me any actual lip, but my escalation strategy there is to look them dead in the eye and ask them whether they're going to give me my perfectly-legal cold remedy or not.

> "Seriously considering buying some illegal drugs to try to turn them back into cold medicine."

Now that sounds like a project.

A Simple and Convenient Synthesis of Pseudoephedrine From N-Methylamphetamine[1]

[1] http://heterodoxy.cc/meowdocs/pseudo/pseudosynth.pdf

I’m convinced that the location of your pharmacy plus whatever class signals you’re silently emanating strongly influence how pharmacists respond to requests for pseudoephedrine. I’ve also never had any issues getting it, but I’m an upper-income guy in a wealthy area of Seattle. I have family members in the rural Midwest who, to put it gently, do not signal upper-class status, and they have told me that pharmacists give them lots of hassle regarding cold medicine. You can sort of understand the logic but it’s a pretty ugly display of naked classism.

If that's the case for OTC cold medicine, it makes you wonder how it is for prescription products like ADHD medication or, God forbid, opiate-based painkillers. My sympathy is stirred up for anyone in chronic pain who happens to exude lower-class status signals!

If that's the case for OTC cold medicine...

If you follow along with the thread, you'll realize this isn't about OTC cold medicine.

What? It's about psuedoephedrine which is available without a prescription; but is subject to mandatory tracking. Not too many years ago, it was available off the shelf.

Two states ban pseudoephedrine without a prescription, and you can’t buy it across state lines.

I have six kids, so it can look suspicious when we all get a cold, but I go to a pharmacy I use regularly and never get hassled.

This isn't even an anecdote about someone being refused sudafed; it's a conjecture that there might be such an anecdote.

Not so much that, just a bit of curious wonder / hope / sadness about the fact that I personally have interpersonal resources that took careful observation to learn that other people do not.

By other people I am including my mother, who is the nicest lady you could imagine, but regularly gets shamed and embarrassed by the medical establishment. This stuff affects her.

It doesn't affect me. I will either escalate all the way to a physical fistfight if I have to or just suddenly decide all of a sudden it's not worth my time and just walk away and forget about it. Usually a bit of both because I typically find that the dynamics I thought I was dealing with going in weren't really there and I'm just acting silly.

Either way I get answers, darnit, and I don't stop until I get them. Same hacker mentality applied to the interpersonal realm. I don't really know how to articulate this mindset, that you really don't have to put up with this behavior, that you can have power over the situation, not even to my own mother.

Where I'm coming from is just that the statistical base rate of pseudo->meth cooks is so low, I presume even if you account for "smurfing" (because nasal congestion is such a universal ailment) that dragnetting sudafed sales can't be productive, and pharmacists will quickly lose interest in scrutinizing customers buying in normal amounts. I'm prepared to be wrong, my suspicion is that most of the concern about disapproving looks from pharmacists is imagined.

I bought some sudafed a week ago and got offered more of it by the pharmacist (they sold me a package with twice as many pills as the one I brought up a card for). And I am a pretty scruffy looking dude; on my better days my fashion sensibility and grooming approaches "possibly homeless".

I usually approach with something indicating disdain for the restrictions like "I'd like as much store-brand pseudoephedrine as the ninnies will let you sell me". I've never had any pushback.

I used to think this, but now I just go ask for the sudafed. It's usually quicker to buy, since you end up checking it out at the pharmacy rather than at the regular checkout. As long as I can reliably buy it --- and I've never had a problem --- I'm not sure why I'd be up in arms about the fact that sudafed is approximately as hard to buy as a pack of cigarettes.

Phenylephrine has been the bane of people's existence for years. I have to constantly remind friends/family when they're complaining that their cold medicine didn't help: "If you pulled it off the shelf yourself, it won't do anything. The kind with the active ingredient that actually works is behind the counter."

It doesn't help that many people shop by brand names and not ingredients. When my SO has cold-type symptoms, I ask her specifically what they are so I can get the right thing.

Otherwise she will just ask for "Mucinex" because it worked really well that one time. This ignores the fact that like all of the *Quils, Sudafeds, Tylenol Cold-Flu-and-Explosive-Diarrheas, and Robitussins, there are multiple preparations made from various ingredients.

If I need an expectorant, I want guaifenesin. Cough suppressant: dextromethorphan. Decongestant: psuedoephedrine. Pain reliever: acetaminophen or ibuprofen or whatever.

It also doesn't help that it's hard to find the specific mix you need in a single preparation but it's also gotten harder to find just single ingredient store brands of some of these as well.

I don't want to take something I don't need so I'd rather not just buy some name brand kitchen-sink capsule that adds various decongestants or antihistamines if I don't need them.

But then the same focus on brand names and basic descriptions can lead to people buying homeopathic sugar pills because they're in the same department and list similar symptoms. If you never shop by ingredient, you won't know that a 1000x diluted extract of duck liver isn't the same as pseudoephedrine and guaifenesin.

As a retail pharmacist, I agree this can be an annoying problem. I try to encourage single-ingredient generic products as much as possible. And yes, "brand extension" as they call it has rendered popular names like Mucinex and Robitussin useless or even downright harmful. I think many people just look for something with "severe cold" or whatever without even considering what's in it.

It's not just patients either. Some OTC products are covered by some insurance plans. I've had prescribers change from one OTC product to another that shared none of its ingredients with the first. Not sure what they were treating other than "patient wants a prescription".

And don't get me started on homeopathic products. I had a man come in once with the box of a homeopathic product looking to buy more for his wife. I looked around, showed him a similar product, and asked if this was OK. He said it was as long as it worked as well. That I could guarantee!

I do try to dissuade such purchases, but when the customer comes in knowing what they want, it's often a losing battle. The one time homeopathic products can be useful is when someone just has to have something to treat their two-year-old's cold.

I wouldn't fault you if you tried harder, particularly if it made people stop screaming "ZICAM!" at me every time I start to sniffle.

In general, cold medicines do not work. We cannot cure the cold viruses, only alleviate symptoms. Mostly, warmth, fluids and rest, and not spreading the cold to others is best advice, plus decongestants, which is what you're mostly being sold. Even so, people ask for antibiotics for many ailments where they are useless, and add to resistance instead.

I had one of those experiences a while back where the conclusion is so obvious that you wonder how you hadn't worked it out many years earlier.

I actually did rest and drink plenty of fluids when I had a horrible cold.

I stayed in bed for most of the next 24 hours, sleeping when I could, at a comfortable room temperature and with a little ventilation.

I made sure I drank several pints of water during that time, even though at first my sore throat was hurting every time I swallowed and I really didn't want to.

One day later, a condition that had felt like it was going to give me at least another week of unpleasantness was already greatly improved. Not fully recovered, but much, much better, far beyond anything any cold remedy medication had ever done for me (though the real medicine did also help with decongestion and allowing enough comfort to fall asleep).

It turns out that doctors have been right all along and it was just me not getting it, fooling myself into thinking that if I went to bed a bit early and had a few extra sips of water then I was following the doctors' advice.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc.

I took megadoses of vitamin C and my cold I was sure would knock me out for a week went away!

Post hoc ergo propter hoc.

Except that taking proper rest and fluids has consistently helped me to get over anything like colds ever since, and as far as I'm aware it is the only common factor that changed other than my age.

I'm not saying you're wrong, and I agree that the data supports "rest and fluids".

But I have relatives that make similar statements about lots of health treatments that are absolutely not supported by the data, and probably just demonstrate variability and placebo effect.

Strongly disagree. For many people a cold with congestion turns into a sinus infection if not treated with decongestants. Then you actually do need the antibiotics!

It's dangerous to assume that just because the "cold medicine" doesn't attack the virus that it doesn't work.

> many people a cold with congestion turns into a sinus infection if not treated with decongestants. Then you actually do need the antibiotics!

This isn't strictly true either. An otherwise healthy person's body will take care of most sinus infections[1] itself given a little time and care. When it turns into something longer-term, that's when antibiotics may come into play.

[1] And these can be bacterial or viral

You know I'd rather not wait to find out if that infection is going to turn nasty and longer-term.

Did once - burst an eardrum and had to take a while off work.

It looks like this was known for a while now.

>The Food and Drug Administration withdrew its 1976 approval as a nasal decongestant in 2007


It shows a real disdain for the public; pseudephedrine used to be in Sudofed IIRC, which was really effective for me. They kept the exact name and packaging and removed the active ingredient - that's fraud IMO.

You can still get Sudafed with pseudoephedrine. You just have to show id (if you are in the US).


Are you in the US? We have Sudafed with pseudoephedrine in the UK.

I'm in UK. Perhaps they have a different one behind the counter? The "sudafed max strength" (presumably they added caffeine to make you think it was working?) I have only has phenylephrine.

[The inefficacy has been reported for a long time, eg https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/19230461/ .]

Edit: just checked, it seems out of the 30 or so "Sudafed" there is one with pseudoephedrine, the key phrase in the otherwise identical packaging is "clears catarrh". Woohoo!

So "max strength" means "no better than placebo", lol.

Hah, I don't remember the packaging. I think I went in and asked for the one with pseudoephedrine and the pharmacist understood.

Boots have their own brand pseudoephedrine tablets too, for future reference!

huh, in the US they added PE to the phenylephrine type.

Yeah, I was going to say that, they did changed the nome (sort of) in the US and you can still get the real stuff, you just have to submit to all sorts of privacy breaches and uncomfortable interactions.

"SudoGest!" which of course reads to me like "$ sudo gest" and now i'm wondering what "gest" is and why it needs su.

Seriously though just a couple days of this last week headed off a sinus infection so i didn't need antibiotics. Win!

Going to the counter and asking for a pack of sudafed and showing ID is an uncomfortable interaction? Do you never buy liquor?

I have walked out of pharmacies without buying Sudafed that I would have wanted because the "ask for a pack of Sudafed" step was too uncomfortable. Buying liquor is easier because I don't have to say words to explain what I want.

Edited to add: I'm not particularly up in arms about needing ID, and I feel like buying Sudafed got easier somehow recently, but this seemed like a place where I could help explain what sorts of things can be uncomfortable/difficult for some people.

I am almost never asked for ID when I buy liquor. Furthermore the liquor store does not record my ID after the purchase.

What is the concern about there being a record of your nasal congestion? There's a much firmer record of every sensitive prescription you've ever been given.

Probably the most rational, objective concern would be mistakenly exceeding a legal limit and being prosecuted. The limit (9g in a month) is high for an individual, but could be a real risk for someone who does most of the shopping for a large family. This kind of thing is not an imagined risk, as it has happened in reality: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/21/meth-laws-oregons-...

Recent backlash against tech companies tracking users suggests that in general, people do not like being tracked. People may even prefer less effective OTC medications to prescriptions on the basis of anonymity. This may or may not be based on a rational concern about a more concrete negative outcome.

I thought it was interesting that people might have been prosecuted for accidentally exceeding the pseudoephedrine purchase limits, so I tracked down the case that the article mentions and pulled it from PACER, both the complaint and the sentencing memorandum.

This may be an "exception that proves the rule", since William Fousse, the guy who got prosecuted, was addicted to pseudoephedrine and was buying large amounts of it, so large that the investigating officers found it implausible that he'd be personally consuming it (it turns out, he was; he was doing a see-saw thing where he'd get drunk and then use the pseudoephedrine to come up from it to get work done). He was buying from multiple pharmacies, apparently to avoid the limit.

This is not a case that makes me alarmed for my own safety when going to buy a 40-pack of sudafed, though I'm receptive to the argument that prosecution for an actual sudafed addiction was not the intent of the law and should not have been prosecuted in the first place.

I don't think anybody should be prosecuted for any self-administration of any substance provided there was no harm or direct, undue risk of harm to others (e.g. DUI). That's a bit of a tangent though.

Instead, let's take a look at scenarios where you might buy over 9000 mg in a month. The maximum recommended dose is 50mg every 8 hours, so 3 times a day. 9000/50/3 = 60 person-days. If it's allergy season and they're all taking the maximum dose, a family of four could hit the limit in 15 days.

Inefficient distribution (making sure there's always some in both of the cars, each kid's backpack, at each adult's work) makes it even easier to hit the limit. The largest size normally available is 96x25 mg. Four of those is 9600 mg. Just trying to get a box for each family member makes you a criminal.

The point I was making was that in the case you cited, the person charged didn't just blow far past the limit (because, again, they were abusing pseudoephedrine as a stimulant), but also took steps to avoid the limit (for instance, by striping their purchases across multiple pharmacies).

Perhaps the limit should be higher? Certainly, I agree in advance that people not making meth and not reselling shouldn't be getting prosecuted. But the story of William Fousse doesn't really have much to tell me about the public policy value of pseudoephedrine restrictions or about the likelihood that an especially allergic family might get caught up in it.

If you find other cases where something like that happened, I'm happy to dig into the filings as best I can.


There are also a couple surveys of the state laws easily Googleable, and most of them have "knowingly" (for evading the limit) or "intent" (to manufacture meth) standards for the offenses themselves.

Here are a couple more. While both of these do involve state laws, one of which looks to have lower limits than the Federal law, the act itself appears to be purchasing pseudoephedrine for on-label use without knowingly skirting legal limits.



Didn't these both happen in the immediate wake of the pseudoephedrine ban, before the states built their automatic registry systems? Don't you get simply get denied your purchase if you try to buy over the limit now?

That does appear to be the case, however attempt to commit a crime is a crime. If prosecutions under that theory are not happening now, they're one "get tough on drugs" prosecutor away from happening.

"Do not take pseudoephedrine for longer than 7 days in a row."[1]


The professional information on drugs.com does not suggest such a limitation when used under the supervision of a healthcare provider. It's most likely there because some common causes of congestion that don't clear up in a week can be more medically significant than the common cold. OTC pain relievers say not to use for more than 10 days, also because the underlying cause may require treatment.

Regardless, people often do use OTC drugs in ways that might not be advisable, but definitely aren't recreational (leaving aside the issue of whether criminalizing recreational drug use is a good idea).

Can we all just agree that because the ban on bulk sudafed purchases has nothing to do with drug safety, there's no public policy conclusion we can draw one way or the other from sudafed's counterindications? I can see this thread going back and force on blood pressure and stroke stuff and I think we probably all agree that if this was the only issue, pseudoephedrine would be back on the shelves.

If a family could reasonably anticipate being arrested or searched for consuming sudafed regularly for several weeks (bad allergies, sinus cold, whatever), I stipulate that's significant and problematic. What I'm contending is that in 2019, that's so unlikely to happen as to be implausible.

Yes, it's clearly about meth. I just wanted to make clear that the fact that it says not to take it for more than 7 days doesn't mean people won't, and I don't think it's very controversial that people shouldn't be prosecuted for it.

I don't know how likely prosecution is in 2019. There have been a few under much more restrictive state laws making pseudoephedrine prescription-only and criminalizing traveling out of state to obtain it, but that's not the original issue we were discussing.

It's probably pretty unlikely under Federal law, but it took several posts back and forth on HN along with a PACER lookup for us to reach that conclusion explains fairly well why many people are uncomfortable with having their purchases tracked in this manner.

That's a fair point. I concede: I understand why it makes some people nervous.

Colour me unsurprised. It's never worked for me, I've spoken to doctors who have agreed it's been useless for them and their patients. I won't buy any product containing it.

It's nice that there's now research backing up these anecdotal pieces.

Had the same experience.

Side note, taking pseudoephedrine HCl has been an absolute lifesaver for me when I have terrible sinus pressure on planes. If you Google for "relieve sinus pressure on plane" or something similar, most of it is stuff that won't help when you're already in pain. I always take an ibuprofin and the real deal sudafed to open up my sinuses and relieve the pain, it works pretty well.

This probably sounds like nonsense, but with nasal congestion sometimes I can clear my sinuses by concentrating on where it feels constricted and trying to relax that area. I don't know anything about this drug, but I am pro placebo effect.

I actually miss phenylpropanolamine. Phenylephrine never does anything for me, and pseudoephedrine gives me rocks in my head.

Nowadays I just take a lot of antihistamines to stop the snot, but they don't do much for congestion.

I can't remember where I read this, but my understanding was that phenylephrine was effective in nasal sprays, but is broken down in the stomach and isn't effective orally.

It's worth remembering that lots of medications may not be much better than placebo; for instance, guaifenesin is apparently not effective, despite forming the basis for popular expectorants.

Heh. I see someone else follows @SwiftOnSecurity.

I didn’t know this until this morning, but it matches my experience perfectly.

I think I tried this once (accidentally) back when pseudoephedrine was put behind the counter and immediately figured out it was total garbage compared to the real thing. I can't believe they're allowed to charge money for that stuff.

Hahaha, this is so satisfying, I never buy that crap and insist on waiting in line in the damn pharmacy for proper pseudoephedrine. I always figured it was possible it was all in my head (I'm not sick THAT often to say for sure), but phenelephrine never seemed like it did a thing.

Funny to read this today as I wake up with a "hangover" from taking Sudafed PE last night. I do have a box of "the good stuff" but it isn't rated for night-time use. I think I'll dump the remainder of the bottle out.

Diphenhydramine (Benadryl) usually counteracts the stimulant effect of pseudoephedrine, and is one of the main ingredients in NyQuil (along with a cough suppressant). That combination is what made NyQuil so formidable before the pseudo-pocalypse, but you can recreate the effect just by taking both.

However nasal sprays like Afrin are just as effective and don’t have nearly the stimulant effect, especially when used with NyQuil

Pseudoephedrine does have a stimulant effect. I find that if I've got bad congestion, the stimulant disturbs sleep less than the congestion would, but I'll still reach for something like afrin (Oxymetazoline) at night in spite of its "bounce back" effect.

What about eucalyptus oil candy? It instantly unblocks my nose whenever I take it, I don't think I'm imagining that.

And if you have sore throat and / or cough, boil a cup of milk with a quarter teaspoon of turmeric powder, pour it into a cup, add half a teaspoon of pepper powder, stir and let it cool down. You can also add honey or sugar to improve the taste. Drink it warm / hot before you sleep and when you wake up, and be amazed at the quick relief you will feel.

Great idea! Turmeric is a good anti-inflammatory drug.

If you burn yourself, you can put yellow mustard the burn and let it sit for a minute or so. Pain will nearly disappear and healing will be notably accelerated. Supposedly it’s due to the turmeric used as color (brown mustard won’t work).

Wouldn’t’ve believed it if I hadn’t tried it myself. Works like a hot damn.

True about Turmeric but for sore throat / coughs it's the Black pepper that really gives the quick relief.

Why would you pop pills when there are perfectly good sprays?

There are reasons for using one in detriment of the other. Like rebound congestion.

The pill also help if you are prone to ear infections. They thin everything out up there.

Applications are open for YC Summer 2019

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact