Hacker News Reader

Comment by nikolay | Hacker News Reader

I never took Tylenol/Paracetamol/acetaminophen, or anything containing it or given it to my children. We never reduce fever below 39.5/103.1 either - risks of febrile seizures are overstated and if you're a responsible parent, not a lazy one, you can see if things are going South, but there are other traditional means to lower fever. People are just too spoiled nowadays!

I tested positive with COVID-19 on Tuesday and had a pretty high fever (103) with a terrible headache, but I didn't take ibuprofen. First, because it could lower my fever, second, because its anti-inflammatory effect would compromise my immune system response to the pathogen. Most people I know immediately try to lower their fever to reduce their discomfort and would immediately take it for headaches, too.

View on HN

I’m not a doctor but I’m pretty sure ibuprofen is _not_ acetaminophen.

Of course it's not - I clearly said I never take acetaminophen, if for headache/fever I would rather take ibuprofen instead... but I don't take even that w/o a solid reason!

People do that because they haven't been "educated" (even superficially) about what fever really is, which is your body working hard to fight of the infection. And messing with it is counterproductive.

They also do it with their kids because they want to help them. Also, some people have a lot on their plate, calling them lazy is not right thing to do. I have health insurance that covers me when my kids are sick (not in the US), so I can take care of them "properly ". This doesn't make me more responsible and someone else that works two jobs and can't afford to have sick kids lazy.

Also, I don't lower fever, even with my kids unless it prevents them from sleeping. But overstated is relative, it's happened to the kid next door from me. You don't want to be careless with infants.

They are lazy if they don’t educate themselves about what they are doing and what they are giving their children. Don’t get offended. I’ve never done anything health-related to my kids without doing thorough research. I’ve witnessed four major medical mistakes made right in front of me in Orange County, California, in some of the best medical facilities and by the best pediatricians in the area! That’s why I don’t blindly trust anyone, whether it’s a doctor or not. I use critical thinking and always look for alternative advice. Doctors often find me a nuisance, but that’s okay with me. Just try asking a doctor when they prescribe Tylenol for a fever: “Why should I try lowering their fever?” or “Why should I give them Tylenol exactly?” The hepatotoxicity of acetaminophen occurs when the production of the toxic metabolite NAPQI exceeds the liver’s glutathione detoxification capacity, which can happen quite frequently during infections! So, then ask your doctor: “Doesn’t it make sense to give them NAC with Tylenol as well, just in case?” They won’t know what to say, trust me!

I have not found any study published after 2020 (the year when the French minister made the statement) that advises against ibuprofen for COVID-19. But I'm not a doctor, so I'd be interested to know your source.

Studies showed negative efficacy. At best, no difference. [0]

[0]: https://c19early.org/ib

> risks of febrile seizures are overstated and if you're a responsible parent, not a lazy one, you can see if things are going South

Not always. Blaming “lazy” and irresponsible parents is disgusting.

But it's the truth. Something that has just a 2% incidence should not dictate 98% of the treatments. Compromising the innate immunity of the 98% is more disgusting!

> But it's the truth.

No it's not, in many case there's just no way the parent can tell something is about to go wrong.

> Something that has just a 2% incidence should not dictate 98% of the treatments.

This isn't the same argument, and I would agree if it was true, but you're distorting numbers as the actual prevalence estimations lie between 2 and 14%[1].

Now you could make the argument that 10% is low enough of incidence it shouldn't dictate the treatment of the other 90%, but that's not what you're doing, instead you are blaming helpless parents and cherry picking numbers, making nothing but noise.

Oh, and by the way, most parents aren't in fact giving their kids paracetamol for that particular reason (as most parents are simply unaware of the existence of febrile seizures), but to help their children sleep and rest (and so themselves can sleep). And in fact, resting being key in innate immunity efficiency, I'm not particularly convinced about the effectiveness of letting your kids cry all night because of the pain and fever. You do what you want with your own kids, but there's no justification for insulting other parents.

Good day.

[1]: https://www.bmj.com/content/351/bmj.h4240

The vast majority of these seizures are benign. If your child had a febrile seizure, then there's a 30% chance of having it again, so, then you have some excuse to keep their fever under control (hopefully not with Tylenol as there are other antipyretics, too). Here's a nice summary by Gemini:

Key Takeaways

- No Lasting Damage: Simple febrile seizures do not cause long-term brain damage, intellectual impairment, or learning disabilities.

- Benign Nature: Despite how terrifying they are to witness, febrile seizures are considered benign events in the vast majority of cases.

- Focus on Reassurance: The primary goal for healthcare providers is to reassure parents and caregivers, providing them with the knowledge and tools to manage a fever and understand the low risk of lasting effects.

Ah, a genius that need an artificial brain to overcome its lack of literacy and is somehow proud of that.

How surprising given the rest of the conversation …

It's not a brain, its a statistical summarizer, but based on the result, it seems to work better than your brain, obviously!

I have 3 kids, all grown up and healthy. They all slept perfectly well with fever, so, there's no such thing as a febrile insomniac kid. High fever has a potent detox element as you sweat out the toxic metabolites. I'm tired of parents who overprotect their children while harming them this way - there are so many studies - from overdrugging kids (thank God that most anti-cough drugs are now off the shelves), to forcing them to wear helmets, no go alone, etc.

> They all slept perfectly well with fever, so, there's no such thing as a febrile insomniac kid.

Please stop believing your sample of 3 kids is representative of the entire population. You were lucky to have kids who sleep well and that's good for you, but that doesn't make other parents lazy or irresponsible.

> I'm tired of parents who overprotect their children

You know what's even more tiring? Parents who judge other parents while not knowing anything about kids in general just because they happened to be lucky on one particular topic. You won't be lucky all the time though.

> to forcing them to wear helmets

I hope you won't regret saying that ever in your life, but being anti-helmet really is as idiotic as being an antivaxxer.

In my childhood, when the movie BMX Bandits (1983) [0] was super popular, helmets and any kind of protection did not exist. We did all kinds of crazy stunts, influenced by the movie. I don't recall any harmed kid among tens if not hundreds. Scaped knees and elbows - sure, but that's all!

[0]: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0085204

Please ask Gemini to explain you that you cannot generalize over small samples like your two kids or a few dozen kids from your childhood…

Literally no kids of a mid-size town in Bulgaria had no head injury riding a bike w/o helmet since I was kid. Not sure where you got the two or a dozen. In fact, a dozen is a fairly good sample size in terms of medical studies, sometimes done with conclusions done with smaller cohorts. In fact, the first COVID-19 booster by Pfizer was only tested on mice, not on a single person even, yet it was administered to billions of people.

Helmets and bike gear are in industry and American industries have powerful lobbies.

> Literally no kids of a mid-size town in Bulgaria had no head injury riding a bike w/o helmet since I was kid

This is BS, any kid could have had one and you simply wouldn't have known it, especially as a kid. Even if some kid died, your parents would likely have been aware of that, but kids around likely wouldn't have, unless they were in the same class or otherwise knew the victim personally. (Simple exercise, check how many child around you do you remember dying when you were a kid, and then check the mortality rate in your country for this age class. You'll realize that statistically during the time you were at school, a bunch of kids in your neighborhood actually died of random causes and you never knew about that).

> In fact, the first COVID-19 booster by Pfizer was only tested on mice, not on a single person even, yet it was administered to billions of people.

Again, this is complete nonsense. There were indeed a few rounds of human trial before mainstream use … That's infowars-level of antivax BS.

> Helmets and bike gear are in industry and American industries have powerful lobbies.

Of course, what's an online discussion without the mandatory conspiracy theory … I appreciate the originality though, as the “big helmet” lobby isn't something I had encountered before. I see you prefer tinfoil hats to bike helmets …

You assume and don't research. There are studies that show that the more your trust kids to be on their own, the lesser the injuries. Yes, the first Pfizer booster was never tested on humans - it's a known fact!

> You assume and don't research.

Oh god, the typical “do your own research”. Is it HN or a random Facebook group? I thought people had a scientific background here, but apparently not everyone has one…

> There are studies that show that the more your trust kids to be on their own, the lesser the injuries

Trusting your kids != don't wear helmets. Note that it doesn't mean you shouldn't give medications to your kids either.

Yes there are overprotective parents that are toxic to their children, but that doesn't mean we need to go full new-age bullshit like you are.

> Yes, the first Pfizer booster was never tested on humans - it's a known fact!

I don't know who “knows” it, but it's completely made up…

Yes, FDA confirmed the first booster was only tested on mice [0].

[0]: https://www.newsweek.com/covid-booster-tested-mice-what-we-k...

Ah I see now, lack of reading proficiency + Newsweek sensationalist title got you confused.

It's written down here:

> new boosters use the same technology and process as the previous vaccines

It's just the same vaccine by FDA's standards and it has indeed been tested on hundreds of thousands of human test subjects.

Now explain how it's relevant to you and your kids not being dead yet?

The technology is the same, but not the vaccine. We test drugs, not drug technologies! Others, then all classic vaccines should not be tested as there are just a couple of vaccine technologies in use before mRNA vaccines.

This was all over the news that before releasing to the public, it was ONLY tested on mice. And then there was a public uproar. And then people stop using these untested toxic substances.

> The technology is the same, but not the vaccine. We test drugs, not drug technologies!

Of course we test technology, you cannot individually test each dose of vaccine! You check that the vaccine production is able to produce consistent output, and then you test a few thousand doses and then extrapolate from there. What you've tested is the particular technology being used to produce the said vaccine.

> Others, then all classic vaccines should not be tested as there are just a couple of vaccine technologies in use before mRNA vaccines

Not if you define technology like you did above: if each exact formulation of a vaccine is a “technology”, then there are as many “technologies” as commercialized vaccines (which is the correct call, they all have their own patents and other IP associated to the vaccine). The concept of “mRNA vaccine” cannot be patented, each exact formulation can, and that's what reused between the first dose and the booster.

> And then people stop using these untested toxic substances.

Sad news is that half million people idiotic enough to call these “untested” and “toxic substance” have died. On the flip side they have been evicted from the gene pool now.

Feel free not to vaccinate you or your children, you're helping natural selection do its job.

It's not well-known, but many people died from ventilators or improper, or rather chaotic, treatment. Vaccine injury is real, it's scientifically validated, and it has injured and killed more people than COVID-19! Myocarditis is not reversible, and no wonder so many young people suddenly died from CVDs without prior history.

> Vaccine injury is real, it's scientifically validated

Yes, vaccines, like all medicine have adverse side effects sometimes.

> and it has injured and killed more people than COVID-19

This is bollocks. Vaccines have possibly killed a few thousand people, when the disease's death toll is counted in millions. Same for nonlethal problems.

> Myocarditis is not reversible, and no wonder so many young people suddenly died from CVDs without prior history.

Yup, Myocarditis and other cardiac problems are one of the most common serious consequences of COVID-19…

Again the prevalence of those is much worse among non-vaccinated than among vaccinated, even though the vaccine like the disease is a risk factor (but much less than the virus).

It's surprising to see Facebook antivax groups narrative popping up on HN…

Reply on news.ycombinator.com