Blog

Posted on

Bee Venom Therapy

A bee on a flower

A stinging endorsement

My experience may be exceptional, but I’ve found the several bee stings I’ve received over the years to be rather unpleasant—even after remembering my favorite things, I still felt pretty bad. So when a reader wrote to tell me about a treatment for such conditions as arthritis and multiple sclerosis (MS) that involves voluntarily stinging oneself with bees, I must admit I found the whole idea rather creepy and off-putting. Although this alternative therapy has not yet proven itself in widespread clinical trials, quite a few people swear by it, insisting that the benefits far outweigh the pain. And even some doctors are trying it with their patients. I feel obliged to insert the usual “don’t try this at home” and “your mileage may vary” disclaimers, but though the jury is officially still out, an increasing body of evidence suggests that there just may be something to this weird notion after all.

A Little Jab’ll Do Ya

Numerous poisons can—in small enough quantities and under the right conditions—produce beneficial effects. So it’s entirely plausible that the same is true of bee venom, or at least some of its components, even though its main purpose is to protect the bees by inflicting pain. Bee venom therapy is a subset of apitherapy, the medicinal use of any substances created by honeybees—including royal jelly and honey, each of which is already known to have some health benefits. Researchers have discovered a number of interesting substances in bee venom—most prominently, melittin, a powerful anti-inflammatory agent. This gives some credence to the anecdotal reports that beekeepers who were stung repeatedly experienced a reduction in the pain and swelling of arthritis.

Perhaps the most interesting application of bee venom is in treating the symptoms of MS. Some patients have reported startling improvements in their condition, and although doctors are quick to point out that bee venom is not a cure, patients frequently exhibit increased stability and mobility, as well as reduced spasms. In addition to arthritis and MS, bee venom therapy has also been used with some reported success in treating a wide range of other conditions, including post-herpetic neuralgia, fibromyalgia, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, tendonitis, high blood pressure, scarring, asthma, post-operative pain, and even hearing loss.

No Pain, No Pain Relief

But let’s be clear about this: bee venom therapy, as usually practiced, hurts. The standard procedure is to remove a live bee from its hive (or a bottle) with a pair of tweezers, hold it next to the skin, wait for it to sting, and repeat. (Sometimes ice or a local anesthetic is used to reduce the pain a bit.) Depending on the condition, patients may receive multiple stings at a time, several times a week, for weeks, months, or in some cases, years. The sites of the stings normally turn red, swell up, and become itchy, just as you’d expect. And although some patients find this a minor annoyance compared to the more serious symptoms that are relieved, others have to discontinue the treatment because it’s just too painful.

In order to deal with both the pain and the inconvenience of keeping and handling live bees, bee venom has also been made available in numerous other forms, such as an injectable solution, ointments, capsules, and drops. From what I’ve read, injectable bee venom approaches live stings in potency but also in pain; other forms appear to be somewhat less effective.

Stinging Criticism

Despite the cottage industry that has sprung up around bee venom therapy and reports from a great many satisfied stingees, the medical establishment in the United States considers it an unproven—and possibly dangerous—practice. Most seriously, about 1% of the population has a severe allergic reaction to bee stings that can, in extreme cases, result in death. When bee stings are administered by lay practitioners, the danger is increased, and yet relatively few doctors are willing to perform the procedure.

A few small studies have been undertaken to determine the safety and effectiveness of bee sting therapy for specific conditions. But one of the problems in performing a proper, rigorous, double-blind study is that a placebo must be used in a control group, and it’s difficult to find an inert substance that causes the same pain and skin reaction as bee venom. Still, some of the test results are encouraging, and everyone’s hope is that the particular substance or substances in bee venom that produce the desirable effects can eventually be isolated and administered without serious pain. In the meantime, people with treatable conditions but a low tolerance for stings must ask themselves: “To bee, or not to bee?”

Note: This is an updated version of an article that originally appeared on Interesting Thing of the Day on May 23, 2005.

Image credit: Maciej A. Czyzewski [GFDL or CC BY-SA 4.0], from Wikimedia Commons


Go to Source
Author: Joe Kissell

Posted on

World Braille Day

Braille text

Louis Braille was born on this day in 1809, and thanks to the system of raised dots he invented, blind and vision-impaired people can read everything from elevator buttons to textbooks. I’ve watched people reading Braille, and frankly I find it astonishing that anyone can decode those tiny bumps, especially at high speed. At one time, Braille required the use of paper and either a stylus or a mechanical embossing device; now, electromechanical Braille displays are also available, making Braille output feasible for computers and other electronic devices. Unfortunately, in many contexts, Braille is an afterthought at best, and many types of text that could be rendered in this way are not, reducing its accessibility. Today, in remembering Louis Braille, we also call attention to the need for a more widespread adoption of his technique.

Image credit: Ralph Aichinger [CC BY 2.0], via Wikimedia Commons


Go to Source
Author: Joe Kissell

Posted on

Happy Ninth Bloggeversary and a Giveaway!

I am really excited to share that as of yesterday this blog is 9 years old, and I’m now in my tenth year straight of blogging!Last year in June I wrote the blog post that I intended to write on January 2, but life got in the way, reflecting on the evolution of this blog, but I must say that even since then so much has changed.I wanted to do a quick sum up of how my life and my blog evolved


Go to Source
Author: Penniless Parenting

Posted on

5 Ways to Keep Your Kids From Having to Take Sick Days This Season and a Giveaway!

We’ve been sick far too often this winter! Here’s some tips from a reader on how to keep from getting sick! Make sure to check out below for details about and to enter the giveaway!

No one likes to take sick days, but during the winter and holiday season they almost seem inevitable—especially for our little ones. During this time of year, schedules seem to get busier and the germs seem to


Go to Source
Author: Penniless Parenting

Posted on

Single parents now able to apply for a parental order in the UK

As of today, single parents who have had a child born through surrogacy are able to apply for a parental order in the UK, as the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 (Remedial) Order 2018 comes into force. This means that they will be able to be recognised as their child’s legal parent and will extinguish any rights and responsibilities their surrogate had.

This is fantastic news, both for those single parents who decided to go through surrogacy before the law change with the knowledge that they would remain in limbo in terms of their parental status until/if the law ever changed, but also for those single parents who haven’t yet been able to find a surrogate due to the legal difficulties and uncertainty, to whom the door will now be open.

For those single parents who already have a child born through surrogacy, it is important to know that there is now a six-month period in which they can apply for a parental order. This will only remain open until early July 2019, and while it may be possible to apply following this, the application will likely be more complex, and so I would encourage all those who have had a child through surrogacy in the past, whether in the UK or overseas to act now.

We are looking forward to supporting many single parents who have either already had a child through surrogacy or those who are currently planning their surrogacy journey.

If you have any questions at all, or would like to get started, please do get in touch with me at Bethan.cleal@stowefamilylaw.co.uk or on 01962 850408.

The post Single parents now able to apply for a parental order in the UK appeared first on Stowe Family Law.


Go to Source
Author: Bethan Cleal

Posted on

Contemptuous approach does not go well for husband

It is obviously trite to say that feelings can run very high in the course of family litigation. Such feelings are rarely conducive to a favourable outcome, so lawyers and judges do what they can to reduce them. It would not, however, be realistic to expect strong feelings to be eliminated entirely. The trick is to ensure that they are reduced sufficiently so as not to cause serious damage to that party’s case.

Sometimes, however, a party is so caught up in their feelings of ill-will towards the other party that they are not able to keep them away from the courtroom. And, as we will see in a moment, the ill-will can even spread to the other party’s lawyers, and even to the court itself, particularly if they believe that the case is not proceeding in a way that is favourable to them. The feelings can manifest themselves in many ways, but a common way is contempt for all others involved in the litigation, including the court. Needless to say, this is not likely to go well for the aggrieved party.

The recent case Quan v Bray is a remarkable example of this phenomenon, in which the husband was found by Mr Justice Mostyn to have a “contemptuous and arrogant approach” to the proceedings. In fact, the case caused much comment amongst family lawyers on Twitter, and none of it favourable towards the husband.

I have, in fact, written here previously about Quan v Bray, in this post. The case concerned a wife’s financial remedies claim, and the recent judgment related to the final hearing of that claim, before Mr Justice Mostyn in the High Court. The wife was represented by lawyers at the hearing, and the husband represented himself.

The case has a complex history (it began in 2012), and there is neither room here nor the need for me to go into its details. Essentially the wife at the hearing was only seeking maintenance, with her capital claims (e.g. for a lump sum payment) being adjourned because the husband did not presently have the capital to meet those claims, but might do so in the future. The husband claimed that he did not have the income to pay maintenance, and that he would not receive sufficient capital in future to make any capital payment to the wife.

Accordingly, the two matters for Mr Justice Mostyn to decide were: should the husband be required to pay maintenance to the wife, and if so how much, and should the wife’s capital claims be adjourned, or dismissed?

I now turn to the husband’s approach to the proceedings. Prior to the hearing, he had already blatantly defied court orders, both to disclosure documentation (which Mr Justice Mostyn believed would be significantly to the husband’s disadvantage, if revealed), and to pay maintenance pending suit to the wife, despite Mr Justice Mostyn finding that he had the means to pay.

But it gets worse. When dealing with his income in his principal witness statement, the husband had sarcastically suggested that he “might be able to earn some money as a drug dealer”, a suggestion that Mr Justice Mostyn described as “not only childish and facetious”, but also “directly and grossly disrespectful to the authority of the court.”

And the husband did not stop there. In the next paragraph of his statement he suggested that a further possibility for him to earn an income was by pursuing a career “extorting money” as a legal executive with the wife’s solicitors, although saying that he “would prefer drug dealing because it is considerably more ethical.” This, said Mr Justice Mostyn, went “beyond childishness and facetiousness.” It was “grossly insulting”, and reflected the husband’s detestation of the wife’s advisers. It was completely unacceptable that he should use a witness statement written for the court as a platform to vent his spleen in this manner.

In the light of the above, it is no surprise that Mr Justice Mostyn found the husband to be a thoroughly unsatisfactory witness, concluding that he had “been dishonest, manipulative, arrogant, menacing and contemptuous of the court’s authority.” In the circumstances he did not accept any of the husband’s evidence, unless it was either agreed or corroborated by clear contemporaneous documents. By contrast, he found the wife to be a credible witness.

He awarded the wife maintenance of £64,000 per annum, and adjourned the wife’s capital claims, concluding that it was “foreseeable that at some stage in the future the husband will have accumulated sufficient sums to make a proper clean-break capital settlement on the wife.”

Following the judgment the husband applied to Mr Justice Mostyn for permission to appeal. However, Mr Justice Mostyn was not satisfied that any of the grounds for appeal put forward by the husband had any prospect of success, and he therefore refused the application.

All in all, a clear illustration of the folly of taking your ill-feelings with you to court, and another lesson in the perils of self-representation (many was the time that I had to advise a client against letting their ill-feelings creep into their evidence). Of course, to the non-lawyer looking in, some of the husband’s behaviour in this case may seem just silly, or even amusing, on a juvenile level. But rest assured, it will not be viewed that way by the court.

You can read Mr Justice Mostyn’s full judgment here.

The post Contemptuous approach does not go well for husband appeared first on Stowe Family Law.


Go to Source
Author: John Bolch

Posted on

Good Points, Shep McAllister

Welcome to Good Points, a new weekly Q&A about credit card points, the people who collect them, and where they take us. First up is…myself! If you know anyone who just won’t shut up about their points strategy (guilty as charged), have them send an email to shep@gizmodomedia.com with the subject line “Good Points”…

Read more…


Go to Source
Author: Shep McAllister on Points, shared by Chelsea Stone to Lifehacker