Originally Posted by Enthalpic
It is just as foolish to dismiss what people experience, or believe they experience, only because you don’t currently understand the mechanism. Good science feeds off observation, which in turn just generates more questions and better observations. If you ever find yourself thinking you know all the answers and begin dismiss client reports, quit.
Here is a proposed mechanism, cold drinks stimulate the vagus nerve. Search vagus cooling
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vagus_nerve
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...=pubmed_docsum
I really hate it when people dismiss what they know nothing about...

Could it also be the fact that he was exercising prior to the ingestion of water? I mean was his observation properly controlled? Can he just sit down somewhere totally relaxed and feeling good and drink a few gulps of cold water and incite an asthma attack? I doubt it. What did he eat that day? What was the mold count? Did he have contact with any animals? The list goes on.
I am not doubting his beliefs or his observation, merely the causation of what he felt. People get diagnosed with diseases at the doctor's office. This doesn't mean doctor's offices cause the disease. Correlation is not causation.
And as to your citations.... Wikipedia doesn't count for anything. Anyone can submit or edit those articles. And I read the Pubmed article.....it was a review article not one with ANY data. They proposed a possible hypothesis based on and I quote "circumstantial evidence." I have read thousands of peer reviewed journal articles in biology and chemistry and never have I heard someone use that term. I can pretty much propose any hypothesis I want. It is meaningless. And even if that article was in any way a decent article, no where do they mention the drinking of cold water causing an asthma attack.