Health hazards of chain lube
#101
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,098 Times
in
5,054 Posts
Too much of almost any chemical can be deadly, so "traces of deadly chemicals" is almost meaningless. For example, For example, exposure to too much dihydrogen monoxide can fully arrest respiration.
#102
Senior Member
Thread Starter
I saw that Penn & Teller bit about dihydrogen monoxide. OTOH the powers that be used to say that Roundup was perfectly safe.
#103
Occam's Rotor
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 7,248
Mentioned: 61 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2366 Post(s)
Liked 2,331 Times
in
1,164 Posts
Chain lube is dribbled onto a bicycle chain, and need not ever touch anything. So even if it was more toxic or carcinogenic than the weed killer, it would be much less a threat.
#104
Banned
California has become very dangerous state, if you read the warning labels on everything..
I hear Water with an extra Neutron is 'the bomb' ...
I hear Water with an extra Neutron is 'the bomb' ...
Likes For fietsbob:
#105
Heft On Wheels
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 3,123
Bikes: Specialized,Cannondale,Argon 18
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 887 Post(s)
Liked 560 Times
in
346 Posts
I am going to post to keep this thread going, super entertaining. OP is well....a ****** for starting this.
oh yeah, waxing is where it at! Smells nice and easy to crash and burn with the paraffin on the chain Also if you get stranded you can burn your chain for heat and light and not hurt the envorment.
oh yeah, waxing is where it at! Smells nice and easy to crash and burn with the paraffin on the chain Also if you get stranded you can burn your chain for heat and light and not hurt the envorment.
#106
Senior Member
Thread Starter
This article is 10 yrs old but it addresses one of the common componenets of bicycle chain lube.
https://theecologist.org/2009/may/13...bel-chain-lube
Teflon, which is known chemically as polytetrafluoroethylene, or PTFE, is a plasticlike substance made up of a complex mixture of perfl uorinated chemicals (PFCs). Unlike known environmental villains such as DDT and PCBs, PFCs are not generally volatile – in other words, they do not become easily airborne and so tend not to migrate long distances. In addition, to produce a substance such as Teflon, these compounds are usually ‘locked’ into polymers – chains of molecules – so it was assumed that they couldn’t leak into the environment. Even if they did, it was assumed that they wouldn’t break down; and even if they did, it was assumed that they were biologically inert. All of these assumptions are being proved wrong.
Scientific data shows that PFCs fulfil every single criterion for persistent bioaccumulative toxins: that is they do not biodegrade, they accumulate in people, animals and the environment, and they have been shown in laboratory tests to be toxic to mammals. Although there are nearly 100 known PFCs, only two have been studied in any depth: perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), a breakdown product of the stain-repellent Scotchguard (now withdrawn from sale), and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), a breakdown product of Teflon. Both have been found in the blood of nearly every human tested, as well as in animals in the Arctic and Atlantic oceans.
Once in the environment, PFCs have been shown to accumulate in organs like the liver, gall bladder and thyroid gland. In primates, including humans, exposure to one of Teflon’s breakdown products, PFOA, has led to an underactive thyroid (hypothyroidism). A prolonged state of hypothyroidism is a risk for obesity, insulin resistance and thyroid cancer.
Laboratory studies also show that PFOA is toxic to at least nine types of cells that regulate immune function. Cells in the spleen and thymus – both critical to immune function – are particularly vulnerable, and humans exposed to PFOA show reduced immune function. Most recently, PFOA has been linked to raised cholesterol and triglyceride (blood fat) levels in factory workers, and in animals to potentially dangerous changes in the size and weight of several important organs such as the brain, liver and spleen. PFOA is also thought to be a hormone disrupter.
In 2005, the US Environmental Protection Agency classified PFOA as a ‘likely human carcinogen’ and asked industry to work towards eliminating PFOA and related chemicals from emissions and products by no later than 2015.
Scientific data shows that PFCs fulfil every single criterion for persistent bioaccumulative toxins: that is they do not biodegrade, they accumulate in people, animals and the environment, and they have been shown in laboratory tests to be toxic to mammals. Although there are nearly 100 known PFCs, only two have been studied in any depth: perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), a breakdown product of the stain-repellent Scotchguard (now withdrawn from sale), and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), a breakdown product of Teflon. Both have been found in the blood of nearly every human tested, as well as in animals in the Arctic and Atlantic oceans.
Once in the environment, PFCs have been shown to accumulate in organs like the liver, gall bladder and thyroid gland. In primates, including humans, exposure to one of Teflon’s breakdown products, PFOA, has led to an underactive thyroid (hypothyroidism). A prolonged state of hypothyroidism is a risk for obesity, insulin resistance and thyroid cancer.
Laboratory studies also show that PFOA is toxic to at least nine types of cells that regulate immune function. Cells in the spleen and thymus – both critical to immune function – are particularly vulnerable, and humans exposed to PFOA show reduced immune function. Most recently, PFOA has been linked to raised cholesterol and triglyceride (blood fat) levels in factory workers, and in animals to potentially dangerous changes in the size and weight of several important organs such as the brain, liver and spleen. PFOA is also thought to be a hormone disrupter.
In 2005, the US Environmental Protection Agency classified PFOA as a ‘likely human carcinogen’ and asked industry to work towards eliminating PFOA and related chemicals from emissions and products by no later than 2015.
#107
Occam's Rotor
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 7,248
Mentioned: 61 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2366 Post(s)
Liked 2,331 Times
in
1,164 Posts
Wax
#108
TeeOhPea 2tha DeeOhGee
I am going to post to keep this thread going, super entertaining. OP is well....a ****** for starting this.
oh yeah, waxing is where it at! Smells nice and easy to crash and burn with the paraffin on the chain Also if you get stranded you can burn your chain for heat and light and not hurt the envorment.
oh yeah, waxing is where it at! Smells nice and easy to crash and burn with the paraffin on the chain Also if you get stranded you can burn your chain for heat and light and not hurt the envorment.
If it helps, I had an uncle Patty O’Ferrniture who was drinking in a bike shop after it closed. Accidentally banged down a shot of bike oil he mistook for whiskey. We thought he’d squeak by, but he slipped away quickly without a sound.
Likes For MaxKatt:
#111
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 12,955
Bikes: (2) ti TiCycles, 2007 w/ triple and 2011 fixed, 1979 Peter Mooney, ~1983 Trek 420 now fixed and ~1973 Raleigh Carlton Competition gravel grinder
Mentioned: 129 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4845 Post(s)
Liked 3,974 Times
in
2,581 Posts
I don't want to hijack this rather strange thread into a debate about acetone or whatever, but liver cleanses are complete quackery and I wouldn't take much from that story in terms of evidence. The statement that "chemicals aren't good for your health" is on its face, absurd. We are composed entirely of chemicals and elements. Some chemicals are harmful, others not, and some are only harmful in such huge quantities as to likely never to be encountered.
Frankly, if you're not willing to name the lube, I see no point in this thread.
Frankly, if you're not willing to name the lube, I see no point in this thread.
This might be quackery, but it has been a bigger life improvement than anything I have ever seen from the medical profession outside the ER. (Of course more proof that this is quackery - the pills cost me $50 one time. About 10 days of inhalants.)
Ben
#112
Half way there
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 2,958
Bikes: Many, and the list changes frequently
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 990 Post(s)
Liked 884 Times
in
529 Posts
All of these materials have some environmental toxicity as you would expect of petroleum products. There is evidence that short chain chlorinated paraffins, though not significantly toxic to fish, may bio-accumulate.
Below is a list of the components, with specific comments.
50-70% Distillates (petroleum), hydrotreated light (c9-c16)
This is analgous to kerosine.
10-20% Distillates (petroleum), hydrotreated heavy naphthenic (C20-C50).
Can be classified as a suspected human carcinogen if it contains > 3% polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). The chain lube manufacturer did not use the carcinogen classification in the product literature so there is some probability that the PAH concentration is below the limit.
There have been some studies showing toxic effects on adrenals, bone marrow, liver, lymph nodes, kidney, stomach, thymus through prolonged or repeated skin exposure; however I found mention of a study of rabbit skin exposure toxicity LD>5000mg/kg, which is not significantly toxic.
10-15% Short chain chlorinated paraffins (C6-C18)
From an assessment by the Australian National Industrial Chemicals Notification and Assessment Scheme (NICNAS): SCCPs exhibit very low acute toxicity by all three routes in animals. Mild skin and eye irritation were observed in some animal studies. Available human data indicate that SCCPs do not cause skin irritation and are not sensitisers.
1-5% Solvent naphtha (petroleum), light aromatic (C8-C10).
Can be classified as a suspected human carcinogen if it contains > 0.1% benzene. The chain lube manufacturer did not use the carcinogen classification in the product literature so there is some probability that the benzine concentration is below the limit.
My bottom line opinion is that this chain lube, which will be used sparingly and infrequently (i.e. once every few weeks) does not present a significant hazard to the user or to the environment. I'd recommend that you wash if you get any on your skin and certainly don't drink it. Also, do not throw unused portions in the trash.
I have know idea why the LBS dropped the product. Their stated justification does not match reality.
Last edited by Moe Zhoost; 06-06-19 at 01:33 PM.
#113
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 39,390
Mentioned: 211 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18476 Post(s)
Liked 15,757 Times
in
7,404 Posts
How come Teflon sticks to stuff?
Likes For clengman:
#117
I'm the anecdote.
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: S.E. Texas
Posts: 1,821
Bikes: '12 Schwinn, '13 Norco
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1110 Post(s)
Liked 1,176 Times
in
795 Posts
The OP provided me the identity of the chain lube in question and I reviewed all of the hazardous components. These are all refined petroleum products. Primary hazards common to all of these are skin and eye irritation. Petroleum products also are classified as severe aspiration hazards because death may occur through lung damage if you drink the material. What happens is that you when you vomit the material back up it can enter your trachea into your lungs.
All of these materials have some environmental toxicity as you would expect of petroleum products. There is evidence that short chain chlorinated paraffins, though not significantly toxic to fish, may bio-accumulate.
Below is a list of the components, with specific comments.
50-70% Distillates (petroleum), hydrotreated light (c9-c16)
This is analgous to kerosine.
10-20% Distillates (petroleum), hydrotreated heavy naphthenic (C20-C50).
Can be classified as a suspected human carcinogen if it contains > 3% polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). The chain lube manufacturer did not use the carcinogen classification in the product literature so there is some probability that the PAH concentration is below the limit.
There have been some studies showing toxic effects on adrenals, bone marrow, liver, lymph nodes, kidney, stomach, thymus through prolonged or repeated skin exposure; however I found mention of a study of rabbit skin exposure toxicity LD>5000mg/kg, which is not significantly toxic.
10-15% Short chain chlorinated paraffins (C6-C18)
From an assessment by the Australian National Industrial Chemicals Notification and Assessment Scheme (NICNAS): SCCPs exhibit very low acute toxicity by all three routes in animals. Mild skin and eye irritation were observed in some animal studies. Available human data indicate that SCCPs do not cause skin irritation and are not sensitisers.
1-5% Solvent naphtha (petroleum), light aromatic (C8-C10).
Can be classified as a suspected human carcinogen if it contains > 0.1% benzene. The chain lube manufacturer did not use the carcinogen classification in the product literature so there is some probability that the benzine concentration is below the limit.
My bottom line opinion is that this chain lube, which will be used sparingly and infrequently (i.e. once every few weeks) does not present a significant hazard to the user or to the environment. I'd recommend that you wash if you get any on your skin and certainly don't drink it. Also, do not throw unused portions in the trash.
I have know idea why the LBS dropped the product. Their stated justification does not match reality.
All of these materials have some environmental toxicity as you would expect of petroleum products. There is evidence that short chain chlorinated paraffins, though not significantly toxic to fish, may bio-accumulate.
Below is a list of the components, with specific comments.
50-70% Distillates (petroleum), hydrotreated light (c9-c16)
This is analgous to kerosine.
10-20% Distillates (petroleum), hydrotreated heavy naphthenic (C20-C50).
Can be classified as a suspected human carcinogen if it contains > 3% polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). The chain lube manufacturer did not use the carcinogen classification in the product literature so there is some probability that the PAH concentration is below the limit.
There have been some studies showing toxic effects on adrenals, bone marrow, liver, lymph nodes, kidney, stomach, thymus through prolonged or repeated skin exposure; however I found mention of a study of rabbit skin exposure toxicity LD>5000mg/kg, which is not significantly toxic.
10-15% Short chain chlorinated paraffins (C6-C18)
From an assessment by the Australian National Industrial Chemicals Notification and Assessment Scheme (NICNAS): SCCPs exhibit very low acute toxicity by all three routes in animals. Mild skin and eye irritation were observed in some animal studies. Available human data indicate that SCCPs do not cause skin irritation and are not sensitisers.
1-5% Solvent naphtha (petroleum), light aromatic (C8-C10).
Can be classified as a suspected human carcinogen if it contains > 0.1% benzene. The chain lube manufacturer did not use the carcinogen classification in the product literature so there is some probability that the benzine concentration is below the limit.
My bottom line opinion is that this chain lube, which will be used sparingly and infrequently (i.e. once every few weeks) does not present a significant hazard to the user or to the environment. I'd recommend that you wash if you get any on your skin and certainly don't drink it. Also, do not throw unused portions in the trash.
I have know idea why the LBS dropped the product. Their stated justification does not match reality.
#118
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,098 Times
in
5,054 Posts
Might be, but that quackery was life changing. The 2 inhalants I had to take at least 1 full squirt of for each nostril every night I still take, but now it is a 1/4 squirt every 4 days. I went 30 years going from from sinuses that caused bacterial sore throats that required anti-biotics about every 18 months to manageable with the above inhalants (at ~$300 for the two small bottles) to almost nothing. I can sleep breathing through my nose, a concept I'd forgotten. I can even ride a bike with my mouth shut. Hadn't been able to do that since I was 30.
This might be quackery, but it has been a bigger life improvement than anything I have ever seen from the medical profession outside the ER. (Of course more proof that this is quackery - the pills cost me $50 one time. About 10 days of inhalants.)
Ben
This might be quackery, but it has been a bigger life improvement than anything I have ever seen from the medical profession outside the ER. (Of course more proof that this is quackery - the pills cost me $50 one time. About 10 days of inhalants.)
Ben
I've had periods in my life where my sinuses acted much like you're describing, really did very little to treat them, and the problem eventually went away by itself. Sinus inflammation is notorious for taking a while to resolve itself.
Frankly, depending of the contents of those pills, $50 could be exorbitant, but if the placebo worked, money well spent.
This really has nothing to do with the OP, so I'm going to pass on any more discussion of this. Feel free to get the last word.
#119
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,098 Times
in
5,054 Posts
#120
Mad bike riding scientist
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 27,410
Bikes: Some silver ones, a red one, a black and orange one, and a few titanium ones
Mentioned: 152 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6241 Post(s)
Liked 4,253 Times
in
2,385 Posts
The OP provided me the identity of the chain lube in question and I reviewed all of the hazardous components. These are all refined petroleum products. Primary hazards common to all of these are skin and eye irritation. Petroleum products also are classified as severe aspiration hazards because death may occur through lung damage if you drink the material. What happens is that you when you vomit the material back up it can enter your trachea into your lungs. Oh, yeah - if you huff it, you can get dizzy and pass out.
All of these materials have some environmental toxicity as you would expect of petroleum products. There is evidence that short chain chlorinated paraffins, though not significantly toxic to fish, may bio-accumulate.
Below is a list of the components, with specific comments.
50-70% Distillates (petroleum), hydrotreated light (c9-c16)
This is analgous to kerosine.
All of these materials have some environmental toxicity as you would expect of petroleum products. There is evidence that short chain chlorinated paraffins, though not significantly toxic to fish, may bio-accumulate.
Below is a list of the components, with specific comments.
50-70% Distillates (petroleum), hydrotreated light (c9-c16)
This is analgous to kerosine.
10-20% Distillates (petroleum), hydrotreated heavy naphthenic (C20-C50).
Can be classified as a suspected human carcinogen if it contains > 3% polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). The chain lube manufacturer did not use the carcinogen classification in the product literature so there is some probability that the PAH concentration is below the limit.
There have been some studies showing toxic effects on adrenals, bone marrow, liver, lymph nodes, kidney, stomach, thymus through prolonged or repeated skin exposure; however I found mention of a study of rabbit skin exposure toxicity LD>5000mg/kg, which is not significantly toxic.
10-15% Short chain chlorinated paraffins (C6-C18)
From an assessment by the Australian National Industrial Chemicals Notification and Assessment Scheme (NICNAS): SCCPs exhibit very low acute toxicity by all three routes in animals. Mild skin and eye irritation were observed in some animal studies. Available human data indicate that SCCPs do not cause skin irritation and are not sensitisers.
1-5% Solvent naphtha (petroleum), light aromatic (C8-C10).
Can be classified as a suspected human carcinogen if it contains > 0.1% benzene. The chain lube manufacturer did not use the carcinogen classification in the product literature so there is some probability that the benzine concentration is below the limit.
My bottom line opinion is that this chain lube, which will be used sparingly and infrequently (i.e. once every few weeks) does not present a significant hazard to the user or to the environment. I'd recommend that you wash if you get any on your skin and certainly don't drink it. Also, do not throw unused portions in the trash.
I have know idea why the LBS dropped the product. Their stated justification does not match reality.
Can be classified as a suspected human carcinogen if it contains > 3% polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). The chain lube manufacturer did not use the carcinogen classification in the product literature so there is some probability that the PAH concentration is below the limit.
There have been some studies showing toxic effects on adrenals, bone marrow, liver, lymph nodes, kidney, stomach, thymus through prolonged or repeated skin exposure; however I found mention of a study of rabbit skin exposure toxicity LD>5000mg/kg, which is not significantly toxic.
10-15% Short chain chlorinated paraffins (C6-C18)
From an assessment by the Australian National Industrial Chemicals Notification and Assessment Scheme (NICNAS): SCCPs exhibit very low acute toxicity by all three routes in animals. Mild skin and eye irritation were observed in some animal studies. Available human data indicate that SCCPs do not cause skin irritation and are not sensitisers.
1-5% Solvent naphtha (petroleum), light aromatic (C8-C10).
Can be classified as a suspected human carcinogen if it contains > 0.1% benzene. The chain lube manufacturer did not use the carcinogen classification in the product literature so there is some probability that the benzine concentration is below the limit.
My bottom line opinion is that this chain lube, which will be used sparingly and infrequently (i.e. once every few weeks) does not present a significant hazard to the user or to the environment. I'd recommend that you wash if you get any on your skin and certainly don't drink it. Also, do not throw unused portions in the trash.
I have know idea why the LBS dropped the product. Their stated justification does not match reality.
__________________
Stuart Black
Plan Epsilon Around Lake Michigan in the era of Covid
Old School…When It Wasn’t Ancient bikepacking
Gold Fever Three days of dirt in Colorado
Pokin' around the Poconos A cold ride around Lake Erie
Dinosaurs in Colorado A mountain bike guide to the Purgatory Canyon dinosaur trackway
Solo Without Pie. The search for pie in the Midwest.
Picking the Scablands. Washington and Oregon, 2005. Pie and spiders on the Columbia River!
Stuart Black
Plan Epsilon Around Lake Michigan in the era of Covid
Old School…When It Wasn’t Ancient bikepacking
Gold Fever Three days of dirt in Colorado
Pokin' around the Poconos A cold ride around Lake Erie
Dinosaurs in Colorado A mountain bike guide to the Purgatory Canyon dinosaur trackway
Solo Without Pie. The search for pie in the Midwest.
Picking the Scablands. Washington and Oregon, 2005. Pie and spiders on the Columbia River!
#121
• —
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Land of Pleasant Living
Posts: 12,276
Bikes: Shmikes
Mentioned: 59 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10194 Post(s)
Liked 5,901 Times
in
3,180 Posts
#122
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 39,390
Mentioned: 211 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18476 Post(s)
Liked 15,757 Times
in
7,404 Posts
NFS is the only chain lube you all should be using anyway. Man up and get some. Just don't drink it.
#123
Very Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Always on the Run
Posts: 1,211
Bikes: Giant Quasar & Fuji Roubaix
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 413 Post(s)
Liked 343 Times
in
244 Posts
I remember when Teflon was first used in frying pans and we were using metal utensils that scraped it off and ate it along with our fatty burgers that came from homeopathic cows.
#124
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,098 Times
in
5,054 Posts
Whatever the compound of concern is, you can look it up on the lovely web site of the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry at the CDC, where they have comprehensive information on all the nasty stuff under your sink.
#125
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 12,955
Bikes: (2) ti TiCycles, 2007 w/ triple and 2011 fixed, 1979 Peter Mooney, ~1983 Trek 420 now fixed and ~1973 Raleigh Carlton Competition gravel grinder
Mentioned: 129 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4845 Post(s)
Liked 3,974 Times
in
2,581 Posts
I'm not going to argue with you and am glad you are feeling better, but there are really very, very good reasons why stories like these are not considered scientific evidence. You took some pills and symptoms went away. There is no reason to assume there's any connection between those two events, especially since I'm pretty sure there's no known medical explanation why acetone would remain in your liver rather than being broken down by it many years ago.
I've had periods in my life where my sinuses acted much like you're describing, really did very little to treat them, and the problem eventually went away by itself. Sinus inflammation is notorious for taking a while to resolve itself.
Frankly, depending of the contents of those pills, $50 could be exorbitant, but if the placebo worked, money well spent.
This really has nothing to do with the OP, so I'm going to pass on any more discussion of this. Feel free to get the last word.
I've had periods in my life where my sinuses acted much like you're describing, really did very little to treat them, and the problem eventually went away by itself. Sinus inflammation is notorious for taking a while to resolve itself.
Frankly, depending of the contents of those pills, $50 could be exorbitant, but if the placebo worked, money well spent.
This really has nothing to do with the OP, so I'm going to pass on any more discussion of this. Feel free to get the last word.
I know this all sounds foo-foo. I also know that what we all heard about as fiberglass builtbuilders never saw the daylight of the media. (Cynical me - blue collar fiberglass laminators doing work nobody wants vs Dow Chemical and Union Carbide - is this a surprise?)
Ben
Likes For 79pmooney: