如何区分风寒和风热?怎么选药更对症、更有效?中医如何治疗“刀片喉”?【科学防疫小贴士】(78)******
在中成药使用中,很多药适应症有风寒和风热的区别,大家应该如何区分自己的症状是寒还是热,怎么选药更对症更有效?
《新冠病毒感染者居家中医药干预指引》以及各地出台的指南指引,推荐了很多中成药,个人参照这些方案,该怎样选药?应注意避免哪些用药误区?
针对本轮疫情中患者出现的“刀片喉”,中医如何看待?在治疗时是否更有优势,应该如何缓解?
北京中医医院院长刘清泉为您权威解答。
在中成药使用中,很多药适应症有风寒和风热的区别,大家应该如何区分自己的症状是寒还是热,怎么选药更对症更有效?
对于新冠病毒感染,从中医来看是“疫病”,通俗的说,是传染性很强的外感病。对于外感病,无论其具有风寒或风热的属性,都会出现发烧、怕冷、乏力、咽喉疼痛等症状。因此,无论风寒或风热引起的临床不适,具有解表功能治疗感冒的药物都会有疗效。当然如果有专业医生运用中医理论进一步区分风寒、风热进行治疗会更有效。
对于临床表现为发热、怕冷很明显、肌肉酸痛、咽干咽痛、乏力、鼻塞流涕、咳嗽等症状的,多属于风寒导致,宜服用具有疏风解表功效的中成药,如感冒清热颗粒、荆防颗粒、正柴胡饮颗粒、清解退热颗粒等。
对于临床表现为发热、咽痛明显,怕冷不明显,肌肉酸痛、乏力、咳嗽等症状的,多属于风热导致,宜服用具有疏风清热、兼有化湿解表或清热解毒功效的中成药,如连花清瘟胶囊或颗粒、金花清感颗粒、疏风解毒胶囊、宣肺败毒颗粒、清肺排毒颗粒、热炎宁合剂(颗粒)、银翘解毒颗粒、蓝芩口服液、复方芩兰口服液、痰热清胶囊、双黄连口服液、抗病毒口服液等。
患者可根据自身症状,选择其中一种中成药,按照说明书剂量服用1-2天后,如症状无明显缓解或持续加重,请及时到正规医疗机构就诊。切勿盲目同时服用多种功效类似的中成药。
特殊重点人群,尤其是老年人合并慢性基础疾病的、肿瘤患者、免疫相关疾病患者、慢性肾功能衰竭在做常规透析的患者等,这些人群如果感染了新冠病毒以后,吃中成药的时候一定要向专业医师咨询,在医生指导下用药。
《新冠病毒感染者居家中医药干预指引》以及各地出台的指南指引,推荐了很多中成药,个人参照这些方案,该怎样选药?应注意避免哪些用药误区?
在参照《指引》用药时,应注意以下几方面。
一是经早期治疗,一般3天之内体温逐渐正常,之后一些患者会出现咽喉疼痛、咳嗽、声音嘶哑等症状,此时宜服用具有宣肺止咳功效的中成药,如急支糖浆、止咳宝、通宣理肺丸、连花清咳片、杏贝止咳颗粒等;咽喉疼痛明显者加用3天利咽止痛功效的中成药,如六神胶囊、清咽滴丸、金喉健等。
二是部分病人出现明显的乏力,以及胃肠道症状如呕吐、腹泻等,此时多兼有湿邪,宜服用具有化湿解表功效的中成药,如藿香正气水、复方香薷水等。但此时不宜服用清热解毒类中成药,以免导致腹泻或者消化道症状加重。
三是儿童出现发热、咽干咽痛、咳嗽者,可用金振口服液、儿童清肺口服液等;如发热、食少腹胀、口臭、大便酸臭或秘结者,可用小儿豉翘清热颗粒、小儿柴桂退热颗粒、醒脾养儿颗粒等。因儿童体质特殊,在服药之前最好咨询儿科中医师。对于婴幼儿,还可以采用一些非药物治疗手段,比如推拿、捏脊,或者中医刮痧,来缓解患儿症状。
对新型冠状病毒感染,要理性用药、合理用药,切忌病急乱投医、盲目用药。
一是照说明书选择相应药物服用,看清楚药物的适应症、禁忌症以及不良反应等情况;
二是用药48小时若症状未见缓解请及时到医院就诊或咨询专业医师;
三是中西药不宜同时服用,应至少间隔30分钟,同一类型药物不建议重叠服用;
四是一般服药时间5-7天,不建议过度服药。
针对本轮疫情中患者出现的“刀片喉”,中医如何看待?在治疗时是否更有优势,应该如何缓解?
“刀片喉”是声门和声带周围的黏膜发生了充血水肿,一般来说,在病程的第3-5天时表现明显。在呼吸道病毒感染急性期结束,病毒复制被抑制,炎症减轻,水肿改善后,将会逐渐恢复。
从中医来看,“刀片喉”是“热毒”从全身消退,而聚到咽喉局部的症状表现。因此,早期规范治疗,及早“解表透邪”,将“热毒”及早透出是治疗的根本,热毒透出来了,“刀片喉”的情况会减少,或不发生,如果只用发汗退热的药但热毒无法清除,“刀片喉”的情况会增加。因此,早期治疗上以解表药为基础,加上清热解毒利咽的药共同发挥作用,既能快速退热,缓解全身症状,又能减少咽喉的不适。
对于已经出现“刀片喉”的感染者,中医药也有很多办法,如及时加用具有利咽止痛、解毒利咽等作用的药物,如六神丸/胶囊、清咽滴丸、金喉健喷雾剂等;也可以由医生进行针灸治疗,针刺少商穴、商阳穴等。这些都可以很好的缓解咽痛症状,如咽痛持续加重,宜前往医院寻求治疗。
来源:国家卫生健康委员会官网、健康中国
中新网评:处理核污水绝不是日本自家私事******
中新网北京1月19日电(蒋鲤)日本政府近日称,将于2023年春夏期间开始向海洋排放经过处理的福岛第一核电站核污水。日本罔顾国内民众及周边国家的屡屡反对,企图将核污水“一倒了之”,把一件关乎全球海洋生态环境和公众健康的事当成了自家私事。
资料图:日本福岛第一核电站。2011年,福岛核电站事故发生后,大量放射性物质泄漏到大气层和太平洋,对周围环境造成了难以逆转的伤害,数十万人被迫撤离该地区。时至今日,作为日本邻国之一的韩国仍未解除福岛海鲜禁令。
日本以核污水存储能力即将达到上限为由,在2021年4月13日,正式决定将福岛第一核电站核污水排入太平洋。过去一年多,日本政府和东京电力公司一直在持续推进核污水排海计划。
日本政府辩称,这些核污水经多核素处理系统(ALPS)处理后很安全,甚至“可以喝”,这样的表态无疑在愚弄大众。
事实上,经过处理的核污水仍含有多种放射性物质,核污水一旦排放入海就无法回收,长期来看,将会给海洋生态带来难以估量的潜在威胁,最终危害人类健康。
因此,核污水排海计划推出后,遭到日本民众强烈反对。日本《朝日新闻》2022年3月公布的问卷调查显示,福岛县、宫城县和岩手县受访的42个市町村长中,约六成反对东京电力公司福岛第一核电站核污水排放入海。日本全国渔业协会联合会也多次申明立场,反对该计划。
日本政府认为,核污水排海是最便宜、最省事的解决方案,但此举却将周边国家乃至全世界置于核污染风险中。太平洋非日本一家之海,核污水会随着洋流流动,其影响势必会跨越国界,危害周边国家乃至整个国际社会的公共福祉和利益。
《韩国经济新闻》发文称,相关研究认为,福岛核污水如果排放入海,约7个月后将到达济州等韩国海域,该国水产业和旅游业将遭受相当大的损失。
德国南极海洋机构也曾发出警告,若日本将所有核污水排入海中,不到半年,整个太平洋都将面临高度辐射威胁,包括远在大洋另一端的美国。太平洋地区人民更是对日本该计划持反对意见。
日本作为《联合国海洋法公约》缔约国,有义务保护海洋环境。然而,在核污水排海方案的正当性、核污水数据的可靠性、净化装置的有效性、环境影响的不确定性等问题上,日本未能作出科学、可信的说明。
国际原子能机构技术工作组虽已三次赴日实地考察评估,但尚未就日排海方案的安全性给出结论,并且对日本提出诸多澄清要求和整改意见。在此情况下,日本仍执意推进核污水排海工程建设,这是极不负责任的行为。
太平洋不是日本的下水道,日本必须正视各方合理关切,在与周边国家等相关利益方和国际原子能机构充分协商后,制定合理的核污水处理方案。日本也要着眼长远,若只顾眼前,执意将核污水排放入海,不仅其自身,周边国家乃至全世界都将为之买单,其后果必将会危害数代人。
Fukushima water disposal by no means Japan’s own business
By John Lee
(ECNS) -- Japan has announced it will release treated wastewater from the wrecked Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant into the Pacific Ocean this year.
Although Fukushima wastewater disposal affects global marine ecological environment protection and public health, Japan has turned a deaf ear to domestic and international opposition to dumping the contaminated water into the sea, treating the "global" matter as its own business.
The Fukushima accident in 2011 had sent large quantities of radiation into the atmosphere and the Pacific Ocean, causing irreversible damage to the surrounding environment, and hundreds of thousands of people were forced to evacuate the area. South Korea still maintains its import ban on Japanese seafood from areas affected by the Fukushima nuclear disaster.
On April 13, 2021, Japan announced it had decided to discharge contaminated radioactive wastewater in Fukushima Prefecture into the sea due to dwindling storage space, with the Japanese government and plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings Inc. promoting the release plan over the past year.
The Japanese government argues that the water treated by an advanced liquid processing system, or ALPS, is safe and drinkable, which is undoubtedly fooling the public.
In fact, the treated wastewater still includes a variety of radioactive substances and can’t be recycled once discharged into the sea, which will pose a great threat to marine ecology and ultimately endanger human health in the long run.
Therefore, the discharge plan has been strongly opposed in Japan. According to a questionnaire conducted by The Asahi Shimbun, nearly 60 percent of mayors of 42 municipalities in Iwate, Miyagi and Fukushima prefectures oppose the discharge plan. The National Fisheries Cooperative Federation of Japan has also repeatedly stated its opposition in public.
The Japanese government believes that dumping Fukushima wastewater into the sea is the cheapest and most convenient solution, but neighboring countries and even the whole world will be at risk of nuclear pollution.
The Pacific Ocean doesn’t belong to Japan and the wastewater flow along oceanic currents will surely break boundaries and endanger public welfare and the interests of neighboring countries and even the international community.
The Korea Economic Daily reported that related research concluded that if contaminated water from Fukushima is released into the ocean, it would only take seven months for the contaminated water to reach the shores of Jeju Island, with the country's aquaculture and tourism suffering considerable losses.
According to the calculation of a German marine scientific research institute, radioactive materials will spread to most of the Pacific Ocean within half a year from the date of discharge, and the U.S. and Canada will be affected by nuclear pollution. People in the Pacific region also oppose the discharge plan.
As a participant of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Japan has the obligation of protecting the marine environment.
However, it hasn’t offered a full and convincing explanation on issues like the legitimacy of the discharge plan, the reliability of data on the nuclear-contaminated water, the efficacy of the treatment system or the uncertainty of environmental impact.
Though the IAEA has yet to complete a comprehensive review after three investigations in Japan, the Japanese side has been pushing through the approval process for its discharge plan and even started building facilities for the discharge. It is rather irresponsible for Japan to act against public opinion at home and concerns abroad.
The Pacific Ocean is not a private Japanese sewer. The country must seriously heed the voices of the international community and make a reasonable plan for the Fukushima wastewater disposal after full consultation with stakeholders and international agencies.
If it only seeks instant interest and insists on discharging the contaminated water into the sea, not only itself, but also its neighboring countries and the entire world will pay for the decision and several generations will be forced to bear the consequence.
(文图:赵筱尘 巫邓炎) [责编:天天中] 阅读剩余全文() |