Talk:Buteyko method

"The lack of evidence that it works in practice" and 90% less asthma medication

The current article claims "the lack of evidence supporting either the theory behind the method[citation needed] or that it works in practice". Six published controlled randomized trials found about 90-95% reduction in main medication for asthmatics in 3-6 months after application of the Buteyko method. There are strong suspicions that people who made these changes in the current version of the article conceal known, publicly available facts about the proven effects of the Buteyko method on people with asthma. If it does not work in practice, why 6 top notch Western trials found 90% less meds? ARakhimov 07:36, 15 September 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by ArtourRakhimov (talk • contribs)

Please do not bomb the lede with tags; it is properly summarizing the body as it is supposed to (and citations are not required in the lede). I don't see what the issue is here. According to the best sources we have, PMID 22082165 & PMID 24085551, the evidence simply isn't good enough to say the method is effective. Wikipedia can do nothing other than reflect that. Also, remember WP:TINC. Alexbrn ^{talk|contribs|COI} 08:17, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

There IS a serious problem here. New pharmaceuticals get approved when they have even just a minor possible significant effect (cf Irving Kirsch: "The Emperor's New Drugs"), while non-pharma therapies like Buteyko's obviously get simply shot down by spin doctors / lobbyists. One example is that here in Germany it has been acknowledged by the medical community as indeed effective (and Germany is very bureaucratic and uber-correct, believe me), yet the state health insurance agencies still won't pay for it, it's reserved to the minority of rich private patients (which are no market for big pharma here). --91.47.43.243 (talk) 01:45, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Do you have any evidence that "here in Germany it has been acknowledged by the medical community as indeed effective"? Claims are cheap, and science does not work differently and come to different conclusions in different countries. --Hob Gadling (talk) 12:48, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

You say "Six published controlled randomized trials found" something. But how good were they, and how many RCTs found nothing? Such questions are answered by meta-analyses such as those quoted in the article. And they found there is no good evidence. This is how it is determined, not by some conspiracy of "spin doctors". Using primary sources is frowned upon here precisely because it prevents cherry-picking such as what you are doing here. --Hob Gadling (talk) 12:48, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Those metanalytic studies against Butyeko don't establish there is no good evidence. This is simply not true, the evidence is incomplete as these articles and other parts of this article state. Using primary sources prevents the bias from interpreting 2 metanalyses. Furthermore, according to the two PMID studies cited above: "Although few in number, RCTs of respiratory muscle training found a significant reduction in bronchodilator medication use. Where meta-analyses could be done, they provided evidence of benefit from yoga, Buteyko breathing technique and physiotherapist-led breathing training in improving asthma-related quality of life." and "Even though individual trials reported positive effects of breathing exercises, no reliable conclusions could be drawn concerning the use of breathing exercises for asthma in clinical practice. This was a result of methodological differences among the included studies and poor reporting of methodological aspects in most of the included studies. However, trends for improvement are encouraging, and further studies including full descriptions of treatment methods and outcome measurements are required."

This is not "no good evidence", that is an overstatement of what is actually incomplete evidence. You my fine sir are cherry-picking excerpts from the metanalyses it seems. Ppavlik (talk) 21:00, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Source: Complementary Therapies in Asthmatic Children

In reading this article, I found that a section requested sources. In searching for sources that pertained to the statements, I found some of the material in COMPLEMENTARY THERAPIES IN ASTHMATIC CHILDREN. @Yobol, you actually pointed out that article plagiarized WP. Good catch! I should have checked the date of the publication against previous versions of the article. It is amazing how many internet sites do plagiarize WP. I'll be more careful in the future. Thatcher57 (talk) 23:12, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Profbuteyko.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:41, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Buteyko Biographer Sergey Altukhov & Buteyko Russian to English Translation Project

Is this resource useful for the Buteyko Method Wiki page? Sergey Altukhov written work details how the Buteyko Method was taught in detail. Sergey Altukhov English Website https://thebreathingman.com/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C4:B628:6C01:9197:66B1:B651:7928 (talk) 20:44, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Doubtful from a WP:FRIND perspective. Bon courage (talk) 20:51, 17 January 2024 (UTC)