Talk:Halotherapy

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative medicine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Alternative medicine related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Alternative medicineWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative medicineTemplate:WikiProject Alternative medicineAlternative medicine articles

Skepticism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Complete Nonsense

This entire article is based on pseudo-science and does NOT include any real sources. It should be removed immediately. 80.225.147.198 (talk) 12:43, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No active editor seems to have taken the challenge to bring this page in line with WP so I would also recommend a Request for Deletion. Any editor opposes?--LexCorp (talk) 19:25, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have initiated the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion process and notified most editors.--LexCorp (talk) 23:48, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion that prompted the start of the article for deletion process -->[1]--LexCorp (talk) 23:51, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Guardian, BBC and Cochrane Collaboration are all real sources so the complaint of the IP above is obsolete. I shall add another source for this notable topic which is obviously not complete nonsense. Colonel Warden (talk) 09:14, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The main complain from me is that most of those sources are news articles and that the whole article is WP:Syn thinly supported by the sources. As an example lets look at the leading sentence.

Salt therapy, halotherapy or speleotherapy[1] is the therapeutic use of salt mines, caves or other forms of exposure to salt air."

The reference does not mention either Salt Therapy or Halotherapy and only mentions Speleotherapy in relation to a salt mine. No mention of caves or salt air at all thus WP:SYN.

There are records of improvements in the breathing of miners in Roman and medieval times.

Where does this come from? the 2nd reference?

Also in the Salt water aerosol section the first sentence is complete WP:Syn. No one has found anything yet, just loose anecdotal reports that surfers experience less pulmonary infections. And why is this considered Salt therapy at all?. The article doesn't state it is Salt therapy. the same could be said about the Clinical reviews section. I really doubt the authors of the study consider it as Salt therapy given that they do not mention it at all.

So in conclusion. It is my view that this is a WP:fringe topic that lacks notability and that is full of WP:syn derived from a few news-bytes articles and one study with dubious connections to the subject at hand.--LexCorp (talk) 11:25, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The existing source already tells us that the use of saline aerosols is more than anecdotal as there have been clinical trials. There are many thousands more scholarly sources for us to study and summarise. There is no doubt much scope for improvement of the article but it seems that we agree that the matter is not complete nonsense. May we mark this section as resolved? Colonel Warden (talk) 13:25, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This was all discussed a month ago. No active editor emerged during that time thus the Request for Deletion. If you feel you are up to the job of bringing this article in line with Wikipedia Policy then by all means do so. As of right now most of its content is WP:SYN. Leaving the article as it is now is not an option in my view. You need to find references that no only acknowledge Salt therapy but also support the multiple claim made in the article as for example the examples given above. Again I would give appropriate time for an active editor to work on the article but if not progress is made or no active editor emerges I would again move to have this article deleted--LexCorp (talk) 16:02, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I fear what you say, too, about this article and it appears in direct contradiction to the wiki on Bronchoconstriction and its references about decreasing salt intake. It appears to be a plug for the pseudo-science rock-salt therapy spas that are now cropping up in cities. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.29.201.22 (talk) 19:32, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What an embarrassment this page is, can someone please flag this for deletion? The moment vested interests (http:www.saltsoftheearth.com.au) are getting away with both updating the article and listing themselves as a reference is a sad day for WP. 27.253.48.4 (talk) 05:14, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The dreadful state of this page has prompted me to visit a talk page for the first time. I agree with the previous comment that it is an embarrassment. I can't even think where to start improving it. It should be deleted.--Voiceintheether (talk) 23:55, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

List of conditions

Here's a list of relevant conditions which I moved here from the article pending sourcing and cleanup. Colonel Warden (talk) 09:48, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Asthma
Bronchitis
Sinusitis
Respiratory allergies
Ear Infection
Unhealthy skin, Eczema, Acne
Long acute diseases of the upper airways
Chronic diseases of the airways
Chronic pharyngitis
Chronic tonsillitis or inflammation of the tonsils
Chronic maxillary sinusitis
Chronic inflammation of the pharyngeal tonsil
Relapsing pneumonia
Chronic and acute otitis
Frequent viral infections
Polinosis or hay rhinitis
Atopic dermatitis
Putrid dermal infection
COPD (Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease)
Cystic Fibrosis

Effectiveness

There needs to be a section on what scientific if any research on this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.159.218.183 (talk) 13:09, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. This seems more like superstition than actual science. ThePlatypusofDoom (talk) 21:15, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Poorly Redirected

I have no idea why someone searching for "salt caves" would be better served by a redirection to a halotherapy article. At least point to a disambiguation page. 99.115.67.243 (talk) 18:41, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

untruth

This article is not truth, there are many mistakes. Speleotherapy is not the same like halotherapy and salt therapy! Speleotherapy does not necessarily have anything to do with the salt. In Wieliczka dr Boczkowski used halotherapy, because miners generated salt aerosol during his job. In addition halotherapy or salt therapy has several forms, not only inhalatios but also baths, irrigation and lavage... All article is untruth and misleads the reader. Katarzyna124 (talk) 17:56, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]