Colds and flu cut by one-third in study of Canada's top cold fighter in vaccinat...(entification of the first human infectio...),Health

Investigators employed two principal methods to check on upper respiratory infections: lab tests and the Jackson method. (A third method non-Jackson assessment of symptoms in combination with lab tests was also used.) While both methods were utilized, the Jackson method is actually more sensitive than lab testing in confirming symptomatic upper respiratory infections and gauging their severity.)

Compared to the placebo, both COLD-FX regimes produced similar and statistically significant reductions in the number of upper respiratory infections per individual 36% for the lower dose and 33% for the higher dose.

Also, the number of Jackson infections in the standard dose COLD-FX group was 31% less than for the placebo group, while infections for the double dose group were 33% below the placebo group statistically significant results.

However, investigators did not find statistically significant differences in confirmed infections, compared to placebo, when they looked at the data in a couple of other ways: based on lab testing alone; and considering lab plus symptom-based (but not Jackson) testing. It's possible the differences weren't statistically significant in these scenarios because the overall influenza numbers were so low during the two flu seasons studied. Also, the trial wasn't designed to measure viral load (the amount of virus in the body). So COLD-FX may actually have reduced the degree of infection in some people but the trial didn't check this.

It did confirm that both COLD-FX dosage levels were safe and well tolerated. Adverse events in the COLD-FX groups showed up at about the same rates as for the placebo group with one intriguing exception. Both COLD-FX groups showed fewer negative cardiovascular events. The reason might be found in COLD-FX's effectiveness in reduc
'/>"/>