Myths of the Eastern Front

The above incoherent rambling is relevant how?

Combining strawmen and your own lack of logic to another is neither correct, reasonable, or appreciated. Unfortunaly with you it's SOP.

You got that rather backwards the reality is that it is related.

Are you trying to illustrate that you don't understand English or logic or both. For a number of reasons not all completely understood flu cases become more common and severe during the winter months. I have repeatedly agreed that it can and does occur at any time of year but that doesn't mean there is not a relationship with winter or for that matter summer (although the relationships are inverse increasing in winter and decreasing in the summer).

Actually that doesn't require "special" logic at all but it wasn't exactly my point either. Influenza show a distinct correlation with winter across both time and geography as has been documented on these pages. Furthermore it can be serious enough, indeed it is very often serious enough, to at least degrade the performance of soldiers if it doesn't require hospitalization much less kill them. The above effect if applied to German soldiers would constitute hurting the German army in any reasonable definition of the term.

And this is relevant how? Or is it simply another attempt at diversion.

When you are proven wrong you would be ahead to simply let the matter drop if you don't have the class to admit you are wrong. Digging yourself deeper into a hole does nothing for your reputation or your arguments.

 

One thing completely ignored is that cold of weather requires a vast increase of caloric intake. A normal day in good weather requires about 3 to 4 thousand or so calories for heavy fighting. Severe cold requires that much just to maintain function, this jumps the need to 8,000 or so calories. Due to the severe supply restrictions it was difficult to maintain that level, which is why German troops were more prone to illness.

 

Good point. The debate is a good one. There are many intangibles that we must consider.

 

There is no proof at all that there was an epidemic of influenza amongst the Ostheer in the winter of 41/42;there is also no proof at all that such epidemic (if it existed) was hurting the Ostheer ,it's the opposite : after all,the Ostheer did reasonably well in 41/42,proving there was no epidemic or if there was one,its effects were negligible .

About influenza and the winter : this relation does not exist : there were cold winters without influenza the winter of 2009 in Belgium was cold,but there was only an influenza in the autumn) and there were very mild winters (in fact " no winters"with autumn temperatures) with a big influenza .

Some wise guys (self-declared experts) are even claiming that warm winters are increasing the risk on influenza ..

Whatever, the fact that there were cold winters with big influenza does not prove a relationship between both .

 

This is starting from the assumption that there was heavy fighting during the winter,meaning lot of casualties, but the stats of German combat losses are showing a different situation :

september : 141000

october :115000

november : 87000

december: 78000
the losses in december were only slightly more than the half of those in september .

 

You should check the medical literature. It has somewhat different take than your anecdotal "evidence" of your experiences with your mother's asthma.

http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/asthma/basics/causes/con-20026992

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/info/asthma/what-causes-asthma.php

Both list "Cold Air"....

 

There is no scientific proof for the influence of cold air on asthma,neither for the existence of a (causal,or not) relationship between asthma and winter.

The following could possibly have a role in the existence of asthma for some people :

Dust mite
Pollen
Domestic animals
Ozon
Cold air

But :

only a small % of the population has asthma and dust mite exist in all houses :thus the relation between both is an unproved assumption

why would pollen hurt only a small % of those who have asthma,and these are also only a small % of the population :thus the relation between both is an unproved assumption

most people who have domestic animals do not suffer from asthma :thus the relation between both is an unproved assumption
the same for ozon : most people who suffer from ozon do not suffer from asthma and the opposite

the same for cold air :most people who suffer from the cold do not suffer from asthma and the opposite

the same for smoking : most smokers do not suffer from asthma and most asthmatics do not smoke

The truth is that a cause for asthma is still not found :what about pollution,hot humidity,humid warmth,heredity,physical efforts,physical strain....?
Are there more asthmatics in Alaska than in Florida ?

Some people can recover from asthma, some not

 

Feel like I'm on WebMD

 

Really? Then what do you suppose these are?
http://www.webmd.com/asthma/features/winter-asthma
http://www.weather.com/health/news/why-cold-air-and-outdoor-activity-hurt-asthma-20141117
http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/asthma/Pages/asthma-cold-weather.aspx
http://kidshealth.org/parent/medical/asthma/weather_asthma.html
http://kidshealth.org/teen/asthma_center/treatment/weather_asthma.html
http://asthma.ca/teamasthma/asthma_coldair_manage_eng.pdf
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/000141.htm

???? That other things can bring on asthma attacks is not in question. That doesn't mean that cold weather is not a factor though. As for your last sentence there is no logic at all in it. A small percentage of the population and the existance of dust mites in no way proves that the weather and in particular cold weather doesn't affect asthma symptoms.

The triggers for asthma symptoms are quite diverse. In the case of pollen it is likely an allergy attack triggering the asthma symptons. Only a small % of people are allergic to any particular pollen and that is likely if completely independent to be only somewhat correlated with the percentage of the population that suffers from asthma. Again that in no way means that the relationship is unproven. Indeed since the correlations clearly exists and a physiolocical mechanism is pretty clear the opposite looks to be true.

Note the similarity to the fallacies in both cases above. As they are the same througout the rest of the post I won't bother to refute them.

Do you mean ozone? If so it is a known poisons gas that irritates the lungs. In sufficient concentration anyone will "suffer" from it. People whose longs already have issue would be expected to be more sensative to it though which is an apt description of those who suffer from asthma.

I'd like to see your statistics on this or are you just assuming this as well? In any case there are a number of good reasons asthmatics would tend not to smoke.

Asthma like pneumonia is a set of symptoms not a disease. There are many causes for both. Most people recover from astham by the way. It is fatal in a few cases and some have to be careful of it's symptoms all of their lives while others out grow it.

I'm not quite sure why we delved in to asthma that much though as other medical issues were likely much more serious. Unless of course this is just another diversion attempt. If so it clearly didn't diver attention from the ill founded nature of most of LJAd's beliefs/statements and his complete inability to formulate a logical argument.

 

From the second source of LWD:cold air seems to predispose people with asthma to have more symptoms," Stanley Fineman, M.D., an allergist with the Atlanta Allergy and Asthma Clin

SEEMS : this seems, not ,it is , a lot of pseudo-scientific blahblah .

The same M.D. is also saying the following : Other changes in the weather CAN hurt to .

My cleaning-lady would say the same .

The fact is that the M.D. knows nothing and must admit that all changes in the weather can have an influence on asthma ,which means: also warm air (warm air is also a change in the weather) .

We can assume that the rest of the sources are on the same level .

 

And what is saying source number 3 ?

Cold weather CAN have a serious impact on the 5.4 million people WITH ASTHMA in the UK .


CAN : this means that it is also possible that the cold weather has no serious impact : that's looking in the future . The Romans had also such experts (Augurs ?) who told their credulous clients a lot of tales, by investigating the entrails of dead birds . And as the M.D.s of today,they did not forget to ask a big fee .

WITH ASTHMA : this means that following the fortune-teller with the title of M.D. the impact was limited to people who had already asthma . My cleaning-lady would have a good laugh .

Thus, the charlatan is saying that cold weather is not creating asthma,something with which I agree.

I could also say that cold weather can have a serious impact on the X million of smokers in the UK (and invent a big number of smokers) . or on the X million of elderly men and women,ot that warm weather can have a serious impact on the X million of elderly men and women .

Last point (and something I expected) : 5.4 million of asthmatics :who was counting them ? What is the scientific research that he used to come to such a number ?

 

Not really. One must keep in mind that he is dealing with and giving information to individuals who can have significantly different reactions to the same stimulii.

Indeed that's well documented also.

He "knws nothing"??? That explains how he got his MD and his position doesn't it? What utter arrogance. Most if not all the sources mention that weather of various sorts can impact asthma. That hardly means that cold weaher doesn't have an impact or isn't or indeed doesn't have a negative impact on more people than other weather related stimulii.

You have shown an amazing ability to make innumerable innane assumptions who am I to prevent you from making more. I just which you wouldn't bother to clutter this board with them.

 

A lot of meaningless blahblah .

 

A quick look would have answered this but of course it wouldn't have helped your position at all would it? Instead you just tried snide comments. Here's what I found with a quick google though:
http://www.asthma.org.uk/asthma-facts-and-statistics

http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/asthma/Pages/Introduction.aspx

 

An accurate assesement had you been talking about your posts in this thread or indeed in recent months.

 

And, who is saying this ? The usual penpusher of the NHS .

 

Combat casualties dropped because there was less fighting on most fronts, especially in the south.

 

And German non-combat casualties rose precipitously once the cold weather came along. From a low of 11,000 in July, to over 90,000 in December, and peaking with some 127,000 in January, 1942.

 

Not only illness, especially in Stalingrad, german soldiers starved to death.
German High Command didn't want to believe this, but increasing numbers of reports, that soldiers just broke down, leaded to examinations of their bodies. The results were clear. Cold weather and not enough food. The effects of the low temperatures were devastating, even if the soldiers get small rations to eat.

My Granddads brother wrote in his last letter from Stalingrad, that they were eating rats...

In the Winterwar 1939/40 in Finnland, soviet offensives were stopped by letting them capture deliberatly abandoned food depots. The freezing soldiers couldn't resist...

The Wehrmacht always had supply problems, the railroads in Russia were few, different in width and more and more attacked by partisans, transports on the road used to much fuel and was even more difficult.

 

Most German casualties during the Stalingrad encirclment were POWs:91000 at the capitulation ,not including those who became POW before the capitulation :91000 on a total of 182740 who were encircled,of which 16345 could leave the pocket .

It is also so that it was less cold at Stalingrad than at Moscow .