My asthma TV show

In my dream world my characters Joe Goofus and Jake Gallant will be the stars of a new cartoon aptly titled Hardluck Asthma: The adventures of Joe Goofus and Jake Gallant.

It will be both a fun and educational cartoon on Nickelodeon featuring the voices of Michael J. Fox and Jake Gallant and yours truly as the voice of Joe Goofus.  I figured most of us are more realistically goofus asthmatics, and therefore I insisted on being the asthma goofus.

The cartoon features the two contrasting characters, both boys, who both have hardluck asthma.  The premise of the cartoon is one or both of the boys faces an obstacle regarding his asthma, and goofus usually makes some decision that gets him into trouble.  Sometimes the decision is irresponsible, yet quite often it's doing something that any normal kid might do.

Jake Gallant usually makes the "perfect" decision, although he still has trouble with his asthma.  In the cartoon he usually takes on the role of trying to help Joe decide what to do when he faces his consequences of his decisions, such as the decision to rake leaves or to go to hunting camp with his dad even though he knows both those things usually lead to an asthma attack.

In my favorite episode Joe Goofus has a test at school, and in order to not have to take the test he doesn't take his controller medicines for a week and runs outside in the cold.  In this way he becomes the Actor Asthmatic, or the asthmatics who fakes his asthma our of convenience.

Jake Gallant and Joe Goofus primary function is to teach children that they are not alone in living with asthma, and teach them basic skills on how to live with this disease.  It also focuses on teaching kids what to do and what not to do in order to prevent asthma symptoms.

This post was written as part of NHBPM – 30 health posts in 30 days: http://bit.ly/vU0g9J

My future asthma book

I do see a book in my future.  I've started three books, and some day I plan to put them together and get them published.  I have a nonfiction book and a fiction book I'm working on.  Yet my nonfiction book would be relevant to to this blog because it's about asthma.  

I've already written chapters of my book on the RT Cave and at MyAsthmaCentral.  I've been trying to write about every aspect of asthma in a pithy (short and sweet) fashion.  Some day I'd like to take my writings and put them together in a simple, easy to read book.  

I want my asthma story to be in the book, yet I don't want that to be the main focus.  I simply want to show how I suffered from the disease, how I survived, and how asthma made me what I am today.  Yes, you can live a normal life and have asthma too. 

Yet I also want to make asthma an easy disease to understand?  What is asthma?  What causes it?  What triggers an attack?  What's the history of asthma?  

Here is an idea I've created for my future book jacket.  It actually comes from one of my posts:

Living through an asthma attack is never fun.  The good news is asthma can be controlled, and you can live a normal life with it.  That in mind, and since we have to live with it anyway, no point in saying, "Why me?"

Based on my experience from being a lifelong asthmatic, I have discovered seven benefits of having asthma  -- and no, I am not referring to using it to get out of gym class or work.  

I have also used my professional and personal experience to create eleven different types of asthmatics, such as the Jake the gallant asthmatic and Joe the goofus asthmatic.  You might be like Joe, yet chances are you might find you have more in common with Mr. Goofus than you think.

Hardluck Asthma  provides the inside scoop of what it's like to live with asthma, and how you too can cope with this disease.  Besides, it's also good to know that you are not alone in having to deal with asthma. 

One thing I'm not so good at is creating titles for my future book.  Here are some ideas I have:

• My Hardluck Asthma Story
• Living with asthma
• How to have fun with asthma
• The truth about asthma
• An asthma guide:  How to survive asthma
• How asthma benefited my life
• Fun with Asthma:  A definition, a history, a life

Those are just some ideas, yet I'm not sure I like any of them.  If you have any ideas let me know in the comments below.  If you have an idea for a book, let me know about that too in the comments below.

This post was written as part of NHBPM – 30 health posts in 30 days: http://bit.ly/vU0g9J

1621-1675:Willis narrows asthma definition

In the 19th century Dr. Samuel Gee (1839-1911) made a gallant effort to update the definition of asthma for physicians during his era.  He wrote fondly of Dr. Thomas Willis (1671-1675), giving him credit as "innovator of the doctrines of the ancients." (1)

Gee described, in 1899, that prior to the 17th century asthma was considered "any kind of panting, gasping, pursy breathing such as follows on running on exertion." (1)

Back then asthma was considered to be a disease caused by the spirits. Yet in 1678 Thomas described asthma as o"obstruction of bronchi by thick humors, swelling of their walls and obstruction from without." (2)
By these words Dr. Gee gave credit to Dr. Willis for the evolution of asthma as more than simply a disease of dyspnea and wheezing.  Other doctors may have helped to advance the definition (such as Dr. van Helmont), yet it was Dr. Willis who made asthma a unique illness in and of its own, such as Tuberculosis and Epilepsy are unique illnesses treated with unique remedies.

"Hence," Gee wrote, "Asthma and dyspnea were synonyms for most of the older physicians.  A few, such as Celsus (25 B.C.-50 A.D.), signified by asthma the highest degree of dyspnea, but this was all; asthma was never regarded as a special sort of dyspnea." (1)

For Gee, ancient definitions of asthma from Hippocrates to Galen to van Helmont were inaccurate until we get to Thomas Willis of the 17th century.  In Willis's book  "Rational Pharmaceutic," which was published the same year as his death in 1675,  Willis explained that all ancient and modern physicians up to his time acknowledged only one kind of asthma, and this was pneumatic asthma.

Gee explained that pneumatic asthma was described by Willis as when the lungs are "obstructed or not open enough."  Gee wrote that the ancients regarded all asthma as "pneumatic and dependent on bronchial obstruction." (1)

He said the ancient definition of asthma is of little value in modern times (for Gee modern times would be 1899).  Yet, "It is interesting to note that those most conservative of people, the illiterate, continue to use the word in the sense of Hippocrates and Galen." (1)

However, we must note that it was illegal for the Ancient Greeks and Romans to dissect human bodies, and even in the 17th century it was very risky to publish ideas that opposed the beliefs of the church or ruling parties (hence the publishing of Willis's works posthumously).  Plus societies tend to be stubborn to new ideas change.

We see this often as we follow the history of science, medicine, and asthma.  It's perhaps this stubborness of mankind that we can give credit for the slowness to which the term asthma was defined, and why it took until 1901 for good asthma medicine to be discovered.

Orville Harry Brown, in his 1917 book, explained that Willis attributed to the cause of asthma "as some humor in the blood. (5, page 27).

Ernst Shmiegelow, in his 1890 book, said Willis may have been one of the first to explore the idea of the diaphragm as being the cause of asthma, and therefore may also be the creator of the diaphragmatic theory of asthma.  (6, page 4)

Gee said Willis described three forms of asthma: (1, page 817)

1. Pneumatic Asthma:  Dyspnea is a result of air passages in the lungs being obstructed or not open enough
2. Convulsive Asthma:  The primary fault of dyspnea comes from the lungs themselves, "in the moving fibres or muscular coats of the air vessels or in the diaphragm and muscles of the chest or in the nerves of the lungs and chest or of the origin of those nerves in the brain."
3. Mixed Asthma:  Both pneumatic and convulsive.

Gee said that in defining convulsive asthma, Willis pondered all the theories before his time and incorporated them into his newly defined convulsive asthma, which "was soon laid hold of.  The term 'asthma' came to be reserved for the exclusive denomination of that form of the disease which was believed to be spasmotic; and this is the sense in which the word is still used by most parsons even in our own day."  (1)

I must continue to remind my readers that nervous asthma was generally thought to be synonymous with spasmotic or convulsive asthma.  By this the medical community believed the the fit of asthma was caused by nervous pathways from the brain as a result of something exciting these nervous pathways.

Barry Brenner, in 1999, said Willis also made an "association between food, emotion, heredity, and asthma."    In fact, it was in 1672 that Willis described emotion as bringing about an asthma attack.  (3)

Way back in the 12th century Maimonides described asthma as a nocturnal disease when studying the disease in Saladin's son.   In the 17th century there were many references to asthma as a nocturnal disease, and this was once again mentioned by Willis who, according to T.J.H. Clark, "in his 1987 book Diurnal Rhythm of Asthma," "blamed the heat of the bed as the cause of nocturnal asthma and he advised leaving the bed and sleeping in a chair.  By contrast, Maimonides recommended celibacy." (4)

Even though he wasn't the first to write about asthma as being caused by the mind, Willis is given credit, perhaps due to his vast writings on the subject.  And while the nervous theory of asthma grew in popularity among the medial community during the 18th century, and grew roots in the 19th century, not all physicians supported it.

Perhaps one of his first opponents was Giovanni Batttista Morgagni (1682-1771). He disagreed with Willis that asthma was a nervous disorder, instead he believed that asthma was caused by "concretions (masses) in the bronchial tubes." He believed this because he found "extravasated serum in the vessicles of the lungs in most cases."  (5, page 27)

Albrecht von Haller (1708-1777) believed that "the normal act of expiration hindered the flow of blood through the lungs," and "demonstrated that the lungs contracted when concentrated acid was applied to it."  (5, page 27)

William Herberden (1710-1801) defined "convulsive asthma" the way angina pectoris was later defined: as chest pain or discomfort due to activity or stress. (5, page 27)

Varnier (name and lifespan unknown to me) believed "irritating fluids or fumes forced into the lungs cause contraction therof."  (5, page 27)

Varnier, however, was also among the first physicians to prove by his experiments that muscles that wrap around the bronchial tubes contract, and this is the cause for the symptoms of asthma.

So at the time Willis's theory was just one of many theories regarding the cause of asthma.  Still, it was his nervous theory of asthma that was grabbed by the medical community and grew roots in the minds of physicians.  These roots would grow so deep that even after his theory was disproved in the mid-20th century, it still held sway.

While many before him described asthma as nervous, Willis is often given credit for bringing the idea to the attention of the medical community.  He is given credit for the nervous theory of asthma.

Further reading:

1. The evolution of the nervous theory of asthma (not yet written)

Click here for more asthma history.

References:

1. Gee, Samuel, "Bronchitis, Pulmonary Emphysema, and Asthma,", Lancet, March 25, 1899, page 817
2. Salvi, Sundeep S., "Is Asthma Really Due to a Polarized T Cell Response Toward a helper T-Cell Type 2 Phenotype," American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Oct. 15, 2001, vol. 164, no. 8, pages 1343-6
3. Brenner, Barry, "Emergency Medicine," 1999, New York, page 6 (Brenner wrote 
4. Clark, T.J.H., "Diurnal Rhythm of Asthma," (American College of Chest Physicians), 1987,  page 1375
5. Brown, Orville Harry, "Asthma, presenting an exposition of nonpassive expiration theory," 1917, St. Louis, C.V. Mosby Company
6. Shmiegelow, Ernst, "Asthma, considered specially in relation to nasal disease," 1890, London, H.K. Lewis
7. Garrison, Fielding Hudson, "An introduction to the history of medicine," 1921, 3rd edition, Philadelphia and London, W.B Saunders Company
8. Ramadge, Francis Hopkins, "Asthma, its species and complications, or researches into pathology or disordered respiration; with remarks on the remedial treatment applicable to each variety; being a practical and theoretical review of this malady, considered in its simple form, and in connection with disease of the heart, catarrh, indigestion, etc." 1835, London,  Longman, Rees, Orme, Brown, Green, and Longman; Ramadge discusses Thomas Willis's views on asthma on pages 93-94.  He also mentions him various other times in his book. 

Why is sputum produced during asthma attack?

Your question:  Why is sputum produced during an asthma attack?

My humble answer:  An asthma attack occurs because you inhale something that your immune system responds to, such as dust mites, mold, cockroach urine, chemicals, etc.  One part of this response is to cause your goblet cells to secrete mucus in order to trap the invading microbes.  As the disease progresses you may even develop an abnormally large amount of goblet cells.  So when you have an asthma attack mucus may be excessive.  

One of the interesting things about asthma sputum is it is usually sterile and white, as I explain here. 

1579- 1644: Van Helmont creates nervous theory of asthma

Jean Baptista van Helmont
(8, page 260)

From about the time of Jesus to the Renaissance there were few advances in medicine. The Greek terms asthma and dyspnea had made their way into the vocabularies of doctors, yet little was considered about their causes.  Then along came the scientific revolution and Jean Baptiste van Helmont, who referred to asthma as "epilepsy of the lungs." (1, page 216)(2, page 176)(8, page 374)

Up until this time the works of Galen were considered the gold standard in medicine.  Science wasn't needed, because every thing any physician could possibly need to know about any disease, asthma included, was in one of Galen's books


This started to change when the dark ages ended with the fall of Constantinople in 1453.  This is believed by many historians to have ended the dark ages and sparked a Renaissance where lost Greek and Roman wisdom was recaptured.

It was in 1514 that Galen's reign as supreme master and god of medical superstitions took a major hit. This was the year Nicolaus Copernicus was questioning the belief that the Earth was the center of the Universe and started writing his theories about the earth rotating the sun. Out of fear of being rejected and maybe even killed, his works weren't published until eight years after his death in 1543.

This one event got many people to thinking, or, better yet, inspired thinkers to become courageous, thus giving birth to the age of reason, or the Renaissance. This was a time people started questioning the views that were etched in stone by the Ancient Greeks and followed through the Middle Ages.

This was a time when fresh ideas that were based on science as opposed to superstitions and false logic. New ideas were formed in physics, astronomy, biology, chemistry and medicine.

Copernicus was the first to use scientific research as opposed to superstitions in science, and it was Galileo Galileo who risked all as he published his book on scientific reason during his lifetime.  Galileo became famous, and because of this he is now called the father of modern science. He set the way for others to question old scientific and medical superstitions that were regarded as facts, and one such physician was Jean Baptiste Van Helmont, who, in 1579, was born into the dawn of the Scientific Revolution in Brussels.

He was the younger son of a noble family, and his father died in his second year. He entered the University of Louvain (Leuven) at a young age, and graduated from his studies in mathematics, astronomy, astrology, and philosophy at the young age of 17. (3, page 260) (4, page 113-114)(7)

He had an opportunity to become the imperial physician, but he declined it because medicine failed to heal him when he obtained scabies from a girl. Instead he decided to "spend his time by fasting, supplication and prayer, and in poverty. He chose the poverty of Christ, giving to his sister all his worldly possessions." (4, page 115)

He then spent time as a Capuchin friar just prior to studying law, botany and medicine. Once this task was completed, he traveled to Switzerland and Italy (1600-1602) and then France and England (1602-15), and then he received his medical degree in 1599. As a physician he was "unwilling to accept money from his sick fellow-man in return for so doubtful an art." (4, page 114)(7)

He put to use his medical skills during a plague that broke out in Antwerp in 1605. (7) This must have earned him quite a bit of fame.  It was also about this time that he was introduced to a person who introduced him to Paracelsus (1493-1541), and he studied his works "zealously." (4, page 114)

Perhaps due to the fame he earned by his travels and experiences, he was offered many attractive jobs from princes and archbishops, although he turned all of these down in 1609, claiming the he did not want to live in the "misery of my fellow men." (7)

It was that same year, in 1609, that he abandoned poverty and Christ, and married a rich heiress by the name of Margaret van Ranst. Through he he inherited several estates, and he retired to one of them, leaving the medical profession to devote his entire life to "chemical science" and transforming the works of Paracelsus. (4, pages 14-15) (7)

Unlike Paracelsus, van Helmont didn't believe in ancient Greek theories.  In fact, he became the first to dismiss the idea that asthma (and diseases in general) was a disease caused by an imbalance of the humors and instead was a disease caused by a narrowing of the pipes in the lungs. It was this view that made him a very controversial person during his lifetime.

 Historian Fielding Hudson Garrison explains van Helmont this way:

Like his master, Paracelsus, van Helmont believed that each material process of the body is presided over by a special archaeus, or spirit (which he calls Blas), and that these physiologic processes are in themselves purely chemical, being due in each case to the agency of a special ferment (or Gas). Each Gas is an instrument in the hands of its special Blas, while the latter are presided over by a sensory-motive soul (anima sensitiva motivaque), which van Helmont locates in the pit of the stomach, since a blow in that region destroys consciousness. (3, page 260)

Bradford explained him as follows:

Van Helmont transmuted the fancies of Paracelsus into a sort of mystic and pious system based on chemical principles. He was a considerable chemist. He thought that air and water were the elements; from the water everything on earth takes its origin—the world is the creation of God.(4, pages 114-115)

In order to prove the basic element of the earth was water he performed an experiment where he grew a tree in a a tub for five years and gave it nothing but pure water. We weighed the tree and soil before the experiment, and in the end the soil weighed the same and the tree had gained 160 pounds. He attributed the weight gain of the tree as being due to water. While his conclusion may not have been completely accurate, some historians refer to him as the father of biochemistry because of this experiment.

Bradford continued:

Disease is something active and is caused by the fall of man. The spirit of man came from God, but on account of the fall became so corrupted that a lesser spirit in man gained control. There was next lower a perceptive soul, and below that a something which he called Archaeus; then there is also Gas which arose by the influence of the Archaeus on water. To Van Helmont we owe this word Gas. (4, page 115) 

The term "gas" he derived from the Greek word for chaos.  Due to his experiments with gases he is considered by many historians as the father of pneumatic (air) science.

One of his most famous experiments was when he burned charcoal and produced the substance carbon dioxide. He explained this was the same product produced from fermenting musk, which rendered the air inside caves as unbreathable. Yet at that time he did not use the word carbon dioxide, he used instead the word gas sylvestre.

He also described other gases, such as carbon monoxide, chlorine gas (prescribed by later physicians as an asthma remedy), digestive gases, sulfer dioxide, and a "vital" gas in the blood that we now refer to as oxygen.

Perhaps one of the reasons van Helmont studied air was that he was an asthmatic.  He generally believed asthma was a physical disease of the lungs caused by factors outside the lungs, such as substances one might come into contact with, substances in the air, and substances affecting the mind.  

Orville Brown explains how van Helmont suspected the "archeus" was the cause of asthma: (5, page 27)

"Archeus"—a something—a vital spirit—was enshrined in the stomach, and when disturbed, was responsible for disease by sending forth a peculiar fluid, which, reaching the lungs, caused asthma.  (5, page 27)

To grasp a more complete understanding of this system of van Helmont, I will once again refer to Thomas Bradford, who said:

Van Helmont declared a very mystical and fanciful philosophy; the spleen and the stomach were the rulers over the body. The spleen presided over the abdomen, the sexual organs; the stomach over sleep, waking, and folly. This Archaeus also possessed a great power both in man and in animals. Disease depended on a perverted action of the Archaeus. (4, page 115)

More specifically, Pagan said that Helmont believed asthma was caused when a "specific disease semen has planted its root; in the present case (for asthma) a semen that closes the peripheral pores through which air passes from the lungs into the chest cavity.  It is a semen with the property of causing contraction of members and parts."  (2, page 175-176

That this has occurred, Pagan said of Helmont's theory, "is eveident with the phenomena associated with asthma," such as: (2, page 176)

• Diuresis
• Diarrhea 
• Gurgling of the gut
• Contraction around the gums (2, page 176)

Pagan likewise said that because the lung contracted, Helmont referred to asthma as "epilepsy of the lungs." He also called it this because asthma was observed to be "latent for long periods, only to provoke on special occasions attacks of contraction that chiefly concern one organ; in this case the lungs, in real epilepsy the nervous system." (2, page 176)  (2, page 176)

Pagan added one other thing about the "specific disease semon" that causes asthma:

Basically, however, neither of these is a localized ailment but one conditioned by the influent archeus, the vital principle of the organism as a while. This is shown by the associated symptoms outside the lungs.  But the anatomical changes must be looked for in the lungs, where the poison attacks directly, and where they are produced as at a specific seat. To that extent asthma (as indeed every other disease) is a local and localized affair. Its poison irritates in the same way cantharides do, and is essentially identical with the poison of epilepsy, but not strong enough to produce the latter. (2, page 176)

It is believed by many historians that he was the first to link asthma with hysteria, and therefore should be given credit as the father of the nervous theory of asthma.  But he usually doesn't get this credit, perhaps because of the controversial nature of his work, and the fact hat he fad no followers.

Most historians give Thomas Willis, his contemporary, credit for creating the nervous theory of asthma.  This is usually the case even though Willis mentioned nervous asthma several years after van Helmont did.  Yet this is just the way history is, sometimes giving credit for discoveries to the most popular person as opposed to the correct person.

Bradford said van Helmont's remedies for just about any disease were: (4, page 115)

• Conjuratoins
• Charms
• Prayer
• Power of god  (4, page 115)

He also used "earthly medicines," such as: (4, page 115)

• Opium
• Mercury
• Antimony
• Wine (for fevers  (4, page 115)

Barry Brenner said:

(Van Helmont) noted that the bronchi were the origin of asthma, and that inhaling dust and fish in certain individuals brought on attacks.  He noted that the bronchi would react with spasm to dust, especially from t demolition of houses and temples.  He described a monk who, while eating fish fired in oil, fell down, deprived of breathing, "so that he was scarce distinguished from a strangled man." The concept put in in conflict with the official Church view of internal humors as the cause of disease, and he was condemned to death until he recanted. (6, page 5-6)

Once he retired he dedicated about seven years to chemical research, and then he spent the rest of his life in "relative solitude and mostly in peace."  (7)

This was despite the fact that most of what he discovered, and most of what he believed, was contrary to the views of the church.  It was due to such controversies surrounding his work that he waited until he was on his deathbed to give his works to his son to edit and publish. So all of what was described above, all he accomplished in his life, was never published until after he was dead.  (7)

Van Helmont had an illustrious mind, one who decided to do what he thought was right as opposed to what was popular.  Surely this caused some controversy during his lifetime, but it was to the benefit of future generations.

References:

1. Nulan, Sherwin B, "The mysteries within: a surgeon explores myth, medicine and the human body," 2000, New York, Simon and Schuster
2. Pagan, Walter, "Joan Baptista Van Helmont: Reformer of Science and Medicine," 1982, UK, Cambridge University Press\
3. Garrison, Fielding Hudson, "An introduction to the history of medicine," 1921, 3rd edition, Philadelphia and London, W.B Saunders Company
4. Bradford, Thomas Lindsley, writer, Robert Ray Roth, editor, “Quiz questions on the history of medicine from the lectures of Thomas Lindley Bradford M.D.,” 1898, Philadelphia, Hohn Joseph McVey
5. Brown, Orville Harry, "Asthma, presenting an exposition of the nonpassive expiration theory," 1917, St. Louis, C.V. Mosby Company
6. Brenner, Barry E, author of chapter one in "Emergency Asthma" called  "Where have we been? The history of acute asthma," 1999, New York, Marcel Dekker, Inc
7. "Jan Baptista van Helmont," Britannica.com, http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/260549/Jan-Baptista-van-Helmont, accessed 11/11/13
8. Gill, M. H., "Review and Bibliographic Notices: "On the spasmotic asthma of adults," by Bergson, published Gill's book, "The Dublin Quarterly Journal of Medical Science," volume X, August and November, 1850, Dublin, Hodges and Smith, pages 373-388

Can you use dulera and symbicort together?

Your humble question:  Can you use dulera and symbicort together?

My humble answer:  Both of these medicines are basically the same; they both have the long acting beta adrenergic foracort in them.  You do not want to put too much of this medicine in your system, and therefore you do not want to use them together.  Doing so can have dire consequences.

Your question:  What is better, dulera or symbicort?

My humble answer:  The only difference between these two medicines is the inhaled corticosteroid.  Symbicort has Pulmicort and Dulera has Flovent.  Which one works best is a matter of personal choice.

Your question:  Will I gain weight if I use symbicort or dulera?

My humble answer:  There is no documented evidence either of these medicines will cause you to gain weight.  However, many of us asthmatics may disagree with this.

Your question:  Should you use a spacer with symbicort and dulera?

My humble answer:  Since they are both inhalers I would recommend you use a spacer.  It's proven to make the medicine work 75 percent better.  

Seneca's view of life helped him cope with asthma

I am in love with Seneca the Younger.  He was an asthmatic with allergies just like me, only he suffered with the disease over 2,000 years ago.  His descriptions of the disease were simply amazing, yet more impressive was the way he learned to cope, and the way he wrote about how asthma made him a better person simply for having experienced it.   

And even more  amazing is the methods that he developed to conquer his asthma.  He wrote that you cannot dwell on the past and say things like, "Oh why me?"  You cannot say things like, "No one had ever been in such a bad state."  You cannot say things like, "The torments and hardships I endured."  These thoughts should be banned, he wrote, because they are of little use.  Dewlling on what ailed you in the past does you no good.

Seneca

Likewise, he wrote that you cannot worry about an asthma attack that will strike you in the future either, because that will do you no good.  What you need to do is try to make the best of your life right now.  You need to clear your mind of such evil thoughts.

In his 78th letter to his friend Lucius he wrote that those who suffer through the battle of an asthma attack are like the boxer who suffers even during the trials of training.  He wrote that a boxer does this for wealth and fame.  He wrote, "Let us too overcome all things, with our reward consisting not in any wealth or garland, not in trumpet calls for silence for the ceremonial proclamaiton of our name, but in moral worth, in strength of spirit, in a peace that is won for every once in any contest fortune has been utterly defeated."

He wrote this over 2,000 years before I wrote my post The Seven Benefits of having Asthma and Seven Ways Asthma has Benefited my Life.  I wrote pretty much what Seneca wrote to his friend Lucius, only I wrote it before I ever even discovered who Seneca was. 

To manage his asthma he didn't rely on witchcraft, or magic, or prayer, nor did he rely on remedies based on some poppycock superstitions or false logic.  The way he learned to cope with his disease was by eating well, staying in shape, and by having many friends, diverting your mind so you don't think about the pains in your life.  He generally writes about the importance of relaxing and soothing your mind to remedy pain or dyspnea or any physical ailment. Today we refer to this as relaxation exercises.

He wrote that to think about the misery you put up with in the past, or to fear the future is senseless and will only increase your anxiety and make your disease and your life even worse; that fear and anxiety will only bring on an attack of "gasping for breath" or catahhr (which is the ancient word for the symptoms we now describe as allergies or nasal inflammation).

He writes, "'I am suffering from pain,' you may say.  'Well, does it stop you suffering it if you endure it in a womanish fashion"

He continued, "Plus there are men who have suffered greater sufferings than you have and survived.  In this way you should consider yourself fortunate.  You could have something worse, like "having your arms stretched on a rack or burnt alive... There have been men who have undergone these experiences and never uttered a groan... Surely pain is something you will want to smile at after this."

"But my illness has taken me away from my duties and won't allow me to achieve anything," he wrote as another example of a common complaint of the suffering. 

He wrote:

"It is your body, not your mind as well, that is in the grip of ill health.  Hence it may slow the feet of a runner and make the hands of a smith or cobbler less efficient, but if your mind is by habit of an active turn you may still give instruction and advice, listen and learn, inquire and remember, Besides, if you meet sickness in a sensible manner, do you really think you are achieving nothing?  You will be demonstrating that even when one cannot always beat it one can always bear an illness.  There is room for heroism, I assure you, in bed as anywhere else.  War and the battle-front are not the only spheres in which proof is to be had of a spirited and fearless character:  a person's bravery is no less evident under the bed-clothes. There is something it lies open to you to achieve, and that is making the fight with illness a good one.  If its threats or importunities leave you quite unmoved, you are sending others a signal example.  How much scope there would be for renown if whenever we were sick we had an audience of spectators!  Be your own spectator anyway, your own applauding audience."

In essence, he is saying that you are alive and therefore you have a gift to offer to the world if you see it and if you use it.  Your job is to bring yourself up, rise up, and make something of what you have left in life.  Use what is not ailing you: your brain, your ability to speak or listen, your ability to read and write and to communicate ideas. 

The benefits I wrote about are perspective on life and an appreciation for every breath, a sense of vulnerability in that you know that you will not live forever and that you must get what you can out of life, and give what you can give while you are here.  You know that you might die tomorrow, so you live for today.  you touch as many people as you can.  You read instead of doing things that might trigger your asthma. You write and communicate what you learn.  And, in this way, you are in effect making a difference in the world with the faculties you have left.

"Moreover," he writes, "even if death is on the way with a summons for him, though it comes all too early, though it cut him off in the prime of his life, he has experienced every reward that the very longest life can offer, having gained extensive knowledge of the world we live in, having learnt that time adds nothing to the finer things in life.  Whereas any life must needs seem short to people who measure it in terms of pleasure which through their empty nature are incapable of completeness."

We must never let the things that ail us set us back.  We must continue on and give what we can in this life.

Click here for more asthma history.

Source for above quotes:  Campbell, Robin, Lucius Annaeus Seneca, "Letters from a Stoic: Epistulae morales ad Lucilium, " Penguin, 1969, letter LXXVII.