Autopiotherapy, etc. -- coined, or standard?

  • Thread starter Thread starter nomadreid
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Standard
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The term "autopiotherapy," correctly spelled as "autopyotherapy," refers to a medical practice involving the re-introduction of a patient's pus. This term, while legitimate, lacks widespread recognition and is not indexed by major search engines like Google. The discussion highlights its historical reference dating back to 1923, indicating that it is not a recent invention but rather a niche term within the medical community. The conversation also raises questions about the validity and scientific basis of the practice associated with this term.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of medical terminology related to immunotherapy
  • Familiarity with historical medical practices and their evolution
  • Knowledge of transliteration and translation issues in medical literature
  • Awareness of the distinction between legitimate medical terms and pseudoscientific jargon
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the historical context and applications of autopyotherapy in medical literature
  • Investigate the scientific validity of pus re-introduction therapies
  • Explore the evolution of immunotherapy terminology and its acceptance in modern medicine
  • Examine case studies or clinical trials involving autopyotherapy or similar practices
USEFUL FOR

Medical professionals, researchers in immunotherapy, and anyone interested in the historical and contemporary discussions surrounding unconventional medical practices.

nomadreid
Gold Member
Messages
1,766
Reaction score
250
TL;DR
In an article cited, a number of terms are used that I do not find via a Google search; the article was written in English by Russians, and perhaps these terms are just incorrectly translated from Russian, or maybe they are just coined, or pseudoscience, or some combination. Are these standard terms in English?
In the article https://medicia.ru/en/immunoterapiya-pri-lechenii-raka-immunoterapiya-chto-nuzhno/, terms such as "autopiotherapy" are used which Google does not give elsewhere. Many legitimate standard terms, of course, are not known to Google. But I did not find, for example, "autopiotherapy" for the re-introduction of a patient's pus, anywhere except on this page. Given that this is an English variation of a Russian page, could someone tell me whether, on the example of "autopiotherapy", this is (a) a mistranslation (because a simple transliteration from the Russian), for which there is a proper term in English (pus transplant?), (b) a coined word that is valid but not yet widespread because the field is new or very restricted, or (c) pseudoscientific technobabble?
If possible, the same question for any of the other unfamiliar terms on that page. Thanks.
 
Biology news on Phys.org
Ah, a fourth possibility that I hadn't thought of! Thanks very much, Andy Resnick! :woot: Wow, 1923... with the correct spelling, there are still not many references to it around, but at least I know that it is a legitimate word. (Whether the associated practice is any good is another question, of course, but as Michael Ende said at the end of his chapters in "The Never-Ending Story", "...but that is another story and shall be told another time.")
 

Similar threads

A syllabus of books/literature from calculus to group theory to QFTs
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
18K
News Bush Administration: My Indictment
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K