Health & Fitness

As the world deals with the scope of the COVID-19 pandemic, scientific articles have zeroed in on who is most vulnerable to the virus. It appears those who are elderly, overweight and suffer from an underlying health condition like diabetes or high blood pressure are most at risk. But the consumption of ultraprocessed food is increasingly seen as a risk factor for contracting COVID-19, too.

Ultraprocessed foods increase the risk of conditions like obesity, cancer, Type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease and gallstones, which make you more vulnerable to illnesses like COVID-19. In fact, eating over four servings of ultraprocessed foods daily increased the risk of premature death by 62% in a 2019 study.¹

When it comes to fighting off COVID-19, ultraprocessed foods pose another health danger: They compromise the gut microbiome, which has a crucial role in your body’s immune response to infection and in maintaining overall health. Even before the virus that causes COVID-19 surfaced, ultraprocessed foods were a bad idea but during the current pandemic they are especially dangerous.

Beware of Ultraprocessed Foods

What are ultraprocessed foods, sometimes referred to as UPFs? According to the NOVA Food Classification system, designed by the Center for Epidemiological Studies in Health and Nutrition, they are:²

"[I]ndustrial formulations made entirely or mostly from substances extracted from foods (oils, fats, sugar, starch, and proteins), derived from food constituents (hydrogenated fats and modified starch), or synthesized in laboratories from food substrates or other organic sources (flavor enhancers, colors, and several food additives used to make the product hyper-palatable).

Manufacturing techniques include extrusion, moulding, and preprocessing by means of frying. Beverages may be ultra-processed."

Ultraprocessed foods, aggressively marketed by giant food producers for their profitable potential, constitute around 25% to 60% of daily energy intake in many countries, according to Science Daily. They include:³

"… packaged baked goods and snacks, fizzy drinks, sugary cereals, ready meals containing food additives, dehydrated vegetable soups, and reconstituted meat and fish products — often containing high levels of added sugar, fat, and/or salt, but lacking in vitamins and fiber."

While it is tempting to dismiss the dangers of UPFs by saying that all foods, to some extent, are "processed," food writer Bee Wilson says that is not the case:⁴

"UPFs are different. They are processed in ways that go far beyond cooking or fermentation, and they may also come plastered with health claims. Bettina Elias Siegel the author of Kid Food: The Challenge of Feeding Children in a Highly Processed World … 'there’s a huge difference between a cooked carrot and a bag of industrially produced, carrot-flavoured veggie puffs' …"

Moreover, cautions Wilson, food giants deliberately mislead consumers. When fat was misleadingly considered the cause of obesity, she says, the food industry rolled out low-fat products. When sugar became the culprit, food giants manipulatively marketed artificially sweetened drinks.⁵

UPF manufacturers have also launched successful campaigns to convince the public that obesity is not caused by their products, but by lack of exercise. Coca-Cola is among them, and, toward that end, has provided funding to universities and a wide spectrum of medical groups including the American Heart Association, the American Lung Association, the American College of Cardiology and the American Academy of Pediatrics.⁶

You can't help but wonder if that is why Harvard Medical School/Partners in Health, a recipient of Coca-Cola funding, writes this about obesity:⁷

"Obesity results from energy imbalance: too many calories in, too few calories burned. A number of factors influence how many calories (or how much ‘energy’) people burn each day, among them, age, body size, and genes. But the most variable factor — and the most easily modified — is the amount of activity people get each day."

Obesity is increasingly linked to serious cases of COVID-19 that require hospitalization, even among young people, according to The New York Times.⁸ The reasons are not entirely clear, but abdominal obesity can cause compression of the lungs and diaphragm, which impairs breathing ability.

Other factors that could explain the link between obesity and serious cases of COVID-19 could include pre-existing respiratory conditions, a greater amount of circulating, pro-inflammatory cytokines and low-grade inflammation, which are all correlated with obesity. Almost 80 million Americans — 42 percent of the population — are obese.⁹

A report released by the Intensive Care National Audit and Research Centre on 196 patients critically ill with COVID-19 found 56 patients had a body mass index (BMI) of 25 to 30, which is classified as overweight.¹⁰ Fifty-eight had a BMI of 30 to 40, which indicates obesity, and 13 had a BMI of 40 or higher, which is severely obese. In the study, 71.7% of the critical patients were overweight, obese or severely obese.¹¹

Ultraprocessed Food Impairs the Microbiome

Two studies published by The BMJ in 2019 cast ultraprocessed food as a threat to global public health. In a linked editorial, Australian researchers add that the negative effects of UPFs on the gut microbiome must be explored.¹²

Science has increasingly revealed the huge effect of diet on the human microbiome and its ability to ward off disease. The more diverse with healthy microorganisms a microbiome is, the better it supports the immune system, according to Tim Spector, professor of genetic epidemiology at King's College in London — especially as COVID-19 has spread all over the world. Writing in The Conversation, Spector says:¹³

"As well as mounting a response to infectious pathogens like coronavirus, a healthy gut microbiome also helps to prevent potentially dangerous immune over-reactions that damage the lungs and other vital organs. These excessive immune responses can cause respiratory failure and death …

The fine details of the interactions between the gut microbiome and the immune system are not fully understood. But there seems to be a link between the makeup of the microbiome and inflammation — one of the hallmarks of the immune response. Gut bacteria produce many beneficial chemicals."

Fermented foods and probiotics are the best route to optimal microbiome health, if they are traditionally made and unpasteurized. Healthy fermented choices include lassi (an Indian yogurt drink), fermented, grass fed organic milk (kefir), fermented soy or natto and different types of pickled fermentations of cabbage, turnips, eggplant, cucumbers, onions, squash and carrots.

Unless antibiotics are absolutely necessary, they should be avoided and, if avoidance is not possible, counteracted with fermented food and probiotics. Be aware that conventionally-raised meats are also a source of antibiotics because animals are routinely fed the medications. Genetically engineered grains and chlorinated and/or fluoridated water can also destroy gut flora.

UPFs Have Put Millions at Risk for COVID-19

Ultraprocessed food is designed to be sensually appealing, hyperpalatable and habit-forming, thanks to additives, crafty packaging and marketing and "convenience." Yet UPFs fill you up without the vitamins, minerals, live enzymes, micronutrients, healthy fats and high-quality protein your body needs. UPFs increase how fast people eat and delay how "full" they feel, causing obesity and metabolic dysfunction.

Dr. Aseem Malhotra is an honorary consultant cardiologist at Lister Hospital in Stevenage, England.¹⁴ According to an article he wrote in European Scientist, UPFs cause:¹⁵

"… chronic metabolic disease which can affect many of 'normal' weight. Furthermore, sarcopenic obesity may misclassify many elderly patients to having a normal BMI on hospital admission with COVID-19 … There’s no such thing as a healthy weight, only a healthy person.

A recent commentary In Nature states that 'patients with type 2 diabetes and metabolic syndrome might have to up 10 times greater risk of death when they contract COVID-19' and has called for mandatory glucose and metabolic control of type 2 diabetes patients to improve outcomes."

Kristin Lawless, author of the book, "Formerly Known As Food: How the Industrial Food System Is Changing Our Minds, Bodies, and Culture," also sees correlations between metabolic dysfunction and succumbing to COVID-19:¹⁶

"These underlying conditions correlate with increased morbidity and mortality for those who contract the virus. Preliminary findings show that metabolic dysfunction is causing devastating complications from COVID-19 and, shockingly, only 12 percent of the entire U.S. adult population is considered metabolically healthy.

Metabolic dysfunction has one primary source: our highly processed, sugar- laden, nutrient-poor food supply."

While the millions who suffer from metabolic syndrome from UPFs are not seen as urgent like COVID-19 is, the problems are one and the same, according to Malhotra. Governments, in addition to telling people to stay home to save lives during the COVID-19 pandemic, should address diet, he asserts. He writes:¹⁷

"[A]n equally strong if not more significant population health message should now be to 'eat real food, protect the NHS and save lives.'

Such implementation backed by policy changes may not just save hundreds and potentially thousands of lives around the world in the coming months but given the high likelihood of another international viral pandemic in the next decade a healthier population … will be much better equipped to handle what would then be a smaller mortality peak on the next occasion."

UPFs Are Especially Harmful to Poor Communities

People living in poverty, whether in developing or advanced countries, are especially vulnerable to health problems from ultraprocessed foods and COVID-19. According to Malhotra:¹⁸

"[T]he disproportionate numbers of those from black and ethnic minority backgrounds succumbing to the virus may in part be explained by a significantly increased risk of chronic metabolic disease in these groups."

Even before the COVID-19 pandemic, food giants have targeted those with low incomes with aggressive marketing of UPFs. Following initiatives by Brazil to fight the trend, Ecuador, Uruguay and Peru have urged citizens to avoid UPFs in favor of natural foods.¹⁹ Food deserts further the dietary exploitation of the poor, according to Lawless:²⁰

"New data show that Black people are dying at higher rates from COVID-19 than other groups. Certainly lack of health care and poor quality of care shape outcomes, and it is well documented that poverty rates among people of color are significantly higher than in white populations.

Perhaps less obvious is the influence of Big Food’s targeted advertising to people of color in neighborhoods with little access to fresh, whole foods. This means many people of color often rely on fast-food and cheap packaged foods for meals that provide more caloric bang for the buck.

Nationwide, Black people have much higher rates of diet-related diseases — Black adults are 60 percent more likely to be diagnosed with diabetes than white adults."

The USDA defines a food desert as a low-income tract where many residents do not have easy access to a supermarket or large grocery store.²¹ In addition to a lack of food outlets offering healthy food, residents' lack of transportation to get to stores is a big factor. Residents who have to walk with their groceries or take the bus can carry fewer groceries, and transporting perishable items is especially difficult.

According to the USDA, many types of organizations like businesses, local governments and nonprofits are eligible for assistance to address the problems created by food deserts.²² However, like discouraging the consumption of UPFs, such changes take time and certainly will not occur during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Other Environmental Causes of COVID-19

A diet of UPFs puts people at risk for COVID-19 because of the metabolic, immune system and microbiome degradation it causes. But the coronavirus pandemic also has environmental causes and repercussions, says Lawless:²³

"All over the world, industrial agriculture has pushed small-scale farmers deeper into forests where these types of pathogens exist. The decimation of forests has also sent those who bring wild animals into city markets deeper into remote forest areas, resulting in human exposure to novel pathogens.

What’s more, animals confined in factory farms are perfect incubators when these pathogens spill over — unsanitary, cramped conditions among animals with near-identical genetics means that viruses spread rapidly and often become more virulent.”

Whether people whose vulnerability to disease has been increased by Big Agriculture or viruses spread from its excesses, most experts agree we need a radical overhaul of the entire food production and distribution system. According to Lawless:²⁴

"First, our industrial food system is decimating our environment. Second, our nutrient-depleted, and chemically saturated processed food supply is changing our bodies from the inside out …

Large-scale mono-crop farms, concentrated animal feeding operations, fertilizers, pesticides, gas-powered machinery, storage facilities, manufacturing plants, and shipping methods are all dependent on and made possible by fossil fuels … A new Harvard analysis shows that exposure to fine particulate matter correlates with COVID-19 deaths.²⁵

Fuel combustion results in dangerous fine particulate matter, which kills 7 million people prematurely each year worldwide."

If ever there were a time to consider our eating habits and the domination of harmful agricultural systems it is during this coronavirus pandemic.

from Articles https://ift.tt/2ScmY99
via IFTTT

During the COVID-19 pandemic, many are asking how they can strengthen their immune system to reduce the potential of getting sick, and how they can support their body if they have a viral infection. As Dr. Roger Seheult explains in this video, natural killer cells are part of your immune response.

While there is no known drug or medication that kills a virus, there are nutraceuticals that have an effect on them. Some of the nutraceuticals support your immune system, while others have the ability to reduce your viral load, as discussed by Mark McCarty and James DiNicolantonio.¹

Solar ultraviolet-B radiation² and supplemental vitamin D³ have also been shown to reduce pandemic fatality rates; this makes sense considering how important vitamin D is for controlling infections and lowering your risk for influenza and the common cold.

How Your Body Uses Natural Killer Cells

Natural killer cells are part of a larger group of cells called lymphocytes. These play a key role in your immune response and defense against viral infections. Inside the cytoplasm of natural killer cells are lytic granules,⁴ such as granulysin, perforin and granusyme A and B.⁵

Natural killer cells work by recognizing stressed cells and then using cytotoxic abilities to kill the abnormal cell.⁶ Once recognized, natural killer cells secrete the granules into a synapse delivering the granules to a target cell. These then trigger apoptosis in the infected cell.

Defects in this system are related to fatal diseases,⁷ such as Griscelli syndrome type 2.⁸ This rare, inherited condition affects the immune system, leaving individuals prone to recurrent infections.

Natural killer cells control infection by limiting tissue damage and spread and they help control tumor growth by limiting the spread of abnormal cells.⁹ They also regulate cells engaged with macrophages, T cells and endothelial cells. Additionally, they can mediate the immune response.

As Seheult explains in the video, natural killer cells are part of the innate immune system, which is the first line of defense against pathogens.¹⁰ The next step is adaptive immunity, also called acquired immunity. This response is specific to the pathogen that enters your body. When you build up an immunity to a pathogen, it is the function of your adaptive immune response.

A Forest Walk May Boost Your Body’s Ability to Fight Viruses

Scientific evidence shows that walking in a forest, also called forest bathing, can help enhance your natural killer cell activity, including the number of cells and the length of activity. Research has been done in men and women involving field trips to the forest. In this first study,¹¹ researchers engaged 12 healthy men who normally worked at large companies in Tokyo.

The participants were taken on a three-day, two-night trip to three different forests. On the first day, they walked for two hours; on the second day they walked for two hours both in the morning and afternoon; and on the third day they left for home. Blood was drawn in the morning before any intervention and after the first and second days of walking.

The study team analyzed natural killer cell activity and the proportion of lytic granules and natural killer cells. On the last day, 11 out of 12 of the subjects had 50% higher activity compared to their levels before entering the forest. The researchers believed:¹²

“Taken together, these findings indicate that a forest bathing trip can increase NK activity, and that this effect at least partially mediated by increasing the number of NK cells and by the induction of intracellular anti-cancer proteins.”

Later, the same team performed the same intervention on 13 healthy women.¹³ Blood and urine samples were also collected seven days and 30 days after the trip was completed. The team also measured concentrations of phytoncides in the forest, which are airborne chemicals emitted by the plants.

The results of this study showed natural killer cell activity remained raised for more than seven days, as did the number of natural killer cells and the “levels of intracellular anticancer proteins.”

The team questioned whether the effects on the natural killer cells was representative of being outdoors, due to exercise or related to the trees. They designed and executed another study¹⁴ with two groups of men who visited two different forests or a city for three days and two nights.

The intervention was the same with blood drawn and urine samples collected before the study began, each day and on Days 7 and 30 after the intervention was complete. During this study they also measured the phytoncides in the forest and the city. As you might expect, measurements in the forest were high, but in the city, most levels were so low they couldn’t be measured. The researchers concluded:¹⁵

“The present study confirmed that a forest bathing trip enhances the immune response as measured by human NK activity and the numbers of NK cells, as reported previously. In contrast, a trip to places without forests (city tourist visit) had no effect on NK activity or the numbers of NK cells, indicating that forest bathing does indeed enhance human NK activity.

Moreover, we also found that the increased NK activity and numbers of NK cells induced by a forest bathing trip lasted more than 7 days, even 30 days, after the trip. This suggests that if people visit a forest once a month, they may be able to maintain increased NK activity. This may be important in health promotion and preventive medicine.”

Can You Repeat These Results at Home?

Once the researchers had identified phytoncides as the probable reason individuals were experiencing a higher measure of natural killer cell activity, they designed a follow-up study.¹⁶ In this they attempted to recreate the boost in natural killer cells using essential oils from trees.

They engaged 12 healthy men who stayed in a city hotel for three nights between 7 p.m. and 8 a.m. In the morning they returned to work in the city. During the night, researchers ran a humidifier with stem oil from the hinoki cypress tree. “Blood samples were taken on the last day and urine samples were analyzed every day during the stay,” they reported.

Phytoncide measurements in the room were also taken. The study team found there was a statistically significant jump in natural killer cell activity after sleeping in the hotel room, despite the fact they returned to work in the city each day. Urine was analyzed for adrenaline and noradrenaline, since the presence of adrenaline reduces the number of natural killer cells.

Although there was a statistically significant difference in the measurement of adrenaline in the urine of those who stayed in the forest,¹⁷ the same difference did not occur in all who stayed in a hotel with stem oil diffused in the room.¹⁸

When the data were analyzed together, there wasn’t a statistically significant drop in the excretion of adrenaline in the urine. However, when the researchers separated the samples into those where the adrenaline increased and those where it decreased, there was a statistically significant difference in the reduction of adrenaline in the urine.

They concluded that, while there was beneficial activity to short-term exposure, prospective studies in people exposed to phytoncides long-term would be needed to confirm the effect.

You Also Benefit From Green Spaces

If you don't have a local forest, you can still benefit from exposure to green spaces. In one meta-analysis of 143 studies,¹⁹ scientists noted statistically significant reductions in blood pressure, heart rates and levels of cortisol secretion measured in saliva. They also identified decreased incidences of diabetes and all-cause and cardiovascular mortality.

The researchers from the University of East Anglia²⁰ analyzed studies looking at postoperative recovery time. In all, there were 290 million participants across all 143 studies from 20 different countries.

When they correlated the amount of time individuals had spent in green areas with 100 health measurements, they also found that women who were pregnant had a reduced risk for preterm birth and a lower risk of delivering a baby who was small for gestational age.

The relationship may be related to a higher level of physical activity that often comes in green spaces. It could also have something to do with social interaction or greater exposure to sunlight. The researchers concluded:²¹

“Green prescriptions involving greenspace use may have substantial benefits. Our findings should encourage practitioners and policymakers to give due regard to how they can create, maintain, and improve existing accessible greenspaces in deprived areas.”

Develop Habits to Support Your Immune System

Developing healthy habits is important to support your immune system, reduce the potential for viral infections and lower your risk of chronic disease. While there are multiple choices you make each day, the following factors are foundational to creating a strong health plan.

from Articles https://ift.tt/2KKRQJL
via IFTTT

A curious thing is happening amid the COVID-19 pandemic: As COVID-19 cases and deaths mount, hospital admissions for other acute ailments are markedly dropping.

In an April 6, 2020, New York Times article, Dr. Harlan Krumholz — professor of medicine at Yale and director of the Yale New Haven Hospital Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation — notes:¹

“The hospitals are eerily quiet, except for Covid-19. I have heard this sentiment from fellow doctors across the United States and in many other countries. We are all asking: Where are all the patients with heart attacks and stroke? They are missing from our hospitals.

Yale New Haven Hospital, where I work, has almost 300 people stricken with Covid-19, and the numbers keep rising — and yet we are not yet at capacity because of a marked decline in our usual types of patients.

In more normal times, we never have so many empty beds … What is striking is that many of the emergencies have disappeared.”

Drastic Reduction in Emergency Admissions

In an informal Twitter poll, created by Angioplasty.org, an online community of cardiologists, 45.4% reported a 40% to 60% reduction in hospital admissions related to heart attacks, and 22.4% reported a reduction greater than 60%.² Other emergencies, including acute appendicitis and gallbladder disease have also dropped, according to unofficial reports from medical professionals.³ What’s more, according to Krumholz:⁴

“This is not a phenomenon specific to the United States. Investigators from Spain reported a 40 percent reduction in emergency procedures for heart attacks during the last week of March compared with the period just before the pandemic hit.”

We still do not have an explanation for these statistics. Krumholz hypothesizes that patients may be avoiding face-to-face medical care for fear of contracting COVID-19. If this is the case, their condition may significantly worsen, and lives may be unnecessarily lost.

“As we fight coronavirus, we need to combat perceptions that everyone else must stay away from the hospital. The pandemic toll will be much worse if it leads people to avoid care for life-threatening, yet treatable, conditions like heart attacks and strokes,” Krumholz says.

This isn’t the only possibility, however. As Krumholz notes, natural triggers of heart attacks and strokes may simply have been removed by the imposed social distancing, eating at home and having more time for physical activity.

He’s not convinced that this theory is the most likely explanation, though, considering respiratory infections tend to increase the risk of heart attack. The fear and stress of the situation should theoretically also have led to an increase in heart attacks, as depression, anxiety and frustration “are all associated with a doubling or more of heart attack risks.”⁵

Delaying Necessary Care Could Cost You

The same story is also reported in an April 19, 2020, article⁶ in The Washington Post, which notes that:

“Five weeks into a nationwide coronavirus lockdown, many doctors believe the pandemic has produced a silent sub-epidemic of people who need care at hospitals but dare not come in.

They include people with inflamed appendixes, infected gall bladders and bowel obstructions, and more ominously, chest pains and stroke symptoms, according to these physicians and early research …

At [the Medical University of South Carolina, trauma medical director Dr. Evert] Eriksson’s general surgery floor, which has 20 beds, housed as few as three people for two to three weeks, he said. Now the census is back over 20.

‘What we’re seeing is late presentation,’ he said. ‘I would say 70 percent of the appendicitis on my service right now are late presentations. What happens when you present late with appendicitis is we can’t operate on you safely.’”

All-Cause Mortality Is Still Uncertain

Whatever the reason for the drastic decreases in hospital admissions for ailments other than COVID-19, time will tell whether the decrease has actually resulted in increased all-cause mortality or not. As reported by The Washington Post:⁷

“Much of the reporting about missing patients is anecdotal — in medical chat rooms and on doctors’ social media accounts. Doctors say it’s unlikely there has been a decline in most of these conditions, which suggests that at least a few people may be dying at home, although there is no data yet to corroborate that.”

Some do claim all-cause mortality has risen during this pandemic. According to an April 14 report by The New York Times:⁸

“Three thousand more people died in New York City between March 11 and April 13 than would have been expected during the same time period in an ordinary year, Dr. Oxiris Barbot, the commissioner of the city Health Department, said in an interview.

While these so-called excess deaths were not explicitly linked to the virus, they might not have happened had the outbreak not occurred, in part because it overwhelmed the normal health care system.”

The New York Times’ claim that the deaths occurred as a result of COVID-19 “overwhelming the health care system” seems suspect, however, in light of so many doctors saying their hospitals are nowhere near capacity.

These conflicting reports show just how difficult it is to tease out the truth without proper data collection and distribution. Without accurate and complete data, it’s virtually impossible to draw any definitive conclusions.

Is Mortality Actually Going Down?

Two interesting graphs created by I. Ratel⁹ — who freely admits he’s not a statistician or doctor but has degrees in industrial management and automotive technology and whose interest in this is fueled by the fact that he’s immunocompromised — suggest a downturn in both pneumonia deaths and all-cause mortality.

Although final data won’t be released until 2021, I did find in my own research that pneumonia deaths in the current flu season (2019-20) are down compared to 2018-19,¹⁰ so I’m including Ratel’s calculations here for anyone interested in diving deeper into his data gathering. Ratel explains the graphs:¹¹

“I’ve been watching CDC’s flu surveillance since last fall when there were rumors floating about of a nasty new flu bug in China … According to the South China Post the first COVID-19 case in Hubei province China was found November 17. Even that article states that patient zero may have been earlier than that …

I contend that it is reasonable to believe that the SARS-CoV-2 virus began circulating around the global population back in November and December, spreading not only across China, but to much of the world.

When considering that possibility, patterns in CDC’s regular ILI (Influenza Like Illness) surveillance data become interesting. I’ve taken their data, and applied my meager Excel skills to chart out some things …

Prior to January we weren’t looking for this virus. We’ve only had useful testing capability for a few weeks now. Given the information we have on disease progression, I assumed that there would be an upward trend in Pneumonia mortality as without looking for and testing for SARS-COV-2, victims should have been classified as deaths due to pneumonia. So, I charted it, with the last 6 years of data published by CDC.

CDC calls week 40 of a year the beginning of the flu season, so all my charts are set to begin in week 40 of one year and end in week 39 of the next, showing years as flu seasons.

There is the customary increase at week 1, I assume related to holiday festivities and travel. However the 2019-2020 season shows week by week pneumonia mortality to be low compared to the last few years … [and a] sharp decline over the last few weeks.

I next looked at all-cause mortality. Perhaps COVID-19 deaths hadn’t been captured in the pneumonia data … We see here that all-cause mortality ran on the high side of normal until it started to drop at the beginning of 2020, and recently dropped significantly. Again, no indication of this virus killing people beyond seasonal norms,” Ratel writes.

Avoiding Hospitals Might Lower Death Toll

That said, previous research has shown that when conventional medical intervention is reduced, mortality often goes down. For example, back in 2000, all-cause mortality in Israel dropped during a time when Israeli doctors at public hospitals went on strike.¹²

One of the reasons for this is because medical care itself tends to be a risky business. Research¹³ published in 2014 found nearly 1 in 5 elderly Medicare patients are injured by their medical care. The most common medical injuries included receiving the wrong medication, having an allergic reaction to medication given, and receiving treatment that led to more complications. As a result of these injuries, they also had a death rate nearly double those who were not injured by their care.

Other research¹⁴ published in 2013 concluded 210,000 Americans are killed by preventable hospital errors each year, and when deaths related to diagnostic errors, errors of omission, and failure to follow guidelines were included, the number skyrocketed to an estimated 440,000 preventable hospital deaths each year.

One in 25 patients in the U.S. also contracts some form of infection while hospitalized, and an estimated 205 Americans die from hospital-acquired infections every day. The unfortunate truth is that once you’re hospitalized, you’re immediately at risk for medical errors that might cost you your life. That’s not to say you should never go to the hospital, though.

If you suspect you’re having a heart attack, stroke or appendicitis, for example, you should seek immediate care. Many other ailments that people seek treatment for, however, may simply place them at increased risk for complications.

The difficulty is determining what you might be able to address at home and what’s an actual emergency. If you have access to a holistic physician you trust, calling them for a consultation would be a good idea.

COVID-19 Deaths Jump Due to Reclassification

While other ailments appear to have declined (at least based on hospital admission rates, which may present a false picture of the situation), COVID-19 deaths in the U.S. have undergone a sudden jump mid-April.

While some use this as a sign that the infection is spreading and perhaps more lethal than suspected, the real reason for this sudden jump is simply the reclassification of COVID-19 deaths to include “probable” cases.

While the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention¹⁵ separates confirmed COVID-19 deaths from all-cause mortality, pneumonia deaths, influenza deaths and deaths with both pneumonia and COVID-19, it has issued guidance to states on how to document COVID-19 deaths on death certificates, indicating that COVID-19 should be indicated if “the disease caused or is assumed to have caused or contributed to death.”¹⁶

By not requiring COVID-19 deaths to be laboratory confirmed, the death rate can easily become skewed. New York City has officially transitioned its record keeping to include suspected COVID-19 cases,^17,18 and as you’d expect, when suspected or “probable” deaths are counted without any proof that SARS-CoV-2 infection was involved at all, the numbers dramatically increase. Ultimately, there is no way to tell what the real impact of the pandemic actually is when using this system.

Looking at the data¹⁹ collected for NYC between March 11, 2020, and April 13, 2020, 23.5% of deaths involving residents between the ages of 45 and 64 are in the “probable” category, as are 23.6% of those among 65- to 74-year-olds and 49.9% of those over the age of 75.

As noted by The New York Times²⁰ on April 14, 2020, New York City’s addition of thousands of “probable” cases increased the alleged death rate from COVID-19 by 17% overnight.

Signs of Suicide Epidemic Emerge

Whether all-cause mortality is in fact going up or down, as predicted we are now starting to see a rise in suicides. Suicide statistics reliably follow economic trends, with financial downturns triggering higher rates of depression and despair. According to an updated March 27, 2020, report by The Sacramento Bee:²¹

“FirstLink, a company that answers both 211 helplines and the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline for North Dakota and parts of Minnesota said this week that call volume in some of its call centers is up 300%.”

According to a spokeswoman for the national Crisis Text Line, text conversations were double that of the normal volume during the week of March 15.²² Google also reports that searches for “panic attack symptoms” have doubled compared to last year.²³

The CDC, meanwhile, appears to take things in stride, noting that “Fear and anxiety about a disease can be overwhelming and cause strong emotions in adults and children,” but that “Coping with stress will make you, the people you care about, and your community stronger.”²⁴

While true as a general statement, the current pandemic has delivered a perfect storm of challenges that is sure to bring many to a breaking point. We’re not just talking about fearing a disease. We’re also talking about the very real challenges of keeping a roof over our heads and feeding ourselves and our families when the entire country has been shut down and millions of workers have been laid off.

According to reports by The Federalist²⁵ and Red State,²⁶ suicides exceeded COVID-19 deaths in Tennessee the week of March 20. The Regional Forensic Center in Tennessee was investigating nine suicides as of March 27, eight of which took place in Knox County — one of the few areas in Tennessee where businesses were ordered to close.

The suicides, which occurred within a 48-hour period, account for 10% of the 2019 suicide rate for the region.²⁷ Meanwhile, only six patients died from COVID-19 in the entire state that week. In a statement, Knoxville, Tennessee Mayor Glenn Jacobs said:²⁸

“That number is completely shocking and makes me wonder if what we are doing now is really the best approach. We have to determine how we can respond to COVID-19 in a way that keeps our economy intact, keeps people employed and empowers them with a feeling of hope and optimism — not desperation and despair.”

Similar warning signs are starting to be noted in other states as well, including Oregon. In a March 24 local news report,²⁹ Portland police chief Jami Resch said suicide threats or attempts are 41% higher now than this time last year, and there’s been a 23% increase since the 10 days before a state of emergency was declared in Portland.

Unfortunately, this is likely the beginning of what is most certainly only going to worsen with time, as many financial experts are predicting a depression worse than the Great Depression of the 1930s.³⁰

Suicide Prevention Resources

Clearly, we’re facing an unprecedented challenge, and it’s hard to know exactly what the right thing to do is. There are risks and benefits to every choice. However, I’ve argued since the very beginning that ignoring the human cost of economic collapse is a serious mistake. It’s an equally serious mistake to spread fear unless fear is truly warranted. Mainstream media have a lot to answer for in this regard.

While the future is certainly unsure, I urge you to do what you can to keep yourself on an even keel going forward. Do your best to moderate your fears. And, if you need help, don’t hesitate to reach out to family, friends or any of the available suicide prevention services:

• The National Suicide Prevention Lifeline (U.S.) — Call 1-800-273-TALK (8255)
• Crisis Text Line — Text HOME to 741741 to connect with a crisis counselor
• Lifeline Crisis Chat — Chat online with a specialist who can provide emotional support, crisis intervention and suicide prevention services at www.crisischat.org

from Articles https://ift.tt/2KIrI27
via IFTTT

As the COVID-19 pandemic gradually declines in Australia, states and territories are easing their coronavirus regulations. Here are all the changes you need to be aware of. 

from Health | body+soul https://ift.tt/3cUK6kk

Researchers have recreated how toxins from smoking cause unique patterns of DNA damage. The discovery could help scientists better understand the cause of bladder cancer and the link to smoking. The causes of bladder cancer remain largely unknown, however smoking is seen as the main risk factor for the disease.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2Yeg4nv

Free open source hardware and 3D printing could help to alleviate the burden of Covid-19 on global health systems, according to scientists.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2SeZ7FW

Given current circumstances and with winter just around the corner, try these new tricks to keep sickness at bay.

from Health | body+soul https://ift.tt/2xgGAS8

We're all baking - and eating - up a banana bread storm in self-isolation, but a dietitian reveals why it's not as healthy as we all think. Plus, she shares her five favourite healthier alternatives.

from Nutrition | body+soul https://ift.tt/35lQONS

Give your insides a cleanse from all the iso-snacking with this bowl packed with protein, good fats, health carbs and all the antioxidants. 

from Nutrition | body+soul https://ift.tt/3f3lZBK

Treat yourself to a healthier version of cheesecake, with this moist chocolate and peanut butter cheesecake recipe. Plus, it requires no baking and minimal cleaning.

from Nutrition | body+soul https://ift.tt/3aIYbQl

When we look at the same object in quick succession, our second glance always reflects a slightly falsified image of the object. Guided by various object characteristics such as motion direction, color and spatial position, our short-term memory makes systematic mistakes. Apparently, these mistakes help us to stabilize the continually changing impressions of our environment.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3cX4AJ8

When we encounter a dangerous situation, signals from the brain make sure that the heart beats faster. When we relax the heart slows down. But the heartbeat also affects the brain but the underlying mechanisms are unclear. Researchers have now identified two mechanisms underpinning how the heart influences our perception, the brain, and how these mechanisms differ between individuals.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2YgiodB

Researchers have developed a promising method for remotely stimulating activity in deep brain regions, advancing understanding of how molecules act in the brain and paving the way for better cancer treatments and therapies for other diseases.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3f9MANQ

Biomedical engineers have used light-based deep brain stimulation to treat motor dysfunction in an animal model of Parkinson's disease. Succeeding where earlier attempts have failed, the method promises to provide new insights into why deep brain stimulation works and ways in which it can be improved on a patient-by-patient basis.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2yPGHEH

A new study finds that earlier high school start times can have significant adverse consequences for students, including increased rates of tardiness and absenteeism.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2Ye0NmL

A drug that has life-extending effects on mice also reverses age-related dental problems in the animals, according to a new study.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2zHxQpf

Medical researchers have develops wireless smart contact lenses for diagnosis and treatment of diabetes.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3bMCvnU

Go ahead: Give your partner a hug or cuddle while you catch some Netflix. According to recently published research, it just might build a stronger relationship.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3f2dPJQ

Researchers estimate non-verbal learning disorder may affect up to 3 million children in the United States.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2SemHlS

Short-term cold exposure may help people with brown fat burn 15% more calories than those without, according to a small study.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2y7cReT

A new study on the spread of disinformation reveals that pairing headlines with credibility alerts from fact checkers, the public, news media and even AI, can reduce peoples' intention to share. However, the effectiveness of these alerts varies with political orientation and gender.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2SdKF0U

Two headlines caught my eye recently:

The relationship between chronic diseases and number of sexual partners: an exploratory analysis

and

Study warns more sex might mean higher likelihood for cancer

It may be hard to believe, but both of these refer to same medical research. I’m not sure which one I like better. The first one is the actual title of the research, which provides no information about its findings. The second one is a newspaper headline. It cuts right to the chase about the study’s main findings. While it’s much more specific — and alarming — it is also misleading.

Is there a link between the number of sexual partners and cancer?

The study investigating this possibility was published BMJ Sexual & Reproductive Health. It enrolled about 2,500 men and 3,200 women who were 50 or older (average age 64). Each person was surveyed about the total number of sexual partners they’d had over the course of their lives. This information was compared with a number of medical conditions they’d developed, including cancer, heart disease, and stroke.

The study demonstrated that

• Men who reported 10 or more sexual partners in their life were nearly 70% more likely to have developed cancer when compared with those reporting 0 or 1 lifetime sexual partners.
• For women, the findings were even more dramatic: women who reported 10 or more sexual partners in their life were nearly 91% more likely to have developed cancer when compared with those reporting 0 or 1 lifetime sexual partners.

Men were more likely than women to report having at least 10 partners (22% of men vs. 8% of women) while women were more likely to have fewer partners (41% of women and 28.5% of men reporting having had 0 to 1 partners).

It’s worth noting this study was performed in England with health information initially collected in the late 1990s. The results could have been different if researchers had assessed risk of a different population or at a different point in time. In addition, self-reporting was relied upon to assess sexual behavior, and it’s possible the reported number of sexual partners and other health behaviors were not accurate.

Does this mean having sex leads to cancer?

The answer is almost surely no.

That’s because this type of study cannot assess whether sex causes cancer. It can only determine whether there is a correlation between the two. Also, we already know of ways that sexual behavior can indirectly affect cancer risk without actually causing cancer, especially through sexually transmitted infections. Some of the strongest connections are for:

• human papilloma virus (HPV), which increases the risk of cancers of the cervix, mouth, penis, and anus
• human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection, which increases the risk of cancers such as Kaposi’s sarcoma and lymphoma
• hepatitis B and hepatitis C infection, which have been linked to liver cancer
• gonorrhea, which increases the risk of prostate cancer (particularly among African American men).

In addition, people with more sexual partners tended to smoke more and drink more alcohol. These factors could, themselves, increase the risk of cancer. So, certain factors — in these cases, infections, smoking, and drinking — could have an impact on cancer risk, rather than having sex or the number of sexual partners.

While future research could find previously unidentified risks in having a higher number of sexual partners, we already know enough to explain the connection.

The bottom line

While it may be tempting to conclude from this new research that limiting the number of sexual partners you have will lower your risk of cancer, I think that would be a misinterpretation of the data. The better take-home message would be to take precautions to avoid sexually transmitted diseases and pursue other proven strategies to lower your cancer risk, including stopping smoking and limiting alcohol.

The post More sexual partners, more cancer? appeared first on Harvard Health Blog.

from Harvard Health Blog https://ift.tt/2SwiU3R

Treatments for prostate cancer are always evolving, and now research is pointing to new ways of treating a cancer that has just begun to spread, or metastasize, after initial surgery or radiation. Doctors usually give hormonal therapies in these cases to block testosterone, which is a hormone that makes the cancer grow faster. But newer evidence shows that treating the metastatic tumors directly with radiation can produce better results.

In March, researchers published the latest study that supports this approach. Based at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine in Baltimore, the team used a method for delivering powerful beams of high-dose radiation to very small cancers in the body. This approach is called stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR), and it can spare healthy tissues with remarkable precision. Doctors map out where to pinpoint the radiation in advance by putting patients into a computed tomography (CT) scanner that takes x-rays of the body from many different angles.

During their study, the Johns Hopkins team recruited 54 men with three or fewer metastatic tumors. All the men had already undergone initial treatment for cancer while it was still in the prostate, and some had also been treated with hormonal therapy, though not within six months of being enrolled for the research. The men were 68 years old on average, and they were each randomly assigned to one of two groups: A third of the men were placed in an observation (control) group, meaning they received no additional treatment until the study was over. The rest were given SABR at a rate of one to five treatments per tumor over a period of about a week.

Then the men were followed for six months and monitored for changes such as PSA increases, tumor growth, worsening symptoms, or how many men wound up on hormonal therapy.

What the results showed

Results showed that the SABR-treated men fared better in all respects. Overall, 19% of those who got the targeted radiation had their cancers progress, compared to 61% of men in the control group. Taken together, the findings support a view that all detectable lesions should be removed, if feasible, to maximize the odds “of a cancer cure,” according to the authors of an editorial accompanying the published paper.

What makes SABR effective for treating early-stage metastases? Scientists are trying to find out. The investigators behind this study speculated that irradiating visible traces of cancer might block signals that feed the growth of even smaller tumors that are still too small to see. It’s also possible that radiation induces a sort of vaccinating effect, which prompts the immune system to attack other tumor cells.

Meanwhile, SABR could soon benefit from an ability to flag even smaller tumors for treatment. A new type of imaging scan called PMSA-targeted positron emissions tomography (PET) was tested in the study, and it found very small tumors that CT scanning had missed.

Dr. Marc Garnick, Gorman Brothers Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School and Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, and editor in chief of HarvardProstateKnowledge.org, says the whole concept of treating metastatic prostate cancer “is undergoing re-evaluation.” He added, “The findings in this case need to be supported with a larger study. However, this research provides more evidence that for patients with less extensive metastasis, SABR treatments can significantly delay systemic therapies such as chemotherapy or hormonal treatment.”

The post New radiation therapies keep advanced prostate cancer in check appeared first on Harvard Health Blog.

from Harvard Health Blog https://ift.tt/3cWiL1i

NewsGuard has classified mercola.com as fake news because we have reported the SARS-CoV-2 virus as potentially having been leaked from the biosafety level 4 laboratory in Wuhan City, China, the epicenter of the COVID-19 outbreak.

NewsGuard’s intern Nina Zweig (edited by deputy editor John Gregory) referred to my February 4, 2020, article, “Novel Coronavirus — The Latest Pandemic Scare,” in which I stated:

"In January 2018, China’s first maximum security virology laboratory (biosecurity level 4) designed for the study of the world’s most dangerous pathogens opened its doors — in Wuhan.^1,2 Is it pure coincidence that Wuhan City is now the epicenter of this novel coronavirus infection?

The year before, Tim Trevan, a Maryland biosafety consultant, expressed concern about viral threats potentially escaping the Wuhan National Biosafety Laboratory,³ which happens to be located just 20 miles from the Wuhan market identified as ground zero for the current NCIP outbreak.⁴”

According to NewsGuard,⁵ “There is no evidence that the Wuhan Institute of Virology was the source of the outbreak, and genomic evidence has found that the virus is ‘96% identical at the whole-genome level to a bat coronavirus.’”

Evidence Suggests SARS-CoV-2 Is a Modified Bat Coronavirus

Sure, as detailed in my April 26, 2020, interview with bioweapons expert Francis Boyle, who drafted the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, SARS-CoV-2 started out with a bat coronavirus, but scientific evidence has revealed much more about this virus, none of which NewsGuard is bothering to take into account before classifying and censoring reports as “misinformation.”

Importantly, there’s compelling scientific evidence published in many prominent scientific journals showing this virus was indeed created in a lab and not zoonotically transmitted (transmitted naturally from animal to human).

As explained by Boyle, SARS-CoV-2 appears to be a bat coronavirus⁶ that was modified to integrate spike proteins that allow the virus to enter human cells by attaching to ACE-2 receptors. It’s also been modified to integrate an envelope protein from HIV called GP141, which tends to impair the immune system.

Additionally, Boyle strongly suspects nanotechnology was used in its creation as well, as its exceptional ability to stay airborne for long periods of time is a nanotech hallmark.⁷

NewsGuard’s arbitrary dismissal of my February 4 article as fake news is equally inappropriate even if the virus is “all natural” and zoonotically transmitted. As reported by The Daily Mail, April 11, 2020:⁸

“The laboratory at the center of scrutiny over the pandemic has been carrying out research on bats from the cave which scientists believe is the original source of the devastating outbreak.

Documents obtained by The Mail on Sunday show the Wuhan Institute of Virology undertook coronavirus experiments on mammals captured more than 1,000 miles away in Yunnan — funded by a $3.7 million grant from the US government. Sequencing of the Covid-19 genome has traced it to bats found in Yunnan's caves.”

Governments Are Not Dismissing Possibility of a Leak

An April 14, 2020, report^9,10 by The Washington Post highlighted the fact that U.S. State Department cables from two years ago warned there were inadequate safety precautions and procedures in place at Wuhan’s BSL4 facility, and April 15, 2020, Fox News reported¹¹ that “State Department leaked cables renew theories on origin of coronavirus.”

Yet NewsGuard, the thought police advertising front group for industries like Big Pharma and tobacco, simply dismisses and wants to bury this information. Such censorship has no room in a democratic and free society. I would argue that shutting down conversations about the origin of SARS-CoV-2 is a direct threat to democracy and indeed to science itself.

Will NewsGuard classify The Washington Post’s and Fox News’ articles as “misinformation” as well? Fox News quotes Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff¹²

"It should be no surprise to you that we have taken a keen interest in that and we've had a lot of intelligence take a hard look at that. I would just say at this point, it's inconclusive, although the weight of evidence seems to indicate natural, but we don't know for certain."

As you may have noticed, in my “flagged” February 4 article I didn’t even make an assertion, I merely asked the question: “Is it pure coincidence that Wuhan City is now the epicenter of this novel coronavirus infection?”

February 16, 2020, Chinese scientists even raised the possibility that SARS-CoV-2 is the result of bioweapons research leaked from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. See the video below for this report.

Since my February 4 article, I’ve become increasingly convinced — through reviewing the scientific literature that NewsGuard ignores or is unaware of — that SARS-CoV-2 may in fact be a synthetic virus, likely created and released (inadvertently or not) from one or more laboratories that worked on weaponizing SARS and bat coronaviruses.

According to an April 5, 2020, article¹³ in Daily Mail, British government officials are also considering the possibility that SARS-CoV-2 leaked from the Wuhan facility, stating the possibility of this “is no longer being discounted.” Will NewsGuard classify Daily Mail as a misinformant?

Will they accuse Gen. Milley of spreading fake news? How about Federal Communications Commission chairman Brendan Carr, who tweeted¹⁴ an April 16 Fox News report¹⁵ about SARS-CoV-2 being leaked from the Wuhan lab “as part of China’s efforts to compete with U.S.”?

Ironically, Carr even commented, “I’m old enough to remember when posting this would get you deplatformed.” Apparently, the abusive power of censorship that Twitter and other tech platforms have has not escaped the FCC.

Is NewsGuard Protecting Chinese Interests?

Interestingly, an April 16, 2020, report¹⁶ by CNN reveals the censorship of articles mentioning the possibility that SARS-CoV-2 may have leaked from the Wuhan BSL4 facility appears to come from China, which means NewsGuard is functionally protecting Chinese interests and inhibiting scientific inquiry. CNN writes:¹⁷

“China has imposed restrictions on the publication of academic research on the origins of the novel coronavirus, according to a central government directive and online notices¹⁸ published by two Chinese universities, that have since been removed from the web.

Under the new policy, all academic papers on Covid-19 will be subject to extra vetting before being submitted for publication. Studies on the origin of the virus will receive extra scrutiny and must be approved by central government officials, according to the now-deleted posts …

The increased scrutiny appears to be the latest effort by the Chinese government to control the narrative on the origins of the coronavirus pandemic …

According to the directive issued by the Ministry of Education's science and technology department, ‘academic papers about tracing the origin of the virus must be strictly and tightly managed’ …

A Chinese researcher who spoke on condition of anonymity due to fear of retaliation said the move was a worrying development that would likely obstruct important scientific research.

‘I think it is a coordinated effort from (the) Chinese government to control (the) narrative, and paint it as if the outbreak did not originate in China,’ the researcher told CNN. ‘And I don't think they will really tolerate any objective study to investigate the origination of this disease.’"

US Funded Wuhan Laboratory

As I mention in my interview with Boyle, while the biosafety level 4 (BSL4) lab in Wuhan may have leaked the virus, the U.S. may have played a role in its creation. For starters, the chairman of the Harvard department of chemistry, nanoscience expert, Charles Lieber, Ph.D., was arrested earlier this year by federal agencies, suspected of illegal dealings with China.¹⁹ Lieber has denied the allegations.

Lieber allegedly oversaw the Nano Key Laboratory, a joint collaboration by the Wuhan University of Technology and Harvard, although Harvard officials claim they had no knowledge of the lab before 2015. In our interview, Boyle dismisses the idea that Harvard was unaware Lieber was working on nanotechnology for biological materials with the Chinese as “preposterous.”

NPR, which summarized the allegations as being centered around a Chinese recruitment program, added even more serious allegations, saying Lieber:²⁰

“… faces charges of trading knowledge for money and lying about it. Prosecutors allege he set up a lab in China in exchange for hundreds of thousands of dollars in payments from the Chinese government and then denied knowledge of those payments to U.S. investigators … others watching the case say it raises important questions about ethics, scientific openness and possible racial profiling in an era of geopolitical tension.”

Lieber’s attorney declined to comment on the charges, NPR said. It’s also noteworthy that both the U.S. National Institutes of Health and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research have funded research at the Wuhan BSL4 facility, including research on bat coronaviruses.^21,22

Arizona senator Martha McSally told Fox news,²³ “The NIH must immediately stop deploying American tax dollars to China for this dangerous research.” Justin Goodman, vice president for advocacy and public policy for the White Coat Waste Project added:²⁴

“The U.S. government’s spending spree that we’ve exposed at the notorious Wuhan Institute of Virology is outrageous and unacceptable. Taxpayers should never be forced to bankroll China’s hazardous bio-agent experiments, which put human life around the world gravely at risk. We’ll continue to work with our advocates and Congress to put an end to this egregious misuse of Americans' tax dollars."

April 14, 2020, Florida Congressman Matt Gaetz tweeted,²⁵ “At best, Americans are funding people who are lying to us. At worst, we’re funding people who we knew had problems handling pathogens, who then birthed a monster virus onto the world.”

NewsGuard Also Promotes Censorship via Public Libraries

NewsGuard has set itself up as the self-appointed global arbiter of what information is “trustworthy” based on nine “credibility and transparency” factors, not only for information viewed on private electronic devices, but also for information accessible in schools and public libraries²⁶ — more than 700 libraries across the globe so far.²⁷

Librarians will even provide instructions to patrons on how to install the NewsGuard extension on their personal computers, tablets and cell phones. Once you’ve installed the NewsGuard browser plugin on your computer or cellphone, the NewsGuard icon rating will appear on all Google and Bing searches and on articles featured in your social media news feeds.

The NewsGuard ratings are meant to influence the reader, instructing them to disregard content with cautionary colors and cautions. Fake news is certainly a problem. But determining who should have the final word on credibility and what is “truth” is not a simple one. Who is going to verify the credibility and transparency of the verifiers, i.e., NewsGuard?

NewsGuard Protects Big Industries

To understand NewsGuard’s agenda, you need to know something about its creation and funding. Aside from internet giants Microsoft²⁸ and Google, NewsGuard is backed by companies that are involved in advertising and marketing of pharmaceutical products, cigarettes and unhealthy junk food to kids.

NewsGuard's $6 million startup was funded in part by the Publicis Groupe,²⁹ the “third largest global communications group” according to the Publicis website.³⁰ Publicis was founded in 1926 by Marcel Bleustein-Blanchet, a French entrepreneur, with the goal of improving the image of advertising and turning it into “a real profession.” In fact, Publicis Groupe’s name is derived in part from the French word for advertising.³¹

The Publicis Groupe has been manipulating what people think about commercial products for nearly a century. Over that century, this advertising and communications firm bought or partnered with targeted advertising avenues, beginning with newspapers, followed by radio, TV, cinema and the internet.

With revenue avenues secured, Publicis’ clients and partners built a global presence that dominated the advertising world. Be it tobacco or sugar, Publicis Groupe found a way to promote and strengthen big industries. In 1983, Publicis introduced the concept of global communication driven by marketing.

Within the Publicis Groupe are four networks serving its clients,³² including Publicis Health,³³ which once boasted on the website that its clients are "some of the biggest and most exciting names in health and wellness,” but has now taken that claim down and moved it to job postings.³⁴

Publicis Scoops Up Top Vaccine Companies

The list of clients that once appeared on the health site’s wallpaper has also been taken down, but were proudly listed in an October 2019 Business Wire news release on Publicis’ third quarter revenue report — which, by the way, was up an impressive 17.3%.³⁵

The report shows that Merck, GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi Pasteur and Regeneron, just to name a few, have come onboard — showing that Publicis is now working for Big Pharma’s top dogs: vaccine companies.

By happenstance, Regeneron just announced that it’s working on a coronavirus vaccine and treatment.³⁶ Regeneron is also partnering with Sanofi to find a COVID-19 treatment; Sanofi is independently working on its own COVID-19 vaccine.³⁷

The Publicis Health board also consists of a power pack of high-profile individuals with Big Pharma position backgrounds or affiliations.^{38,39,40,41,42,43} Leo Burnett, the ad company famous for creating the Marlboro man ad campaigns that made Marlboro the best-selling cigarette in the world and led to the nicotine addiction of millions, many of whom died from smoking, is also part of Publicis.^44,45

To put icing on the cake, Publicis has also added Google and Facebook Messenger to their repertoire.⁴⁶ When you consider that Publicis now describes its business model approach as putting clients and their needs and objectives at the center of all they do so their clients can “win and grow,” it’s easy to see what’s driving NewsGuard.

What You Can Do to STOP This Abuse

Overall, NewsGuard is just another big business aimed at keeping the chemical, drug and food industries, as well as mainstream media, intact by discrediting and eliminating unwanted competitors and analysts who empower you with information that runs counter to any given industry’s agenda.

You can learn more about NewsGuard in my previous articles, “Beware: New Plan to Censor Health Websites” and “Thought Police NewsGuard Is Owned by Big Pharma.”

If you’re as disturbed by censorship as I am, be sure to contact your local library today to find out if they’re one of the more than 700 libraries using NewsGuard. If they are, then ask them if they’re aware of NewsGuard’s censorship of truthful news that is now encroaching on scientific freedom and threatening the very roots of our democracy.

If your local library is using NewsGuard, it would be helpful to start a campaign to get it removed. Contact your neighbors and let them know what is happening so they can kick out this public health threat.

from Articles https://ift.tt/35cIr7h
via IFTTT

The symptoms of COVID-19 — fever, cough, shortness of breath, chills, muscle pain — are widely reported via the media and public health organizations. Less publicized, however, is the fact that a sizable number of people with COVID-19 do not experience symptoms at all.

Even the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), in their about-face regarding the usage of masks to slow the spread of COVID-19, stated, "We now know from recent studies that a significant portion of individuals with coronavirus lack symptoms ("asymptomatic") …"¹

One of those studies found that in a family of three who had all tested positive, only one — a 35-year-old man — had symptoms. The other two family members, a 33-year-old woman and 3-year-old boy, were asymptomatic.²

Since widespread testing hasn't been done in the U.S., and most of those who have been tested had symptoms, it's largely unknown how many people may have already had, and recovered from, COVID-19 but didn't know it because they didn't have symptoms.

The few studies that have been done toward this end, however, are providing revealing data showing that 87.9% of one group that tested positive had no symptoms.³

Majority of Pregnant Patients With COVID-19 Had No Symptoms

A hospital in New York City began universal screening for SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, among pregnant women admitted for delivery. Between March 22, 2020, and April 4, 2020, 215 were screened on admission for symptoms of COVID-19 and tested for the virus.

Only four of the women had fever or other COVID-19 symptoms, and all four tested positive. Of the remaining women who were tested even though they had no symptoms, 13.7% — 29 — were positive. This means that, overall, 87.9% of the 33 women who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 had no symptoms.⁴

Among those who tested positive without symptoms, three women (10%) developed fever before they were discharged from the hospital (within about two days). However, two of these women were treated for endomyometritis, a pregnancy complication that causes fever, while only one was presumed to have developed a fever due to COVID-19.

In one additional woman who had initially tested negative, symptoms developed after delivery and she tested positive three days after the initial test. The study authors explained:⁵

"Our use of universal SARS-CoV-2 testing in all pregnant patients presenting for delivery revealed that at this point in the pandemic in New York City, most of the patients who were positive for SARS-CoV-2 at delivery were asymptomatic, and more than one of eight asymptomatic patients who were admitted to the labor and delivery unit were positive for SARS-CoV-2."

Study co-author Dr. Dena Goffman, with the Columbia University Irving Medical Center, told CBS News, "If we're not checking, we really do risk missing people who are carrying the virus."⁶ And therein lies the point — most people aren't being tested for COVID-19, especially those without symptoms, so it's anyone's guess how much of the population may have already had it.

Symptoms 'Uncommon' During COVID-19 Outbreak at Shelter

Another example of COVID-19's apparent stealth came from a large homeless shelter in Boston. After a cluster of COVID-19 cases was observed there, researchers conducted symptoms assessments and testing among all guests residing at the shelter over a two-day period.⁷

Of 408 people tested, 147, or 36%, were positive, and although the positive individuals were more likely to be male, there were no other distinguishing characteristics. That being said, symptoms were conspicuously absent.

Cough occurred in only 7.5% of cases, shortness of breath in 1.4% and fever in 0.7%. All were "uncommon among COVID-positive individuals," the researchers noted, adding that because COVID-19 can apparently be transmitted rapidly in a homeless shelter setting without a corresponding rise in symptoms, universal testing, rather than a symptom-triggered approach to testing, may be a better strategy for identifying cases.

In Chelsea, Massachusetts, a city across the Mystic River from Boston, many cases are also occurring without symptoms. As of April 17, 2020, Chelsea had the highest rate of confirmed COVID-19 cases in Massachusetts — 32%, although the actual rate is probably higher.⁸

In a pilot study by physicians at Massachusetts General Hospital, 200 participants who "generally appeared healthy" were tested to see if they had antibodies made by their immune system to fight off COVID-19, which would suggest they'd been previously infected and may not have known it.

Among them, 32% tested positive for antibodies linked to COVID-19. However, only about half said they'd experienced at least one COVID-19 symptom in the past four weeks. Chelsea's city manager, Thomas Ambrosino, told the Boston Globe, "[I]t's kind of sobering that 30 percent of a random group of 200 people that are showing no symptoms are, in fact, infected."⁹

While studies are hinting that the majority of COVID-19 patients in some populations could be without symptoms, the CDC has also confirmed that asymptomatic COVID-19 cases exist. "One of the [pieces of] information that we have pretty much confirmed now is that a significant number of individuals that are infected actually remain asymptomatic," CDC director Dr. Robert Redfield, told NPR. "That may be as many as 25%."¹⁰

Further, as reported in a correspondence article in The Lancet, in which researchers made a case for mass testing of both symptomatic and asymptomatic health care workers:¹¹

"The number of asymptomatic cases of COVID-19 is significant. In a study of COVID-19 symptomatic and asymptomatic infection on the Diamond Princess cruise ship, 328 of the 634 positive cases (51.7%) were asymptomatic at the time of testing. Estimated asymptomatic carriage was 17.9% … whereas China's National Health Commission recorded on April 1, 2020, that 130 (78%) of 166 positive cases were asymptomatic."

Is Half the Population Potentially Already Part of the Herd?

When the majority of people have had an infectious disease and naturally acquired long lasting natural immunity, herd immunity is said to have developed. Could it be that natural herd immunity is developing for COVID-19, with many not even realizing they've already had it?

Yes, according to a hypothetical modeling study by researchers at Oxford University's Evolutionary Ecology of Infectious Disease lab, which suggests up to half of the U.K. population may have already been infected.¹²

They suggested that, according to public health theory, SARS-CoV-2, assuming it elicits protective immunity, will conform to the three distinct phases that typically occur when a novel infectious agent elicits protective immunity:¹³

1. An initial phase of slow accumulation of new, often undetectable, new infections
2. A second phase of rapid growth in cases of infection, disease and death
3. An eventual slow down of transmission due to the depletion of susceptible individuals, typically leading to the termination of the first epidemic wave

The hypothetical modeling used data on COVID-19 deaths from the U.K. and Italy, and assumed that such deaths occur only in a vulnerable fraction of the population. As reported by New York magazine, under this scenario:¹⁴

"[T]he coronavirus arrived in mid-January at the latest, and spread undetected for over a month before the first cases were confirmed. Based on a susceptibility-infected-recovery model — a commonly used estimate in epidemiology — with data from case and death reports in the U.K. and Italy, the researchers determined that the initial 'herd immunity' strategy of the U.K. government could have been sound."

That is, the U.K. initially planned to suppress the spread of COVID-19 but not completely eliminate it, allowing it to spread among younger, less vulnerable populations while protecting the elderly and immunocompromised.¹⁵ They since changed strategies, in part because of reports suggesting up to 250,000 people could die using the suppression plan, to one adopted by most other countries, involving case isolation, social distancing and widespread closures.

"I am surprised that there has been such unqualified acceptance of the Imperial model," said lead researcher Sunetra Gupta, calling for immediate large-scale antibody testing to determine what stage of the pandemic we're currently facing.¹⁶ The researchers further noted:¹⁷

"Importantly, the results we present here suggest the ongoing epidemics in the UK and Italy started at least a month before the first reported death and have already led to the accumulation of significant levels of herd immunity in both countries.

There is an inverse relationship between the proportion currently immune and the fraction of the population vulnerable to severe disease. This relationship can be used to determine how many people will require hospitalisation (and possibly die) in the coming weeks if we are able to accurately determine current levels of herd immunity."

Vaccines for Everyone — Don't Become Naturally Immune!

Biotech company Moderna began the first clinical trial for a COVID-19 vaccine in March 2020. Biotech company Inovio, which is funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, is the second company to start testing an experimental COVID-19 vaccine in humans in the U.S.¹⁸

At least 70 COVID-19 vaccines are under development,¹⁹ each of them likely attempting to be fast-tracked to the market.²⁰ Under normal circumstances, a vaccine may take five to 10 years to be developed, and pushing rapid progress comes with significant safety concerns.

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is funding the construction of factories to produce seven vaccine candidates,²¹ with the winning vaccine being produced en masse, to vaccinate the world's population. Foundation chief executive Mark Suzman said, "There are 7 billion people on the planet. We are going to need to vaccinate nearly every one. There is no manufacturing capacity to do that."²²

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is the biggest funder of the World Health Organization (WHO), by the way, and in a Washington Times opinion piece, published March 31, 2020, Gates calls for the complete shutdown of all U.S. states and quarantining of all Americans "until the case numbers start to go down … which could take 10 weeks or more."²³

While Gates can undoubtedly afford it, few working-class Americans would be able to survive without income for months on end and could face serious mental health repercussions as a result.

So Gates, a key funder of WHO, is calling for a 10-week or longer shutdown of the U.S. and the rapid building of brand-new vaccine manufacturing facilities to handle the manufacturing of billions of doses of COVID-19 vaccine — which would be rendered useless if it turns out that the majority of the population has already been exposed to the virus by going about their daily lives, and thereby acquired herd immunity naturally.

from Articles https://ift.tt/3cSxHNN
via IFTTT