Health & Fitness

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought many fragile industries to the breaking point and highlighted systemic problems in others, including the industrialized, centralized food system in the U.S. Major meat processing plants have emerged as hotspots for transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19.

Prior to the Defense Production Act, which compels meat plants to stay open in order to protect the functioning of the U.S. meat and poultry supply chain, being invoked in April 2020, many were forced to shut down. As threats of meat shortages emerged, farmers were faced with the grim prospect of killing thousands of food animals just because they had nowhere to send them to be processed.¹

The system created to serve concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) has cracked during the pandemic, putting U.S. food supplies in jeopardy. Meanwhile, so-called “carbon cowboys” — those who have embraced an alternative method of food production that works with nature instead of against it — not only are surviving the upheaval but thriving, all while providing nutritious food to their communities.

‘Carbon Cowboys’ Persevere, Thrive During Pandemic

The dichotomy between CAFOs and carbon cowboys could not be more stark, with CAFOs that control the majority of U.S. meat and poultry largely reliant on a limited number of large processing plants. “The coronavirus is showing how food supply has become too centralized, especially for meat processing,” Peter Byck, an Arizona State University professor, told Fox News.²

Byck directed a 10-part documentary titled “Carbon Cowboys,” following farmers who use regenerative grazing techniques, allowing them to largely avoid chemical pesticides, fertilizers and other pitfalls of industrial farming while building carbon-rich soil that increases crop health and livestock yields.

“We could use a lot more mid-level meat processing plants, all around the country. So, if one plant went down, there would be others to pick up the slack. It’s one of the reasons the farmers in the film are often making so much more money — because they’ve created their own supply chain and selling direct to customers,” Byck said.³

Indeed, regenerative farmers who sell their products directly to consumers and rely on small processing plants are not facing the hardships that CAFOs are seeing. While meat from small, custom slaughterhouses is not permitted to be sold to grocery stores, schools or restaurants, it can be sold directly to customers who have purchased an entire animal prior to slaughter through a share program, as well as via local farmers markets.

Allen Williams, a sixth-generation farmer and chief ranching officer for Joyce Farms, is one of the carbon cowboys featured in the film. He cited a 400% to 1,200% increase in demand for regenerative producers, and though the film has been in the works for six years, the farmers it features stated they’re seeing a three- to 10fold increase in demand compared to last year, thanks to their ability to market directly to consumers.⁴

Will Harris III, owner of White Oak Pastures in Bluffton, Georgia, also cited the need for smaller, decentralized processing facilities to free up the bottleneck that’s placing a hardship on so many farmers. By creating “at least one medium-sized plant in every state,” food that currently travels an average of 1,500 miles to get to consumers would only need to travel 100 or 200 miles. This, he says, is key to transforming the U.S. food system:

“We have to build out additional capacity. We need processing of the middle. We don’t need a lot more mom-and-pop processors. We need processing facilities with 100-500 per day capacity to start …

With more processors, more farms can transform and thus grow small businesses and the rural economy. These communities that are dead and boarded up will come to life and rural economies will surge. The country’s economy surges when small businesses and communities thrive.”⁵

Meat Prices May Rise as Plants’ Poor Conditions Spread Virus

Tyson, JBS USA, Smithfield Foods and Cargill Inc. control the majority of U.S. meat and poultry, processing it in a handful of centralized mega-processing plants. The plants are notorious for their poor working conditions even under ordinary circumstances, but in the midst of a pandemic, the elbow-to-elbow spacing and fast line speeds have made the low-paying job even more hazardous.

It’s unknown just how many COVID-19 infections have occurred among the more than 500,000 workers employed by the approximately 7,600 slaughter and processing facilities in North America,⁶ but internationally it’s suggested that more than 10,000 meat workers have been infected while at least 30 have died as a result.⁷ The cases aren’t confined to inside the processing plants but, rather, are spreading to the community.

An analysis by the Environmental Working Group (EWG) found that counties with meatpacking plants, or within a 15-mile radius, reported 373 COVID-19 cases per 100,000 residents, which is close to double the U.S. average of 199 cases per 100,000.⁸

To slow the spread of infection, some plants have slowed production to adhere to social distancing measures, while others have installed barriers between workers and in common areas. Other processing plants are ramping up efforts to automate the process, accelerating plans that have been in the works since long before the pandemic.

“You are going to see a bifurcation where the larger, more profitable facilities are going to move toward a vastly more automated meat processing facility,” Decker Walker, an agribusiness expert at Boston Consulting Group, told the Longview News-Journal. “Incentives for automation have never been higher.”⁹ Ultimately, consumers will pay for the changes being implemented throughout the industry.

Sanchoy Das, a professor at the New Jersey Institute of Technology, predicted that reduced capacity at processing plants, along with the distribution of protective equipment, could drive up conventional chicken prices by 25% to 30%, adding, “The 99-cents per pound chicken could be in short supply very quickly.”¹⁰

Is Big Meat Really Cheap?

The increase in meat prices, as well as the increased demand for higher priced niche meats like heritage pork and grass fed beef, is also highlighting a socioeconomic divide in the U.S. While some grocery outlets are running out of supplies of low-priced CAFO meat, demand has ramped up for specialty meat products, for those who have the income to support it.

However, as the processing facilities spread disease and necessitate shutdowns, we’re now seeing the high price that is ultimately paid for the convenience of cheap meat, whereas regenerative farming, while often producing a higher-priced product, remains able to supply food to local communities, without the environmental destruction and disease outbreaks caused by industrial agriculture. As Bloomberg reported:¹¹

“The virus has had limited impact on the output of specialty meats for some of the same reasons those products are more expensive. The plants aren’t run on huge economies-of-scale, where hundreds of workers are jammed into elbow-to-elbow working conditions processing thousands of animals each day.

Instead, livestock are raised on organic feed and pastures and then processed in relatively tiny plants or local butcher shops. It’s small-scale production, which means social distancing is easier and companies can more readily enforce sanitary precautions. Even if one plant goes down, it only accounts for a small fraction of supply, and the larger chain isn’t broken.”

Meanwhile, prices for specialty meat are holding steady while conventional meat prices have risen sharply in recent months. The price for conventional ground chuck, for instance, increased by 57% compared to a year ago, according to USDA data.¹²

Ultimately, if demand for grass fed meat increases, and processing facilities are available to distribute it, it can become more accessible for all. And, it’s important to remember that real costs come with Big Ag’s “cheap meat.” The Organic Consumers Association (OCA), in fact, has sued pork giant Smithfield Foods for claiming its products are the safest U.S. pork products.

“Consumers are unlikely to know that the USDA has notified Smithfield slaughter plants on multiple occasions that their pork was more likely to be contaminated with salmonella than similar products in slaughter plants of the same size,” said Ronnie Cummins, OCA co-founder and director.¹³

“Failure to report these notifications to consumers is one thing. But claiming that its products are the ‘safest’ possible pork products in the U.S. is a blatant misrepresentation of the brand’s actual safety record,” Cummins said. “The current heightened consumer concern about safety in the meat industry is all the more reason to hold Smithfield accountable for false safety claims.”

The conditions in which cheap meat is raised and processed are the same that have been found to contribute to antibiotic-resistant disease as well as the emergence of diseases that may be transmitted from animals to humans, a high cost for all of humanity.

Food System Is Changing, Is Reform Coming?

The pandemic started with Americans hoarding food and has triggered a newfound, or perhaps old-fashioned, trend to cook more meals at home. The return to home-cooked meals has been a boon to meal kit companies, which have cashed in on Americans’ desire to eat at home and have their groceries delivered while they’re at it.

Meal-kit delivery service Blue Apron noted a 27% increase in demand in late March and early April 2020, while online food retailer Thrive Market cited two distinct waves of increased demand — the first for certain products like toilet paper and hand sanitizer and the second from those seeking to replicate their normal grocery shopping online.¹⁴ Many of these changes are likely to remain even post-pandemic.

“People are more confident in the kitchen than they used to be before, and more than half of them intend to cook at home more than they did before Covid-19, even as things start to settle down,” Blue Apron’s chief executive Linda Findley Kozlowski told The New York Times.¹⁵ Still, as Americans’ desire for fresh, safe and readily accessible food has peaked, many small farmers are struggling.

With restaurants and farmers markets closed, small farmers have lost steady customers. Many have pivoted and have begun supplying produce boxes directly to consumers, but such changes are labor intensive and farmers may not be able to keep up with the demand. In a survey of small farmers, between 30% and 40% predicted they could be bankrupt by the end of 2020.¹⁶

Representative Chellie Pingree, D-Maine, is among those calling for reform and suggesting that the pandemic is providing a unique opportunity for change:¹⁷

“As the owner of a small farm, I’m frequently amazed at how little Washington understands the work that goes into putting food on our plates, but coronavirus has made it impossible to ignore the labor of grocery store employees, farmers, processors and food producers. Our nation is collectively acknowledging what’s always been true: Those who grow, sell and serve our food are essential workers, and we should treat them as such.”

In addition to calling for an essential workers’ bill of rights that would provide benefits to essential workers in the food system, and expanding access to locally produced food for food banks and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program beneficiaries, a key part of the change should be making locally raised livestock processing more widely available.

Under current government regulations, the USDA, not individual states, has control over how meat is processed, and small farmers must send animals to be processed at a USDA-inspected slaughterhouse, which may be hundreds of miles away. The state of Maine, for instance, has only one USDA poultry plant in the state.

The PRIME Act Is More Important Than Ever

The Processing Revival and Intrastate Meat Exemption (PRIME) Act would allow farmers to sell meat processed at smaller slaughtering facilities and allow states to set their own meat processing standards. Because small slaughterhouses do not have an inspector on staff — a requirement that only large facilities can easily fulfill — they’re banned from selling their meat. The PRIME Act would lift this regulation without sacrificing safety.¹⁸

“The PRIME Act would change federal regulations to make it easier to process meat locally, helping small farmers stay afloat during this economic crisis while simultaneously keeping food on our plates,” Pingree said. “This bill would shift more safety oversight to states, some of which already have equally rigorous inspection practices, and break down barriers for small farms looking to sell their product.”¹⁹

The solution to food reform is not, as some lab-grown meat companies would like you to believe, to create a fake meat industry without animals²⁰ — that is big technology’s ultraprocessed dream.

Replacing farms and livestock with chemistry labs is not the "environmentally friendly" alternative envisioned by biotech startups and its chemists. The long-term answer actually lies in the transition to sustainable, regenerative, chemical-free farming practices, and making the sustainably-grown foods produced by small farmers accessible to all.

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

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is the biggest funder of vaccines in the entire world and, according to Gates, its COVID-19 vaccination effort “dwarfs anything we’ve ever worked on before.”¹ Indeed, Gates push for mandatory COVID-19 vaccination — and investment in those vaccines — is historically unprecedented.

In an April 30, 2020, GatesNotes post,^2,3 Gates even states he “suspect[s] the COVID-19 vaccine will become part of the routine newborn immunization schedule.” In other words, a novel vaccine that alters your DNA and RNA — turning your body into an antigen-producing factory — will be given to newborns, if Gates has his way.

What could possibly go wrong? If history tells us anything, we know that just about anything could or will go wrong if the CDC mandates the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine on the newborn vaccine schedule.

Considering the vast majority of COVID-19 deaths occur in the elderly, why would babies, who are the absolutely lowest at-risk age group, need mandatory vaccination against COVID-19 in the first place? There’s absolutely no evidence to suggest vaccinating babies would prevent them from spreading the virus if infected, or develop lifelong immunity.

Newborns To Be Tested and Separated From Infected Mothers

In related, beyond ludicrous news,⁴ the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is now recommending⁵ newborns be tested for COVID-19 — not just once, but twice — and separated from mothers with confirmed or suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection. As reported by CBSN Pittsburgh May 26, 2020:⁶

“’The recommendation is the baby be tested sometime around 24 hours after birth. And if the test is negative, they’re recommending a second test at 48 hours,’ says Dr. Paul Weinbaum, an obstetrician at the Allegheny Health Network. And these babies must be kept apart.

‘The baby should not only be separated from other babies but perhaps separated from the mother if that’s feasible,’ he said … If the baby’s tests are negative, the separation is over. But what happens if a baby tests positive? ‘They don’t recommend keeping these babies in the hospital,’ says Dr. Weinbaum.”

Early Separation Can Have Lasting Psychological Effects

If you ask me, separating newborns from their mothers due to SARS-CoV-2 infection (especially if it’s only “suspected”) appears not only unnecessary at best but foolhardy and cruel at worst — especially in light of the fact that only three pediatric deaths from alleged COVID-19 illness have been reported⁷ in the U.S., and the fact that such separation has been proven to cause emotional and neurobiological problems well into adulthood. As stated in a 2018 article in Psychological Science:⁸

“The attachment bond between a mother and her child is first formed in the womb, where fetuses have been found to develop preferential responses to maternal scents and sounds that persist after birth …

These rapid early-learning processes continue during the newborn stage of development, in which children begin to recognize their mothers’ faces and voices.

From this point on, early maternal separation can result in a series of traumatic emotional reactions during which the child engages in an anxious period of calling and active search behavior followed by a period of declining behavioral responsiveness.

In a study of infant rats, [Sackler Institute for Developmental Psychology director Myron] Hofer found that this behavior was largely a response to the loss of warmth a child receives through bodily contact, nutrients, and other physiological interactions with its mother …

The research suggests that withdrawing maternal support early in a child’s life can have a number of physiological and behavioral consequences that may contribute to a complex, changing pattern of vulnerability over the life span …”

Such findings are not entirely new. According to a 2011 study⁹ published in Biological Psychiatry, evidence shows “separating infants from their mother is stressful to the baby.” As reported by Science Daily:¹⁰

“Researchers measured heart rate variability in 2-day-old sleeping babies for one hour each during skin-to-skin contact with mother and alone in a cot next to mother's bed. Neonatal autonomic activity was 176% higher and quiet sleep 86% lower during maternal separation compared to skin-to-skin contact.

Dr. John Krystal, Editor of Biological Psychiatry, commented on the study's findings: ‘This paper highlights the profound impact of maternal separation on the infant. We knew that this was stressful, but the current study suggests that this is major physiologic stressor for the infant.’"

While that 2011 study claimed to be one of the first providing evidence that separation causes undue stress, other studies have been published since then, showing the same thing.

Examples include another 2011 study,¹¹ which found “mother-child separation of a week or longer within the first two years of life was related to higher levels of child negativity (at age 3) and aggression (at ages 3 and 5),” and that “the effects of separation on children’s aggressive behavior are early and persistent.”

Similarly, a 2012 study that looked at “physical and emotional closeness between the preterm infant and parent in the neonatal intensive care unit” found physical and emotional closeness are “crucial to the physical, emotional and social well-being of both the infant and the parent,” and that such closeness is an important part of healthy infant brain development.

COVID-19 Vaccine Likely To Be Riskier Than Most

The COVID-19 vaccine is the most fast-tracked vaccine ever created in history, and some companies are skipping previously required safety testing steps, such as animal testing.^12,13

Phase 1 human trials have already begun for a few different COVID-19 vaccines within weeks of the infection hitting the U.S. In the Moderna trial of an experimental coronavirus vaccine,¹⁴ one of the subjects developed a fever “of more than 103 degrees” Fahrenheit, fainted, and reported feeling “more sick than he ever has before” after his second dose.¹⁵

Moderna and several other competitor vaccine manufacturers are using messenger RNA (mRNA) technology to make their vaccines rather than live or attenuated (inactivated) viruses grown in animal cells.¹⁶ (The GlaxoSmithKline and Sanofi COVID-19 vaccines, on the other hand, will be produced in insect cells with the dangerous squalene oil adjuvant.¹⁷) As explained by The New York Times:¹⁸

“… messenger RNA … carries the instructions for cells to make proteins. By injecting a specially designed messenger RNA into the body, the vaccine could potentially tell cells how to make the spike protein of the coronavirus without actually making a person sick.

Because the virus typically uses this protein as a key to unlock and take over lung cells, the vaccine could train a healthy immune system to produce antibodies to fight off an infection … But no vaccine made with this technology for other viruses has ever reached the global market.”

So, not only are we dealing with a novel virus, the mechanics of which are still under debate (some experts are now saying it appears to be a genetically engineered virus that attacks the blood¹⁹ more so than the lungs, for example), they’re also fast-tracking experimental RNA-based vaccines that have never been licensed or used in humans before.

As explained in “Fast-Tracked COVID-19 Vaccine — What Could Go Wrong?” previous attempts to create coronavirus vaccines have failed due to coronaviruses triggering production of two different types of antibodies: one that fights disease, and one that triggers paradoxical immune enhancement that often results in very serious disease and/or death when the patient is exposed to the wild virus.

Based on the historical failures to defend against coronaviruses with a vaccine, this could become one of the biggest public health disasters in the history of the world. And, not one of those involved would face any repercussions. Instead, they will all profit from it. 

COVID-19 Vaccine Will Alter Your RNA and DNA

I recently interviewed Barbara Loe Fisher, co-founder and president of the nonprofit National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), about these fast-tracked vaccines and the simultaneous push to make them mandatory for travel, if not for work and social life in general.

As noted by Fisher, the mRNA vaccines being developed against COVID-19 will alter your RNA and DNA, which is of tremendous concern. As mentioned, the idea behind them is to turn your body into an antigen-manufacturing plant, and if your immune system is hypersensitive, it could overreact, causing severe problems. Considering how many people have autoimmune diseases and allergies, these vaccines could have devastating effects for many.

“When you try to stimulate strong inflammatory responses in the body … what is this going to do to people who don't resolve inflammation in the body and become chronically inflamed and chronically ill and disabled?” Fisher said.

“This is what vaccines do. They stimulate inflammation in the body. They have to in order to provoke an antibody response, but this is atypical. When you're trying to do this in the body, this is not a normal way that the body mounts an inflammatory response to a microbe.

They've turned everything upside down and we are just accepting it. Why are we not thinking critically? Why do people think that they shouldn't really do the research and look at the science and look at what's being done before they take a pharmaceutical product or a vaccine? This is what I don't understand. We've totally given up our critical thinking ability …

I think … you need to get educated, you need to get the accurate facts. Mercola.com and nvic.org, we do our research. We reference all of our information because we want you to have accurate information, and you need to share that information with your family, friends, community leaders and legislators, because the only way that we're going to be able to change government is by electing people who are going to reflect our values and beliefs.”

Does the State Own Your Baby?

As reported in “Children Taken From Parents Who Refuse Vitamin K Shots,” an increasing number of parents question the routine practice of injecting their newborns with vitamin K1, and some hospitals have started harassing and even removing newborns from their parents, calling parents’ refusal of the shot “medical neglect.”²⁰

While vitamin K1 is necessary for newborns, the painful (and potentially toxic) injection is not. You can safely and noninvasively normalize your baby’s vitamin K1 level with oral drops.

In his 1999 paper, “Babies Don’t Feel Pain: A Century of Denial in Medicine,” David B. Chamberlain, Ph.D., a psychologist and co-founder of the Association of Pre-and Perinatal Psychology and Health, wrote:²¹

“The earlier an infant is subjected to pain, the greater the potential for harm … We must alert the medical community to the psychological hazards of early pain and call for the removal of all man-made pain surrounding birth.”

A 2004 study²² found that very early pain or stress experiences have long-lasting adverse consequences for newborns, including changes in the central nervous system and changes in responsiveness of the neuroendocrine and immune systems at maturity. Similar findings were also published in 2008.²³

In 2019, several Illinois families who experienced harassment and investigation by the Division of Children and Families Services over refusal of the vitamin K shot have filed a class action lawsuit against local hospitals (Silver Cross Hospital, Advocate Christ Medical Center and the University of Chicago Medical Center), the American Academy of Pediatrics, DCFS and several pediatricians.²⁴

The fact that doctors, nurses, DCFS workers and state health officials are trying to circumvent parents’ rights to make medical decisions for their children is disturbing in the extreme.

Chances are, the fight over who really has control over your children is likely to heat up once again if or when a COVID-19 vaccine becomes available and is added to the federally recommended childhood vaccination schedule, which is being turned into state law in most states. Before the time comes when a COVID-19 vaccine is mandated not only for all children but for all adults, too, I hope you all join us in the fight for freedom of choice.

To prepare, I urge you to sign up for the National Vaccine Information Center’s online Advocacy Portal, a tool you can use to communicate with your elected representatives. This free service monitors vaccine-related state legislation throughout the U.S. and alerts you when proposed bills are moving in your state.

NVIC also provides you with fact-based talking points you can share with your legislators to educate them about the need to protect the legal right to make voluntary decisions about vaccination for yourself and your children.

>>>>> Click Here <<<<<

from Articles https://ift.tt/30mFY9L
via IFTTT

Researchers working in rural Kenya have identified the most productive breeding habitats for mosquitoes that spread a range of untreatable viruses. Their findings point to more effective health interventions that focus on the purpose of water-holding containers.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/30lNd1D

Now that the restrictions are easing and gyms are opening, people are trying to get their fitness back. According to dietitian Melissa Meier, you can ditch the corona kilos without obsessing over the scales. Here's how...

from Diet | body+soul https://ift.tt/30lerW6

Fitness expert Sam Wood shares the best high protein, low-carb lunches for when you’re striving to get in shape again. 

from Nutrition | body+soul https://ift.tt/3h8lW8Z

The reality TV star has sparked rumours she has broken up with Carlin after declaring her relationship status was “no one’s business”.

from Health | body+soul https://ift.tt/37bLYUl

The pandemic has led to a spike in domestic violence cases worldwide. Now, this secret hand gesture could help women in lockdown escape their physically abusive partners.

from Health | body+soul https://ift.tt/30mW2Zh

Do you fall easily for labels such as "no added sugar" or "natural sugars only"? Dietitian Millie Padula explains why you need to look a little more closely at the ingredients list and nutrition information panel.

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

The pandemic has made us more vigilant about everyday circumstances. For example, taking sick days will be more important than ever in a post-corona world. Here's why...

from Health | body+soul https://ift.tt/2UojS33

Popular discount supermarket ALDI, is selling a premium rowing machine for only $349 as part of their Special Buys promotion. Here’s what we know so far…

from Fitness | body+soul https://ift.tt/3h3LbJH

For well over 30 years, physicians have understood the role of LDL (low-density lipoprotein, or “bad”) cholesterol in the development of cardiovascular disease (CVD). LDL cholesterol levels are directly correlated with increasing CVD risk and, as summarized in a recent blog post, lowering LDL cholesterol levels, through both lifestyle changes and medications, has been shown to reduce this risk.

Statins are the first-line choice of medications for lowering LDL cholesterol. They are widely prescribed for both primary prevention (reducing CVD risk in patients without known CVD) and secondary prevention (preventing subsequent heart attacks, strokes, and other CVD events in patients with established CVD).

How do PCSK9 inhibitors work?

In 2003, researchers found a genetic mutation that caused some people to develop very high LDL cholesterol levels and CVD at a young age. This laid the groundwork for understanding the PCSK9 pathway, and ultimately the medications now known as PCSK9 inhibitors.

Our liver makes PCSK9 protein, and this protein breaks down LDL receptors, which remove LDL cholesterol from our bloodstream. So the more PCSK9 protein in our bodies, the fewer LDL receptors in our liver, and the higher our LDL cholesterol levels. PCSK9 inhibitors are monoclonal antibodies that block the PCSK9 protein from working. As a result, levels of LDL receptors increase, and LDL cholesterol levels fall. PCSK9 inhibitors work via a pathway different from statin medications, and may be used together.

The FDA approved two PCSK9 inhibitors in 2015: alirocumab (Praluent) and evolocumab (Repatha). These drugs must be given by injection, typically every two to four weeks.

Who could benefit from PCSK9 inhibitors?

The most recent cholesterol treatment guidelines, a collaborative effort from multiple professional organizations including the American Heart Association and the American College of Cardiology, were updated in 2018. These guidelines were broadened from the previous version to include LDL treatment targets, which has prompted doctors to think about adding PCSK9 inhibitors to treat select patients. In the 2018 guidelines, high-risk patients are defined as those with known CVD or with elevated cholesterol levels and diabetes. For high-risk individuals, the guidelines recommend an LDL cholesterol target of less than 70 mg/dl. This cholesterol goal can usually be achieved on a high-dose statin. But what happens if your LDL cholesterol level remains elevated?

Initial studies (FOURIER using evolocumab and ODYSSEY using alirocumab) compared these medications against placebo in patients with known atherosclerotic disease; an LDL cholesterol level above goal; and some, but not all, patients on a statin. In both trials, PCSK9 inhibitors compared against placebo demonstrated average LDL cholesterol reduction of 60%, with a favorable safety profile and robust reductions in CVD events.

A 2019 study published in JAMA Cardiology asked the question: does adding a PCSK9 inhibitor to a statin, in patients with stable CVD and LDL cholesterol levels above goal (greater than 70 mg/dl), prevent future CVD events? For this study, patients fitting this profile were randomized to receive either the PCSK9 inhibitor evolocumab or a placebo. All patients in the study continued to take their statin medication. Researchers looked at the occurrence of CVD events (heart attack, stroke, or hospitalization for heart-related reasons) during the average two-year follow-up period. They found a significant reduction in cardiac events in patients receiving the PCSK9 inhibitor plus a statin, compared to study subjects taking statin plus a placebo.

Side effects and cost of PCSK9 inhibitors

PCSK9 inhibitors are usually well tolerated. Some people experience flulike symptoms with fatigue, feeling cold, and back pain. Muscle aches and pains have also been reported. The most common side effect is pain at the injection site.

The cost of PCSK9 inhibitors has dramatically decreased from their initial pricing of around $14,000 per year. Prescription coverage has also broadened to include these medications, but restrictions still apply based on individual plans.

In summary

Over the past few years, the FDA has expanded its approval of PCSK9 inhibitors to include a larger group of people with elevated LDL cholesterol levels who are at high risk for CVD events. If your LDL cholesterol remains elevated, talk to your doctor about available treatment options.

The post Are statins enough? When to consider PCSK9 inhibitors appeared first on Harvard Health Blog.

from Harvard Health Blog https://ift.tt/3dMDfu7

Researchers have discovered that repurposed enzymes and light are key to producing chemical compounds in an environmentally friendly fashion. By blending bio- and photocatalysis and experimenting with reactionary 'ingredients,' the research team developed a visible-light-induced reaction using the enzyme family ene-reductase (ER). The substrates used in this study, alkenes, can be derived in principle from biomass fatty acids; the end products are valuable chiral carbonyl compounds with potential pharmaceutical applications.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/37cNdCw

Scientists have recently identified a small mitochondrial uncoupler, named BAM15, that decreases the body fat mass of mice without affecting food intake and muscle mass or increasing body temperature.

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

Neuroengineers have created a tiny surgical implant that can electrically stimulate the brain and nervous system without using a battery or wired power supply.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3cM8mVn

Loss of estrogen has an effect on muscles and leads to a decline in muscle mass. Physical activity in all of its forms may help maintain muscle mass in midlife.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2UoCa43

Loss of estrogen has an effect on muscles and leads to a decline in muscle mass. Physical activity in all of its forms may help maintain muscle mass in midlife.

from Women's Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2UoCa43

Scientists have recently identified a small mitochondrial uncoupler, named BAM15, that decreases the body fat mass of mice without affecting food intake and muscle mass or increasing body temperature.

from Diet and Weight Loss News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3cIRgaZ

Scientists have shown that pancreatic cancer metastasis -- when tumor cells gain the deadly ability to migrate to new parts of the body -- can be suppressed by inhibiting a protein called Slug that regulates cell movement. The study also revealed two druggable targets that interact with Slug and hold promise as treatments that may stop the spread of pancreatic cancer.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/37cpZMQ

Taking prescription blood pressure medication helped even the frailest elderly patients live longer, according to a large study in Italy. While the improved survival benefit was found in all older people, the healthier older people survived longer than those with multiple medical conditions.

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

Telepresence robots help university students learning remotely to feel more a part of the class, new research suggests.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2Y7Zqo0

A new system for delivering vaccines to children in low-income nations has taken a vital step forward, thanks to groundbreaking work.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2zdqM3y

Persistently engaging in negative thinking patterns may raise the risk of Alzheimer's disease, finds a new UCL-led study published in Alzheimer's & Dementia.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/30kuTGj

Virus DNA left on a hospital bed rail was found in nearly half of all sites sampled across a ward within 10 hours and persisted for at least five days, according to a new study in the United Kingdom.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/30g5XzI

May 31, 2020, I posted an interview with three vitamin D experts in which we discuss the importance of vitamin D for preventing COVID-19 infection. A few days earlier, May 27, CNN published a report¹ that could have deadly consequences if believed, claiming taking vitamin D supplements “can hurt a lot.”

The article was written by Sandee LaMotte — a medical producer and writer for CNN and executive producer of video at pharma-biased WebMD. Three other CNN reporters, Emma Reynolds, Shelby Lin Erdman and Rob Picheta, also contributed to the story.

The article quotes Robin May, director of the British Institute of Microbiology and Infection as saying:² "To date, there is no evidence that very high vitamin D levels are protective against COVID-19 and consequently medical guidance is that people should not be supplementing their vitamin D levels beyond those which are currently recommended by published medical advice."

CNN Cites Vitamin D Recommendations Known To Be Incorrect

LaMotte cites dosing recommendations from the Institute of Medicine’s National Academies' Food and Nutrition Board — a nongovernmental organization — which advises a daily dose of just 600 IUs for anyone over the age of 4, and 800 IUs for those over 70. In the U.K., the daily dose is a meager 400 IUs a day.

Nowhere does the article mention that the IOM’s dosage recommendations are based on the levels thought to be adequate only for bone health.³ They do not take into account the amount of vitamin D you need to prevent influenza, heart- or liver- disease, respiratory infections, cancer, or any of the many other diseases that have a clearly documented link to vitamin D deficiency.

LaMotte also fails to mention that the IOMs recommendations are off by a factor of 10 due to a mathematical error, as reported by Science Daily⁴ in 2015. Two papers^5,6 confronting this issue have been published in the journal Nutrients, both of which call for the IOM to correct its mistake, lest public health suffer.

So, if IOM were to simply go back and correct this egregious mistake, the “conventional medical advice” would be to take 6,000 IUs a day, or 8,000 IUs if you’re over 70. These dosages are quite close to the so-called “high-dose” recommendations suggested by many vitamin D researchers.

The statement that there is “no evidence that very high vitamin D levels are protective against COVID-19” is equally misleading, considering a number of reports from COVID-19 researchers now show that vitamin D appears to play a significant role in this infectious disease.

Similarly, researchers demonstrated that the age-specific case fatality rate of COVID-19 was highest in Italy, Spain and France — European countries with the highest incidence of severe vitamin D deficiency.⁷

In the video below, published May 11, 2020, on Medscape.com, Dr. JoAnn E. Manson, professor of medicine and chief of division of preventive medicine at Harvard Medical School, discusses the protective role of vitamin D against COVID-19.

Vitamin D Deficiency Increases Risk of Positive COVID-19 Test

A May 2020 paper⁸ published on the preprint server MedRxiv (which means it’s still awaiting peer-review) presents evidence that vitamin D deficiency increases the risk of testing positive for COVID-19 infection. As reported by News Medical Life Sciences:⁹

“The study by researchers at the University of Chicago looked at over 4,300 patients with COVID-19 of whom 499 had been tested for vitamin D levels in the previous year. Based on this, they were divided into likely deficient (25%), likely adequate (58%), and uncertain (16%).

Vitamin D deficiency was diagnosed by ‘the most recent 25-hydroxycholecalciferol <20ng/ml or 1,25-dihydroxycholecalciferol <18pg/ml within one year before COVID-19 testing.’

Multiple variables were analyzed in this study. The researchers found that people with vitamin D deficiency at the last testing, and who did not receive higher doses of vitamin D (keeping them deficient in all probability), are much more likely to be infected with the virus than those with probably sufficient levels. The corresponding rates of infection were 22% vs. 12%.”

Similarly, a May 6, 2020, report¹⁰ in the journal Nutrients pointed out that vitamin D concentrations are lower in patients with positive PCR (polymerase chain reaction) tests for SARS-CoV-2. As noted in this report, which retrospectively investigated the vitamin D levels obtained from a cohort of patients in Switzerland:¹¹

“In this cohort, significantly lower 25(OH)D levels were found in PCR-positive for SARS-CoV-2 (median value 11.1 ng/mL) patients compared with negative patients (24.6 ng/mL); this was also confirmed by stratifying patients according to age >70 years. On the basis of this preliminary observation, vitamin D supplementation might be a useful measure to reduce the risk of infection.”

Low Vitamin D Boosts Risk of Serious COVID-19 Infection

According to an editorial review^12,13 by Irish researchers, people with vitamin D deficiency appear to be far more prone to severe COVID-19 infections. According to the authors:¹⁴

“When mortality per million is plotted against latitude, it can be seen that all countries that lie below 35 degrees North have relatively low mortality. Thirty‐five degrees North also happens to be the latitude above which people do not receive sufficient sunlight to retain adequate vitamin D levels during winter. This suggests a possible role for vitamin D in determining outcomes from COVID‐19 …

There are considerable experimental data showing that vitamin D is important in regulating and suppressing the inflammatory cytokine response of respiratory epithelial cells and macrophages to various pathogens including respiratory viruses …

It is important to note that the hypothesis is not that vitamin D would protect against SARS‐CoV‐2 infection but that it could be very important in preventing the cytokine storm and subsequent acute respiratory distress syndrome that is commonly the cause of mortality …

The evidence supporting a protective effect of vitamin D against severe COVID‐19 disease is very suggestive, a substantial proportion of the population in the Northern Hemisphere will currently be vitamin D deficient, and supplements, for example, 1,000 international units (25 micrograms) per day are very safe.

It is time for governments to strengthen recommendations for vitamin D intake and supplementation, particularly when under lock‐down.”

Similarly, Mark Alipio with GrassrootsHealth conducted a retrospective multicenter study^15,16 involving 212 patients in Southeast Asia who had COVID-19. He too found a strong correlation between vitamin D levels and disease severity. Those with the mildest disease had the highest vitamin D levels, and vice versa.

Normal vitamin D levels were defined as greater than 30 ng/ml; insufficient levels were defined as 21 to 29 ng/ml; anything below 20 ng/mL was considered deficient. While Grassroots Health research has determined that 40 ng/mL is the lower edge of optimal, with 60 ng/mL to 80 ng/mL being ideal for health and disease prevention, the benefit of having a vitamin D level above 30 ng/mL was clear.

Low Vitamin D Levels Linked to Increased COVID-19 Mortality

The epidemiology of COVID-19 provides evidence that vitamin D might be helpful in reducing risk associated with COVID-19 deaths.¹⁷ A May 6, 2020, report¹⁸ published in Aging Clinical and Experimental Research (its prepublication featured in the Daily Mail May 1¹⁹) found that countries with lower vitamin D levels also have higher mortality rates from COVID-19. According to the authors:²⁰

“The Seneca study showed a mean serum vitamin D level of 26 nmol/L in Spain, 28 nmol/L in Italy and 45 nmol/L in the Nordic countries, in older people. In Switzerland, mean vitamin D level is 23 nmol/L in nursing homes and in Italy 76% of women over 70 years of age have been found to have circulating levels below 30 nmol/L.

These are the countries with high number of cases of COVID-19 and the aging people is the group with the highest risk for morbidity and mortality with SARS-CoV2.”

In the preprint version²¹ of this paper, the authors concluded: “We believe that we can advise vitamin D supplementation to protect against SARS-CoV2 infection.” In the final version,²² they toned down the recommendation to: “We hypothesize that vitamin D may play a protective role for COVID-19.”

Another study,^23,24 which looked at data from 780 hospital patients in Indonesia, found those with a vitamin D level between 20 ng/mL and 30 ng/mL had a sevenfold higher risk of death than those with a level above 30 ng/mL, and having a level below 20 ng/mL was associated with a 12 times higher risk of death.

Vitamin D Is a Simple Strategy That Can Save Lives

In a May 18, 2020, letter²⁵ to the Federal Chancellor of Germany, Angela Merkel, retired biochemist Bernd Glauner and Lorenz Borsche highlight these and other studies²⁶ and ask whether a nationwide supply of vitamin D has been considered in Germany.

“Until a vaccine is available, vitamin D supplementation could be a preventive measure that should be discussed to reduce the lethality of covid-19. The available studies also suggest that vitamin D shock treatment may protect patients already infected and hospitalized with Covid-19 from lethal sepsis,” they write.

The following graph is included in the letter.

Glauner and Borsche continue:²⁷

“… Scientific and clinical studies suggesting an alternative treatment option are apparently ignored. One of these promising approaches is the treatment with vitamin D. The available studies on Covid-19 patients suggest that a large proportion of deaths could possibly be prevented and severe courses could be reduced to milder ones …

This way would be easy and does not cause high costs. It would be sufficient to measure the vitamin D level in Covid-19 infected persons, hospital staff and risk patients and, if necessary, to raise it to healthy levels well above 35 ng/ml. In any case, no comparison to the enormous costs of the lockdown. This could possibly save us another lockdown and many more Covid-19 fatalities.”

No, Vitamin D Supplementation Is Not Dangerous

The CNN article is just another propaganda COVID-19 narrative of mainstream media. This egregious behavior is similar to the hydroxychloroquine paper published in The Lancet that the WHO has used to discredit and stop using hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19. Over 100 scientists question the ethics and standards of this incredibly shoddy study.²⁸

Probably the most serious mistake in LaMotte’s CNN article are her claims that vitamin D supplementation “can hurt a lot.” She claims “too much vitamin D can lead to a toxic buildup of calcium in your blood, causing confusion, disorientation and problems with heart rhythm, as well as bone pain, kidney damage and painful kidney stones.”

She makes those claims without a) citing or referencing any supporting evidence, b) clarifying that the “toxic buildup of calcium” (hypercalcemia) is caused by insufficient vitamin K2 in relation to vitamin D, not vitamin D per se (a fact that is now well-established) and c) without specifying what “too much” actually might be.

A review²⁹ of published trials have demonstrated there are no toxicity symptoms — including hypercalcemia — at dosages up to 10,000 IU of vitamin D3 per day, even when used long-term. A more recent paper found that Intakes of vitamin D up to 15,000 IU/day are safe.³⁰

In my search for horror stories, I discovered a case paper³¹ published in 2011, which presented the cases of 10 adult patients diagnosed with hypercalcemia in relation to vitamin D supplementation.

Symptoms listed in this paper include vomiting, polyuria (excessive urination), polydipsia (excessive thirst), hypercalcemia (excessive calcium levels), encephalopathy (brain damage or disease causing memory loss, personality changes or seizures, for example) and kidney dysfunction.

It sounds scary, but when you consider that these patients were taking MILLIONS of units of vitamin D — specifically, 3,600,000 (3.6 million) IUs and 210,000,000 (210 million) IUs over the course of one to four months (median two months) — you start to see just how wrong it is to warn people off vitamin D supplements.

For example, the dosages these people were getting would be like taking 30,000 IUs of vitamin D per day for 120 days on the lowest end, or 7 million IUs a day for 30 days on the extreme upper end. No one is recommending you take these kinds of dosages, especially not for extended periods of time.

Many may need 10,000 IUs a day — which is safe — to get their level above 60 ng/mL. The maintenance dose, however, is typically lower. To determine your ideal dose, you need to get your blood tested, ideally twice a year. The level you’re looking for is between 60 ng/mL and 80 ng/mL. As of right now, there does not appear to be any significant benefit to levels higher than 80 ng/mL. 

REALLY IMPORTANT: Optimize Your Vitamin D Level Before Fall!

Experts are already warning that SARS-CoV-2 may reemerge in the fall when temperatures and humidity levels drop, thereby increasing the virus’ transmissibility.

I am in the process of writing an even more comprehensive and detailed report on vitamin D in the prevention of COVID-19 and I hope to enlist ALL of you to participate as an army to go out and tell all your friends and family and get them on board to get their vitamin levels optimized.

Once you have done that, the next step is to encourage pastors of black churches to get their congregations on board. It will also be important to reach out to mangers of nursing homes and assisted living facilities as both of these populations have notoriously low vitamin D levels that put them at greater risk of COVID-19.

You now have a known “deadline” for optimizing your vitamin D level. Historically, December typically has highest flu activity in the U.S.,³² but it would probably be good to aim for October, or maybe even earlier depending on your location.

To improve your immune function and lower your risk of viral infections, you’ll want to raise your vitamin D to a level between 60 nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL) and 80 ng/mL by fall. In Europe, the measurements you’re looking for are 150 nanomoles per liter (nmol/L) and 200 nmol/L.

Again, optimizing your vitamin D is particularly important if you have darker skin, as darker skin places you at higher risk for vitamin D deficiency — and serious COVID-19 infection. What’s more, the elderly tend to lose the ability to synthesize vitamin D from sun exposure, and therefore tend to have suboptimal levels even if they spend plenty of time outdoors.

One of the easiest and most cost-effective ways of measuring your vitamin D level is to participate in the GrassrootsHealth’s personalized nutrition project, which includes a vitamin D testing kit, either alone or in combination with the omega-3 test. This is done in the convenience of your home.

You’ll learn your nutrient levels, how effective your health actions are, and you’ll be able to see thousands of other data sets that allow you to compare health outcomes important to you. Knowledge is empowerment, and that is particularly true during this pandemic. To make sure your immune system has a chance to work optimally, follow these three steps.

Step 1: Measure Your Vitamin D

First, find out what your base level is. This is done with a simple blood test. An easy and cost-effective way of doing this is to order GrassrootsHealth’s vitamin D testing kit.

Once you know what your blood level is, you can assess the dose needed to maintain or improve your level. Again, the ideal level you’re looking for is above 40 ng/mL, and ideally between 60 ng/mL and 80 ng/mL (European measurement: 100 nmol/L or, ideally, 150 nmol/L to 200 nmol/L).

The easiest way to raise your level is by getting regular, safe sun exposure, but if you’re very dark-skinned, you may need to spend about 1.5 hours a day in the sun to have any noticeable effect.

Those with very light skin may only need 15 minutes a day, which is far easier to achieve. Still, they too will typically struggle to maintain ideal levels during the winter. So, depending on your situation, you may need to use an oral vitamin D3 supplement. The next question then becomes, how much do you need?

Step 2: Assess Your Individualized Vitamin D3 Dosage

The following chart can provide you with a basic starting point:

You can fine-tune your dosage further by taking into account your baseline vitamin D level. To do that, you can either use the chart below, or use GrassrootsHealth’s Vitamin D*calculator. To convert ng/mL into the European measurement (nmol/L), simply multiply the ng/mL measurement by 2.5.

How to Calculate Your Vitamin D From Sun Exposure

To calculate how much vitamin D you may be getting from regular sun exposure in addition to your supplemental intake, consider using the DMinder app,³³ created by Dr. Michael Holick, author of “The Vitamin D Solution: A Three-Step Strategy to Cure Our Most Common Health Problems.” The free app is available for iPhone and android in the Apple store and Google play respectively. As explained by imedicalapps.com:³⁴

“The app attempts to calculate a patients’ vitamin D level based on demographics imputed when first opening the app and then updates the level based on either actual lab draws or data from the app. The app even uses the phone’s GPS and clock to determine the ‘best’ time of day for a patient to get the required sun exposure for vitamin D skin conversion.”

Step 3: Retest

Lastly, you’ll need to remeasure your vitamin D level in three to six months, to evaluate how your sun exposure and/or supplement dose is working for you. Not only will optimizing your vitamin D be an important strategy for you and your family, but it would be really helpful to start thinking about your community as well.

If you can, speak to pastors in churches with large congregations of people of color and help them start a program getting people on vitamin D. Doing so could save far more lives than any vaccine program.

If you have a family member or know anyone who is in an assisted living facility you could meet with the director of the program and encourage them to get everyone tested or at least start them on vitamin D.

from Articles https://ift.tt/2Yb7swq
via IFTTT

 

from Articles https://ift.tt/2MGr7yZ
via IFTTT

The body of scientific evidence demonstrating the medicinal value of cannabis continues to grow and become more compelling. Your body makes its own cannabinoids that interact with the receptors in your brain, lungs, liver, kidneys, immune system and other organs, tissues and blood vessels. They are activated by the therapeutic and psychoactive properties of the plant.¹

Cannabis can be bred to have high levels of cannabidiol (CBD) and low levels of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) content. THC has the psychoactive activity, while CBD has no psychoactive properties. The plant also contains terpenes, which are the oils that give cannabis its distinctive flavor and odor.

To date, hundreds of compounds have been identified in the plant,² including cannabinoids, terpenes and other phytochemicals. In China, Cannabis sativa has a long history of recorded use, dating back nearly 2,000 years.³ In old texts, researchers have found references to application of cannabis for pain and mental illness.

Much of the current research has been on the relationship of CBD and THC to inflammation. However, during the first severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) epidemic in 2003 to 2004, researchers investigated the effects of terpenes found in cannabis and other plants and found they have antiviral properties.⁴

Twofold Testing on Specific Strains of Cannabis Sativa

Angiotensin converting enzyme 2, or ACE2 receptors, provide an entry point for SARS-CoV-2 to infect the human cell.⁵ This receptor is found on the surface of many types of cells, but most specifically in the oral and nasal mucosa, lungs, intestinal tract, liver, kidney and brain.⁶

The virus uses spike-like proteins to bind with the ACE2 receptor, giving it entrance into the cell. Scientists are researching ways to use this pathway to modulate the entry of the virus into the cell with the hope of decreasing an individual's susceptibility to the disease. One team investigated the effect that cannabis has on ACE2 receptors.⁷

The researchers used extracts from hundreds of lines of Cannabis sativa in a computer-generated model of human mouth, airway and intestinal tissue. Their preliminary data show that the extract of 13 lines of Cannabis sativa that were high in CBD could keep the virus out of the cells.

They acknowledge that further large-scale validation is necessary, but the initial result may provide useful preliminary evidence that adding these extracts could be used as adjunct therapy.

They suggest developing preventive treatments, such as the use of mouthwash, that may reduce viral entry through the oral mucosa. One of the researchers, Dr. Igor Kovalchuk, spoke with a reporter form the Calgary Herald about the results:⁸

"A number of them have reduced the number of these (virus) receptors by 73 per cent, the chance of it getting in is much lower. If they can reduce the number of receptors, there's much less chance of getting infected. It will take a long time to find what the active ingredient is — there may be many."

Past Data Support Antiviral Activity of Some Terpenes

A second team from the Israel Institute of Technology led by Dedi Meiri, Ph.D., spoke with a reporter from Health Europa about a formulation of terpenes extracted from cannabis being tested against Stars CoV-2.⁹

Health Europa reported after the SARS outbreak in 2002 that researchers found terpenes were effective antiviral agents and could reduce the severity and impact of an infection by preventing the virus from penetrating human cells. Meiri said his lab is approved to conduct an investigation and colleagues are currently underway promoting two lines of study based on cannabis. He explained the initial study:

"First, we will try to identify the plant's own molecules that are capable of suppressing the immune response to the COVID-19 coronavirus — which causes inflammation and severe disease — to lower the immune system response without suppressing it, thereby providing better complementary treatment to the steroids, which completely suppress the immune system."

In the second study, researchers will be looking at how the cannabis molecule may affect the viral process of infecting cells through the ACE2 receptor. Researchers have been looking for a way to impact ACE2 receptors since the first SARS outbreak in 2003.¹⁰

The team hopes terpenes found in cannabis will help modulate the cytokine storm — overreaction of the immune system — associated with COVID-19, known to cause organ system failure leading to death.¹¹

In 2007, a study was published in the Journal of Medicinal Chemistry in which researchers evaluated 221 phytocompounds for their activity against SARS. They induced cytopathogenic effects on cell cultures and tested terpenoids, lignoids and curcumin against the cell cultures.¹²

The data showed that 22 compounds could inhibit 50% of the pathogenic cell proliferation and viral replication. The researchers suggest specific types of diterpenoids and lignoids have a powerful effect against the SARS virus in vitro.

Scientists have also found terpenoids may have a synergistic effect in cannabis that may help to treat pain, inflammation and bacterial infections in combination with other phytochemicals.¹³

Social Media Headlines Overstated Current Facts

While the research is promising, some who republished certain information overstated the facts. The headline "Cannabis May Stop Coronavirus From Infecting People, Study Finds" first appeared on the website MerryJane.¹⁴ The headline was quickly picked up and passed through social media, until Facebook flagged it for "false news and misinformation" as reported by Politifact.¹⁵

However, while the headline may have been misleading, the content in the MerryJane article followed the research, communicating the data and the shortcomings of the study. Forbes Magazine also picked up the story. In their article the writer linked an article in the New York Post¹⁶ with the viral content on Facebook and finally to a quote that appears to have come from the New York Post:¹⁷

"And a rally 'vaguely' timed, as MarketWatch reporter Max Cherney observed, with the New York Post's publication Thursday of its take on the big story that had gone viral on Facebook earlier that month, and was later flagged as fake news: the claim, first made in a preclinical paper published in April, by Canadian scientists that certain high CBD strains of 'cannabis could prevent and treat coronavirus.'"

Kovalchuk spoke with a reporter from Politifact and confirmed the headline was an overstatement.¹⁸ Kovalchuk was also interviewed by the Forbes reporter and said:¹⁹

"It reduces the possibility to get infected. I never said it would prevent or block it entirely. It is a possible treatment. A treatment is not a cure. When [news reports] say it treats COVID, or can potentially treat COVID, they are absolutely right."

Terpene-Extract May Boost Hand Cleaning for COVID-19

In mid-April, Vanguard Scientific announced they had developed a new hand cleaner made from terpene extract. The hand cleaner uses an alcohol-based sanitizer following CDC recommendations, into which the company added terpenes derived from cannabis. They believe this "may boost the mixture's antibacterial, antimicrobial and antiviral effects."²⁰

The company also began an open source project in which they released the recipe and the standard operating procedures for free. They've called it Project Terpenes-Clean and hope it will bring together scientists from around the world to develop a powerful hand cleaner. Matthew Anderson is CEO of Vanguard Scientific and commented on the program and the product:²¹

"Like all industries, the botanical extraction industries have been hit hard by the COVID-19 crisis. As a company working with clients to target specialized botanical extracts, we've focused on finding opportunities to help in the fight against the virus.

We know that traditional healers have used plant-derived compounds as powerful medicine for centuries, so we're offering our expertise to the rest of the industry so others can join us in creating a soap-less hand cleaner that leverages industry science and increases the supply of hand cleaning products.

Open source drives innovation while promoting collaboration and adoption to ensure maximum transparency: anyone can inspect an open source project for errors or inconsistencies and that matters in regulated industries."

Cannabinoids Affect Cardiovascular System

Researchers presented data at a 2019 meeting of the American Heart Association showing that young people who had been diagnosed with a cannabis use disorder had a 47% to 52% higher risk of being hospitalized for an irregular heartbeat, also known as an arrhythmia, as compared to those without the disorder.²²

In the study, researchers use data from more than 67 million hospital patients. The effect appeared to be dependent on the dose. Lower doses were linked to a rapid heart rate while higher doses were linked to heart rates that were too slow.²³

Results from a second study showed that those who used cannabis for more than 10 days a month had a 2.5 times increased risk of stroke compared to nonusers.²⁴ Those who also smoked cigarettes or e-cigarettes had an even higher risk — more than three times that of nonusers.

Your body has cannabinoid receptors in the brain, lungs, liver, kidneys and other organs and tissues, as well as blood vessels. Harvard Medical School describes the action cannabinoids have on heart health:²⁵

"One of the few things scientists know for sure about marijuana and cardiovascular health is that people with established heart disease who are under stress develop chest pain more quickly if they have been smoking marijuana than they would have otherwise.

This is because of complex effects cannabinoids have on the cardiovascular system, including raising resting heart rate, dilating blood vessels, and making the heart pump harder. Research suggests that the risk of heart attack is several times higher in the hour after smoking marijuana than it would be normally."

Benefits of Medical Cannabis

Considering the distribution of cannabinoid receptors in the body, it's no surprise that appropriate dosages can help alleviate problems. Evidence has been increasing for its therapeutic use in the treatment of migraines and headaches, as well as in assisting detoxification and weaning from opioid addiction.²⁶

The NIH has awarded nine research grants totaling $3 million to analyze the potential cannabis may have on pain relief and strengthen the evidence. The studies are focused on the biological activity of natural substances in cannabis that are not psychoactive to steer clear of "THC's disadvantages."

Helene Langevin, director of National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health, spoke out about the need for safe and effective pain relief options, saying:²⁷

"The treatment of chronic pain has relied heavily on opioids, despite their potential for addiction and overdose and the fact that they often don't work well when used on a long-term basis. There's an urgent need for more effective and safer options."

It's important to note that specific strains influence the ratios of phytochemicals, cannabinoids and terpenes, which is a crucial consideration. Results from one study led by researchers from the University of Massachusetts and the University of Bath confirmed the scientific basis for the use of cannabinoids in alleviating gut problems, specifically inflammatory bowel disease.²⁸

Some people are uncomfortable with the use of medical cannabis or the idea of legalizing it. I urge you to evaluate the research and how doctors are using it in clinical practice. You'll find more information about the impact it has on gut health, on your overall health and dozens of cited studies in these past articles:

• Medical Cannabis Offers New Hope for Those With Inflammatory Bowel Diseases
• Cannabis in Modern Medicine
• Can Cannabis Fight Tumors?
• Cannabis: A Lost History

from Articles https://ift.tt/30lfJ3w
via IFTTT