Health & Fitness

Your kidneys are essential to filter excess water and waste from your blood.¹ Chronic kidney disease (CKD) can lead to dialysis and the need for a kidney transplant to live. One woman in Colorado recently learned that the University of Colorado Health System's policy change meant she was no longer eligible for a kidney transplant.²

Conditions that damage your kidney and decrease their function are called chronic kidney disease.³ Chronic kidney disease is divided into stages.⁴ The higher the stage, the greater the damage to the kidneys. Stages range from Stage 1 indicating mild kidney damage to Stage 5, which is just before complete failure.

Dialysis is needed when a person reaches Stage 5 kidney failure.⁵ This process helps the body eliminate waste products, salt and extra water, and helps control blood pressure. Dialysis is done in a dialysis unit or at home, depending upon the process used. However, without a kidney transplant, the average life expectancy on dialysis is between five and 10 years.

For the majority of people, a kidney transplant is the best option. Although it is not a cure for kidney disease, it can improve the quality and length of life.⁶ The United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) maintains the list of individuals who need any type of organ transplant, including a kidney transplant.

On average, people wait three to five years for a kidney transplant. In some areas, it can be even longer. The wait time is dependent on blood type and history of blood transfusions or transplants.

Leilani Lutali's situation became public when Colorado state Rep. Tim Geitner published the letter that Lutali received from UCHealth denying the transplant. Geitner posted a copy of the letter on Twitter without Lutali's identifying information saying, "UCHealth denies lifesaving treatment — kidney transplant — to El Paso County resident. See my FB live post @timgeitnercolorado"⁷

Unvaccinated Woman Denied Direct Kidney Transplant

Lutali met her kidney donor, Jaimee Fougner, at a Bible study. In August 2021, Lutali confirmed with UCHealth that a COVID shot was not required, but by September 28, 2021, she learned she would be denied the lifesaving transplant because she and her donor were unwilling to get the shot.

In an interview with CBS,⁸ we learn that Lutali has already had COVID and Fougner cannot get the shot for religious reasons, in what the news anchor called the "latest example of someone facing severe consequences after refusing to get vaccinated for COVID."

Despite thousands of deaths and disabilities⁹ resulting from the vaccine, another newscaster quoted UCHealth, saying,¹⁰ "The hospital system says that keeping people from dying unnecessarily is kind of the point."

Hospitals have routinely placed conditions on organ transplants, hoping to extend the life of those who receive the organ. Some of these requirements include stopping smoking, avoiding alcohol, changing eating habits or taking certain vaccinations.¹¹ However, with the COVID shot, Lutali clearly expresses her concern that it's still new and there are many questions about how it would affect her health.¹²

Interestingly, the hospital also requires the donor to be vaccinated. They reason that a living donor could pass a COVID infection to the recipient after testing negative.¹³ And yet, according to government officials, anyone vaccinated can pass COVID to anyone else.¹⁴ Therefore, using the hospital's reasoning, it does not track that the donor must also be vaccinated.

Lutali is receiving a direct donation and is not taking a kidney from the transplant waiting list. According to the Department of Health Resources and Services Administration,¹⁵ there are currently 106,729 people on the waiting list and 17 people will die every day waiting for an organ transplant.

It is worth noting that while government officials and hospitals continue to call the shot a vaccine, it does not meet the definition of a vaccine by the CDC before 2021. Until September 1, 2021, the definition was:¹⁶

"A product that stimulates a person's immune system to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease. Vaccines are usually administered through needle injections, but can also be administered by mouth or sprayed in the nose."

However, just days after the FDA approved the Pfizer shot,¹⁷ September 1, 2021, the CDC changed the definition of a "vaccine" to:¹⁸

"A preparation that is used to stimulate the body's immune response against diseases. Vaccines are usually administered through needle injections, but some can be administered by mouth or sprayed into the nose."

As you may have noticed, in this latest iteration, a vaccine is a "preparation" that:

• No longer directly stimulates the immune response, but is used to stimulate the system
• Does not produce immunity
• Stimulates the immune response against diseases, not against a specific disease
• No longer protects a person from the disease

Data Show Transplant Deaths Related to Comorbid Conditions

9 News reported that the hospital released a statement saying,¹⁹ "… studies indicate the mortality rate for transplant recipients who test positive for COVID ranges from 18% to 32%, compared to a 1.6% mortality rate among all people who have tested positive."

After a kidney transplant, patients must take anti-rejection drugs that have a significant impact on their innate immune system.²⁰ Children and adults are prescribed a combination of immunosuppressant medications that must be taken for as long as the kidney transplant is working.

These drugs have serious side effects, including an increased risk for all infections.²¹ They also increase the risk for influenza infection. However, while past research has demonstrated influenza vaccination may reduce the risk of flu after a kidney transplant,^22,23,24 UCHealth has not mandated a flu vaccine, only a COVID shot.

One literature review²⁵ found the overall mortality rate from COVID-19 was 20% for those who had received a transplant. However, the median age range of the patients was 66 years and the participants had other comorbid conditions often related to severe disease, including high blood pressure, diabetes, malignancy and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

In one prospective cohort study²⁶ in France, 5% of the participants were diagnosed with COVID. Again, the mortality rate was 24% with comorbidities that included obesity, diabetes, asthma and chronic pulmonary disease. A third study²⁷ enrolled 1,073 patients with a mean age of 60 years who had either a kidney transplant or were on dialysis.

Mortality was associated with older age in transplant patients, and with age and frailty in those on dialysis. Interestingly, one study²⁸ found factors strongly associated with mortality from COVID after a kidney transplant were demographic, clinical and social determinants, such as age, sex, body mass index, diabetes, education and socioeconomic status.

Religious Exemption Based on Use of Aborted Fetal Cells

Fougner cannot get the shot for religious reasons, supported by the announcement in February 2021 by the New Orleans Archdiocese in which they stated the Johnson & Johnson vaccine was "morally compromised as it uses the abortion-derived cell line in development and production of the vaccine as well as the testing."

While the Archdiocese recommended avoiding the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, it did not have the same concerns for Pfizer and Moderna. However, other clergy disagree since abortion-derived cell lines were used in lab testing for all the vaccines. This debate has a long history that centers on using HEK293 cells that were harvested from an aborted fetus in the early 1970s.²⁹

This is the moral dilemma that is at the basis for most religious exemptions for the vaccine. Several fact-checkers including PolitiFact,³⁰ The Associated Press³¹ and Snopes³² have labeled this claim as false because the fetal cells are not directly in the vaccine.

However, as it turns out the fact-checkers relied on semantics when, technically, fetal cells are used during the production of certain vaccines. Several of the cell lines commonly used in vaccine development that originated from aborted fetuses include:

• HEK293³³ — human embryonic cell line originally derived from kidney tissue obtained from a female fetus aborted in the Netherlands in 1972
• MRC5³⁴ — human embryonic cell line originally derived from the lung tissue of a 14-week-old male fetus aborted in 1966
• PER.C6³⁵ — human embryonic cell line originally derived from the retina of an 18-week-old male fetus aborted in the Netherlands in 1985
• WI38³⁶ — human embryonic cell line originally derived from the lung tissue of a 12-week-old female fetus aborted in 1961

Some critics of abortion-derived cell lines have claimed that since the vaccines literally do not contain abortion-derived cells, the entire claim is false. In other instances, fact-checkers claim the cell lines are not original, as in the statement made in an archived article from The Washington Post,³⁷ but rather a clone.

However, the claim that the cells are clones of the original is like saying your 20-year-old or 40-year-old body is no longer your body since all the cells are copies of those when you were a baby. They are, in essence, a clone of the original.

Yet, there is virtually no difference between cells that grow and multiply in a petri dish and those that grow and multiply in your body during your lifetime. If the cells in your body are still you, then the cells in the petri dish are still those of the original aborted fetus.

It has become apparent that fact-checkers are trying to dissuade people from having a public conversation about the ethics of using abortion-derived cell lines to produce and test vaccines.

How Many Deaths Attributed to Disease or Lack of Treatment?

So how many deaths could there be that are attributable to disease or lack of treatment? The answer to this question is unknowable. At the start of 2020, doctors scrambled to find treatments that would be effective against the SARS-CoV-2 virus. If you have been reading my newsletter, you know that I have interviewed several of these experts, including Dr. Vladimir Zelenko,^38,39 who has been successfully treating his patient population with hydroxychloroquine and zinc.

In the video above you can see Dr. Peter McCullough's early treatment regimen at minute 53:40 that includes a nutraceutical bundle, progressing to monoclonal antibody therapy, antiinfectives like hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin, antibiotics, steroids and blood thinners.

You have also heard from Front Line care doctors, including Dr. Paul Marik who is a critical care doctor at Sentara Norfolk General Hospital in East Virginia. Marik was one of the founding critical care doctors who formed the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Working Group (FLCCC)⁴⁰ early in the pandemic.

In each case, the experiences of these physicians have demonstrated treatment protocols that have severely reduced the mortality rate in those treated. Yet, physicians who chose to use these protocols or institute early treatment for their patients experienced the unthinkable — they were being threatened with the loss of their medical license for trying to help.^41,42

Hospitals were sued to use ivermectin, and the decisions were reversed.⁴³ Without hope of early or effective treatment, the public was being conditioned to wait for a vaccination. Since the U.S. rollout of the vaccine in December 2020,⁴⁴ through October 1, 2021, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System⁴⁵ has recorded:

• 16,310 deaths
• 75,605 hospitalizations
• 17,619 life-threatening adverse events
• 30631 severe allergic reactions
• 23,712 permanent disabilities.

Approved Drugs May Be Deadly

Instead of using drugs with a low side effect profile, the FDA⁴⁶ approved the use of remdesivir October 22, 2020. Remdesivir is an antiviral drug that's a nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitor.

According to the National Institutes of Health,⁴⁷ the drug is approved for hospitalized adult and pediatric patients 12 years and older and has emergency use authorization for hospitalized pediatric patients younger than 12 years.

This treatment protocol is not recommended by the World Health Organization that published a conditional recommendation against remdesivir November 20, 2020, which they have not rescinded.⁴⁸ They stated, "there is currently no evidence that remdesivir improves survival and other outcomes in these patients."⁴⁹

What is important to note is that remdesivir, the only recommended treatment protocol in the U.S., has significantly damaged kidney function in past studies^50,51 and has not been used yet in COVID vaccine clinical trials for patients with kidney damage.⁵²

I recommend that you proactively work to support your immune system using strategies evidence has demonstrated reduces your risk of severe disease. Should you get sick at home, there are several early treatment protocols you may consider that do not require prescription.

If you have had an organ transplant or other underlying medical condition, check with your health care professional, or a physician familiar with early treatments and your health condition. You may find a list of telemedicine doctors at Aesthetic Advisor⁵³ or the FLCCC.⁵⁴ Take care to share your current medical history and ensure the drugs being prescribed are safe for your situation.

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

It was only a matter of time before a vaccine-resistant strain of COVID-19 would surface, and that time has already come to pass. As reported by The Conservative Treehouse October 3, 2021:¹

“What this study² finds is exactly what vaccine developer Geert Vanden Bossche (Belgium) has been predicting. The predominance of antibody-resistant SARS-Cov-2 variants in vaccine breakthrough cases from the San Francisco Bay Area, California …

Dr. Vanden Bossche has been using Israeli data and showing³ how the widespread vaccination rates were creating pressure on the virus to mutate into variants with higher levels of contagion.

The unvaccinated group has been keeping the pressure down by defeating the virus and carrying natural immunity. However, as the unvaccinated population is increasingly made smaller, the pressure on the virus to mutate increases. Subsequently, these mutations stay at higher or more effective levels of infection.”

Vaccine-Evading Variants Are Emerging

The study, posted on the preprint server medRxiv, August 25, 2021, concluded that those who are fully “vaccinated” against COVID-19 are in fact more susceptible to COVID variant infections than unvaccinated people.

Vanden Bossche’s theory was that vaccine antibodies would suppress natural antibody responses, allowing variants to slip through, and this seems to be what’s happening. As explained by The Conservative Treehouse October 3, 2021:⁴

“Among vaccinated individuals, a COVID variant virus is not recognized by the specialized antibodies provided by the vaccine, and the natural antibodies have been programmed to stand down.”

According to the authors of the study:⁵

“Associations between vaccine breakthrough cases and infection by SARS coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants have remained largely unexplored. Here we analyzed SARS-CoV-2 whole-genome sequences and viral loads from 1,373 persons with COVID-19 from the San Francisco Bay Area from February 1 to June 30, 2021, of which 125 (9.1%) were vaccine breakthrough infections.

Fully vaccinated were more likely than unvaccinated persons to be infected by variants carrying mutations associated with decreased antibody neutralization (78% versus 48%), but not by those associated with increased infectivity (85% versus 77%) …

These findings suggest that vaccine breakthrough cases are preferentially caused by circulating antibody-resistant SARS-CoV-2 variants, and that symptomatic breakthrough infections may potentially transmit COVID-19 as efficiently as unvaccinated infections, regardless of the infecting lineage.”

“Be careful around vaccinated people, because they can carry a more resistant form of COVID-19,” The Conservative Treehouse warns, adding that the narrow protection you get from the COVID shot will inevitably necessitate a booster shot for each emerging new variant that is resistant to the shots.

UK Data Show Increased COVID Mortality Among Fully Vaxxed

British data also raise serious questions about the wisdom of this injection campaign. In its Technical Briefing 23,⁶ published September 17, 2021, Public Health England reveals data showing the COVID death toll is actually higher among the fully vaccinated compared to the unvaccinated.

Between February 1, 2021, and September 12, 2021, 157,400 fully vaccinated patients (26.52% of total cases) were diagnosed with a Delta variant. Among the unvaccinated, there were 257,357 Delta variant cases (43.36% of total cases).

However, while Delta infections were far more prevalent among the unvaccinated, these patients also had better outcomes. In all, 63.5% of those who died from COVID-19 within 28 days of a positive test were fully vaccinated (1,613 compared to 722 in the unvaccinated group).

More Signs of Antibody-Dependent Enhancement

In a letter to the editor of the Journal of Infection,⁷ published August 9, 2021, three researchers point out that “infection-enhancing anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies recognize both the original Wuhan/D614G strain and Delta variants,” which suggests antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) is emerging. According to the authors:⁸

“Antibody dependent enhancement (ADE) of infection is a safety concern for vaccine strategies. In a recent publication, Li et al. (Cell 184 :4203–4219, 2021) have reported that infection-enhancing antibodies directed against the N-terminal domain (NTD) of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein facilitate virus infection in vitro, but not in vivo.

However, this study was performed with the original Wuhan/D614G strain. Since the Covid-19 pandemic is now dominated with Delta variants, we analyzed the interaction of facilitating antibodies with the NTD of these variants … [W]e show that enhancing antibodies have a higher affinity for Delta variants than for Wuhan/D614G NTDs …

As the NTD is also targeted by neutralizing antibodies, our data suggest that the balance between neutralizing and facilitating antibodies in vaccinated individuals is in favor of neutralization for the original Wuhan/D614G strain.

However, in the case of the Delta variant, neutralizing antibodies have a decreased affinity for the spike protein, whereas facilitating antibodies display a strikingly increased affinity. Thus, ADE may be a concern for people receiving vaccines based on the original Wuhan strain spike sequence (either mRNA or viral vectors).”

As noted by independent journalist Sharyl Attkisson,⁹ “Despite the fact that multiple medical authorities predicted, told us, and hoped, ADE would not impact Covid-19 vaccines, data from the study indicates it has done just that.”

Antibody Levels Decrease After Second Dose

While you’re not considered “fully vaccinated” until 14 days after your first dose of Janssen’s or AstraZeneca’s shot, or second dose of Moderna’s or Pfizer’s, a recent Israeli study found antibody levels actually decrease after the second dose of Pfizer’s COVID shot. The findings were reported by The Jerusalem Post, October 7, 2021:¹⁰

“Antibody levels decrease rapidly after two doses of the Pfizer coronavirus vaccine, a study¹¹ by researchers at the Sheba Medical Center published … in the New England Journal of Medicine …

The research also showed the probability that different groups of individuals — based on age and general health status — will find themselves below a certain antibody threshold after a period of six months.”

In all, 4,868 staff members at the Sheba Medical Center participated in the study,¹² undergoing monthly serological tests to measure their antibodies for up to six months after their second Pfizer shot.

Everyone, regardless of age or gender, saw a rapid decline in their antibodies after the second dose. IgG antibodies — which are part of your humoral immune response — decreased at a consistent rate over time, whereas the neutralizing antibodies rapidly decreased during the first three months, and then slowed down thereafter. According to the authors:¹³

“Although IgG antibody levels were highly correlated with neutralizing antibody titers (Spearman’s rank correlation between 0.68 and 0.75), the regression relationship between the IgG and neutralizing antibody levels depended on the time since receipt of the second vaccine dose …

The highest titers after the receipt of the second vaccine dose (peak) were observed during days 4 through 30, so this was defined as the peak period.

The expected geometric mean titer (GMT) for IgG for the peak period, expressed as a sample-to-cutoff ratio, was 29.3. A substantial reduction in the IgG level each month, which culminated in a decrease by a factor of 18.3 after 6 months, was observed.

Neutralizing antibody titers also decreased significantly, with a decrease by a factor of 3.9 from the peak to the end of study period 2, but the decrease from the start of period 3 onward was much slower, with an overall decrease by a factor of 1.2 during periods 3 through 6. The GMT of neutralizing antibody, expressed as a 50% neutralization titer, was 557.1 in the peak period and decreased to 119.4 in period 6 ...

Six months after receipt of the second dose, neutralizing antibody titers were substantially lower among men than among women, lower among persons 65 years of age or older than among those 18 to less than 45 years of age, and lower among participants with immunosuppression than among those without immunosuppression.”

COVID-19 Unrelated to Jab in 68 Countries, 2,947 US Counties

The Israeli findings above can help explain the findings of a study¹⁴ published September 30, 2021, in the European Journal of Epidemiology, which found no relationship between COVID-19 cases and levels of vaccination in 68 countries worldwide and 2,947 counties in the U.S. If anything, areas with high vaccination rates had slightly higher incidences of COVID-19. According to the authors:¹⁵

“[T]he trend line suggests a marginally positive association such that countries with higher percentage of population fully vaccinated have higher COVID-19 cases per 1 million people.”

Iceland and Portugal, for example, where more than 75% of their populations are fully vaccinated, had more COVID-19 cases per 1 million people than Vietnam and South Africa, where only about 10% of the populations are fully vaccinated.¹⁶

Data from U.S. counties showed the same thing. New COVID-19 cases per 100,000 people were “largely similar,” regardless of the percentage of a state’s population that was fully vaccinated.

“There … appears to be no significant signaling of COVID-19 cases decreasing with higher percentages of population fully vaccinated,” the authors wrote.¹⁷ Notably, out of the five U.S. counties with the highest vaccination rates — ranging from 84.3% to 99.9% fully vaccinated — four of them were on the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s “high transmission” list. Meanwhile, 26.3% of the 57 counties with “low transmission” have vaccination rates below 20%.

The study even accounted for a one-month lag time that could occur among the fully vaccinated, since it’s said that it takes two weeks after the final dose for “full immunity” to occur. Still, “no discernable association between COVID-19 cases and levels of fully vaccinated” was observed.¹⁸

Key Reasons Why Reliance on Jabs Should Be Reexamined

The study summed up several reasons why the “sole reliance on vaccination as a primary strategy to mitigate COVID-19” should be reevaluated. For starters, the jab’s effectiveness is rapidly waning.

“A substantial decline in immunity from mRNA vaccines six months’ post immunization has … been reported,” the researchers noted, adding that even severe hospitalization and death from COVID-19, which the jabs claim to protect against, have increased from 0.01% to 9% and 0% to 15.1%, respectively, among the fully vaccinated from January 2021 to May 2021.¹⁹

If the jabs work as advertised, why haven’t these rates continued to rise instead of fall? “It is also emerging,” the researchers noted, “that immunity derived from the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine may not be as strong as immunity acquired through recovery from the COVID-19 virus.”²⁰

For instance, a retrospective observational study published August 25, 2021, revealed that natural immunity is superior to immunity from COVID-19 jabs. According to the authors:²¹

“This study demonstrated that natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization caused by the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, compared to the BNT162b2 two-dose vaccine-induced immunity.”

Reinfection Is Very Rare

The fact is, while breakthrough cases continue among those who have gotten one or more COVID-19 injections, it’s extremely rare to get COVID-19 after you’ve recovered from the infection. How rare? Researchers from Ireland conducted a systematic review including 615,777 people who had recovered from COVID-19, with a maximum duration of follow-up of more than 10 months.²²

“Reinfection was an uncommon event,” they noted, “with no study reporting an increase in the risk of reinfection over time.” The absolute reinfection rate ranged from 0% to 1.1%, while the median reinfection rate was just 0.27%.^23,24,25

Another study revealed similarly reassuring results. It followed 43,044 SARS-CoV-2 antibody-positive people for up to 35 weeks, and only 0.7% were reinfected. When genome sequencing was applied to estimate population-level risk of reinfection, the risk was estimated at 0.1%.²⁶

There was no indication of waning immunity over seven months of follow-up, unlike with the COVID-19 injection, which led the researchers to conclude that “Reinfection is rare. Natural infection appears to elicit strong protection against reinfection with an efficacy >90% for at least seven months.”²⁷

All Risk for No Reward?

The purpose of informed consent is to give people all of the data related to a medical procedure so they can make an educated decision before consenting. In the case of COVID-19 injections, such data initially weren’t available, given their emergency authorization, and as concerning side effects became apparent, attempts to share them publicly were suppressed.

In August 2021, a large study from Israel²⁸ revealed that the Pfizer COVID-19 mRNA jab is associated with a threefold increased risk of myocarditis,²⁹ leading to the condition at a rate of one to five events per 100,000 persons.³⁰ Other elevated risks were also identified following the COVID-19 jab, including lymphadenopathy (swollen lymph nodes), appendicitis and herpes zoster infection.³¹

Dr. Peter McCullough, an internist, cardiologist and epidemiologist, is among those who have warned that COVID-19 injections are not only failing but putting lives at risk.³²

According to McCullough, by January 22, 2021, there had been 186 deaths reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database following COVID-19 injection — more than enough to reach the mortality signal of concern to stop the program.

“With a program this size, anything over 150 deaths would be an alarm signal,” he said. The U.S. “hit 186 deaths with only 27 million Americans jabbed.” McCullough believes if the proper safety boards had been in place, the COVID-19 jab program would have been shut down in February 2021 based on safety and risk of death.³³

Now, with data showing no difference in rates of COVID-19 cases among the vaxxed and unvaxxed, it appears more and more likely that the injections have a high level of risk with very little reward, especially among certain populations, like youth.

Mass Vaccination Drives Mutations

It’s well-known that if you put living organisms like bacteria or viruses under pressure, via antibiotics, antibodies or chemotherapeutics, for example, but don’t kill them off completely, you can inadvertently encourage their mutation into more virulent strains. Those that escape your immune system end up surviving and selecting mutations to ensure their further survival.

Many have warned about immune escape due to the pressure being placed upon the COVID-19 virus during mass vaccination,³⁴ and according to one mathematical model,³⁵ a worst-case scenario can develop when a large percentage of a population is vaccinated but viral transmission remains high, such as it is now. This is a prime scenario for the development of resistant mutant strains.³⁶

At this point, COVID-19 injection failures and serious jab-related health risks are both apparent. We now also have data showing that having a high vaccination rate does nothing to lower COVID-19 incidence.

It might actually increase it slightly, as we’re seeing in India. In Kerala, India, which boasts a 93% vaccination rate, more than half of all new COVID cases are fully vaccinated, as are 57% of COVID-related deaths.³⁷ With all data pointing in the same direction, it’s clear that COVID shots aren’t the answer. As noted in the European of Journal of Epidemiology:³⁸

“Stigmatizing populations can do more harm than good. Importantly, other non-pharmacological prevention efforts (e.g., the importance of basic public health hygiene with regards to maintaining safe distance or handwashing, promoting better frequent and cheaper forms of testing) needs to be renewed in order to strike the balance of learning to live with COVID-19 in the same manner we continue to live a 100 years later with various seasonal alterations of the 1918 Influenza virus.”

If You’re ‘Vaccinated’ You May Be High-Risk for COVID

As predicted from the very beginning of the mass vaccination campaign, we’re now starting to see evidence of ADE, which makes people more prone to serious illness rather than less.

Even if your risk for ADE is small (and we have no data on prevalence as of yet), the data we do have suggest the shots aren’t ending outbreaks, and indeed can’t, end them, as it’s the vaccinated who are facilitating the emergence of vaccine-evading variants. The real answer is natural herd immunity, as natural immunity protects against most variants and not just one.

To be on the safe side, I recommend considering yourself “high-risk” for severe COVID if you’ve received one or more shots, and implement known effective treatment at the first sign of a respiratory infection.

Options include the Zelenko protocol,³⁹ the MATH+ protocols⁴⁰ and nebulized hydrogen peroxide, as detailed in Dr. David Brownstein’s case paper⁴¹ and Dr. Thomas Levy’s free e-book, “Rapid Virus Recovery.” Whichever treatment protocol you use, make sure you begin treatment as soon as possible, ideally at first onset of symptoms.

from Articles https://ift.tt/3pBCcG8
via IFTTT

This article was previously published December 07, 2021, and has been updated with new information.

There's good news for those of you who have taken the proactive step to make sure your vitamin D level is optimized. Several recent studies demonstrate vitamin D can have a significantly beneficial impact on your cancer risk, both in terms of preventing cancer and in the treatment of cancer.

Vitamin D Reduces Cancer Mortality

In the first of these studies,^1,2 which included 25,871 patients, vitamin D supplementation was found to reduce the risk for metastatic cancer and death by 17%. The risk was reduced by as much as 38% among those who also maintained a healthy weight.

This was a really poorly done study as they only gave participants 2,000 IUs a day and never measured their blood levels. Had there been no improvement, I would not have been surprised, but the fact is it still reduced metastatic cancer and death by 17%, and they found significant benefit among those who were not obese.

This is pretty extraordinary but not as good as epidemiological studies that show a 50% to even 78% reduction in vitamin D-sufficient people, as suggested in a study further below. That said, UPI reported the results saying:³

"The benefits of vitamin D3 in limiting metastases — or disease spread to other organs — and severity was seen across all cancers, and was particularly prominent among study participants who maintained a healthy weight …

'The primary message [of our study] is that vitamin D may reduce the chance of developing metastatic or fatal cancer among adults without a diagnosis of cancer,’ study co-author Dr. Paulette Chandler told UPI."

The study, published in JAMA Network Open, is a secondary analysis of the VITAL Study⁴ which, in part, sought to determine whether taking 2,000 IUs of vitamin D per day would reduce the risk of cancer, heart disease or stroke in people who did not have a prior history of these diseases.

The VITAL study itself, which followed patients for an average of 5.3 years, found no statistical difference in overall cancer rates among those who took vitamin D3, but there was a reduction in cancer-related deaths, which is what prompted this secondary analysis.

Obesity May Inhibit Vitamin D's Benefits

The fact that patients with a healthy weight derived a much greater benefit — a 38% reduced risk for metastatic cancer and death compared to 17% overall — suggests your body weight may play a significant role in whether vitamin D supplementation will provide you with the anticancer benefits you seek.

According to study co-author Dr. Paulette Chandler, assistant professor of medicine at Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston, "Our study highlights that obesity may confer resistance to vitamin D effects."⁵

There may be something to that. Research⁶ published in 2010 found that dietary fructose inhibits intestinal calcium absorption, thereby inducing vitamin D insufficiency in people with chronic kidney disease.

That said, vitamin D tends to be lower in obese people in general, for the fact that it's a fat-soluble nutrient and when you're obese, the vitamin D ends up being "volumetrically diluted." As explained in the paper "Vitamin D in Obesity," published in 2017:⁷

"Serum vitamin D is lower in obese people; it is important to understand the mechanism of this effect and whether it indicates clinically significant deficiency … Vitamin D is fat soluble, and distributed into fat, muscle, liver, and serum.

All of these compartments are increased in volume in obesity, so the lower vitamin D likely reflects a volumetric dilution effect and whole body stores of vitamin D may be adequate … Obese people need higher loading doses of vitamin D to achieve the same serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D as normal weight."

While that particular paper stresses that lower vitamin D in obese individuals might not mean that they're deficient, others disagree. For example, one study^8,9 found that for every 10% increase in body-mass index, there's a 4.2% reduction in blood levels of vitamin D. According to the authors of that particular study, obesity may in fact be a causal factor in the development of vitamin D deficiency.¹⁰

Vitamin D Also Improves Colorectal Cancer Outcomes

A scientific review¹¹ published in the September 2020 issue of the British Journal of Cancer noted that having low vitamin D is associated with poor colorectal cancer survival.

To assess whether vitamin D supplementation might improve survival in these patients, they reviewed the findings of seven trials, three of which included patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer from the outset and four population trials that reported survival in incident cases.

Overall, the meta-analysis found supplementation resulted in a 30% reduction in adverse colorectal cancer outcomes. Vitamin D also improved outcomes among patients already diagnosed with colorectal cancer. According to the authors:¹²

"Meta-analysis demonstrates a clinically meaningful benefit of vitamin D supplementation on [colorectal cancer] survival outcomes. Further well-designed, adequately powered RCTs are needed to … [determine] optimal dosing."

Low Vitamin D Linked to Increased Cancer Incidence

Another review and meta-analysis,¹³ this one published in November 2019 in Bioscience Reports, looked at vitamin D supplementation on cancer incidence and mortality in general. Ten randomized controlled trials with a pool of 81,362 participants were included in the analysis.

While the incidence rate of cancer was very similar between the vitamin D intervention group and the placebo control group (9.16% versus 9.29%), the risk reduction in mortality was deemed "significant." As reported by the authors:

"The mortality rate of cancer was 2.11% (821 cases) and 2.43% (942 cases) in vitamin D intervention group and placebo group, respectively, resulting in a significant reduction in risk (RR = 0.87).

There was no observable heterogeneity or publication bias … Our findings support a beneficial effect of vitamin D supplement on lowering cancer mortality, especially in subpopulations with no history of cancer, extra use of vitamin D, or calcium supplement."

Vitamin D Protects Against Breast Cancer

Several studies have highlighted the benefit of vitamin D for breast cancer. For example, an analysis¹⁴ by GrassrootsHealth published June 2018 in PLOS ONE showed women with a vitamin D level at or above 60 ng/mL (150 nmol/L) had an 82% lower risk of breast cancer compared to those with levels below 20 ng/mL (50 nmol/L).

An earlier study,^15,16 which looked at women in the U.K., found having a vitamin D level above 60 ng/mL resulted in an 83% lower breast cancer risk, which is nearly identical to GrassrootsHealth's 2018 analysis.

One of the more recent meta-analyses^17,18 looking at breast cancer was published December 28, 2019, in the journal Aging. Here, they reviewed 70 observational studies, finding that for each 2 ng/mL (5 nmol/L) increase in vitamin D level there was a corresponding 6% decrease in breast cancer incidence.

Overall, this translates into a 71% reduced risk when you increase your vitamin D level from 20 ng/mL to 60 ng/mL. The following graph, created by GrassrootsHealth,¹⁹ illustrates the dose response between vitamin D levels and breast cancer risk found in this study.

GrassrootsHealth's 2018 analysis in PLOS ONE also analyzed this dose relationship.²⁰ To do that, they looked at the percentage of breast cancer-free participants in various vitamin D groups, from deficient (below 20 ng/mL) to optimal (at or above 60 ng/mL), over time (four years).

As you might expect, the higher the blood level of vitamin D, the lower the incidence of breast cancer. The graph below illustrates this dose-related protection. At four years, the percentage of women who had been diagnosed with breast cancer in the 60 ng/mL group was 78% lower than among those with blood levels below 20 ng/mL.

How to Optimize Your Vitamin D Level

If you live in the northern hemisphere, which is currently heading toward winter, now is the time to check your vitamin D level and start taking action to raise it if you're below 40 ng/mL (100 nmol/L). As you can see from the studies above, a vitamin D level of 60 ng/mL (150 nmol/L) or higher is recommended if you want to protect against cancer.

An easy and cost-effective way of measuring your vitamin D level is to order GrassrootsHealth’s vitamin D testing kit. Once you know your current vitamin D level, use the GrassrootsHealth vitamin D calculator²¹ to determine how much vitamin D you might need to reach your target level. To optimize vitamin D absorption and utilization, be sure to take your vitamin D with vitamin K2 and magnesium.

Lastly, remember to retest in three to four months to make sure you’ve reached your target level. If you have, then you know you’re taking the correct dosage. If you’re still low (or have reached a level above 80 ng/mL), you’ll need to adjust your dosage accordingly and retest again in another three to four months.

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

Researchers have made a discovery that could lead to new treatments for axial spondyloarthritis (SpA), a painful and debilitating form of arthritis which causes inflammation in the spine, joints, eyes, gut and skin.

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

A multi-institutional research team has designed nanoparticles that can communicate with and slow the development of cancer cells. The work has uncovered a novel framework for the potential development of drug-free cancer therapies.

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

Epilepsy seizures can be triggered when a natural braking system meant to control brain activity goes awry, researchers found. The discovery could open the door to new treatments.

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

Immunotherapy may benefit people with leptomeningeal carcinomatosis, a rare but serious complication of cancer that has spread to the brain and/or spinal cord. Treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors caused notable changes in the characteristics of immune cells within the cerebrospinal fluid of patients. In a phase II clinical trial, treatment extended overall survival in patients compared with historical controls.

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

Researchers analyzed ketogenic and calorically restricted diets in mice, revealing how those diets affect cancer cells and offering an explanation for why restricting calories may slow tumor growth.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2XIzCT9

Researchers have uncovered a fundamental role of glial cells in the nervous system of the gut in maintaining a healthy intestine. These cells have been found to coordinate the immune responses of the gut following pathogen invasion and could be key targets when exploring new treatments for inflammatory bowel conditions.

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

Researchers have discovered that people with asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease have a protein in their lungs that leaks a small molecule into their bloodstream that restricts their breathing instead of relaxing their airways. The findings will help clinicians diagnose and determine the severity of chronic lung diseases and make bronchodilators more effective.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3py4Fg5

As the pandemic rolls on, we learn more about the virus that placed the entire world on pause. There’s one symptom that is having a long-term impact.

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

Some ham products from South Australia have been recalled due to a listeria contamination scare, the brand’s second in less than three weeks.

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

Protein intake is known to be vital for maintaining brain function in older individuals. Now, using a mouse model of Alzheimer's disease, researchers have shown that the intake of a specific set of amino acids can inhibit the death of brain cells, protect the connections between them, and reduce inflammation, preserving brain function. Their research suggests that this amino acid combination called Amino LP7 can hinder the development of dementia, including Alzheimer's disease.

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

A new study provides deep insights into how the brain's hippocampus works, involving networks of millions of neurons. That knowledge could be an important step toward the development of treatments for neurological disorders such as Alzheimer's disease, schizophrenia and epilepsy, all of which are related to dysfunction in the hippocampus.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3bb5umK

Bacteria rapidly modify mobile parts of their genome to develop resistance to viruses.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3jzRPu5

Researchers have developed 'mini brains' that allow them to study a fatal and untreatable neurological disorder causing paralysis and dementia -- and for the first time have been able to grow these for almost a year.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3Ec9Je7