Health, Fitness,Dite plan, health tips,athletic club,crunch fitness,fitness studio,lose weight,fitness world,mens health,aerobic,personal trainer,lifetime fitness,nutrition,workout,fitness first,weight loss,how to lose weight,exercise,24 hour fitness,

Latest Post

The nerve cells, also called neurons, in our brain control all the basic processes of our body. For this reason, there are different types of neurons distributed over specific regions of the brain. Researchers have now developed an approach that allows them to show that neurons that are supposedly the same are actually very different: they not only sense different hormones for the body's energy state, but also have a different influence on food intake. This can have a direct effect on our metabolism, for example by differentially restraining our appetite.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3u2gwl6

This is the first evidence that secondhand smoke during pregnancy correlates with changes in disease-related gene regulation in babies. These findings support the idea that many adult diseases have their origins in environmental exposures, such as stress, poor nutrition, pollution or tobacco smoke, during early development.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2QBLy5B

When it comes to the treatment of COVID-19, many Western nations have been hobbled by the politicization of medicine. Throughout 2020, media and many public health experts warned against the use of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), despite the fact that many practicing doctors were praising its ability to save patients. Most have been silenced through online censorship. Some even lost their jobs for the “sin” of publicly sharing their successes with the drug.

Another decades-old antiparasitic drug that may be even more useful than HCQ is ivermectin. Like HCQ, ivermectin is on the World Health Organization’s list of essential drugs, but its benefits are also being ignored by public health officials and buried by mainstream media.

Ivermectin is a heartworm medication that has been shown to inhibit SARS-CoV-2 replication in vitro.1 In the U.S., the Frontline COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) has been calling for widespread adoption of Ivermectin, both as a prophylactic and for the treatment of all phases of COVID-19.2,3

In the video above, Dr. John Campbell interviews Dr. Tess Lawrie about the drug and its use against COVID-19. Lawrie is a medical doctor and Ph.D. researcher who has done a lot of work in South Africa.

She’s also the director of Evidence-Based Medicine Consultancy Ltd.,4 which is based in the U.K., and she helped organize the British Ivermectin Recommendation Development (BIRD) panel5 and the International Ivermectin for COVID Conference, held April 24, 2021.

Ironically, as a consultant to the World Health Organization and many other public health organizations, her largest clients are the very ones who are now actively suppressing the use of this drug.

Ivermectin Useful in All Stages of COVID

What makes ivermectin particularly useful in COVID-19 is the fact that it works both in the initial viral phase of the illness, when antivirals are required, as well as the inflammatory stage, when the viral load drops off and anti-inflammatories become necessary.

According to Dr. Surya Kant, a medical doctor in India who has written a white paper6 on ivermectin, the drug reduces replication of the SARS-CoV-2 virus by several thousand times.7 Kant’s paper led several Indian provinces to start using ivermectin, both as a prophylactic and as treatment for COVID-19 in the summer of 2020.8

In the video, Lawrie reviews the science behind her recommendation to use ivermectin. In summary:

• A scientific review by Dr. Andrew Hill at Liverpool University, funded by the WHO and UNITAID and published January 18, 2021, found ivermectin reduced COVID-19 deaths by 75%. It also increased viral clearance. This finding was based on a review of six randomized, controlled trials involving a total of 1,255 patients.

• Lawrie’s meta-analysis, published February 8, 2021, found a 68% reduction in deaths. Here, 13 studies were included in the analysis. This, she explains, is an underestimation of the beneficial effect, because they included a study in which the control arm was given HCQ.

Since HCQ is an active treatment that has also been shown to have a positive impact on outcomes, it’s not surprising that this particular study did not rate ivermectin as better than the control treatment (which was HCQ).

• Adding two new randomized controlled trials to her February analysis that included data on mortality, Lawrie published an updated analysis March 31, 2021, showing a 62% reduction in deaths.

When four studies with high risk of bias were removed during a subsequent sensitivity analysis, they ended up with a 72% reduction in deaths. Sensitivity analyses are done to double-check and verify results.

WHO Still Refuses to Recommend Ivermectin

Curiously, when the WHO finally updated its guidance on ivermectin at the end of March 2021,9,10 they gave it a thumbs-down, saying more data are needed. They only recommend it for patients who are enrolled in a clinical trial. Yet they based their negative recommendation on a review that included just five studies, which ended up showing a 72% reduction in deaths.

Lawrie points out discrepancies in this WHO analysis, such as two studies deemed by Lawrie to have a high risk of bias being listed by the WHO team to have a low risk of bias. (In the interview, she explains why she considers them to have a high risk of bias.)

What’s more, in the WHO’s summary of findings, they suddenly include data from seven studies, which combined show an 81% reduction in deaths. The confidence interval is also surprisingly high, with a 64% reduction in deaths on the low end, and 91% on the high end.

What’s more, their absolute effect estimate for standard of care is 70 deaths per 1,000, compared to just 14 deaths per 1,000 when treating with ivermectin. That’s a reduction in deaths of 56 per 1,000 when using ivermectin. The confidence interval is between 44 and 63 fewer deaths per 1,000.

Despite that, the WHO refuses to recommend this drug for COVID-19. Rabindra Abeyasinghe, a WHO representative to the Philippines, commented that using ivermectin without “strong” evidence is “harmful” because it can give “false confidence” to the public.11

As noted by Daniel Horowitz in an April 1, 2021, article in The Blaze,12 “That sure sounds a lot like telling people if they wear a mask indoors, they won’t get COVID. Tragically, when they invariably do get the virus, the global health elites have nothing to treat them with.”

Doctors Urge Acceptance of Ivermectin to Save Lives

As mentioned earlier, in the U.S., the FLCCC has also been calling for widespread adoption of ivermectin, both as a prophylactic and for the treatment of all phases of COVID-19.13,14

FLCCC president Dr. Pierre Kory, former professor of medicine at St. Luke’s Aurora Medical Center in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, has testified to the benefits of ivermectin before a number of COVID-19 panels, including the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs in December 2020,15 and the National Institutes of Health COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel January 6, 2021.16 As noted by the FLCCC:17

“The data shows the ability of the drug Ivermectin to prevent COVID-19, to keep those with early symptoms from progressing to the hyper-inflammatory phase of the disease, and even to help critically ill patients recover.

Dr. Kory testified that Ivermectin is effectively a ‘miracle drug’ against COVID-19 and called upon the government’s medical authorities … to urgently review the latest data and then issue guidelines for physicians, nurse-practitioners, and physician assistants to prescribe Ivermectin for COVID-1918 …

… numerous clinical studies — including peer-reviewed randomized controlled trials — showed large magnitude benefits of Ivermectin in prophylaxis, early treatment and also in late-stage disease. Taken together … dozens of clinical trials that have now emerged from around the world are substantial enough to reliably assess clinical efficacy.

… data from 18 randomized controlled trials that included over 2,100 patients … demonstrated that Ivermectin produces faster viral clearance, faster time to hospital discharge, faster time to clinical recovery, and a 75% reduction in mortality rates.”19

A one-page summary20 of the clinical trial evidence for Ivermectin can be downloaded from the FLCCC website. A more comprehensive, 31-page review21 of trials data has been published in the journal Frontiers of Pharmacology.

At the time of this writing, the number of trials involving ivermectin has risen to 55, including 28 randomized controlled trials. A listing of all the Ivermectin trials done to date, with links to the published studies, can be found on c19Ivermectin.com.22 

The FLCCC’s COVID-19 protocol was initially dubbed MATH+ (an acronym based on the key components of the treatment), but after several tweaks and updates, the prophylaxis and early outpatient treatment protocol is now known as I-MASK+23 while the hospital treatment has been renamed I-MATH+,24 due to the addition of ivermectin.

The two protocols25,26 are available for download on the FLCCC Alliance website in multiple languages. The clinical and scientific rationale for the I-MATH+ hospital protocol has also been peer-reviewed and was published in the Journal of Intensive Care Medicine27 in mid-December 2020. 

NIH Loosens Restrictions, FDA Warns Against Prophylactic Use

In mid-January 2021, the NIH did revise its guidelines on ivermectin, in large part thanks to the data presented by Kory and others. However, while the NIH no longer warns against its use, they also do not outright recommend it, and they did not grant ivermectin emergency use authorization.

As a result, many patients in the U.S. still struggle to access the drug, as many doctors are unwilling to prescribe it off-label against health officials’ recommendations.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has adopted an even less favorable stance, March 9, 2021 actually issuing a consumer warning March 5, 2021, to not use ivermectin as a prophylactic.28 The FDA also has not approved ivermectin for prevention of or treatment for SARS-CoV-2.29

The International Ivermectin for COVID Conference

April 24 through 25, 2021, Lawrie hosted the first International Ivermectin for COVID Conference online.30 Twelve medical experts31 from around the world shared their knowledge during this conference, reviewing mechanism of action, protocols for prevention and treatment, including so-called long-hauler syndrome, research findings and real world data.

All of the lectures, which were recorded via Zoom, can be viewed on Bird-Group.org.32 In her closing address, Lawrie stated:33

"The story of Ivermectin has highlighted that we are at a remarkable juncture in medical history. The tools that we use to heal and our connection with our patients are being systematically undermined by relentless disinformation stemming from corporate greed.

The story of Ivermectin shows that we as a public have misplaced our trust in the authorities and have underestimated the extent to which money and power corrupts.

Had Ivermectin being employed in 2020 when medical colleagues around the world first alerted the authorities to its efficacy, millions of lives could have been saved, and the pandemic with all its associated suffering and loss brought to a rapid and timely end.

Since then, hundreds of millions of people have been involved in the largest medical experiment in human history. Mass vaccination was an unproven novel therapy. Hundreds of billions will be made by Big Pharma and paid for by the public.

With politicians and other nonmedical individuals dictating to us what we are allowed to prescribe to the ill, we as doctors, have been put in a position such that our ability to uphold the Hippocratic oath is under attack.

At this fateful juncture, we must therefore choose, will we continue to be held ransom by corrupt organizations, health authorities, Big Pharma, and billionaire sociopaths, or will we do our moral and professional duty to do no harm and always do the best for those in our care?

The latter includes urgently reaching out to colleagues around the world to discuss which of our tried and tested safe older medicines can be used against COVID.”

During the conference, Lawrie proposed that doctors around the world join together to form a new people-centered World Health Organization. "Never before has our role as doctors been so important because never before have we become complicit in causing so much harm,” she said.



from Articles https://ift.tt/3u5FHmP
via IFTTT

Whether you are for or against vaccines of any kind, it is hard to ignore the seismic changes that have affected how vaccines have been developed, licensed and regulated during the COVID-19 pandemic.1,2 Some researchers are taking the next step, hoping to develop a new type of vaccine that self-spreads through the environment.3

Since the pandemic was declared by the World Health Organization in early 2020, federal and state lawmakers have been persuaded to build a pandemic response around a single experimental biological product, which has generated billions of dollars in profit for liability-free drug companies.4,5,6

Yet, as soon as pharmaceutical companies announced they were developing the vaccine, doctors, scientists, researchers and other experts began raising warnings7,8 about the historical problems of creating a coronavirus vaccine and the propensity it has to produce antibody-dependent enhancement, which made vaccinated individuals more susceptible to infection by the virus or a variant.

Subsequently, one study9,10,11 found the South African variant of SARS-CoV-2, which accounted for 1% of all cases of COVID-19 in Israel in April 2021, caused greater illness in people vaccinated with Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine than in unvaccinated people. To ensure more are vaccinated, no matter the cost, vaccine passports are being rolled out across the world, including the U.S.

As reported by former U.S. Rep. and physician Ron Paul in his Liberty Report12,13 that streamed live March 29, 2021, the Biden Administration is “seriously looking into establishing some kind of federal vaccine passport system, where Americans who cannot (or will not) prove to the government they have been jabbed with the experimental vaccine will be legally treated as second-class citizens.”

Paul warns that this system “will quickly morph into a copy of China’s ‘social credit’ system, where undesirable behaviors are severely punished.” I’ve been saying the same thing for many months now, and there’s every reason to suspect that this is indeed where we’re headed.

The newest Frankenstein iterations of vaccine development are those that self-disseminate through humans and wildlife. Using this technology, which researchers say already exists,14 the government wants to strip away one more layer of your civil rights.

This Prevention May Be Far Worse Than the Illness or Cure

The headlines read: “Vaccines of the Future Could Be as Contagious as Viruses”15 and “COVID-19 cure: Scientists Plan to Develop 'Self-Spreading' Coronavirus Vaccine.”16 Scott Nuismer and James Bull, authors of a paper in Nature17 calling for “Self-Disseminating Vaccines to Suppress Zoonoses,” told a New Scientist reporter, “Prevention is better than cure, so we should start using genetic techniques to stop dangerous animal diseases jumping to humans.”18

Some scientists are publicly19 calling for self-disseminating vaccines to spread vaccinations for infectious diseases that start in wild animals and may make the leap to humans. They cite diseases like SARS, MERS and COVID-19.20 This vaccination program would ostensibly be a complementary approach to reduce or eliminate the prevalence of the infectious agent within the wildlife communities.

To make the case, they cite the example of rabies vaccine programs that have significantly reduced the transmission of rabies in the U.S. and Europe and compare them to how rabies continues to affect people living in Africa and Asia, where the cost of vaccinating wild carnivores prevents the countries from attaining a sufficient level of immunity.

Apparently, the solution is to create a self-disseminating vaccine that relies on a radical change in development and production. The idea is to insert a small piece of genetic material into another virus that already spreads within the animal community, thus immunizing the animals that acquire the new virus.

The technology to achieve this has been used in field trials in wild rabbits to protect them from a viral hemorrhagic fever. Researchers are now investigating prototypes for Ebola and Lassa virus.

The public relations approach is to call for an ounce of prevention,21 weighing it against the ongoing costs of finding a cure for COVID-19. However, cost effective treatment protocols for COVID-19 already exist. The problem is they are so cost-effective for pharmaceutical companies to generate enough revenue using them.

Opinion pieces22 begin by touting the effectiveness of the current vaccine programs against smallpox, rubella, tetanus and measles. What they fail to mention is that those vaccine programs are vastly different from the genetic experiments being proposed. The idea is to:23

“... tamp down the spread of HIV and other contagious diseases and immunize people who would not otherwise be protected. Plus, the strategy would be cheaper than vaccinating everyone by hand.”

Self-Spreading Vaccine Virus Is a Ticking Time Bomb

You should know there is a drawback to these types of vaccines. The live vaccine may mutate to revert to the virulent form, which increases the risk of the illness for which the vaccine was developed. This has happened with the oral polio vaccine.24

Although it was not intentionally designed to transmit vaccine-derived polio viruses, there is a version of the oral polio vaccine that briefly spreads to other people. The polio strain that had been eradicated in the wild may have mutated and reverted to its virulent form.

The World Health Organization subsequently switched the oral polio vaccine,25 but also played down the issues from circulating vaccine-derived poliovirus26 saying the strain could be rapidly stopped by immunizing “every child several times with the oral vaccine to stop polio transmission, regardless of the origin of the virus.”27

Since they are still using the oral polio vaccine in some countries, today vaccine-derived polio infection numbers far exceed natural case numbers. In 2020 by the end of October there had been 200 wild polio cases and 600 vaccine-derived cases, according to an NPR report.28

With self-spreading vaccines, the chance of an intentionally designed transmissible vaccine to revert to the more virulent form is higher than in regular vaccines since there is the chance to replicate more times before dying. Scientists think that altering the transmissible vaccine to make it weaker may not eradicate the disease, but could reduce the risk the virus would revert and would require less people to be directly vaccinated.29

Nuismer postulates that using benign viruses to carry the genetic material may prove effective. For example, cytomegalovirus (CMV), which is common in humans and mammals, often creates no symptoms. If genetic material were injected into CMV, the vaccine would only lose effectiveness if the CMV reverted.

However, since CMV spreads easily and up to 80% of adults in the U.S. have been infected by age 40, using it as a vector may not work. Researchers are also investigating a transmissible vaccine for HIV intended for people who are infected. The “vaccine” would act as a parasite to compete with resources inside an infected cell.

The hope is these therapeutic interfering particles (TIPs) would lower the level of circulating viruses, prevent the spread of HIV and slow the progression to full-blown AIDS. Yet even the researchers who are attempting to develop such a vaccine acknowledged there are possible monstrous aberrations.30

For example, since the TIP can replicate it can also evolve. This is another way of saying it can develop a mutant variant that could become uncontrollable. If the TIP should revert to HIV, the researchers think that it would simply infect the person who was already carrying the virus.

However, because the TIP is transmissible, it can spread to people without HIV. In the initial development, the TIP cannot replicate in the body without HIV. However, after several generations of replication and possible reversion, is that a risk worth taking?

Scientists Are Blatantly Ignoring Informed Consent

Setting aside the health risks, it's important to note that scientists and experts who are proposing the use of transmissible vaccines are blatantly ignoring your right to informed consent. This is a federal law,31 which says you have a right to receive information about the treatment you're undergoing so you can make a well-informed decision about your medical care.

Medical practitioners are bound by ethical and legal obligations to disclose the risks and benefits of medical treatments before you receive them. To meet the legal standard, every person in the U.S., and in fact the world, would have to provide informed consent before a transmissible vaccine is released into the wild.

This kind of blatant disregard for your civil rights reared its ugly head in human testing for the COVID vaccine. Considering the unprecedented speed32 in which the vaccines were developed and released, it is not possible to provide participants in studies, or those taking the vaccine, a full list of the potential risks.

One of those significant concerns that researchers and doctors are aware of is antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE). Anyone receiving this experimental genetic procedure would want to be informed of the potential to worsen the very disease they're trying to avoid.

Despite researchers' strong recommendation in October 2020 that this risk should be “prominently and independently disclosed,”33 it was not part of the informed consent disclosure. The International Journal of Clinical Practice researchers wrote:34

“This risk [ADE] is sufficiently obscured in clinical trial protocols and consent forms for ongoing COVID-19 vaccine trials that adequate patient comprehension of this risk is unlikely to occur, obviating truly informed consent by subjects in these trials.”

We are on a slippery slope. Unless researchers, pharmaceutical companies and governmental agencies are held accountable and watched closely we will continue to lose more and more of our civil rights until they have completely eroded.

How Will Big Pharma React to Losing $50 Million Each Year?

Nusimer estimates the cost savings from a transmissible vaccine may be roughly $50 million every year. He said, “It's astronomical the amount of money you would save, even with a weakly transmissible vaccine.”35

However, that number is likely far from the financial loss pharmaceutical companies would experience. For example, if the flu vaccine were to be transmissible it would put a big dent in the $3 billion a year36 they reap from a vaccine with an overall effectiveness of 30%.

By February 2021, Pfizer had estimated their COVID-19 vaccine was worth $15 billion and would be the “second highest revenue-generating drug anytime, anywhere.”37 AstraZeneca’s COVID vaccine netted $275 million in the first quarter of 2021, despite being one of the more controversial of the four released under an emergency authorization for use.38

As has been reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System,39 there are thousands of people who have reported vaccine injuries and deaths, and likely hundreds of thousands who have not.40 In fact, the Johnson & Johnson vaccine was previously paused to teach doctors how to report vaccine injuries. As Dr. Anne Schuchat, principal deputy director for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said:41

“... a key component of why we are on this pause is so we can educate the clinicians about how to diagnose and treat this condition because the usual treatment could actually make things worse ... but also to report it, because we don't know if we've missed some cases, whether the risk really is 1 in a million or perhaps more than that."

The pause has since been lifted and vaccination with the Johnson & Johnson COVID vaccine has resumed in the U.S.42 It’s important to remember, meanwhile, that once a transmissible virus vaccine has been released, it cannot be recalled. Any variant or mutation that causes devastating damage, disability and death is irreparable. The financial cost and the cost in human life may reach apocalyptic levels.

COVID-19 Uses Metabolic Poison to Bind to Human Cells

In late 2020, a different group of researchers from the University of Bristol revealed they had discovered groundbreaking information that the virus had a pocket on the surface into which they hoped to be able to inject antiviral drugs.43 The virus uses linoleic acid (LA) to attached itself to human cells and then begins to replicate.

According to the original laboratory research,44 the linoleic acid stabilizes the locked SARS-CoV-2 spike to the cell and that reduces angiotensin-converting-enzyme 2 (ACE2) interaction. One of the lead researchers said:45

"We were truly puzzled by our discovery and its implications. So here we have LA, a molecule which is at the center of those functions that go haywire in COVID-19 patients, with terrible consequences. And the virus that is causing all this chaos, according to our data, grabs and holds on to exactly this molecule — basically disarming much of the body's defenses.

Our discovery provides the first direct link between LA, COVID-19 pathological manifestations, and the virus itself. The question now is how to turn this new knowledge against the virus itself and defeat the pandemic.”

I believe that LA is likely the contributing cause of nearly every chronic disease from the last century. In my interview with Tucker Goodrich in December 2020, we discussed the health benefits of avoiding omega-6 fats as a key component to good health. Specifically, omega-6 fats found in vegetable oils and conventionally raised chicken, which are fed LA rich grains.

Linoleic acid accounts for up to 80% of all omega-6 fats, which according to research Goodrich cites makes up nearly 20% of all the energy in a western diet. As Goodrich noted, levels of linoleic acid in the diet are associated with an increased potential for cancer, obesity, heart disease and even sunburn.

Evidence suggests that LA plays a role in severe COVID-19 disease as it helps the virus attach to human cells, giving it the opportunity to replicate and grow. You can see the interview and read more about the significant damage associated with consuming LA in my article, “How Linoleic Acid Wrecks Your Health.”



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

MKRdezign

Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *

Powered by Blogger.
Javascript DisablePlease Enable Javascript To See All Widget