Scientists have produced the first fine-detail molecular blueprints of a bacterial enzyme known as Lit, which is suspected to play a 'stealthy' role in the progression of infection by reducing the immune response. Blueprints such as these allow drug designers to uncover potential weaknesses in bacterial arsenals as they seek to develop new therapeutics that may help us win the war against antibiotic resistance.
from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3esfwlx
The blood-brain barrier protects the brain and is notoriously hard to get past for drug delivery, making it difficult to treat disorders in the central nervous system. In a mice study, a team of researchers used a novel approach to study the barrier and in detail characterized a Trojan horse technique to help to solve the challenge.
from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3AR8jot
Excluding non-melanoma skin cancers, colon and rectal cancers are the third most common types of cancer diagnosed each year in the U.S.1 Scientists have identified several modifiable factors that increase your risk of colorectal cancer, and the most current link is sugar-sweetened drinks, which are very popular in the West.2
Colon and rectal cancers are the third leading cause of death from cancer in men and women, or the second leading cause if you combine the two.3 The American Cancer Society (ACS) estimates there will be 149,500 new cases of colorectal cancer diagnosed in 2021. Experts expect 52,982 to die in 2021 from colorectal cancer.
Although colorectal cancer numbers have been dropping in older adults for the past couple decades because of increased testing and lifestyle changes, scientists believe that this downward trend is masking a rising number of younger adults who are being diagnosed with it.4
In a paper published by the ACS in 2017,5 researchers looked at incident patterns from 1974 to 2013. They wrote that “nearly one-third of rectal cancer patients are younger than age 55 years,”6 which fueled headlines and recommendations that younger people should consider colon cancer screening.
However, it’s not clear whether increasing the number of screenings could reduce the number of people who are diagnosed, as it's a mistake to equate screening with prevention. This is especially true since the ramifications of poor diet and sedentary behavior are catching up at an increasingly younger ages.
So, instead of signaling a need for more testing, the rising number of young adults diagnosed with colorectal cancer should be a wake-up call to reassess your lifestyle. In fact, data from the featured study demonstrate the impact one dietary choice can have on your risk of colorectal cancer.7
Sugary Drinks Increase Risk of Colon Cancer in Young Adults
In this study, a team of researchers from Washington University School of Medicine,8 used data from the national Nurses’ Health Study II to evaluate the relationship between sugar-sweetened beverages and the increasing number of individuals younger than 55 diagnosed with colorectal cancer.9
There were 95,464 women aged 25 to 42 who reported their beverage intake from 1991 to 2015.10 They also examined data from a subset of 41,272 nurses who used a validated high school food frequency questionnaire to report their beverage intake when they were aged 13 to 18.
During the 24-year prospective study, the researchers documented 109 early-onset colorectal cancers in the group. After analyzing the data, they found that individuals who drank two or more 8-ounce servings11 each week of a sugar-sweetened beverage more than doubled their risk of diagnosis as compared to people who drank less than one sugar-sweetened beverage each week.12
The results also appeared to show that the earlier individuals began drinking sugar-sweetened drinks, the higher the risk of early-onset colorectal cancer. In adults, with every additional 8-ounce beverage they drank each week, it increased their risk 16%. However, in the adolescent group, for every additional sugar-sweetened drink each week, their risk of developing the cancer before age 50 rose by 32%.13
The data also showed that when individuals replaced one sugar-sweetened drink with coffee, tea or artificially sweetened beverages, their risk reduced from 17% to 36%. However, as I discuss below, there are additional and dangerous health risks outside of colorectal cancer that are associated with artificial sweeteners.
Caroline H. Johnson is an epidemiologist at the Yale School of Public Health whose interest lies in the environmental risks associated with colorectal cancer. She was not involved in the study but spoke to a reporter from The New York Times about the results, saying,14 “I was really interested to see that the study was on women. The focus has mostly been on males. It will be interesting to see if it’s confirmed in men.”
Interestingly, the researchers did not find an association between drinking fruit juices and early-onset colorectal cancer. During the analysis, the scientists controlled for a variety of external factors that also affect risk, including hormonal use during menopause, smoking, alcohol, race and physical activity.15
One of the researchers commented that while weight gain is a known risk, their analysis controlled for obesity, suggesting the statistical association they found is outside the independent risk of obesity. Senior author Yin Cao, associate professor of surgery and medicine, commented on the results:16
"Despite the small number of cases, there is still a strong signal to suggest that sugar intake, especially in early life, is playing a role down the road in increasing adulthood colorectal cancer risk before age 50.
This study, combined with our past work linking obesity and metabolic conditions to a higher risk of early-onset colorectal cancer, suggests that metabolic problems, such as insulin resistance, may play an important role in the development of this cancer in younger adults."
Artificial Sweeteners Also Carry Significant Risks
Although the featured study did not look for a link between artificial sweeteners and colorectal cancer, past research has confirmed that artificial sweeteners have a significantly negative effect on your health.
For example, one French study17 found people who drank just 6.26 ounces or more each day of sugar-sweetened soda had a higher risk of cardiovascular events over 6.6 years of follow-up18 — but people who drank 5.97 ounces of artificially sweetened beverages experienced a similar increase in cardiovascular disease.
Additionally, these sugar substitutes have a variety of metabolic effects, including a negative impact on your gut microbiome. One recent molecular research study19 from Angelia Ruskin University20 discovered that popular artificial sweeteners, including sucralose (Splenda), aspartame (NutraSweet, Equal and Sugar Twin) and saccharin (Sweet’n Low, Necta Sweet and Sweet Twin) have a pathogenic effect on two types of gut bacteria.
When E. coli and E. faecalis become pathogenic, they kill Caco-2 cells that line the wall of the intestines. Data from the study showed a concentration from two cans of diet soft drinks significantly increased the ability of E coli and E. faecalis to adhere to the Caco-2 cells and increase the development of bacterial biofilms.21
One animal study22 published in the journal Molecules analyzed six artificial sweeteners including saccharin, sucralose, aspartame, neotame, advantame and acesulfame potassium-K. The data showed they all caused DNA damage in, and interfered with, the normal and healthy activity of gut bacteria.
Another study23 showed a link between artificially sweetened soft drinks and death from circulatory diseases and an association between sugar-sweetened soft drinks and death from digestive diseases.24 And, a study published in April 202125 confirmed earlier rodent studies that showed “aspartame is a chemical carcinogen” that can increase the risk of cancer in offspring that are exposed to it in utero.
This suggests that policies aimed at cutting or reducing sugar consumption may have disastrous consequences when manufacturers reformulate their products using artificial sweeteners.
Vitamin D Deficiency in Older Adults Linked With Colon Cancer
New evidence published in BMC Public Health26 revealed an aged dependent inverse link between exposure to ultraviolet B (UVB) light and the incidence of colorectal cancer. The data were gathered over 186 countries using UVB estimates and the incident rates of colorectal cancer.
The researchers made the association between UVB light and the manufacturer of vitamin D in the body since vitamin D has limited dietary sources. Inadequate vitamin D status has been identified as a risk factor in the development of colorectal cancer and has a potential protective action.
Past research demonstrates that taking at least 1,000 international units of vitamin D each day can reduce the risk of colorectal cancer by up to 50%.27 While analyzing the data, the researchers accounted for factors that may affect the results, such as smoking, skin pigmentation and age.28
The authors suggested that lower UVB exposure may lower an individual's levels of vitamin D. Since deficiency has been associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer in the past, the researchers used UVB data to estimate vitamin D levels. Lack of exposure to UVB was correlated with higher rates of colorectal cancer in all age groups living in all countries that were included in the study.
However, the association between lower exposure and higher risk of cancer was more significant in those over age 45. Raphael Cuomo, Ph.D., is a public health scientist from the University of California, San Diego, and co-author of the current study. He commented in a press release:29
"Differences in UVB light accounted for a large amount of the variation we saw in colorectal cancer rates, especially for people over age 45. Although this is still preliminary evidence, it may be that older individuals, in particular, may reduce their risk of colorectal cancer by correcting deficiencies in vitamin D."
Risks Associated With Screening Tests
The risk of colorectal cancer must be balanced against the risk of the testing procedures. Depending on the data source, the risk of death from a colonoscopy may be 1 out of every 16,318 procedures30 to 1 out of every 1,000 procedures.31 As of 2018, there were nearly 19 million colonoscopies being performed each year in the U.S.32
This means if you use the lower comparison of 1 in every 1,000, as many as 19,000 Americans may die as the result of a routine screening test. According to on paper, serious complications, injury or death from a colonoscopy is 0.5%, or about 95,000 per year.33
An alternate method of testing for colorectal cancer, virtual colonoscopy, appears to have minimal risk. However, the X-ray exposure from a virtual colonoscopy raises your lifetime risk of all forms of cancer by 20%.34 As noted by GutSense.org:35
"Virtual colonoscopies are now recommended every five years. By age 70 one's risk of developing any other form of cancer grows to 100 percent. Killing you with another form of cancer before the colon gets affected is one hell of [a] way to 'prevent' colon cancer."
Perforation of the colon, which occurs at a rate of 0.9 out of every 1,000 procedures.37 Research38 shows the risk of death after a perforation was 51.9 per 1,000 colonoscopy perforations and 64.5 per 1000 sigmoidoscopy perforations.
Dysbiosis and other gut imbalances, caused by the process of flushing out your intestinal tract before the procedure with harsh laxatives.39
Complications from the anesthesia.40 In addition to the expected complications from anesthesia, during a colonoscopy anesthesia increased the risk of complications by 13% within 30 days after the procedure and specifically was associated with an increased risk of perforation.
Infections caused by poorly disinfected scopes.41
Tips to Prevent Colorectal Cancer
Data show there are non-modifiable and modifiable risk factors for colorectal cancer.42 Some of the non-modifiable risk factors include race, sex, age, inflammatory bowel disease and abdominal radiation. Modifiable risk factors are those over which you have control and may reduce your risk of colorectal cancer.
These include obesity, physical activity, diet, smoking, alcohol and certain medications. People with diabetes and insulin resistance also have an increased risk related to the metabolic shift that promotes carcinogenic activity.43
Below are several diet and fitness suggestions that may significantly lower your risk of colorectal cancer, regardless of your age:
Eat more vegetables — Vegetables contain an array of antioxidants and other disease-fighting compounds that are very difficult to get anywhere else, such as magnesium. Results from one meta-analysis indicated that higher intakes of magnesium resulted in a lower risk of colorectal cancer.44
Eat more fiber — For optimal health, I recommend getting about 50 grams of fiber per 1,000 calories. If you follow the tip above and eat more vegetables, you'll naturally be eating more fiber from the best possible source.
Optimize your vitamin D level — Vitamin D deficiency is a risk factor for colorectal cancer. Sensible ultraviolet exposure, ideally from the sun, and/or vitamin D3 supplementation can get your vitamin D levels into the optimal range of 45 to 60 nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL). You'll need to monitor your level to be sure you stay within this target range.
Lower your protein intake and avoid processed meats entirely — Most Americans eat far more protein than they need, thereby raising their risk for cancer. A more ideal protein intake is likely around one-half gram of protein per pound of lean body mass. Avoid processed meats of all kinds.
Get regular exercise — There's convincing evidence that regular exercise can significantly reduce your risk of colon cancer.45 For instance, one study46 showed physically active men and women have about a 30% to 40% reduction in the risk of developing colon cancer compared with inactive persons.
Maintain a healthy weight and control belly fat — Several studies have linked obesity to an increased risk for about a dozen different cancers, including colon cancer. Losing excess belly fat is particularly important, as belly fat is linked to an increased risk of colon cancer regardless of your body weight.47
Limit alcohol and quit smoking — Both excessive alcohol intake and smoking are associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer.
Eat more garlic — Research has shown those who consume high amounts of raw garlic have a lower risk of stomach and colorectal cancers.48
Drink soursop tea — Drinking tea made from soursop leaves may help reduce the risk of colon cancer. A PLOS One study49 notes that the leaves contain a compound named "annomuricin E," which has apoptosis-inducing effects against colon cancer cell lines.
In the featured video, which aired June 22, 2021, independent reporter Stew Peters plays an audio recording1 made by a young woman who suddenly developed Guillain-Barre syndrome after her Moderna injection. Her neurologist believes her condition is the direct result of the COVID shot.
While the neurologist filed an adverse event report with the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS), the woman decided to report it to Moderna as well. The Moderna rep does not appear the least surprised by the injury, and appears to admit he’s received similar reports before.
Everyone Who Gets the Jab Is Part of the Safety Trial
During that call, the Moderna representative reads her the following disclaimer:
“The Moderna COVID-19 vaccine has not been approved or licensed by the Food and Drug Administration, but it has been authorized for emergency use by the FDA under an emergency use authorization to prevent coronavirus disease 2019, for use in individuals 18 years of age and older.
There is no FDA-approved vaccine to prevent COVID-19. The EUA for the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine is in effect for the duration of the COVID-19 EUA declaration, justifying emergency use of the product unless that declaration is terminated or the authorization is revoked sooner.”
The rep also points out that all clinical trial phases are still ongoing, and that long-term protective efficacy against COVID-19 is unknown. When the patient asks whether everyone who gets the COVID shot — even if they did not specifically sign up to be a trial participant — is in fact part of the clinical trial, he replies, with a chuckle, “pretty much, yeah.”
So, in a nutshell, while vaccine makers, health authorities, mainstream media, social media platforms like Facebook and public advertisements tell you the vaccine has undergone rigorous testing, has been “approved” and is safe and effective, none of those claims are true.
The shots have received emergency use authorization only, which is completely different from regular FDA approval and licensing. They don’t know how effective the shot is, or how long the effects last, and they don’t know if it’s safe, because the trials have not been completed. In fact, the public vaccination campaign is a big part of those trials, whether people realize it or not.
Children Are Being Coerced into Medical Experimentation
This makes the push to inject children and teens all the more disturbing. Vaccine manufacturers have received EUA for children as young as 12,2 and parents are now being told their children “must” participate in what is a medical experiment.
People are being told it’s their social “duty” to participate in a medical experiment. People are told they have to participate in a medical experiment or lose their job or educational prospects. What’s happening here is no different than being told you “must” participate in a new cancer drug trial in order to keep your job or attend school. It’s completely absurd, unethical and illegal.3,4,5
When people do get the shot, they are not informed that they’re taking part in a medical experiment and they’re not asked to sign a consent form (as this particular requirement is waived under EUA rules). While consent forms are waived under an EUA, providing truthful information about potential side effects is not.
It’s really important to realize that coercing people to participate in medical experimentation violates long-established research ethics rules. If you wanted to perform a medical study and decided to lure participants with free ice cream or a free Playstation, the ethics committee would shut down your project.
The problem here is that the COVID-19 injection trials have no oversight boards. There’s no Data Safety Monitoring Board, no Clinical Event Committee and no Clinical Ethics Committee. This despite the fact that such oversight is standard practice for all human research. If such committees do exist, they’ve not been announced and no standard reports have been published.
Myocarditis Update
Peters also addresses an increasingly common side effect, namely myocarditis, i.e., heart inflammation. Animal research performed by Masonic Medical Research Institute researchers in collaboration with the Boston Children’s Hospital was posted on the preprint server bioRxiv, June 20, 2021.6
The study, “Selectively Expressing SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein S1 Subunit in Cardiomyocytes Induces Cardiac Hypertrophy in Mice,”7 found that the spike protein itself (without the rest of the virus) “directly impairs endothelial function.” As it turns out, the S1 subunit of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein activates NF-kB, a protein that controls not only the transcription of DNA but also cellular survival, cytokine production and secondary inflammation.
This disease process does not involve the ACE2 receptor but rather the toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4), which is responsible for the detection of pathogens and the initiation of innate immune responses. In summary, the research showed spike protein subunit “caused heart dysfunction, induced hypertrophic remodeling and elicited cardiac inflammation.”
“Since CoV-2-S does not interact with murine ACE2, our study presents a novel ACE2-independent pathological role of CoV-2-S [SARS-CoV-2], and suggests that the circulating CoV-2-S1 [CoV-2-spike protein subunit 1] is a TLR4-recognizable alarmin that may harm the CMs [cardiomyocytes, i.e., heart cells] by triggering their innate immune responses,” the authors state.8
In short, the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein subunit directly damages the heart and causes myocarditis by triggering an exaggerated immune response — a cytokine storm — in the heart cells.
Importantly, hypertrophic remodeling means this is a permanent reshaping and damage of the heart, which refutes claims that the hundreds of myocarditis cases reported to VAERS are of little concern and that their hearts will eventually heal. I believe those assumptions will be found to be wrong, and that many of them may be left with permanently damaged hearts.
‘They Knew What They Were Doing’
As noted by Jane Ruby, Ph.D., on the Stew Peters Show, this research should have been done before these injections were put out into the public domain. Instead of conducting rigorous animal trials, vaccine makers are using the public as guinea pigs in one of the biggest experiments in human history, making tens of billions of dollars in profits while enjoying absolute immunity from any damage their experimental jabs cause.
By falsely labeling these gene modification tools as vaccines (because gene therapy does not qualify as a pandemic treatment that can be granted immunity against liability), they’ve been given the green light to conduct human experimentation without remuneration, informed consent or liability under the guise of a public health emergency.
There’s no way these gene therapies in any rational society would have been released to be tested on this many human subjects, including pregnant women and children, were it not for this sinister misrepresentation.
Here’s the most disturbing part, though: It appears these COVID injections may have been designed to cause this kind of cell damage on purpose. Why? Because the researchers also tested the natural spike protein subunit of another coronavirus called NL63.
This virus was chosen because it, like SARS-CoV-2, uses the ACE2 receptor for entry into the human cell. The NL63 spike protein did not, however, trigger this kind of heart damage. “They knew what they were doing when they engineered this mRNA to make this particular spike protein,” Ruby says.
Pfizer Injection Victim Speaks Out
In the video above, Peters interviews Stevie Thrasher, a previously healthy 29-year-old in Washington state who got her first Pfizer shot April 27, 2021. Since then, she’s been hospitalized nine times, and her doctor has confirmed her injuries are a direct result of the Pfizer mRNA injection. Her neurologist has told her not to get a second dose.
One of her first symptoms was severe menstrual bleeding. After that, she started experiencing severe body pains, muscle weakness and muscle failure, fatigue, dizziness and disorientation. Since her shot, she’s been in the hospital nine times, had three neurological evaluations and received referrals to rheumatologists and immunologists.
Remarkably, despite the severity of her symptoms, all tests, including imaging and blood work, appear normal, with the exception of an ANA blood test (a test that detects antinuclear antibodies that can attack your own tissues) indicating she might have an autoimmune condition, although it’s unclear which one.
Her doctors have thus far been unable to explain why her test results are all normal while she’s clearly experiencing symptoms of disease, and all she’s been diagnosed with so far is “adverse reaction to Pfizer COVID vaccine with myalgias.” As you can see in the video above, she has involuntary tremors. She says they come and go depending on circumstances. Triggers include sunlight, heat, elevation, stress and physical activity.
While Thrasher was warned of the possibility of blood clots and anaphylactic reactions, she was not informed there may be neurological and autoimmune side effects. “If I had known this was a possibility, I would have turned around and ran,” she tells Peters.
Unvaccinated Falsely Accused of Being ‘Disease Factories’
Adding insult to injury, mainstream media are now pushing the idea that those who refuse the COVID shot are to blame for the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants, even though a number of health experts have warned that it’s the complete opposite — that mass injections, causing a very narrow band of antibodies, are forcing more rapid mutations of the virus.9
It’s a general principle in biology, vaccinology and microbiology, that if you put living organisms like bacteria or viruses under pressure, via antibiotics or antibodies, 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.
If an individual who does not have a narrow band of antibodies becomes infected, then, if mutation does occur, it’s far less likely to result in a more aggressive virus. So, while mutation can occur in both vaccinated and unvaccinated people, vaccinated individuals are actually far more likely to pressure the virus into a mutation that strengthens it and makes it more dangerous. Alas, according to CNN:10
“Unvaccinated people do more than merely risk their own health. They're also a risk to everyone if they become infected with coronavirus, infectious disease specialists say. That's because the only source of new coronavirus variants is the body of an infected person.
‘Unvaccinated people are potential variant factories,’ Dr. William Schaffner, a professor in the Division of Infectious Diseases at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, told CNN … ‘The more unvaccinated people there are, the more opportunities for the virus to multiply,’ Schaffner said.”
What Schaffner and CNN fail to address is the confirmed fact that the COVID shot does not provide immune protection against a SARS-CoV-2 infection. So those who have gotten the injection can also become hosts to the virus, just like those who have haven’t been scammed into taking the COVID jab.
There’s absolutely no medical justification for singling out unvaccinated people as the sole disease vectors, or the sole vectors for mutation. Breakthrough cases in fully “vaccinated” people prove this point. Unfortunately, vaccinated individuals are not informed about the potential that they might experience antibody‐dependent enhancement (ADE) or paradoxical immune enhancement (PIE), which may actually render them more susceptible to infection by variants.11
If that turns out to be the case, and there are already indicators suggesting this is happening,12,13,14,15,16,17 then vaccinating even more people is not the answer. Unvaccinated individuals cannot be held responsible for what happens to those who volunteered to take part in this mass experiment, or be asked to “save” those people by putting their own health at risk.
Control Groups Destroyed on Purpose
Disturbingly, all the evidence points to vaccine makers and health agencies not wanting to identify problems with these shots. Despite this being the largest medical experiment in human history, vaccine makers are purposely eliminating their control groups so that injuries will be far more difficult to ascertain, since they won’t have anything to compare the vaccine recipients against.
In a JAMA report,18 Rita Rubin, senior writer for JAMA medical news and perspectives, quotes the chief scientific adviser for Operation Warp Speed, Moncref Slaoui, Ph.D., saying he thinks “it’s very important that we unblind the trial at once and offer the placebo group vaccines” because trial participants “should be rewarded” for their participation.
Such statements violate the very basics of what a safety trial needs, which is a control group against which you can compare the effects of the drug in question over the long term. I find it inconceivable that unblinding was even considered, seeing how the core studies have not even concluded yet, and some standard safety studies have been bypassed entirely.
For example, Pfizer has not conducted any reproductive toxicology studies despite finding the mRNA and spike protein accumulates in the ovaries. The only purpose of this unblinding is to conceal the fact that these injections are unsafe. Safety evaluations have also been undermined by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which chose not to require vaccine makers to implement robust post-injection data collection and follow-up on the general public.
What Is the Mass Injection Campaign Really All About?
It’s obvious the COVID injection manufacturers intentionally removed every safety monitoring control because they wanted to obfuscate the anticipated complications that were certain to occur. They wanted to prevent as many complications as possible from surfacing. Safety is clearly not something they are concerned about.
Think about it: If the vaccination campaign were about creating a high rate of immunity within the population, they would accept natural immunity to COVID as an alternative to the jab. But they don’t. Even if you can prove you have high levels of antibodies from natural infection, you still must get the COVID shot if you want to attend school or keep your job in some areas, and natural immunity does not count if you want a COVID immunity passport.
This means the injections are NOT about creating herd immunity. They want a needle in every arm for some other reason. What do you think that reason might be? Many who have pondered this question have reached the conclusion that whatever the reason might be, it’s a nefarious one.
At a minimum, this campaign is about getting a needle in every arm to maximize their profits. At its extreme worst, it could be part of a cleverly constructed depopulation strategy.
Michael Yeadon, Ph.D., a life science researcher and former vice-president and chief scientist of allergy and respiratory research at Pfizer, has gone on record saying he believes the COVID-19 injections, and the upcoming boosters in particular, are a “serious attempt at mass depopulation.”19
In my view, there are still so many potential avenues of harm and so many uncertainties, I would encourage everyone to do your homework, keep reading and learning, weigh the potential pros and cons, and take your time when deciding whether to get any of these COVID-19 gene therapies. If you have already had one, think long and hard before getting any boosters.
1Which of the following has resulted in the greatest number of severe injuries and deaths over the past three decades?
MMR vaccine
COVID-19 gene therapy injections
The reported rate of death from COVID-19 shots exceeds the reported death rate of more than 70 vaccines combined over the past 30 years. The COVID shots are also five times more dangerous than the pandemic H1N1 vaccine, which had a 25-per-million severe side effect rate. Learn more.
Diabecon (an herbal antidiabetic)
Seasonal influenza vaccine
2June 16, 2021, the Wikipedia page for mRNA vaccines was updated in which of the following ways?
Information about hazards were deleted
An FDA warning that children should not receive the COVID jabs was wiped
The name of the inventor of the mRNA vaccine technology, Dr. Robert Malone, was erased from the history section
June 11, 2021, the inventor of the mRNA vaccine technology, Dr. Robert Malone, spoke out on the DarkHorse podcast about the potential dangers of COVID-19 gene therapy injections. The podcast was quickly erased from YouTube. Five days later, his scientific contributions were scrubbed from Wikipedia's mRNA vaccine page. Learn more.
Details on how to file an adverse events report were scrubbed
3Which of the following science journals has promoted the natural origin theory for SARS-CoV-2, and protected the theory by refusing to publish counter arguments and/or publishing scientific statements by individuals with serious conflicts of interest?
Science Magazine
Bulletin of the Chemical Society
Helvetica Chimica Acta
The Lancet
The Lancet and Nature have promoted the natural origin theory for SARS-CoV-2, and protected the theory by refusing to publish counter arguments and/or publishing scientific statements by individuals with serious conflicts of interest. Learn more.
4It's becoming increasingly clear that use of vitamin D in patients with COVID-19:
Significantly reduces ICU admission and death
Again, vitamin D was a clear winner, with use in COVID-19 patients significantly associated with reduced ICU admission and mortality, along with a reduced risk of adverse outcomes, particularly when given after COVID-19 diagnosis. Learn more.
Is too expensive to justify on a large scale
Leads to longer hospital stays
Is not feasible due to vitamin D's scarcity
5Moderna and NIAID's transfer of information related to their mRNA coronavirus vaccines to the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in December 2019 is alarming because:
The researchers didn't send them to more universities
It occurred before there was a known COVID-19 pandemic
Baric, who signed the material transfer agreement to investigate the mRNA coronavirus vaccine candidate before there was a known COVID-19 pandemic, pioneered techniques for genetically manipulating coronaviruses, according to Peter Gøtzsche with the Institute for Scientific Freedom, and these became a major focus for WIV. Learn more.
The information should have remained confidential
The vaccine candidates weren't effective
6Which of the following is the gold standard of scientific evidence for or against a given medical product?
Randomized controlled trials
Cohort studies
Meta-analyses
Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials are the gold standard of scientific evidence. The reason for this is because any given trial can be skewed by any number of protocol factors. When you do a meta-analysis of several trials, even if those trials are small, you have the best chance of detecting signals of danger or benefit because it corrects for flaws in the various protocols. Learn more.
Case-control studies
7Which of the following is the most important when you develop symptoms of COVID-19?
Get an mRNA COVID injection
Get a viral vector DNA COVID shot
Stay home and get plenty of bedrest
Start treatment at home
Early treatment is key for positive COVID outcomes, so start treatment at home, and do it early. An estimated 85% of COVID deaths could have been prevented had early treatment protocols been widely implemented rather than censored. Learn more.
One of the simplest and most enjoyable ways to up the health ante of your meals is by adding herbs and spices, and in the realm of spices, turmeric and its active ingredient curcumin may be king.
If you're a fan of curry, you're probably also a fan of turmeric, as this is the yellow-orange spice that makes the foundation of many curry dishes. It's a great addition to your diet, but to get the full benefits curcumin has to offer, look for a turmeric extract that contains 100 percent certified organic ingredients and at least 95 percent curcuminoids.
Research is emerging showing that this potent spice may play a beneficial role in preventing and treating numerous chronic diseases, and may offer promise in helping people deal with obesity and obesity-related metabolic diseases.
Does Curcumin Boost Weight Loss?
Research in the European Journal of Nutrition suggests that curcumin may be useful for the treatment and prevention of obesity-related chronic diseases, as the interactions of curcumin with several signal transduction pathways -- the process by which biological functions are recognized -- also reverse insulin resistance, hyperglycemia, hyperlipidemia, and other inflammatory symptoms associated with obesity and metabolic disorders.
Curcumin is known for its potent anti-inflammatory properties, and chronic inflammation is the hallmark of most chronic disease, including diabetes, arthritis, and heart disease. But many people are not aware that obesity contributes to a state of low-grade, chronic inflammation in your body that can trigger metabolic disorders such as insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes. Curcumin appears to modulate several cellular transduction pathways that contribute to this damaging process.
"These findings might enable novel phytochemical treatment strategies as well as curcumin translation to the clinical practice for the treatment and prevention of obesity-related chronic diseases. Furthermore, the relatively low cost of curcumin, safety and proven efficacy make it advisable to include curcumin as part of a healthy diet."
Past research has revealed similar findings, including that curcumin reduces the formation of fat tissue by suppressing the blood vessels needed to form it. As the researchers stated:
"Our results clearly demonstrate that curcumin at cellular and whole organism levels displays remarkable potential health benefits for prevention of obesity and associated metabolic disorders."
Weight Loss is Just the Icing on the Cake
The benefits of curcumin go way beyond weight loss. The compound has been shown to influence more than 700 genes, and it can inhibit both the activity and the synthesis of cyclooxygenase-2 (COX2) and 5-lipooxygenase (5-LOX), as well as other enzymes that have been implicated in inflammation.
But that's not all. Curcumin currently has the most evidence-based literature supporting its use against cancer than any other nutrient. Interestingly this also includes the metabolite of curcumin and its derivatives, which are also anti-cancerous. Best of all, curcumin appears to be safe in the treatment of all cancers. Researchers have found that curcumin can affect more than 100 different pathways, once it gets into the cell.
More specifically, curcumin has been found to:
✓ Inhibit the proliferation of tumor cells
✓ Decrease inflammation
✓ Inhibit the transformation of cells from normal to tumor
✓ Inhibit the synthesis of a protein thought to be instrumental in tumor formation
✓ Help your body destroy mutated cancer cells so they cannot spread throughout your body
✓ Help prevent the development of additional blood supply necessary for cancer cell growth (angiogenesis)
However, much of curcumin's power seems to lie in its ability to modulate genetic activity and expression -- both by destroying cancer cells and by promoting healthy cell function. As such, evidence suggests curcumin may play a beneficial role in the following conditions:
You can use turmeric in your cooking (choose a pure turmeric powder, rather than a curry powder, as at least one study has found that curry powders tend to contain very little curcumin), but you may also want to consider taking it in supplement form. For many this is a more convenient method to obtain the potential health benefits, especially if it is from a high-quality organic source, and also if you don't particularly enjoy the taste of curry.
Unfortunately, at the present time there really are no formulations available for the use against cancer, as relatively high doses are required and curcumin is not absorbed that well.
According to Dr. William LaValley, one of the leading medicine cancer physicians I personally know, typical anticancer doses are up to three grams of good bioavailable curcumin extract, three to four times daily. One work-around is to use the curcumin powder and make a microemulsion of it by combining a tablespoon of the powder and mixing it into 1-2 egg yolks and a teaspoon or two of melted coconut oil. Then use a high-speed hand blender to emulsify the powder.
Another strategy that can help increase absorption is to put one tablespoon of the curcumin powder into a quart of boiling water. It must be boiling when you add the powder as it will not work as well if you put it in room temperature water and heat the water and curcumin. After boiling it for ten minutes you will have created a 12 percent solution that you can drink once it has cooled down. It will have a woody taste.
The curcumin will gradually fall out of solution however. In about six hours it will be a 6 percent solution, so it's best to drink the water within four hours. Be aware that curcumin is a very potent yellow pigment and can permanently discolor surfaces if you aren't careful.
Be Sure Your Weight Loss Strategy is Comprehensive
It can't hurt to add curcumin to your comprehensive weight loss program, but it should not be your only strategy for weight loss if you're currently overweight or obese.
You can read an in-depth explanation of the common factors that contribute to weight loss here, but the key is the quality of your calories and exercise. Typically you will need to replace grains and sugars, including fructose, with high-quality protein and fats AND add in high-intensity exercise training like Peak Fitness. I realize that this might conflict with your previous understanding of a healthy diet, but that is clearly what the bulk of the science and anecdotal evidence supports.
German-American supermodel and mother of four Heidi Klum gets real with Body+Soul about the modelling industry, body diversity and the long-awaited changes at Victoria’s Secret.
