This documentary sheds light on the shocking truth behind the consumption of vegetable oils, revealing how they may be far more harmful to our health than previously thought. The film follows the history of these oils, their rise to ubiquity in our diets, and the serious implications for our long-term health. Let’s break down the key moments and insights covered in the documentary.
0:00 - The Switcheroo The film opens by describing what the creators call "The Switcheroo"—a shift in public perception that occurred in the mid-20th century. Animal fats, which had been a dietary staple for centuries, were suddenly demonized, while vegetable oils were promoted as a heart-healthy alternative. This switch, the documentary argues, was based on questionable science and driven by powerful food and medical organizations. 1:52 - History of Vegetable Oils The documentary delves into the origins of vegetable oils, originally introduced as cheap by-products of the industrial revolution. These oils, including canola, soybean, and corn oil, were never part of the human diet until modern processing techniques made them readily available. Despite their industrial beginnings, they quickly found their way into the food supply as replacements for butter and lard. 3:50 - Enter the American Heart Association The American Heart Association (AHA) played a pivotal role in promoting vegetable oils as a healthier alternative to saturated fats. Backed by commercial interests, the AHA endorsed vegetable oils to help reduce cholesterol and prevent heart disease. The film points out, however, that this was based on flawed studies that failed to address the negative long-term effects of these oils. 5:27 - The Massive Increase in Vegetable Oil Consumption Since the mid-20th century, the consumption of vegetable oils has skyrocketed. The documentary highlights data showing a dramatic increase in the use of vegetable oils in processed foods, leading to widespread exposure to their harmful effects. 6:06 - Is Vegetable Oil Bad or Benign? While some argue that vegetable oils are neutral or even beneficial, the documentary challenges this notion. It raises questions about whether these oils are truly benign, pointing to emerging evidence of their links to chronic diseases and oxidative stress in the body. 6:55 - Why do some animals live longer than others? In this segment, the film explores how the types of fats consumed by different animals affect their longevity. Animals that consume saturated fats tend to live longer, while those that rely on polyunsaturated fats—like those found in vegetable oils—show shorter lifespans. This raises concerns about how human health might be impacted by the widespread use of these oils. 7:51 - Vegetable Oil Stays in Your Body for Years The documentary provides startling information about how vegetable oils accumulate in our tissues and remain in the body for years. These oils are stored in fat cells and can lead to inflammation and oxidative damage over time, contributing to the development of various diseases. 9:11 - Hidden Data Throughout the documentary, the creators expose hidden data that was either ignored or suppressed by the food and medical industries. This includes studies that revealed the harmful effects of vegetable oils but were never given public attention due to commercial interests. 12:08 - Vegetable Oils are in EVERYTHING One of the most alarming points is just how pervasive vegetable oils have become. They are found in nearly all processed foods, from snacks to salad dressings. The documentary emphasizes how difficult it is to avoid these oils, making it almost impossible for consumers to make informed choices about their health. 13:07 - Why Vegetable Oils are Bad for Health The film explains that vegetable oils are high in omega-6 fatty acids, which promote inflammation in the body when consumed in excess. Chronic inflammation is a known contributor to heart disease, cancer, and autoimmune conditions. The imbalance between omega-6 and omega-3 fatty acids in modern diets is a key factor in the negative health outcomes associated with vegetable oil consumption. 15:04 - The Toxic Oxidation Products When vegetable oils are heated, they produce toxic oxidation products, including aldehydes and other harmful compounds. These substances can damage cells, tissues, and DNA, increasing the risk of diseases such as cancer and neurodegenerative conditions. The film underscores the importance of avoiding fried foods cooked in vegetable oils. 16:28 - How Vegetable Oils are Made The documentary offers a detailed look at the industrial process used to create vegetable oils, which involves high heat, chemical solvents, and deodorizers. This process strips the oils of any beneficial nutrients and creates harmful by-products. The film suggests that these oils are far from the "natural" products they are often marketed as. 18:33 - Are Vegetable Oils Linked to Alzheimer’s? Emerging research is exploring the potential link between vegetable oils and Alzheimer’s disease. The documentary discusses how the inflammatory and oxidative properties of these oils may contribute to the development of neurodegenerative diseases by damaging brain cells over time. 20:06 - Mitochondria, The Powerhouse of the Cell The film highlights the role of mitochondria—the cell’s energy producers—in relation to vegetable oil consumption. It argues that the toxic by-products of these oils can impair mitochondrial function, leading to reduced energy production, fatigue, and an increased risk of chronic illness. 24:35 - Most Studies on Vegetable Oils Aren’t Long Enough Many studies that claim vegetable oils are safe are often too short to capture the long-term effects of consumption. The documentary argues that because these oils accumulate in the body over time, their health impacts may not become apparent until much later in life. Longer studies are needed to truly understand the risks. 26:04 - Why Aren’t More People Talking About This? The documentary concludes by exploring why the dangers of vegetable oils are not more widely discussed. It points to conflicts of interest in the food and pharmaceutical industries, where financial incentives often overshadow public health concerns. Despite mounting evidence, the widespread promotion of vegetable oils continues, leaving consumers unaware of the potential harm. The documentary presents a compelling case against the consumption of vegetable oils, revealing the hidden dangers of these seemingly harmless products. From their inflammatory effects to their role in chronic disease, the film makes a strong argument for rethinking the way we approach fats in our diet. With vegetable oils found in nearly every processed food, it’s important for consumers to be aware of the potential risks and seek healthier alternatives.
0 Comments
The COVID-19 pandemic led to a unforeseen advancement in medical product technology with the emergency use authorization of the first-ever mRNA gene technology ("COVID vaccines")—BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) and mRNA-1273 (Moderna). These "vaccines" utilized synthetic mRNA molecules that encode the SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein, encapsulated in synthetic lipid nanoparticles (LNPs), allowing for the widespread delivery of mRNA into virtually all human cells. This technology is intended to mimic a natural infection, enabling the host cells to produce the viral spike protein (which happens to induce the well-known cytokine storm, and lasts for months), which then triggers a hyperactive immune response that can lead to severe inflammation and damage to tissues. One of the more concerning observations is that mRNA vaccines may stimulate the production of IgG4 antibodies, otherwise known as immunoglobulin G, subtype 4. More specifically, IgG4 antibodies induced by repeated vaccination appear to generate immune tolerance to the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. Immune tolerance means the immune system is less likely to mount a strong inflammatory response to the antigen (in this case, the Spike protein of SARS-CoV-2), which can lead to a host of various immune problems, including but not limited to cancer. "Emerging evidence suggests that the reported increase in IgG4 levels detected after repeated vaccination with the mRNA vaccines may not be a protective mechanism; rather, it constitutes an immune tolerance mechanism to the spike protein that could promote unopposed SARS-CoV2 infection and replication by suppressing natural antiviral responses." What are immunoglobulins?Immunoglobulins (antibodies) play a vital role in the human immune system, acting as the primary defense against infections and foreign substances. Among the various immunoglobulin classes (IgA, IgE, IgM, and IgG), IgG is the most abundant and is subdivided into four subclasses: IgG1, IgG2, IgG3, and IgG4. These subclasses differ in their structure, physiological roles, and interaction with immune cells. While IgG1 is the most common, accounting for the majority of serum immunoglobulins (66%), IgG4 represents a smaller fraction (4%) but has gained significant interest due to its unique properties and effects on the immune system. Structure and Unusual Behavior of IgG4IgG4 differs from other subclasses due to its limited ability to activate the complement system, a key immune mechanism responsible for destroying infected cells. This characteristic has led to IgG4 being classified as an unusual antibody. One of its most intriguing features is Fab arm exchange, a process in which the two halves of an IgG4 antibody can dissociate and recombine with halves from other IgG4 antibodies. This creates bi-specific antibodies with two distinct Fab arms, reducing their ability to form immune complexes and stimulate immune responses. IgG4 antibodies have low affinity for C1q and Fc receptors, which limits their capacity to initiate effector responses. However, this bi-specific structure enables IgG4 to potentially block the inflammatory effects of other antibody classes, such as IgG1 or IgE, by displacing their antigen-binding capabilities. This property contributes to IgG4's role as a "blocking antibody", known for its anti-inflammatory effects. Think of C1q as a "signal booster" in the immune system. When an antibody (like other IgGs) sticks to a virus or bacteria, C1q can attach to the antibody and kickstart a bigger immune response. This response helps destroy the invader by activating a defense system called the complement system, which can puncture the bad cell or attract more immune cells to the area to help fight. However, IgG4 doesn’t do this as effectively as other types of IgG antibodies. It has a much weaker ability to call on C1q, meaning it doesn't start this complement attack as strongly. This makes IgG4 more of a "quiet observer" in some situations, which can be helpful in avoiding too much inflammation. Fc receptors are like "docking stations" found on the surface of immune cells. These docking stations grab onto the "tail" end of antibodies (this part of the antibody is called the Fc region) and help immune cells, like phagocytes (cells that eat invaders), detect and destroy harmful germs or infected cells. IgG4 doesn’t bind well to these Fc receptors, so it doesn’t trigger a strong immune attack like other antibodies (such as IgG1). In Other Words:
IgG4-Related Systemic DiseaseIgG4 is linked to a broad range of clinical conditions, collectively referred to as IgG4-related systemic disease. This condition involves multiple organs, characterized by significant fibrosis, infiltration of IgG4-positive plasma cells, and dispersed immune cell infiltrates. Although the disease can affect different organs, common histological (anatomical tissue) features are observed, such as tissue fibrosis and immune cell infiltration. IgG4: Friend or Foe?The role of IgG4 in human health is complex, with evidence pointing to both protective and pathogenic effects. In allergy immunotherapy, for example, IgG4 is often viewed as a protective antibody due to its ability to reduce inflammation and prevent IgE-mediated allergic reactions. Elevated levels of antigen-specific IgG4 are associated with successful desensitization to allergens, allowing for the development of immune tolerance. During prolonged exposure to allergens, IgG4 competes with IgE for antigen binding, effectively neutralizing allergic responses without activating immune effector cells. However, IgG4 can also be involved in pathogenic processes. In some autoimmune diseases, such as pemphigus vulgaris (autoimmune disease that causes blistering of the skin and mucous membranes, such as the mouth, throat, and genitals), IgG4 plays a role in the disease’s progression by contributing to tissue damage. Additionally, IgG4 has been linked to the suppression of immune responses in certain types of cancer, where its blocking ability may inhibit the immune system's capacity to fight tumor cells. Protective Role in Allergy ImmunotherapyIn the context of allergy immunotherapy, IgG4’s lack of effector function and its capacity for half-antibody exchange raise questions about its role in modulating immune responses. Several studies have demonstrated that high levels of antigen-specific IgG4 are associated with successful outcomes in allergen-specific immunotherapy. This is because IgG4 can inhibit the effects of IgE, the antibody responsible for allergic reactions. Through allergen-specific memory T- and B-cell responses, the immune system adapts to tolerate allergens, reducing chronic inflammation and allergic responses. This process is crucial for building a more robust and balanced immune system. IgG4-Related Disease and Its PathogenesisIgG4-related disease (IgG4-RD) is a condition that causes inflammation and tissue damage in various parts of the body. It is marked by high levels of a specific type of immune cell called IgG4 plasma cells, which are found in the affected tissues, and higher-than-normal levels of IgG4 antibodies in the blood. IgG4-RD includes a wide variety of diseases:
It also plays a significant role in the pathogenesis of at least 13 autoimmune disorders, including rheumatoid arthritis, and myasthenia gravis. The clinical manifestations of IgG4-RD are usually tumor-like masses or organ enlargement, which result from dense tissue infiltration by immune cells and expansion of the extra-cellular matrix. One or more organs are affected; the 11 organs considered typical of IgG4-RD including the:
In certain autoimmune diseases, IgG4 levels correlate with disease severity, and in experimental models, IgG4 has been shown to cause disease manifestations when injected into animals. This indicates the pathogenic role of IgG4 in these disorders. IgG4’s Role in CancerRecent studies suggest that IgG4 antibodies may play a role in immune evasion by cancer cells, contributing to cancer progression. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICBs) are commonly used in cancer immunotherapy to block proteins like PD-1 (programmed cell death protein 1) and allow the immune system to attack cancer cells. However, IgG4 antibodies, including PD-1 antibodies, have been linked to cases of rapid disease progression, known as hyper-progressive disease (HPD). IgG4 antibodies were found to interfere with anti-tumor immune responses, blocking the ability of other antibodies (such as IgG1) to target and destroy cancer cells. This was demonstrated in studies of cancers like malignant melanoma, where locally produced IgG4 antibodies hindered the immune system's response, allowing tumors to grow unchecked. Studies using animal models confirmed that IgG4 promotes tumor growth by blocking local immune responses. For example, in a breast cancer model, the local administration of IgG4 significantly accelerated tumor growth compared to controls. These findings suggest that IgG4 antibodies assist cancer cells in escaping immune detection, facilitating tumor progression. Although immune checkpoint inhibitors targeting PD-1 are effective in some cancers, their IgG4 subclass raises concerns about potential side effects, including autoimmune reactions and rapid tumor progression. IgG4's role in blocking immune responses may explain the occurrence of hyper-progressive disease in some patients undergoing cancer immunotherapy. Studies have shown that certain cancers, including malignant melanoma, extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, and pancreatic cancer, often have an abundance of IgG4-positive plasma cells in and around the tumor. A groundbreaking study by Karagiannis et al. revealed that cancer-specific IgG4 antibodies, unlike their IgG1 counterparts, do not activate the immune processes required to destroy cancer cells. Instead, IgG4 appears to interfere with IgG1's ability to promote tumor cell death, allowing the cancer to evade immune attack. This mechanism of immune escape enables the tumor to grow unchecked, making IgG4 a key player in cancer progression. IgG4's Impact on Tumor Immune Evasion Karagiannis and colleagues demonstrated that tumors producing IgG4 can actively inhibit the immune system’s ability to kill cancer cells. In their study, they found that IL-4 and IL-10, cytokines associated with immune regulation, were elevated in cancerous tissues, leading to increased IgG4 production. The research showed that IgG4 not only failed to fight tumors but also blocked other immune antibodies, like IgG1, from effectively doing so. This was further supported by experiments using immunocompetent mice models, where the introduction of IgG4 antibodies sped up tumor growth. These findings suggest that IgG4 plays a direct role in helping cancers evade the immune system. IgG4 and Cancer Immunotherapy IgG4’s interference with the immune system extends to cancer immunotherapy. Specifically, nivolumab, a PD-1 blocking antibody used in cancer treatment, belongs to the IgG4 class. While effective in some cases, its IgG4 nature may also contribute to the rapid progression of cancer in others. In mouse studies, treatment with nivolumab led to faster tumor growth when compared to controls, suggesting that IgG4’s role in cancer therapy may have unintended negative effects. The connection between IgG4 and cancer highlights the challenges of using ICIs. On the one hand, PD-1 inhibitors can stimulate the immune system to fight cancer, but on the other hand, they may inadvertently promote immune evasion and tumor growth when IgG4 is involved. Cancers Appearing in Ways Never Before Seen After COVID Vaccinations: Dr. Harvey RischDr. Harvey Risch, professor emeritus of epidemiology at the Yale School of Public Health and Yale School of Medicine, has voiced concerns about a potential rise in cancer cases following COVID-19 vaccinations. Dr. Risch, whose research focuses on cancer causes and prevention, recently shared his observations in an interview with EpochTV’s American Thought Leaders. According to him, oncology clinics are facing significant delays in appointment availability, especially in New York, where patients are now waiting months instead of weeks for cancer-related consultations. One of the key points Dr. Risch highlights is the appearance of unusual cancer cases, particularly in younger individuals. For instance, he cites cases of 25-year-olds developing colon cancer despite having no family history, a rare occurrence under normal circumstances. He believes that something must be triggering these early-onset cancers, which don't align with traditional understandings of cancer development, which can take years or even decades to manifest. Dr. Risch explained that a healthy immune system plays a crucial role in detecting and neutralizing cancerous cells before they can multiply. However, if the immune system is weakened or compromised, it may fail to perform this function effectively, allowing cancerous cells to grow unchecked. He believes that in some people, the COVID-19 vaccines have impaired their immune systems to varying degrees, potentially leading to an increased risk of developing cancer, recurring infections, or other serious health conditions. Dr. Risch used the term “turbo cancers” to describe aggressive forms of cancer that seem to develop and progress at an unusually fast rate. He mentioned cases where cancers, such as breast cancer, are reappearing in vaccinated women much sooner than expected. Typically, breast cancer that returns after surgery takes around two decades to reappear, but in some of these cases, it has resurfaced in much shorter timeframes. He also reported instances where tumors grew dramatically in the short period between initial diagnosis and follow-up appointments, surprising oncologists who are accustomed to slower cancer progression. In light of these findings, Dr. Risch encourages individuals to be particularly attentive to any new or unusual symptoms in their bodies. Being proactive and aware of potential warning signs could help detect issues earlier. Dr. Risch also discussed the way medical agencies track adverse events following vaccination. Officially, a person is not considered "vaccinated" until two weeks after their shot, meaning any negative reactions occurring before then are often counted as happening to unvaccinated individuals. However, Dr. Risch emphasized that a significant portion of adverse reactions, including serious health issues, can occur within the first few days of vaccination, yet they are being incorrectly attributed. Dr. Risch criticized how public health policies were handled during the pandemic, saying key principles of public health were abandoned early on. He cited the denial of early treatments for COVID-19 and what he believes were unnecessary vaccinations, calling the approach a “colossal failure.” In his view, a lot of the current fear surrounding new COVID variants is being fueled by propaganda designed to promote more vaccinations, rather than genuine concern for public health. While Dr. Risch acknowledges that the individual risk of a severe adverse reaction to the vaccine is relatively low, when millions of people are vaccinated, even small risks can translate to large numbers of individuals experiencing serious health consequences. According to him, these reactions can sometimes be worse than the virus itself, leaving hundreds of thousands of people with injuries or long-term health problems. Given the mild nature of current COVID-19 variants, Dr. Risch strongly advises against receiving more mRNA vaccines. He believes that most people already have some immunity from previous infections and that the new variants are not life-threatening. For Dr. Risch, the focus should be on managing these illnesses as we do with other common infections, like the flu, without resorting to unnecessary vaccinations. In summary, Dr. Risch’s concerns reflect growing skepticism over the long-term effects of COVID-19 vaccines, particularly their potential link to an increase in cancer cases. His call for awareness, both from individuals and the medical community, underscores the need for further research into the vaccines’ impact on the immune system and overall health. Hyper-Progressive Disease and Immune EscapeThe phenomenon of HPD—where patients experience accelerated cancer progression during treatment—may be partly explained by IgG4’s involvement. As tumors produce more IgG4 antibodies, they hinder immune responses and facilitate tumor survival and growth. This could explain why a subset of patients receiving PD-1 inhibitors experience HPD rather than remission. IgG4 and AutoimmunityInterestingly, while IgG4 can contribute to immune suppression in cancer, it may also lead to autoimmune reactions. In some cases, the use of PD-1 inhibitors has been associated with the development of acute myocarditis, a severe inflammation of the heart muscle. This potentially life-threatening condition highlights the delicate balance ICIs strike between immune stimulation and suppression. antibody class switchingAntibody class switching is like your immune system changing the type of weapon it uses to fight an infection. When you get vaccinated, your immune system makes antibodies—proteins that help protect you by recognizing and neutralizing harmful invaders like viruses. At first, your body might make certain types of antibodies, like IgG1 and IgG3, which are really good at attacking and destroying a virus. But after repeated exposure to the same vaccine or virus (like with the repeated doses of the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines), your body may shift gears and start producing a different type of antibody, called IgG4. IgG4 antibodies act more like peacekeepers than attackers. Instead of creating a strong inflammatory response to destroy invaders, IgG4 helps calm the immune system down. This happens after the immune system has been repeatedly exposed to the same thing over time, which is why it can occur after multiple mRNA vaccine doses. While this shift to IgG4 antibodies can help prevent excessive inflammation, it also means the immune response might be less aggressive, particularly in detecting and neutralizing immune threats. In the case of the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, scientists have noticed that repeated doses can lead to higher levels of IgG4, and it appears to leading to higher rates of cancer and other IgG4-related diseases. The body might be learning to tolerate the spike protein (the part of the virus the vaccine targets), but the effects of this shift on long-term immunity are arguably worse than the disease itself. The Impact of Antigen Dose and Repeated Vaccination on IgG4 Antibody ProductionVaccines have long been claimed to be a cornerstone in disease prevention, but recent research has shown that certain vaccines can induce the production of IgG4 antibodies. While the mRNA COVID-19 "vaccines" have brought this response into focus, it's not unique to them—vaccines for diseases like HIV, malaria, pertussis, tetanus toxoid (TT) vaccine and the respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) have also been associated with IgG4 production. This antibody class switch is influenced by three key factors: antigen concentration, repeated vaccination, and the type of vaccine used.
In contrast, adenovirus-based vaccines like AstraZeneca's did not elicit such a long-lasting IgG4 response (despite them being suspended in 18 countries for adverse events). The link between higher antigen doses and immune tolerance is well-documented: too much antigen can lead to T-cell exhaustion and immune tolerance, weakening the immune system’s ability to fight infections. While the traditional view has supported the idea that “more is better” when it comes to antigen doses for vaccines, especially in cases like HIV or tuberculosis where there are no clear immune predictors of protection, this approach is not without drawbacks. The following key concerns arise from excessive antigen dosing:
Studies have also shown that in some cases, lower vaccine doses can result in better T-cell responses. This has led experts to reconsider vaccine dosing strategies, suggesting that smaller doses may sometimes be more effective, especially in boosting immunity. 2. Repeated Vaccination Repeated exposure to vaccines, especially mRNA-based vaccines, can significantly influence the type of antibodies produced. After the initial two doses of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, most individuals develop IgG1 and IgG3 antibodies, which are typically pro-inflammatory and play a key role in fighting infections. However, as more doses are administered, a shift occurs, with IgG4 levels increasing significantly, particularly after a third dose or subsequent infection with a SARS-CoV-2 variant. A group of 29 people got three doses of the Pfizer mRNA vaccine, Comirnaty. Blood samples were taken from them at different points: after each dose, and later during two follow-up visits, one about 7 months after the second shot and the other about 6 months after the third. During this time, 10 people got infected despite being vaccinated. Researchers measured specific immune responses (different types of antibodies) in their blood using special tests. Results below a certain threshold were marked as very low. The graphs show individual results and averages for the group. Only certain comparisons between the time points are shown in the data. This IgG4 response was not observed in those who received adenovirus-based vaccines. In one study, only recipients of the Pfizer mRNA vaccine exhibited this significant increase in IgG4 levels, particularly 5–6 months after the second vaccination. In contrast, other vaccine schedules, such as mixing Pfizer with AstraZeneca, did not show a similar IgG4 rise, emphasizing the unique nature of the mRNA vaccines in inducing this response. 3. The Consequences of Over-Vaccination Recent studies have raised concerns about the potential negative effects of over-vaccination with mRNA boosters (as of September 2024, the CDC has recommended the American public to administer nine doses of COVID "vaccines" since the onset of the pandemic). In mouse models, extended booster vaccination schedules diminished the effectiveness of the immune system against new infections, particularly for Delta and Omicron variants. The findings showed that excessive boosting resulted in:
This suggests that repeated vaccination may diminish the immune system's ability to respond to new infections or reinfections, potentially leading to more severe disease outcomes for those who become infected again after multiple booster doses. Interestingly, the increase in IgG4 antibodies after mRNA COVID-19 vaccinations does not appear to be caused by genetic predisposition. Around 50% of individuals showed a significant increase in IgG4 after their second mRNA vaccination, and this was consistent across different populations, indicating that repeated exposure to the antigen was the primary cause. This finding contradicts the traditional paradigm of vaccinology, where low antigen doses are generally recommended for booster shots. Both Pfizer and Moderna vaccines used the same antigen doses for primary and booster shots, leading to elevated IgG4 levels. The production of IgG4 antibodies following vaccination is influenced by several factors, including antigen dose, repeated exposure, and the type of vaccine. The unique ability of the mRNA vaccines to induce IgG4 antibody production—especially after multiple doses—raises important questions about long-term immunity and potential immune tolerance. As research continues, striking a balance between sufficient immune response and avoiding immune exhaustion will be crucial in optimizing vaccination strategies for future diseases. REferencesUversky, Vladimir N, et al. “IgG4 Antibodies Induced by Repeated Vaccination May Generate Immune Tolerance to the SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein.” Vaccines, vol. 11, no. 5, 17 May 2023, pp. 991–991, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10222767/, https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines11050991.
Koneczny, Inga. “Update on IgG4-Mediated Autoimmune Diseases: New Insights and New Family Members.” Autoimmunity Reviews, vol. 19, no. 10, Oct. 2020, p. 102646, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autrev.2020.102646. Boretti, Alberto. “MRNA Vaccine Boosters and Impaired Immune System Response in Immune Compromised Individuals: A Narrative Review.” Clinical and Experimental Medicine, vol. 24, no. 1, 27 Jan. 2024, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10821957/#:~:text=Immunocompromised%20individuals%20may%20not%20mount, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10238-023-01264-1. Perugino, Cory. “IgG4-Related Disease - Musculoskeletal and Connective Tissue Disorders.” Merck Manuals Professional Edition, Aug. 2023, www.merckmanuals.com/professional/musculoskeletal-and-connective-tissue-disorders/igg4-related-disease/igg4-related-disease. Rispens, Theo, and Maartje G Huijbers. “The Unique Properties of IgG4 and Its Roles in Health and Disease.” Nature Reviews Immunology, 24 Apr. 2023, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41577-023-00871-z. Brogna, Carlo, et al. “Detection of Recombinant Spike Protein in the Blood of Individuals Vaccinated against SARS‐CoV‐2: Possible Molecular Mechanisms.” PROTEOMICS - Clinical Applications, 31 Aug. 2023, https://doi.org/10.1002/prca.202300048. Irrgang, Pascal, et al. “Class Switch toward Noninflammatory, Spike-Specific IgG4 Antibodies after Repeated SARS-CoV-2 MRNA Vaccination.” Science Immunology, vol. 8, no. 79, 27 Jan. 2023, https://doi.org/10.1126/sciimmunol.ade2798. Efthymis Oraiopoulos, and Jan Jekielek. “Cancers Appearing in Ways Never before Seen after COVID Vaccinations: Dr. Harvey Risch.” The Epoch Times, 20 Sept. 2023, web.archive.org/web/20230923113807/www.theepochtimes.com/health/cancers-appearing-in-ways-never-before-seen-after-covid-vaccinations-dr-harvey-risch-5495364. Accessed 4 Oct. 2024. Goldman, Serge, et al. “Rapid Progression of Angioimmunoblastic T Cell Lymphoma Following BNT162b2 MRNA Vaccine Booster Shot: A Case Report.” Frontiers in Medicine, vol. 8, 25 Nov. 2021, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8656165/, https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2021.798095. Accessed 15 May 2024. Nearly 75% of US adults are overweight or obese, and 40% have pre-diabetes or diabetes. This widespread issue has led to increased interest in medications like Ozempic (Semaglutide), a GLP-1 (glucagon-like peptide-1) receptor agonist. Ozempic mimics the hormone GLP-1, which regulates blood sugar by stimulating insulin secretion and inhibiting glucagon release. It also slows digestion, increasing feelings of fullness and reducing caloric intake. This dual action helps improve glycemic control and can aid in weight loss. Efficacy varies among individuals; about 20% of users may not lose weight or may even gain weight. This is likely due to the fact that while for many people Ozempic reduces appetite, for some individuals Ozempic may lead to blood sugar that is too low, a condition known as hypoglycemia, which can increase cravings for carbohydrates and sugar. ozempic side effectsOzempic has shown significant benefits for many, but it is not without risks. Known side effects include kidney damage, gastroparesis, gallbladder issues, muscle loss, nutrient deficiencies, thyroid cancer, and mental health concerns, including depression and increased suicidal ideation. Importantly, Ozempic is FDA-approved only for Type 2 Diabetes, not for weight loss. When discontinuing Ozempic, rapid weight gain, often termed "Ozempic rebound," is common. Studies show that within a year of stopping, two-thirds of users regain the lost weight, often ending up with a higher body fat percentage due to muscle loss (leads to lowered metabolic rate), poor dietary and lifestyle factors, and metabolic inhibition due to calorie restriction. "With...[GLP-1]...treatments, there is a concomitant reduction in lean body mass, which seems to be in the range of 25%–40% of total weight loss." In other words, studies show that upwards of 40% of the weight lost on Ozempic isn’t the fat you’re hoping to bid adieu to – it’s muscle! Additional Risks of Ozempic
Safety trial duration on Ozempic lasted only 30-68 weeks, so safety for use beyond this timeframe has not been evaluated. The Real Culprits of ObesityThe obesity crisis is not due to a lack of injectable medications. The primary contributors are:
Natural Alternatives to GLP-1 agonistsFor those seeking alternatives or aiming to prevent post-Ozempic weight gain, lifestyle changes are crucial. Natural ways to boost GLP-1 include:
Peptides for Weight Loss and Muscle GainFor those seeking more advanced methods, peptides can be a powerful tool with fewer side effects than GLP-1 agonists. Some effective peptides include:
For injectable peptides, I recommend the companies Limitless Life or Peptide Sciences. If you're looking for quality oral peptide formulations, check out LVLUP Health. Also, it’s important to understand that the best effects from any of the peptides listed above come via pairing them with a consistent weight training routine, adequate protein intake, and a physically active lifestyle. While Ozempic has been demonstrated to mitigate blood sugar control and weight management, it's essential to weigh these against potential risks and side effects. Incorporating lifestyle changes and considering natural alternatives can help mitigate these risks and support long-term health. Natural alternatives and peptides can provide effective, safer options for achieving weight loss and muscle gain. Combining these with lifestyle changes is crucial for long-term success. Addressing the root causes of obesity through lifestyle changes is crucial for long-term health. Prioritizing physical activity, a balanced diet, reducing exposure to toxins, managing stress, and ensuring adequate sleep can significantly impact overall well-being and weight management. referencesWadden, Thomas A. et al. “The Role of Lifestyle Modification with Second-Generation Anti-obesity Medications: Comparisons, Questions, and Clinical Opportunities.” Current Obesity Reports 12 (2023): 453 - 473. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13679-023-00534-z.
Castellanos, Vanessa, et al. “Semaglutide-Induced Lupus Erythematosus with Multiorgan Involvement.” Cureus, vol. 16, no. 3, 1 Mar. 2024, p. e55324, pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38559525/, https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.55324. Billings, Sabrina A., et al. “Rhabdomyolysis Associated with Semaglutide Therapy: A Case Report.” Cureus, vol. 15, no. 12, 1 Dec. 2023, p. e50227, pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38192938/, https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.50227. Li, J, et al. “Case Report: Semaglutide-Associated Depression: A Report of Two Cases.” Frontiers in Psychiatry, vol. 14, 29 Aug. 2023, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10495976/#:~:text=At%20present%2C%20most%20reported%20adverse, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1238353. Casella, Sarah, and Katelyn Galli. “Appendicitis: A Hidden Danger of GLP-1 Receptor Agonists?” the Journal of Pharmacy Technology, vol. 40, no. 2, 7 Dec. 2023, pp. 108–111, https://doi.org/10.1177/87551225231216638. Challa, Tenagne Delessa, et al. “Regulation of Adipocyte Formation by GLP-1/GLP-1R Signaling.” Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 287, no. 9, Feb. 2012, pp. 6421–6430, https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.m111.310342. Willoughby, Darryn, et al. “Body Composition Changes in Weight Loss: Strategies and Supplementation for Maintaining Lean Body Mass, a Brief Review.” Nutrients, vol. 10, no. 12, 3 Dec. 2018, p. 1876, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6315740/, https://doi.org/10.3390/nu10121876. Wilding, John P. H., et al. “Weight Regain and Cardiometabolic Effects after Withdrawal of Semaglutide: The STEP 1 Trial Extension.” Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism, vol. 24, no. 8, 19 May 2022, pp. 1553–1564, pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35441470/, https://doi.org/10.1111/dom.14725. Leehey, David J., et al. “Acute Kidney Injury Associated with Semaglutide.” Kidney Medicine, vol. 3, no. 2, Mar. 2021, pp. 282–285, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xkme.2020.10.008. Bezin, Julien, et al. “GLP-1 Receptor Agonists and the Risk of Thyroid Cancer.” Diabetes Care, vol. 46, no. 2, 10 Nov. 2022, https://doi.org/10.2337/dc22-1148. Investigating the Potential Link Between COVID-19 Vaccination and Neurodegenerative Diseases7/28/2024 The COVID-19 pandemic has introduced numerous challenges, including concerns about the potential side effects of vaccines. Recently, there has been increasing interest in understanding whether COVID-19 vaccination might be associated with neurodegenerative diseases, particularly Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and its prodromal state, mild cognitive impairment (MCI). A recent groundbreaking study published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Association of Physicians has investigated the potential association between COVID-19 vaccination and the onset of Alzheimer’s disease and mild cognitive impairment. A nationwide, retrospective cohort design was utilized, leveraging data from the Korean National Health Insurance Service. The study focused on determining if there is a significant association between receiving a COVID-19 vaccine and the subsequent development of AD and MCI. Conducted in Seoul, South Korea, the study analyzed data from a random 50% sample of city residents aged 65 and above, totaling 558,017 individuals. Participants were divided into vaccinated and unvaccinated groups, with vaccinations including both mRNA and cDNA vaccines. Incidences of AD and MCI post-vaccination were identified using ICD-10 codes. Multivariable logistic and Cox regression analyses were employed to interpret the data, with patients having vascular dementia or Parkinson’s disease serving as control subjects. The study found an increased incidence of MCI and AD in vaccinated individuals, particularly those who received mRNA vaccines, within three months post-vaccination. Specifically, the mRNA vaccine group exhibited a significantly higher incidence of AD (odds ratio [OR]: 1.225; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.025–1.464; P = 0.026) and MCI (OR: 2.377; CI: 1.845–3.064; P < 0.001) compared to the unvaccinated group. However, no significant relationship was found with vascular dementia or Parkinson’s disease. Mechanisms of NeurodegenerationThe potential mechanisms underlying these observations involve several pathways. One hypothesis is related to the interaction of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein with heparin and heparin-binding proteins in the brain, which are prone to self-assembly, aggregation, and fibrillation. Research suggests that the S1 region of the spike protein binds to these proteins, potentially acting as functional amyloid and forming toxic aggregates. These aggregates could seed the aggregation of misfolded brain proteins, leading to neurodegeneration. Additionally, the spike protein's ability to cross the blood-brain barrier raises concerns. Free spike protein particles have been detected in various organs, including the brain, where they might contribute to pathological processes. The spike protein's interaction with the ACE2 receptor and subsequent cellular entry could disturb protein synthesis machinery, endoplasmic reticulum and mitochondrial function, and increase the accumulation of misfolded proteins. This cascade of events could activate protein aggregation, mitochondrial oxidative stress, apoptosis, and ultimately neurodegeneration. There is also evidence from studies on other viruses, such as HSV-1, that viral proteins can bind to heparin and increase the aggregation of amyloid β (Aβ42) peptides, a hallmark of Alzheimer’s disease. Given that the receptor-binding domain of SARS-CoV-2's spike protein has several heparin-binding sites, a similar mechanism of neurodegeneration involving the aggregation of proteins like Aβ, α-synuclein, tau, prions, and TDP-43 could be at play in COVID-19. Preliminary evidence suggests a potential association between COVID-19 vaccination, especially with mRNA vaccines, and an increased incidence of Alzheimer’s disease and mild cognitive impairment. These findings highlight the need for further research to understand the mechanisms underlying this potential link, particularly focusing on vaccine-induced immune responses and their impact on neurodegenerative processes. Continuous monitoring and investigation into the long-term neurological impacts of COVID-19 vaccines are crucial to ensure comprehensive understanding and safety. referencesJee Hoon Roh, et al. “A Potential Association between COVID-19 Vaccination and Development of Alzheimer’s Disease.” QJM, 28 May 2024, https://doi.org/10.1093/qjmed/hcae103.
Grobbelaar, Lize M, et al. “SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein S1 Induces Fibrin(Ogen) Resistant to Fibrinolysis: Implications for Microclot Formation in COVID-19.” MedRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory), 8 Mar. 2021, https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.03.05.21252960. Idrees, Danish, and Vijay Kumar. “SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Interactions with Amyloidogenic Proteins: Potential Clues to Neurodegeneration.” Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications, vol. 554, May 2021, pp. 94–98, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbrc.2021.03.100. Prescription drugs have become a significant public health concern, with overtreatment and misuse leading to an alarming number of deaths. The increasing death rate from these drugs is particularly concerning given that many of these fatalities are preventable. The Scale of the ProblemIn 2013, it was estimated that prescription drugs were the third leading cause of death in the United States, following heart disease and cancer. By 2015, it was noted that psychiatric drugs alone also ranked as the third leading cause of death. However, some estimates place prescription drugs as the fourth leading cause, based on a 1998 meta-analysis that primarily considered in-hospital adverse drug reactions. This analysis likely underestimates the true extent of the problem since most drug-related deaths occur outside of hospitals and involve complications that are not always correctly attributed to drug use. Underreported and Misclassified DeathsMany deaths linked to prescription drugs are misclassified as natural or unknown causes. This issue is particularly prevalent with psychiatric drugs, where sudden deaths in young patients are often labeled as natural despite known risks of fatal heart arrhythmias from neuroleptics. Similarly, deaths from depression drugs in the elderly, caused by falls and fractures, often go unrecognized as drug-related. Specific Drug Categories and Risks
Increasing PolypharmacyPolypharmacy, the use of multiple medications by a single patient, has been on the rise, especially among the elderly. This trend increases the risk of adverse drug interactions and fatalities. For example, combining benzodiazepines with neuroleptics significantly raises mortality rates. Estimates of Annual Drug-Related DeathsCurrent estimates suggest that over 882,000 deaths in the United States annually can be attributed to prescription drugs. This figure includes hospital deaths, psychiatric drug fatalities, opioid overdoses, and deaths from NSAIDs. These numbers highlight the magnitude of the problem and the urgent need for intervention. The Role of Misguided Regulation and Lack of AwarenessThe pharmaceutical industry's influence on drug regulation has led to more permissive policies, exacerbating the issue. Many deaths could be prevented if drugs were prescribed more judiciously. For instance, neuroleptics and antidepressants often show minimal efficacy in trials, yet they are widely prescribed. Similarly, NSAIDs are commonly recommended despite their significant risks, often without sufficient consideration of safer alternatives. The pervasive issue of prescription drug-related deaths necessitates a reevaluation of current medical practices and regulatory policies. With most of these deaths being preventable, a more cautious approach to prescribing and better awareness of the risks associated with these medications could save countless lives. It is crucial for healthcare providers, regulators, and patients to acknowledge the dangers and work towards safer, more effective treatment strategies. In bed with big pharma: A $12 Billion RelationshipA comprehensive analysis by Yale University researchers has revealed that nearly six in ten doctors in the United States have received over $12 billion in payments from pharmaceutical and medical device companies over the past decade. This study sheds light on the pervasive financial relationships between healthcare providers and the medical industry, highlighting potential conflicts of interest. Key Findings from the Study
Largest Recipients by SpecialtyOrthopedic surgeons topped the list, receiving the highest total sum of payments at $1.36 billion. They were followed by:
most profitable Drugs and Devices
most prescribed drugsEvery day, millions of people in the U.S. take prescribed drugs in an effort to help them live their lives. As our understanding of medicine has evolved, we’ve developed drugs to aid with some of the most common medical conditions—from pain and blood pressure drugs to asthma medication, thyroid treatments, and antidepressants. This analysis uses prescribed medicines data from the U.S. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, released in 2021 for the 2019 calendar year. It also uses supporting drug and health information from MedlinePlus. Top 10 Most Prescribed Drugs in America (2019)
The most prescribed drug, atorvastatin (sold under the brand name Lipitor), was prescribed to 24.5 million people in the U.S. in 2019, or 7.5% of the population. It was one of many statin medications listed, which are claimed to prevent cardiovascular disease and treat abnormal lipid levels. Prevalent Conditions Treated Most of the top prescribed drugs are used to treat high blood pressure or symptoms of it. This is significant as 108 million, or nearly half of adults in the U.S., have hypertension or high blood pressure.
Combining the total patients for blood pressure and cholesterol medications covers 33% of the U.S. population. Pain and inflammation medications were the most frequent on the top 30 list, prescribed to 13.6% of people. Drug Spending in the U.S.A drug’s total number of patients doesn’t necessarily reflect its importance or cost. For example, levothyroxine, the fourth-most prescribed drug by total patients, was the second-most prescribed by total prescriptions with 102.6 million in 2019 at an average cost of $25.10 per prescription. More specialized medications like fluticasone had fewer total prescriptions (27.9 million) but a higher average cost of $97.68 per prescription. Prices are influenced by factors like demand, patent status, and healthcare system variations. Implications and ConcernsThe study underscores ongoing concerns about financial conflicts of interest in the medical field. Researchers noted that such payments might influence physician prescribing behavior and potentially undermine patient trust in medical professionals. Despite these concerns, the practice of accepting industry payments remains widespread. Data Source and MethodologyThe study utilized data from the Open Payments platform, a national database where drug and medical device companies are required to disclose payments made to physicians. This platform aims to increase transparency and help patients make informed decisions about their healthcare providers. FDA recalls and safety concernsIn a related safety concern, the FDA recalled certain Impella devices in December due to a perforation risk that could cause serious injuries or death. This highlights the ongoing need for vigilance regarding the safety of medical devices widely used in clinical practice. ConclusionThis comprehensive analysis by Yale University researchers provides a clear picture of the substantial financial ties between US doctors and the medical industry, emphasizing the need for ongoing scrutiny and transparency. The relationship between healthcare providers and the medical industry is complex and often financially intertwined. While these financial interactions can support medical education and innovation, they also pose significant ethical and practical challenges. Ensuring transparency and addressing potential conflicts of interest are crucial steps toward maintaining the integrity of medical practice and patient trust. referencesGøtzsche PC. Deadly Medicines and Organised Crime: How Big Pharma Has Corrupted Health Care. London: Radcliffe Publishing; 2013.
Gøtzsche PC. Deadly Psychiatry and Organised Denial. Copenhagen: People’s Press; 2015. Schroeder MO. Death by Prescription: By one estimate, taking prescribed medications is the fourth leading cause of death among Americans. US News 2016; Sept 27. Light DW, Lexchin J, Darrow JJ. Institutional corruption of pharmaceuticals and the myth of safe and effective drugs. J Law Med Ethics 2013;41:590-600. Lazarou J, Pomeranz BH, Corey PN. Incidence of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized patients: a meta-analysis of prospective studies. JAMA 1998;279:1200–5. FAERS Reporting by Patient Outcomes by Year. FDA 2015;Nov 10. Gøtzsche PC. Mental Health Survival Kit and Withdrawal From Psychiatric Drugs. Ann Arbor: L H Press; 2022. Hubbard R, Farrington P, Smith C, et al. Exposure to tricyclic and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor antidepressants and the risk of hip fracture. Am J Epidemiol 2003;158:77-84. Thapa PB, Gideon P, Cost TW, et al. Antidepressants and the risk of falls among nursing home residents. N Engl J Med 1998;339:875-82. Ebbesen J, Buajordet I, Erikssen J, et al. Drug-related deaths in a department of internal medicine. Arch Intern Med 2001;161:2317–23. James JTA. A new, evidence-based estimate of patient harms associated with hospital care. J Patient Saf 2013;9:122-8. Ho JY. Life Course Patterns of Prescription Drug Use in the United States. Demography 2023;60:1549-79. Gøtzsche PC. Long-term use of antipsychotics and antidepressants is not evidence-based. Int J Risk Saf Med 2020;31:37-42. Gøtzsche PC. Long-Term Use of Benzodiazepines, Stimulants and Lithium is Not Evidence-Based. Clin Neuropsychiatry 2020;17:281-3. Forbruget af antipsykotika blandt 18-64 årige patienter, med skizofreni, mani eller bipolar affektiv sindslidelse. København: Sundhedsstyrelsen; 2006. Hughes S, Cohen D, Jaggi R. Differences in reporting serious adverse events in industry sponsored clinical trial registries and journal articles on antidepressant and antipsychotic drugs: a cross-sectional study. BMJ Open 2014;4:e005535. Schneider LS, Dagerman KS, Insel P. Risk of death with atypical antipsychotic drug treatment for dementia: meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials. JAMA 2005;294:1934–43. FDA package insert for Risperdal (risperidone). Accessed 30 May 2022. Koponen M, Taipale H, Lavikainen P, et al. Risk of Mortality Associated with Antipsychotic Monotherapy and Polypharmacy Among Community-Dwelling Persons with Alzheimer’s Disease. J Alzheimers Dis 2017;56:107-18. Whitaker R. Lure of Riches Fuels Testing. Boston Globe 1998; Nov 17. Whitaker R. Mad in America: Bad science, Bad medicine, and the Enduring Mistreatment of the Mentally Ill. Cambridge: Perseus Books Group; 2002:page 269. Vanderburg DG, Batzar E, Fogel I, et al. A pooled analysis of suicidality in double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of sertraline in adults. J Clin Psychiatry 2009;70:674-83. Hengartner MP, Plöderl M. Newer-Generation Antidepressants and Suicide Risk in Randomized Controlled Trials: a Re-Analysis of the FDA Database. Psychother Psychosom 2019;88:247-8. Hengartner MP, Plöderl M. Reply to the Letter to the Editor: “Newer-Generation Antidepressants and Suicide Risk: Thoughts on Hengartner and Plöderl’s ReAnalysis.” Psychother Psychosom 2019;88:373-4. Weich S, Pearce HL, Croft P, et al. Effect of anxiolytic and hypnotic drug prescriptions on mortality hazards: retrospective cohort study. BMJ 2014;348:g1996. Kripke DF, Langer RD, Kline LE. Hypnotics’ association with mortality or cancer: a matched cohort study. BMJ Open 2012;2:e000850. Coupland C, Dhiman P, Morriss R, et al. Antidepressant use and risk of adverse outcomes in older people: population based cohort study. BMJ 2011;343:d4551. Smoller JW, Allison M, Cochrane BB, et al. Antidepressant use and risk of incident cardiovascular morbidity and mortality among postmenopausal women in the Women’s Health Initiative study. Arch Intern Med 2009;169:2128-39. O’Neill A. Age distribution in the United States from 2012 to 2022. Statista 2024;Jan 25. Olfson M, King M, Schoenbaum M. Antipsychotic Treatment of Adults in the United States. Psychiatrist.com 2015;Oct 21. Maust DT, Lin LA, Blow FC. Benzodiazepine Use and Misuse Among Adults in the United States. Psychiatr Serv 2019;70:97-106. Brody DJ, Gu Q. Antidepressant Use Among Adults: United States, 2015-2018. CDC 2020; Sept. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Leading Causes of Death. 2024; Jan 17. Drug Overdose Deaths. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2023; Aug 22. Davis JS, Lee HY, Kim J, et al. Use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in US adults: changes over time and by demographic. Open Heart 2017;4:e000550. Conaghan PG. A turbulent decade for NSAIDs: update on current concepts of classification, epidemiology, comparative efficacy, and toxicity. Rheumatol Int 2012;32:1491-502. Bally M, Dendukuri N, Rich B, et al. Risk of acute myocardial infarction with NSAIDs in real world use: bayesian meta-analysis of individual patient data. BMJ 2017;357:j1909. Bresalier RS, Sandler RS, Quan H, et al. Cardiovascular Events Associated with Rofecoxib in a Colorectal Adenoma Chemoprevention Trial. N Engl J Med 2005;352:1092-102. Blower AL, Brooks A, Fenn GC, et al. Emergency admissions for upper gastrointestinal disease and their relation to NSAID use. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 1997;11:283–91. Davis C, Lexchin J, Jefferson T, Gøtzsche P, McKee M. “Adaptive pathways” to drug authorisation: adapting to industry? BMJ 2016;354:i4437. van der Hooft CS, Sturkenboom MC, van Grootheest K, et al. Adverse drug reaction-related hospitalisations: a nationwide study in The Netherlands. Drug Saf 2006;29:161-8. Gøtzsche PC. Big marketing hoax: Non-steroidal, anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are not anti-inflammatory. Copenhagen: Institute for Scientific Freedom 2022;Nov 10. Perlis R. The time has come for over-the-counter antidepressants. Stat News 2024;April 8. Gøtzsche PC. Critical Psychiatry Textbook. Copenhagen: Institute for Scientific Freedom; 2022. Freely available. Tilley, Caitlin. “Corruption Fears as Report Finds US Doctors Received Record $12bn.” Mail Online, 3 Apr. 2024, www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-13268371/Corruption-doctors-received-pharma-payments.html. Tanne, Janice Hopkins. “US Doctors Received More than $12bn in Industry Payments between 2013 and 2022, Study Shows.” BMJ, vol. 385, 2 Apr. 2024, p. q781, www.bmj.com/content/385/bmj.q781.full, https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.q781. Since the declaration of the COVID-19 pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO) on March 11, 2020, over 13.5 billion doses of COVID-19 vaccines have been administered worldwide. This remarkable achievement in vaccine distribution highlights the urgent need for comprehensive vaccine safety monitoring, as very rare adverse events associated with COVID-19 vaccines may only become apparent after widespread administration. To address this need, the Safety Platform for Emergency Vaccines (SPEAC) initiative formulated a list of potential COVID-19 vaccine adverse events of special interest (AESI) in 2020. These AESI were selected based on various factors, including their associations with immunization, vaccine platforms, or adjuvants, as well as theoretical concerns related to immunopathogenesis. One flexible approach for assessing AESI is the comparison of observed AESI rates following vaccine introduction with expected rates based on historical periods pre-vaccine rollout. This method, known as observed vs. expected (OE) analysis, can rapidly detect potential vaccine safety signals. For example, OE analysis played a crucial role in identifying thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) as a safety signal, prompting the suspension of the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine in certain countries. To further enhance vaccine safety monitoring, a global cohort study was conducted as part of the Global COVID Vaccine Safety (GCoVS) Project. This project, funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), involves multiple nations and aims to monitor COVID-19 vaccine safety on a global scale. Thirteen AESI were selected for evaluation, including neurological, hematologic, and cardiovascular conditions, which are as follows:
The study analyzed data from 10 sites across eight countries, comprising a total vaccinated population of 99,068,901 individuals. Notable findings include a statistically significant increase in Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) cases following the administration of the ChAdOx1 (India) vaccine and an increased risk of acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM) after the mRNA-1273 vaccine (Moderna). Hematologic conditions such as cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST) and immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) also showed elevated risk ratios following certain vaccine doses. Similarly, cardiovascular conditions like myocarditis and pericarditis demonstrated increased risk ratios, particularly after mRNA vaccine doses (Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca). Here is the raw data collected from the study: Here is a chart summarizing the raw data collected in the study: Overall, these findings underscore the importance of ongoing vaccine safety monitoring and highlight the value of global collaboration in assessing vaccine-related adverse events. By leveraging methodologies such as OE analysis and conducting comprehensive cohort studies, public health agencies can swiftly detect and respond to potential vaccine safety signals, ensuring the continued safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination efforts worldwide. referencesK. Faksova, et al. “COVID-19 Vaccines and Adverse Events of Special Interest: A Multinational Global Vaccine Data Network (GVDN) Cohort Study of 99 Million Vaccinated Individuals.” Vaccine, 1 Feb. 2024, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.01.100.
Technologies like cellular phones and wireless devices are ubiquitous in our daily lives, serving as essential tools for communication, entertainment, and productivity. In recent years, the proliferation of these wireless internet technologies has led to the mainstream become more aware of these devices emitting significant amounts of electromagnetic radiation (EMR)/electromagnetic frequencies (EMF). These devices, which operate as radio devices transmitting and receiving radio EMF within a large band of radio frequencies (RF), come with significant health concerns, particularly in the realm of reproductive health. The radiation emitted by mobile phones can have both thermal and non-thermal impacts on biological materials, with potential long-term effects on cellular functions and the hormonal balance in the human body. Emerging research points to a troubling link between mobile phone usage and male infertility, a condition that already affects nearly half of the 15% of couples worldwide struggling with reproductive issues. Frequency emitting devicesFor years the cell phone companies have assured people that cell phones are perfectly safe. Currently there are over 700 million cell phone users in the world. Analog phones operate at 450–900 MHz, digital phones (Global System for Mobile Communications [GSM]) at 850–1900 MHz, and third-generation phones at approximately 2000 MHz. The radiation emitted by Wi-Fi and all generations of mobile phones is classified as non-ionizing radiation, which falls within the microwave range (3–300 GHz).
5G routers and modems, operating on higher frequencies, emit more powerful electromagnetic fields, potentially amplifying the risks. The introduction of 5G technology, which involves more frequent data transmissions at higher power levels, has raised concerns about whether this could intensify the reproductive risks posed by EMF radiation. Keep in mind, the EMFs emitted by cell phones are a form of microwave energy. Specifically, cell phones emit RF radiation, which falls within the microwave portion of the electromagnetic spectrum. Microwaves, including the frequencies used by cell phones, are non-ionizing radiation, meaning they don't carry enough energy to ionize atoms or molecules. Cell phones typically operate at frequencies between 800 MHz and 2.6 GHz, which are in the lower part of the microwave frequency range. This type of radiation is also used in other wireless technologies, such as Wi-Fi and Bluetooth. While the power levels of cell phones are much lower than those of devices like microwave ovens, the concern over potential health effects has led to ongoing research on the long-term exposure to RF radiation emitted by mobile devices. Specific Absorption RateThe intensity of RF-EMR is measured using a standardized unit called Specific Absorption Rate (SAR), which quantifies how much energy the body absorbs during exposure. According to the United States Federal Communications Commission, SAR limit should not exceed 1.6 W/kg as averaged over one gram of tissue. Additionally, the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection recommends a limit of 2 W/kg for head and trunk exposure over 10 grams of tissue. SAR is distributed in a non-uniform way in the human body and is typically highest in the body part closest to the device. In other words, EMF exposure is highest in body parts closest to mobile devices, and when mobile phones are placed less than 15 cm from the testes, they can reach harmful levels, potentially affecting testicular function, and downstream effects of altered testicular function, AKA endocrine/hormone function. Harmful effects of EMFs to HumansAs mentioned, the biological effects of RF-EMR emitted from wireless devices can be categorized as thermal and non-thermal.
The germ cell cycle refers to the process that our reproductive cells (sperm in males and eggs in females) go through in order to develop and be ready for fertilization. These cells are very sensitive to their environment because they play a crucial role in reproduction and passing on our DNA to the next generation. Impact on Hormones Among the reproductive parameters studied, less attention has been paid to the effects of wireless devices on male reproductive hormones. The intricate interaction of hormones involved in the hypothalamic–pituitary–testes axis, particularly gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH), follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), luteinizing hormone (LH), testosterone, and estrogen, are essential for male reproductive functions. These hormones have been documented to be affected by RF-EMR exposure, which may result in male reproductive dysfunction and infertility depending on various factors. Impact on Testes The human testis is particularly sensitive to both radiation and heat. These factors play a crucial role in reproductive health, and the introduction of EMR from mobile devices has raised significant concerns. Studies have demonstrated that the testis, being a delicate organ, can suffer damage from prolonged exposure to radiation, ultimately impairing sperm production. RF-EMR have been observed to cause histological aberrations (dysfunctional tissue changes) in the testes, testicular tissue atrophy, decreased testosterone levels, and a subsequent deterioration in sperm quality. Impact on Semen Studies examining the association between mobile phone use and semen parameters have yielded significant results. Men who stored mobile phones in their trouser pockets exhibited a decrease in the percentage of normal sperm morphology and luteinizing hormone levels. Additionally, exposure to mobile phone EMR was associated with:
The frequency and duration of mobile phone use have been linked to declines in semen volume, sperm concentration, and total sperm count, indicating a detrimental effect on sperm quality and male fertility. Notably, carrying cell phones in hip pockets and on belts has been associated with lower sperm motility compared to other storage methods. Moreover, prolonged exposure to EMF from mobile phones and routers has been linked to a higher rate of childlessness among certain professions, such as military personnel in the Royal Norwegian Navy. These findings suggest that frequent exposure to mobile phone radiation may impair reproductive health over time. Numerous studies have shown that radiation emitted by Wi-Fi and 5G routers, especially when used for prolonged periods, can negatively affect sperm quality, including sperm count, motility, and DNA integrity. A laboratory study found that exposing sperm samples to a laptop connected to Wi-Fi for just four hours significantly reduced sperm motility and increased DNA fragmentation. This indicates that not only direct phone use but also proximity to routers and modems could affect sperm health. In human studies, semen analysis in the four cell phone user groups showed a decrease in sperm count, motility, viability, and normal morphology with the increase in daily use of cell phone - in a dose dependent manner (the more EMF radiation exposure, the greater the effects to semen). Other researchers suggested in their study on mice that Leydig cells are among the most susceptible cells to EMW, and injury to Leydig cells may affect spermatogenesis. Additionally, mobile phone EMR induced genotoxic effects on epididymal spermatozoa, which is critical for fertility. Beyond reproductive damage, innumerable reports of potential adverse effects of radiofrequency EMF on brain, heart, endocrine system, and DNA of humans and animals are widely reported in the literature. Electromagnetic waves alter brain electroencephalographic activity and cause:
How Mobile Phone Radiation Affects Biological Systems: Known mechanisms Studies evaluating the effects of EMR from mobile phones on male fertility have yielded noteworthy results. Mobile phones emit EMF that alter biological functions by depositing energy at the molecular level. These changes are believed to target the body at the sub-cellular level, influencing key components such as hormones and cellular receptors. Among the various systems that EMF radiation impacts, the reproductive system appears to be one of the most vulnerable. The radiation can disrupt the normal polarization of cellular membranes, impairing processes such as hormone synthesis and secretion. In males, the hormone testosterone plays a critical role in spermatogenesis—the production of sperm—and disruptions to this process can result in infertility. Both human and animal studies have reported reduced sperm motility, structural abnormalities, and increased oxidative stress in spermatozoa exposed to EMR. Scrotal hyperthermia and elevated oxidative stress are identified as key mechanisms through which EMR affects male fertility, with the duration of mobile phone use correlating with the severity of these effects. The effects of EMF radiation on male fertility have been studied in animal models, with significant findings. Wistar albino rats exposed to mobile phone radiation for 30-60 minutes experienced a marked decline in serum testosterone levels, from 5.10 ng/mL to 3.10 ng/mL, compared to the control group, which maintained a level of 6.34 ng/mL. These changes in testosterone levels can directly impair spermatogenesis, leading to decreased sperm count, motility, and viability. In short, regular exposure to mobile phone radiation may significantly affect male reproductive health by disrupting critical hormonal and cellular processes. One of the mechanisms through which EMF radiation harms reproductive tissues is through the generation of oxidative stress via changes in intracellular calcium. EMF exposure from mobile phones and Wi-Fi devices has been shown to increase reactive oxygen species (ROS) production by augmenting the action of nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide oxidase in human cell membranes. This elevated ROS levels can lead to oxidative stress, DNA damage, and disruptions to testicular function, potentially compromising male fertility. Studies suggest that EMF exposure causes electron leakage from the mitochondria, leading to the production of free radicals. These free radicals can damage sperm cells by affecting their membrane structure and DNA integrity. Oxidative stress, induced by prolonged mobile phone use, may also disturb free radical metabolism in reproductive tissues, leading to changes in reproductive parameters like sperm morphology and function. Research has further demonstrated that EMF radiation may affect testosterone levels at various points in the hormonal feedback cycle, including through the anterior pituitary gland and serum protein binding. These disruptions in hormonal feedback can exacerbate the negative impact on sperm quality and overall male fertility. Hormonal ChangesResearch indicates that prolonged RF-EMR exposure, such as frequent use of mobile phones over several years, can lower testosterone levels in men. Testosterone is a critical hormone for sperm production and general male health. Over time, men using mobile phones emitting 950 MHz RF-EMR experienced a gradual reduction in testosterone levels. Additionally, RF-EMR negatively affects the anterior pituitary gland, which regulates several hormones, including cortisol, thyroid hormones, and adrenocorticotrophic hormone (ACTH). This interference with hormonal balance may result in decreased reproductive function. Some studies have suggested that mobile phone radiation could lead to Leydig cell hyperplasia, a condition where these testicular cells overgrow and produce elevated testosterone levels. However, this increase is misleading, as reproductive functions, such as sperm quality, are still impaired despite the rise in testosterone. Decreased sperm count, motility, and quality have been consistently linked to mobile phone use, validating the harmful impact of mobile phone radiation on male fertility. Animal Studies on RF-EMR Exposure Animal studies have further validated these concerns. Exposure to RF-EMR, particularly at 900 MHz, has been shown to increase the levels of reproductive hormones such as FSH (Follicle Stimulating Hormone), LH (Luteinizing Hormone), and prolactin in animals. While these hormones are typically involved in regulating male reproductive functions, prolonged exposure to RF-EMR disrupts this balance. For example, increased LH levels in animals exposed to mobile phone radiation were accompanied by damage to Leydig cells via changes in protein kinase C, which led to reduced testosterone production. Additionally, RF-EMR exposure increases oxidative stress in Leydig cells, leading to cellular damage and apoptosis (cell death). This oxidative stress, combined with thermal effects from radiation, can impair the function of the hypothalamus and pituitary gland, which are essential for regulating reproductive hormones like LH and FSH. When these hormones are out of balance, the entire reproductive system can be negatively impacted. Human Studies on RF-EMR Exposure In studies of men, the group exposed to EMFs had a considerable decrease in LH levels. Additionally, RF-EMR appears to have a negative relationship with the anterior pituitary gland and the downstream effects of hormones released via the actions of the pituitary. Studies of men with long-term use of 950 MHz mobile phones (6 years) have revealed reduced testosterone levels, which is dependent on time, likely due to damage to Leydig cells and insufficient LH, as LH stimulates the secretion of testosterone by testicular Leydig cells. These hormonal regulations by the hypothalamus and anterior pituitary are essential for male reproductive functions. RF-EMR emitted from mobile phones can cause thermal effects as manifested by the elevation of temperature and EMF strength value on the hypothalamus and pituitary gland after mobile phone exposure. The penetration of RF-EMR on the hypothalamus and pituitary gland is deeper in lower frequency bands (700 and 900 MHz). Long-Term Concerns and Future GenerationsThe potential consequences of long-term mobile phone radiation exposure extend beyond the individual. In their study on mice, some researchers suggest that radiofrequency EMF might have a genotoxic effect (toxic to genes) on epididymal spermatozoa. As radiation affects hormone synthesis and cellular receptors, these changes can have long-lasting implications, possibly influencing future generations. Researchers argue that the reproductive system may be particularly vulnerable to EMF radiation, and chronic exposure could have enduring consequences on fertility rates globally. The rising use of mobile phones and other EMF-emitting devices further intensifies the need for increased awareness of these risks. Mitigating the RisksWhile mobile phones are an integral part of modern life, there are ways to mitigate the risks associated with EMF radiation. Phone Use, Screen Time, & Talking Time While low-intensity RF-EMF exposure may not significantly affect sperm quality, prolonged or frequent mobile phone use has adverse effects on male reproductive health. It is essential to minimize exposure to EMR by limiting the duration of phone calls and internet browsing on mobile devices. The amount of time spent using a mobile phone also plays a significant role in fertility outcomes (high duration of phone time is associated with low volume of semen, sperm concentration and total sperm count). Researchers discovered that talking on a mobile phone for more than an hour per day was associated with a higher percentage of abnormal sperm concentration compared to those who spoke for less than an hour (60.9% vs. 35.7%, P < 0.04). Phone Use While Charging Even more concerning, using a phone while it is charging, when radiation levels are higher due to an external power source, led to worse sperm quality compared to when the phone was used unplugged. While charging a mobile phone, the external power source emits energy and owing to the unceasing supply of energy from the external source, the device transmits at a higher power, without the need for energy saving, which is different when compared to the usual talking mode. Proximity of Wireless Devices Some recommended practices include limiting the proximity of mobile phone use, keeping the phone away from the body, especially near reproductive organs, and using hands-free devices to reduce direct exposure. The location where men keep their phones while not in use is also important. Nearly 87.6% of study participants reported keeping their phones less than 50 cm from their groin (e.g., in a pocket or on a belt), a practice that may expose their reproductive organs to higher levels of radiation. The overall exposure to radiation from frequent mobile phone use was linked to reduced sperm motility, as indicated by a meta-analysis of 1492 samples. Airplane Mode Additionally, placing phones in airplane mode when not in use and avoiding carrying phones in pockets can help lower radiation exposure. Supplements Studies suggest that antioxidant vitamins like Vitamin C and Vitamin E, as well as other supplements such as glutathione, have been observed to provide some protection against the adverse effects of EMF on the testis. These supplements could help mitigate the oxidative stress caused by radiation, preserving sperm quality and potentially safeguarding fertility. EMF Harmonizing Devices For those seeking advanced protection, innovative technologies like Aires Tech offer a solution. Aires Tech devices create a coherent field in the form of a fractal matrix around biological objects. This matrix, generated by a lattice resonator formed from ringed topological lines, serves as a coherent transducer. In simpler terms, it acts as a shield against the negative influence of techogenic electromagnetic radiation across a wide range of frequencies. Promoting Awareness and Further ResearchMobile phones emit electromagnetic fields that, while useful for communication, may come at the cost of reproductive health, particularly for men. Given the growing prevalence of mobile phone use and the compelling evidence linking its use to male infertility, it is imperative to raise awareness about these issues. Prolonged exposure to electromagnetic radiation, particularly through mobile phones and Wi-Fi-enabled devices, has been shown to negatively impact sperm quality, count, motility, and viability. Research has also demonstrated the potential for EMF radiation to negatively impact testosterone levels, and overall fertility. While mobile phones are seemingly indispensable in modern life, it’s important to be mindful of their potential risks, especially regarding reproductive health. As mobile phone use continues to increase, the need for further investigation into its health effects is crucial. Further research is needed to elucidate the long-term effects of EMR exposure on male reproductive health and to develop strategies for mitigating potential risks, particularly concerning the latest 5G technology. Studies exploring the thermal and nonthermal effects of 5G smartphones on cell membrane structures and organ system function are warranted to fully understand the potential risks associated with EMR exposure. Until more conclusive evidence is available, minimizing exposure to EMF radiation is a sensible precaution for preserving reproductive health. The accumulating evidence underscores the importance of considering the impact of mobile phone use on health. By raising awareness of these findings and promoting responsible mobile phone usage, individuals can take proactive steps to mitigate potential risks and safeguard reproductive health. As research in this field continues to evolve, ongoing investigations into the effects of EMR exposure on male fertility will be critical for informing public health guidelines and ensuring the well-being of future generations. referencesMeo, Sultan, et al. Effects of Mobile Phone Radiation on Serum Testosterone in Wistar Albino Rats. 2010.
Maluin, Sofwatul Mokhtarah, et al. “Effect of Radiation Emitted by Wireless Devices on Male Reproductive Hormones: A Systematic Review.” Frontiers in Physiology, vol. 12, 24 Sept. 2021, p. 732420, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8497974/, https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2021.732420. Accessed 22 Oct. 2021. Okechukwu, Chidiebere Emmanuel. “Does the Use of Mobile Phone Affect Male Fertility? A Mini-Review.” Journal of Human Reproductive Sciences, vol. 13, no. 3, 2020, p. 174, https://doi.org/10.4103/jhrs.jhrs_126_19. Agarwal, Ashok, et al. “Effect of Cell Phone Usage on Semen Analysis in Men Attending Infertility Clinic: An Observational Study.” Fertility and Sterility, vol. 89, no. 1, Jan. 2008, pp. 124–128, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.01.166. The human gut is teeming with a diverse array of bacteria collectively known as the gut microbiota. Among its many functions, one of the most vital is colonization resistance—the ability to prevent harmful pathogens from taking up residence in the gut and causing disease. However, understanding which microbiota communities are protective and which allow pathogens to thrive has long been a challenge. In a groundbreaking study led by Spragge et al., researchers shed light on the complex dynamics of gut microbiota and their role in colonization resistance against two significant bacterial pathogens: Klebsiella pneumoniae and Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium. Their findings, published in Science, unveil the critical importance of microbiome diversity in safeguarding against pathogenic invasion. Traditionally, it was believed that certain individual bacterial species might confer colonization resistance. However, Spragge et al. discovered that the true protective power lies in the collective diversity of the microbiota. They conducted meticulous experiments both in vitro and in gnotobiotic mice (mice that have been raised in a controlled environment where the microbial composition of their gut is precisely known and controlled), evaluating the ability of single bacterial species and increasingly diverse microbiota communities to resist pathogen colonization. Surprisingly, the researchers found that single species alone provided limited protection against the pathogens. It was only when these species were combined into diverse communities consisting of up to 50 different species that colonization resistance was significantly enhanced. This underscores the importance of ecological diversity in promoting gut health. Moreover, the study identified certain key species within these diverse communities that played a pivotal role in bolstering colonization resistance, even though they offered little protection on their own. These key species acted by consuming nutrients required by the pathogens, thereby depriving them of essential resources for growth and establishment in the host. Importantly, Spragge et al. demonstrated that microbiome diversity not only increases the probability of protection against pathogens but also enhances the overlap in nutrient utilization profiles between the microbiota community and the pathogen. This nutrient blocking mechanism serves as a potent defense strategy against pathogenic invasion. The implications of these findings are profound. They provide compelling evidence for the health benefits of a diverse gut microbiome and offer insights into the rational design of pathogen-resistant microbiota communities. By harnessing the protective power of microbiome diversity, we may pave the way for innovative strategies to combat infectious diseases and promote overall gut health. In conclusion, Spragge et al.'s study unveils the intricate interplay between microbiome diversity and colonization resistance, highlighting the collective strength of diverse bacterial communities in defending against pathogenic threats. This research not only expands our understanding of gut microbiota dynamics but also holds promise for the development of novel therapeutics aimed at fortifying the body's natural defenses against infections. referencesSpragge, Frances, et al. “Microbiome Diversity Protects against Pathogens by Nutrient Blocking.” Science, vol. 382, no. 6676, 15 Dec. 2023, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adj3502.
In recent years, researchers have uncovered a surprising trend in human physiology: a decline in body temperature over the past two centuries. Contrary to the long-standing belief that the normal body temperature is 37°C (98.6°F), studies spanning multiple cohorts and time periods have revealed a consistent decrease in average body temperature, suggesting a real physiological change rather than a mere artifact of measurement bias. A groundbreaking study analyzed data from three cohorts spanning 157 years (over 600,000 data inputs), including Union Army Veterans of the Civil War, the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey I, and the Stanford Translational Research Integrated Database Environment. The findings revealed a monotonic decrease in body temperature, with men born in the early 19th century having temperatures 0.59°C higher than men today. A similar decline was observed in women, indicating a significant shift in human physiology over time. While some may attribute these findings to changes in measurement methods or biases, the study's authors argue that the observed drop in temperature reflects real physiological differences. Human body temperature is a crude surrogate for basal metabolic rate. These findings of a decrease in body temperature indicate a decrease in metabolic rate, which is supported in the literature when comparing modern experimental data to those from 1919. Resting metabolic rate, a key component of daily energy expenditure, has been linked to body temperature and longevity. The observed decrease in body temperature suggests a corresponding decline in metabolic rate, independent of changes in body size. This likely has implications for human health and longevity, as metabolic health underlies all vital organ functions. Additionally, changes in ambient temperature and the widespread adoption of heating and cooling systems in modern times may have influenced body temperature trends. Increased time spent in thermoneutral zones, where minimal energy is expended to maintain body temperature, could contribute to the observed decline in resting metabolic rate and body temperature. In conclusion, body temperature has declined, implying lower metabolic rates (since heat is generated as a byproduct of energy production). This declining trend in human body temperature over the past two centuries offers valuable insights into the complex interplay between physiology, environment, and health. As researchers continue to unravel the mysteries of human biology, these findings pave the way for a deeper understanding of our species' evolution and resilience in the face of changing environments and lifestyles. referencesProtsiv, Myroslava, et al. “Decreasing Human Body Temperature in the United States since the Industrial Revolution.” ELife, vol. 9, 7 Jan. 2020, p. e49555, elifesciences.org/articles/49555, https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.49555.
Dai, Dao-Fu, et al. “Mitochondrial Oxidative Stress in Aging and Healthspan.” Longevity & Healthspan, vol. 3, no. 1, 2014, p. 6, https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-2395-3-6. In our modern world, where convenience often comes at a cost, the prevalence of obesogens – chemicals that disrupt the body's normal metabolism and contribute to weight gain – has emerged as a growing concern. From everyday products to industrial pollutants, obesogens permeate our environment, exerting subtle yet profound effects on our health and well-being. Commonly encountered obesogensAmong the many obesogens encountered in daily life, several stand out for their widespread use and potential health impacts:
Mechanisms of ActionObesogens exert their effects through various mechanisms, including:
Disruption of Metabolism via MitochondriaObesogens, through their pervasive presence in our environment, exert insidious effects on metabolic function, including the intricate workings of mitochondria – the cellular powerhouses responsible for energy production. By disrupting mitochondrial function, obesogens can contribute to metabolic dysregulation and, ultimately, weight gain. Mitochondria play a central role in energy metabolism, converting nutrients into adenosine triphosphate (ATP), the primary source of cellular energy. However, exposure to obesogens can impair mitochondrial function through various mechanisms, including:
The disruption of mitochondrial function by obesogens can have profound implications for metabolic health and contribute to obesity through several pathways:
causative relationship with health conditionsThe impact of obesogens on human health extends beyond weight gain, with associations documented with various health conditions, including:
Additionally, obesogens are highly related to the following health conditions and physiologic imbalances:
Unraveling the Role of Dysfunctional Adipose TissueRelatively little is known about the extent to which obesogen exposure programs dysfunctional adipose tissue that may store but not mobilize fat. However, emerging evidence suggests that obesogens may contribute to adipocyte dysfunction, leading to altered fat storage and metabolism. One potential underlying factor is suboptimal liver detoxification pathways due to inadequate micronutrient cofactors. Inadequate levels of essential micronutrients, such as vitamins and minerals, can impair liver detoxification pathways responsible for metabolizing and eliminating obesogens from the body. As a result, obesogens may accumulate in adipose tissue, disrupting metabolic function and contributing to weight gain. Additionally, micronutrient deficiencies can compromise mitochondrial function, further exacerbating metabolic dysfunction and obesity risk. A Layman's Overview of Obesogens: Redefining the Weight Loss ParadigmIn the quest for weight loss, many of us often find ourselves fixating on calorie counting, fad diets, or intense workout regimens. However, what if I told you that the key to achieving a healthy weight isn't solely about shedding pounds but rather fixing your metabolism? Enter obesogens – a lesser-known yet influential factor in the obesity epidemic. As mentioned, obesogens are chemicals found in our environment, ranging from pesticides and plastics to food additives and personal care products. These substances have the uncanny ability to disrupt our body's natural weight-regulating mechanisms, leading to weight gain and metabolic dysfunction. Instead of solely blaming calories in versus calories out, it's essential to recognize the role obesogens play in shaping our metabolism. The Better Question: Fixing MetabolismRather than constantly asking ourselves, "How do I lose weight?" a more pertinent question would be: "How do I fix my metabolism?" Fixing metabolism involves addressing the root cause of weight gain – obesogen exposure and metabolic disruption. By eliminating or reducing our exposure to obesogens and ensuring our bodies receive essential micronutrients, we can optimize metabolic function and promote overall health. The Two-Fold SolutionTo achieve optimal health and maintain a healthy weight, a two-fold approach is necessary: 1. Reduce Toxin Exposure: Minimize exposure to obesogens by making conscious choices in our daily lives. This includes opting for organic produce, using natural cleaning and personal care products, and avoiding plastic containers and food packaging whenever possible. By participating in a structured evidenced-based detoxification program, we in turn lower our toxic burden, and we can mitigate the adverse effects of obesogens on our metabolism. 2. Consume Micronutrients: Vital micronutrients, such as vitamins and minerals, serve as essential cofactors in metabolic pathways. Ensuring adequate intake of these micronutrients through a balanced diet rich in fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and lean proteins can support optimal metabolic function. Additionally, supplementation may be necessary to address any deficiencies and promote metabolic health. The conventional approach to weight loss often overlooks the critical role obesogens play in metabolic dysfunction. Instead of solely focusing on calorie restriction or intense exercise, shifting our focus to fixing metabolism through toxin reduction and micronutrient consumption offers a more holistic and sustainable solution to achieving optimal health. By addressing the underlying factors contributing to metabolic disruption, we can pave the way for lasting weight management and overall well-being. the harm of environmental toxinsThe disruption of metabolic and mitochondrial function by obesogens represents a significant public health concern, with implications for obesity and metabolic disease. By understanding the mechanisms through which obesogens impair mitochondrial function and contribute to weight gain, researchers can develop targeted interventions to mitigate their adverse effects on metabolic health. Moreover, addressing underlying factors such as suboptimal liver detoxification pathways and micronutrient deficiencies is essential in combating the detrimental impact of obesogens on metabolic function and obesity prevalence. The pervasive presence of obesogens in our environment underscores the need for greater awareness and regulation of these harmful chemicals. By minimizing exposure to obesogens and advocating for safer alternatives, we can mitigate their adverse effects on human health and combat the rising tide of obesity and metabolic disease. As we navigate the complexities of modern living, vigilance and informed consumer choices are essential in safeguarding our health and well-being against the hidden threats of obesogens. Taking Action: The Integral Wellness ProgramFor those seeking tangible solutions to combat the effects of obesogens and improve their overall well-being, the Integral Wellness Program offers a comprehensive approach to optimizing health and vitality. This flagship service provides personalized guidance and support in key areas of movement, nutrition, and lifestyle to directly enhance quality of life. Online/In-Person Guidance One of the standout features of the Integral Wellness Program is its flexibility, offering both online and in-person consultations tailored to individual preferences and needs. Whether you prefer the convenience of virtual sessions or the hands-on approach of in-person coaching, our team of experienced wellness professionals is dedicated to supporting you every step of the way. Movement, Nutrition, and Lifestyle The Integral Wellness Program takes a holistic approach to health, addressing modifiable factors and behaviors in three core areas:
Augmenting the Health Process By participating in the Integral Wellness Program, you'll not only gain valuable knowledge and skills to navigate the challenges of modern living but also receive ongoing support and accountability to stay on track towards your health goals. Through targeted interventions aimed at eliminating obesogen exposure and promoting healthy behaviors, you can unlock your body's full potential and thrive in all aspects of life. The Integral Wellness Program offers a transformative journey towards optimal health and vitality. By prioritizing movement, nutrition, and lifestyle modifications, participants can take proactive steps to combat the effects of obesogens and reclaim control over their well-being. With the guidance and support of our dedicated wellness professionals, you'll embark on a path of self-discovery, empowerment, and lasting transformation. referencesThis article challenges the conventional understanding of heart disease, particularly the widely accepted theory that attributes its cause primarily to events occurring in the coronary arteries. Instead, a paradigm shift is proposed, contending that a deeper understanding of heart disease, encompassing angina, unstable angina, and myocardial infarction (heart attack), necessitates a focus on events within the myocardium, the muscular tissue of the heart. Over the past decades, the prevailing belief in the coronary artery theory has led to costly surgical interventions, widespread medication use with questionable benefits, and dietary recommendations that may exacerbate rather than alleviate the problem. By delving into the precise pathophysiological events that underlie heart attacks, we can uncover alternative approaches to prevention and treatment, such as adopting a "Nourishing Traditions"-style diet and utilizing safe and affordable medicines like g-strophanthin. Furthermore, this shift in perspective prompts us to confront broader issues, including the impact of modern lifestyles on human health, the need for a new medical paradigm, and the importance of ecological consciousness. Ultimately, reexamining the root causes of heart disease offers a pathway to addressing this pervasive health challenge and forging a healthier future for all. The information is summarized based on the work of Dr. Thomas Cowan, vice president of the Physicians Association for Anthroposophical Medicine and is a founding board member of the Weston A. Price Foundation. During his career he has studied and written about many subjects in medicine. These include nutrition, homeopathy, anthroposophical medicine, and herbal medicine. Challenging the Conventional model: Revisiting the Causes of Heart AttacksThe traditional understanding of heart attacks, largely centered on arterial blockage due to plaque buildup, has faced challenges in recent years. Initially, it was believed that blockages in the major coronary arteries led to oxygen deficiency in the heart, causing chest pain (angina) and eventually progressing to a heart attack. This simplistic view prompted invasive procedures like angioplasty, stents, and coronary bypass surgery as standard treatments. However, clinical observations and research findings have cast doubts on this approach. Anecdotal evidence (admittedly low quality evidence) from a trial in rural Alabama revealed surprising outcomes among individuals with single artery blockages. Contrary to expectations, less than 10% of those who experienced heart attacks did so in the region of the heart supplied by the blocked artery. Similarly, a comprehensive study conducted by the Mayo Clinic highlighted the limited efficacy of bypass surgery in preventing future heart attacks. While the procedure offered relief from chest pain, it did not significantly reduce the risk of subsequent heart events, except in high-risk patients. Contrary to popular belief, blockages exceeding 90% are often compensated for by collateral blood vessels, which develop over time to ensure uninterrupted blood flow to the heart. This extensive network of collateral vessels serves as a natural bypass system, mitigating the impact of arterial blockages on blood circulation. However, diagnostic procedures like coronary angiograms, which rely on injecting heavy dye into the arteries, often fail to accurately assess the extent of blockages and the true blood flow in the heart. As a result, many patients undergo invasive treatments such as bypass surgery, stents, or angioplasty based on misleading information about the severity of their arterial blockages. Moreover, studies have shown that these procedures provide minimal benefit, if any, to patients, particularly those with minimally symptomatic blockages exceeding 90%. Despite the widespread use of these interventions, their efficacy in restoring blood flow and preventing heart attacks remains questionable. These revelations underscore the need for a reevaluation of conventional treatment strategies and a deeper exploration of the underlying mechanisms behind heart attacks. Rather than focusing solely on arterial blockages, a more holistic approach that considers factors beyond plaque buildup may offer greater insights into the prevention and management of heart disease. Beyond the Coronary Artery TheoryThe prevailing focus in cardiology has long been on the stable, progressing plaque within the coronary arteries, deemed responsible for heart attacks. However, recent insights challenge this notion, redirecting attention to the unpredictable nature of unstable plaques. Unlike their calcified counterparts, unstable plaques are soft and prone to rapid evolution, abruptly occluding arteries and triggering downstream oxygen deficits, angina, and ischemia. These vulnerable plaques are believed to be a blend of inflammatory buildup and low-density lipoprotein (LDL), the primary targets of statin drugs. Consequently, the widespread adoption of statin therapy is advocated as a preventive measure against heart attacks, fueled by angiogram studies purportedly showcasing the prevalence of unstable plaques as the leading cause of myocardial infarctions (MIs). Yet, autopsies and pathology studies present a different narrative. Thrombosis, deemed crucial in precipitating MIs, is found in only a fraction of cases upon meticulous examination. Furthermore, measurements of myocardial oxygen levels during MIs reveal no discernible deficit, challenging the conventional understanding of ischemia as the primary mechanism. While thrombosis does occur in conjunction with MIs, its occurrence in less than half of cases underscores the inadequacy of attributing MIs solely to arterial blockages. The timing of thrombosis, often post-MI, begs the question: what precipitated the event in the first place? These inconsistencies underscore the limitations of existing theories surrounding coronary artery involvement in MIs. As the spotlight shifts away from stable plaques, a pressing question emerges: What truly underlies the genesis of heart attacks? Unveiling the Autonomic Symphony: The Heart's Harmonious BalanceAn accurate understanding of myocardial ischemia necessitates consideration of the primary risk factors associated with heart disease, including gender, diabetes, smoking, and chronic psychological stress. Curiously, none of these risk factors directly implicate coronary artery pathology; instead, they impact capillary health or exert indirect effects. Over the past five decades, key medications in cardiology, such as beta-blockers, nitrates, aspirin, and statins, have demonstrated some benefits for heart patients. However, their mechanisms of action must be scrutinized within a comprehensive theory of myocardial ischemia. A groundbreaking revelation in heart disease prevention and treatment stems from the autonomic nervous system's role in ischemia genesis, as illuminated by heart-rate variability monitoring. The autonomic nervous system comprises two branches—the sympathetic and parasympathetic—responsible for regulating physiological responses. Imbalance between these branches emerges as a significant contributor to heart disease. Studies reveal a notable reduction in parasympathetic activity among patients with ischemic heart disease, particularly preceding ischemic events triggered by physical or emotional stressors. Conversely, abrupt increases in sympathetic activity rarely culminate in ischemia without antecedent parasympathetic decline. Notably, women exhibit stronger vagal activity than men, potentially influencing sex-based disparities in MI incidence. Multiple risk factors, including hypertension, smoking, diabetes, and stress, diminish parasympathetic activity, underscoring the pivotal role of the regenerative nervous system in heart health. Conversely, pharmacological interventions like nitrates, aspirin, and statins stimulate parasympathetic mediators, promoting ANS balance. In essence, while traditional risk factors and interventions influence plaque and stenosis development, their paramount impact lies in restoring ANS equilibrium. Thus, understanding the sequence of events leading to myocardial infarction demands a deeper exploration of autonomic nervous system dynamics. The Underlying pathophysiology of Myocardial IschemiaIn the vast majority of cases, the pathology leading to myocardial infarction (MI) begins with a decreased tonic activity of the parasympathetic nervous system (rest and digest), often exacerbated by physical or emotional stressors. This reduction prompts an increase in sympathetic nervous system activity, triggering heightened adrenaline production and directing myocardial cells to break down glucose via aerobic glycolysis, rather than their preferred fuel source of ketones and fatty acids (often explaining why patients report feeling tired before a MI). Remarkably, despite these metabolic shifts, no change in blood flow, as measured by the myocardial cell oxygen level (pO2), occurs. The shift towards glycolysis results in a surge of lactic acid production within myocardial cells, a phenomenon observed in nearly all MIs. This surge, coupled with localized tissue acidosis, impedes calcium entry into cells, compromising their contractility. Consequently, localized edema ensues, leading to hypokinesis—the hallmark of ischemic disease—and eventual tissue necrosis characteristic of an MI. Moreover, the ensuing tissue edema alters arterial hemodynamics, escalating sheer pressure and exacerbating plaque instability. This process elucidates the rupture of unstable plaques and their role in exacerbating arterial blockage during critical, acute scenarios. This explanation accounts for all the observable phenomena associated with heart disease. Understanding the etiology of heart disease holds profound implications beyond academic curiosity. It informs therapeutic strategies aimed at preserving parasympathetic activity, fostering holistic approaches to heart health, and challenging prevailing "civilized" industrial lifestyles. Central to this paradigm shift is the recognition of the vital role played by g-strophanthin—a hormone derived from the strophanthus plant. G-strophanthin is an endogenous hormone made in the adrenal cortex from cholesterol, whose production is inhibited by statin drugs, that does two things that are crucial for heart health and are done by no other medicine. G-strophanthin uniquely stimulates the production of acetylcholine, the primary neurotransmitter of the parasympathetic nervous system, while also converting lactic acid—the metabolic poison implicated in ischemic processes—into pyruvate, a preferred myocardial cell fuel. Perhaps this “magic” is why Chinese medicine practitioners say that the kidneys (i.e., adrenals, where ouabain is made) nourish the heart. Embracing this understanding not only guides therapeutic interventions but also underscores the imperative of dietary modifications. A diet abundant in healthful fats and fat-soluble nutrients, while low in processed carbohydrates and sugars, emerges as a cornerstone of heart health—a departure from the industrialized diets synonymous with modern civilization. In essence, unraveling the metabolic symphony orchestrating myocardial ischemia offers a transformative lens through which to perceive heart disease, fostering a holistic approach that transcends conventional paradigms and embraces the profound interconnectedness of mind, body, and environment. referencesGiorgio Baroldi. The Etiopathogenesis of Coronary Heart Disease. CRC Press EBooks, Informa, 20 Jan. 2004. Accessed 29 Mar. 2024.
Sroka K. On the genesis of myocardial ischemia. Z Kardiol. 2004 Oct;93(10):768-83. doi: 10.1007/s00392-004-0137-6. PMID: 15492892. Helfant, R. H., et al. “Coronary Heart Disease. Differential Hemodynamic, Metabolic, and Electrocardiographic Effects in Subjects with and without Angina Pectoris during Atrial Pacing.” Circulation, vol. 42, no. 4, 1 Oct. 1970, pp. 601–610, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11993303., https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.42.4.601. Takase, B., Kurita, A., Noritake, M., Uehata, A., Maruyama, T., Nagayoshi, H., ... & Nakamura, H. (1992). Heart rate variability in patients with diabetes mellitus, ischemic heart disease, and congestive heart failure. Journal of electrocardiology, 25(2), 79-88. Sroka, K., Peimann, C. J., & Seevers, H. (1997). Heart rate variability in myocardial ischemia during daily life. Journal of electrocardiology, 30(1), 45-56. Scheuer, J., & Brachfeld, N. (1966). Coronary insufficiency: relations between hemodynamic, electrical, and biochemical parameters. Circulation Research, 18(2), 178-189. Schmid, P. G., Greif, B. J., Lund, D. D., & Roskoski Jr, R. O. B. E. R. T. (1978). Regional choline acetyltransferase activity in the guinea pig heart. Circulation Research, 42(5), 657-660. Katz, A. M. (1971). Effects of ischemia on the cardiac contractile proteins. Cardiology, 56(1-6), 276-283. Manunta, Paolo, et al. “Endogenous Ouabain in Cardiovascular Function and Disease.” Journal of Hypertension, vol. 27, no. 1, 1 Jan. 2009, pp. 9–18, journals.lww.com/jhypertension/Abstract/2009/01000/Endogenous_ouabain_in_cardiovascular_function_and.3.aspx, https://doi.org/10.1097/HJH.0b013e32831cf2c6. Doepp, Manfred. “May Strophanthin Be a Valuable Cardiac Drug ? .” American Journal of Medical and Clinical Research & Reviews, vol. 2, no. 9, 15 Sept. 2023, pp. 1–6, ajmcrr.com/index.php/pub/article/view/75/74, https://doi.org/10.58372/2835-6276.1069. Accessed 29 Mar. 2024. Thayer, J. F., Yamamoto, S. S., & Brosschot, J. F. (2010). The relationship of autonomic imbalance, heart rate variability and cardiovascular disease risk factors. International journal of cardiology, 141(2), 122-131. Recent breakthrough studies have shone a light on the intriguing link between our microbiome – the diverse community of microorganisms residing in our gut and mouth – and the secret to a longer, healthier life. Scientists have long suspected that our genes, environment, and internal factors like the microbiome play a role in determining how long we live, but the specifics remained elusive. Now, thanks to cutting-edge research, we're getting closer to unraveling the mysteries of longevity. In this groundbreaking exploration, scientists employed a sophisticated approach called Mendelian randomization (MR) to delve into the intricate relationships between the human microbiome and longevity. By analyzing genetic data from large cohorts, they uncovered some compelling associations that shed light on the microbial players in the quest for a longer life. The Gut Chronicles: Microbial Superstars and CulpritsThe gut microbiome, a bustling metropolis of bacteria, has been a focal point in the quest for longevity. The study identified certain gut microbes as potential champions in the battle against aging. Microbial heroes like Coriobacteriaceae, Oxalobacter, and the probiotic Lactobacillus amylovorus were found to be positively linked to increased odds of longevity. On the flip side, a few gut microbes emerged as potential antagonists, with names like Fusobacterium nucleatum, Coprococcus, Streptococcus, Lactobacillus, and Neisseria negatively associated with longevity. These microbial foes might have a role in determining how gracefully we age. Oral Health: More Than Just a Pretty SmileThe study didn't stop at the gut; it extended its gaze to the oral microbiome, a less-explored but equally important realm. The findings suggested a fascinating connection between the oral microbiome and longevity. Specific oral bacteria were identified as potential influencers in the longevity game. Interestingly, the research hinted at a lower gut microbial diversity among centenarians (diversity appears to lower with age), but no significant difference in their oral microbiota. This finding underscores the importance of tracking the movements of these beneficial microbes across different parts of the body for a longer and healthier life. Decoding the Genetic Blueprint for LongevityThe study leveraged Mendelian randomization to unravel the causality between the microbiome and longevity. This approach, using genetic variants as tools, allowed scientists to explore the potential causal links between specific microbial features and the length of our lives. The bidirectional analyses provided a wealth of information, not only pinpointing specific microbes associated with longevity but also revealing the microbial preferences of genetically longevous individuals. For instance, genetic predisposition to longevity correlated with a higher abundance of Prevotella and a lower abundance of Bacteroides, suggesting a potential link between dietary choices and a longer life. Microbes and Diseases: Unraveling the We The study didn't just stop at longevity; it ventured into the realm of diseases. Certain microbes associated with longevity were found to have correlations with specific diseases. For example, Coriobacteriaceae, linked to longevity, was significantly reduced in patients with heart failure, suggesting a potential protective role against cardiovascular diseases. This "microbiota—disease—longevity" axis provides a nuanced understanding of how our microbial companions might influence not only our lifespan but also our susceptibility to various health conditions. What's Next in the Quest for a Longer LifeWhile the study opens exciting new avenues, there are some limitations to consider. The identified causalities didn't all reach statistical significance due to the vast number of microbial features tested. However, the robustness of the findings was supported by the replication of several identified causal links in independent datasets. Moving forward, researchers aim to collect more comprehensive individual-level data, including microbiome profiles, genetics, socio-economic factors, behaviors, and environmental influences. This holistic approach will help tease apart the individual contributions of these factors to longevity. In conclusion, this pioneering study, using Mendelian randomization, has provided us with a roadmap to explore the intricate connections between our microbiome and the quest for a longer, healthier life. As we unlock the secrets hidden in our genes and microbes, we inch closer to personalized approaches for healthy aging and interventions that could extend our time on this planet. referencesLiu, Xiaomin, et al. “Mendelian Randomization Analyses Reveal Causal Relationships between the Human Microbiome and Longevity.” Scientific Reports, vol. 13, no. 1, 29 Mar. 2023, p. 5127, www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-31115-8, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-31115-8.
In an update to its 2007 scientific statement, the American Heart Association (AHA) emphasizes the significant and multifaceted benefits of resistance training (RT) on cardiovascular health. Contrary to the misconception that RT solely enhances muscle mass and strength, the statement highlights the favorable physiological and clinical effects of this form of exercise on cardiovascular disease (CVD) and associated risk factors. The scientific statement aims to provide comprehensive insights into the impact of RT, either alone or in combination with aerobic training, on traditional and nontraditional CVD risk factors. More is not always betterEpidemiological evidence suggests that RT is associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality and CVD morbidity and mortality. Adults who participate in RT have ≈15% lower risk of all-cause mortality and 17% lower risk of CVD, compared with adults who report no RT. Approximately 30 to 60 minutes per week of RT is associated with the maximum risk reduction for all-cause mortality and incident CVD. Notice this "U" shape in the curve when examining the relationship between RT and morbidity and mortality. This curve suggests that some RT is clearly beneficial, but has the volume of RT increases past a certain point the benefits drop and it becomes harmful. The concept of a "biphasic response" is fundamental to understanding hormesis. It describes the characteristic dose-response relationship observed in hormetic processes, where a substance or stressor elicits opposite effects at low and high doses. The response can be visualized as a U-shaped or J-shaped curve, illustrating the beneficial effects at low doses and potential harm at higher doses. Benefits of RT on Traditional CVD Risk FactorsThe AHA's scientific statement underscores the positive influence of RT on traditional CVD risk factors, including blood pressure (BP), glycemia, lipid profiles, and body composition. Numerous studies indicate that engaging in RT is associated with reduced resting BP, improved glycemic control, and favorable alterations in lipid profiles, contributing to a lower risk of all-cause mortality and CVD morbidity. Despite recommendations suggesting 2 days per week of RT, only 28% of U.S. adults adhere to this guideline, highlighting the need for increased awareness and promotion. RT and resting blood pressureRT has demonstrated the ability to reduce resting BP across diverse populations, with notable benefits observed in individuals with prehypertension and hypertension. The mechanisms behind these benefits include enhancements in endothelial function, vasodilatory capacity, and vascular conductance. The reductions in BP achieved through RT are comparable to those achieved with antihypertensive medications. RT and GlycemiaRT shows promise in improving glycemia and insulin resistance, leading to a lower incidence of diabetes. The evidence suggests a nonlinear dose-response association, with up to 60 minutes per week of RT associated with the maximum risk reduction for diabetes. RT and Lipid ProfilesWhile the effect on lipid profiles is modest, RT results in favorable changes in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, total cholesterol, and triglycerides. These improvements are more pronounced in older adults and those with elevated cardiometabolic risk. Rt, Body composition, and weightRT positively influences body composition by increasing lean body mass and reducing body fat percentage. It is particularly effective in overweight or obese individuals, contributing to increased metabolic rate and mitigating weight gain over time. Benefits of RT on Nontraditional CVD Risk FactorsIn addition to traditional risk factors, the scientific statement highlights the potential mechanisms by which RT positively affects nontraditional CVD risk factors. These include increased cardiorespiratory fitness, improved endothelial function, and potential benefits for sleep quality, psychological health, and well-being. The AHA's updated scientific statement reinforces the pivotal role of resistance training in cardiovascular health, providing a comprehensive overview of its impact on both traditional and nontraditional risk factors. As the evidence supporting RT's benefits continues to grow, the statement serves as a valuable resource for clinicians and public health professionals, offering practical strategies for promoting and prescribing resistance training to enhance cardiovascular health in diverse populations. ReferencesPaluch, Amanda E, et al. “Resistance Exercise Training in Individuals with and without Cardiovascular Disease: 2023 Update: A Scientific Statement from the American Heart Association.” Circulation, 7 Dec. 2023, https://doi.org/10.1161/cir.0000000000001189. Accessed 11 Dec. 2023.
Momma H, Kawakami R, Honda T, Sawada SS. Muscle-strengthening activities are associated with lower risk and mortality in major non-communicable diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies. Br J Sports Med. 2022 Jul;56(13):755-763. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2021-105061. Epub 2022 Feb 28. PMID: 35228201; PMCID: PMC9209691. We’ve built an entire economy, not just in the United States but the entire Western civilization, on healthcare. For thousands of years, real control over populations has been around their food. Today, with billions of souls on the planet, controlling food has become a massive business and a means of ultimate political control. Between 1982 and 2000, something changed in our environment, overwhelming the immune system of the population. Diseases in different organ systems started going epidemic simultaneously, challenging the notion of a thousand different diseases.
In the late 1800s, we changed the way we farmed, leading to a disrespect for crop rotation and soil health. This disrespect for soil health resulted in the Dust Bowl of the 1920s and 30s, pushing us to outsource our food production and rely on imported food. After World War II, with a surplus of petroleum, we started producing chemical-based fertilizers, leading to the Green Revolution. While plants turned green due to nitrogen and phosphorus, they lacked essential nutrients and medicine. This deficiency weakened plants, making them susceptible to diseases and pests. The chemical industry introduced pesticides and herbicides (including #Glyphosate), creating a co-dependent relationship between farmers and chemical solutions. Similarly, in healthcare, we’ve become dependent on drugs to manage symptoms, creating a cycle of side effects and more medications. The epidemic rise in diseases like autism, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, and autoimmune disorders signals a deeper problem, challenging our understanding of the root cause of diseases. It’s time to reconsider our approach to health, starting with understanding the importance of soil health and nutrition. Just as respecting soil is crucial for healthy crops, prioritizing our body’s nutritional needs is fundamental for overall well-being. Let’s shift our focus from symptom management to addressing the root cause, promoting a holistic approach to health. Zach Bush, MD is triple board-certified physician specializing in internal medicine, endocrinology and hospice care. He is the founder of Seraphic Group, an organization devoted to developing root-cause solutions for human and ecological health in the sectors of big farming, big pharma, and Western Medicine at large. And he is also the founder of Farmers Footprint https://farmersfootprint.us/, a non-profit coalition of farmers, educators, doctors, scientists, and business leaders aiming to expose the deleterious human and environmental impacts of chemical farming and pesticide reliance - while simultaneously offering a path forward through regenerative agricultural practices. |
The Awareness domain contains research, news, information, observations, and ideas at the level of self in an effort to intellectualize health concepts.
The Lifestyle domain builds off intellectual concepts and offers practical applications.
Taking care of yourself is at the core of the other domains because the others depend on your health and wellness.
Archives
October 2024
Categories
All
|