Cholesterol is indispensable to the brain and nerves. Native non-oxidized cholesterol is much more important to the nervous system than other organ systems for which such normal levels of cholesterol may be excessive in that system. So much so that the brain has its own isolated supply separated from the blood by the notoriously hard to cross blood brain barrier (BBB) which relies on collagen to make it selectively impenetrable to certain molecules. Any excess is turned into a hydroxy- soluble form which is released from the brain into the blood circulation. However, when it runs low for whatever reason, cholesterol can be and is actively transported across the BBB from the hepatic supply. Nowdays, the statin industry has introduced some confusion by entering into the science of Alzheimer's disease. The big million dollar question is how interfering with the mevalonate pathway can help reduce the causal protein tangles when lowering cholesterol below normal is very toxic to neural function. There are some elucidations regarding isoprenoids involvement, independent of cholesterol. Perhaps in some instances with specific ApoE isoforms this is true, but in the majority of instances lowering CNS cholesterol damages it instead of benefitting it. The tangible outcome of cholesterol depletion in the human brain are problems like amnesia, and the very symptoms of Alzheimer's itself. The question to answer is probably what optimal cholesterol synthesis is to the brain, as compared to that in the blood supply, just as the "normal" brain ascorbate pool (2000-10,000uM) is much much higher than that of the bloodstream (60-150uM).
Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor Regulates Cholesterol Metabolism for Synapse Development
Vitamin C function in the brain: vital role of the ascorbate transporter SVCT2
Friday, December 19, 2014
Tuesday, December 2, 2014
Dr. Robert F. Cathcart III, M.D. was right...in 1975
While combinations upon the base of high dose Vitamin C are fairly new, the application of high dose Vitamin C against viral ailments is a very old idea that was actually put into practice by Dr. Cathcart. As with most things in medicine, things that are both cheap and effective tend to get buried by the new widget or pill for sale. Cathcart was no crank, or belligerent lecturer, but a practicing physician with very strong credentials.
His experience as an actual practicing doctor in the USA, employing Vitamin C as a medicine, clearly shows that a little sprinkle (91 mgs) is quite far away from what you need as a therapeutic dose.
He explains this clearly, unambiguously, in 1981 in the Orthmolecular Psychiatry, one of the few non-corporate aligned outlets that would display an efficacious medicine for humanity that would not bankrupt it. Yes, we should constantly remember that while people are well-meaning, well-meaning people working for a business are lead by business interests not human interests. So then the chicken chase goes on for the patent drug, the newest widget and pill to be able to sell at the same time a widely available and safe cure might exist.
The Method of Determining Proper Doses of Vitamin C for the Treatment of Disease by Titrating to Bowel Tolerance
Anyone who tries to revert back to little sprinkles of Vitamin C does not understand the topic and worse will not achieve a cure or effect. Might as well do nothing then...
Here is the PubMed entry which documents his experience in healing patients with Vitamin C:
Vitamin C in the treatment of acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS).
If someone thinks a viral disease which can be spread through needle sticks somehow has something to do with morality, they should discuss this idea with their medical doctor or nurse and listen to what they have to say about plagues that arise by "immorality." Better yet, find one of the many children born with the disease and tell them how they are immoral before they know the meaning of it. Now that the inane and tedious medieval fingerpointers have been given their aggrandizements, the science can be returned to:
Here is the body of the text in regular html on Vitamincfoundation.org:
VITAMIN C IN THE TREATMENT OF ACQUIRED IMMUNE DEFICIENCY SYNDROME (AIDS)
"Why eradicate a disease when you can profit by selling non-working pills for it and weaponize its stigma as a sociopolitical gambit" - The body of fiscal corporate thought.
His experience as an actual practicing doctor in the USA, employing Vitamin C as a medicine, clearly shows that a little sprinkle (91 mgs) is quite far away from what you need as a therapeutic dose.
He explains this clearly, unambiguously, in 1981 in the Orthmolecular Psychiatry, one of the few non-corporate aligned outlets that would display an efficacious medicine for humanity that would not bankrupt it. Yes, we should constantly remember that while people are well-meaning, well-meaning people working for a business are lead by business interests not human interests. So then the chicken chase goes on for the patent drug, the newest widget and pill to be able to sell at the same time a widely available and safe cure might exist.
The Method of Determining Proper Doses of Vitamin C for the Treatment of Disease by Titrating to Bowel Tolerance
Anyone who tries to revert back to little sprinkles of Vitamin C does not understand the topic and worse will not achieve a cure or effect. Might as well do nothing then...
Here is the PubMed entry which documents his experience in healing patients with Vitamin C:
Vitamin C in the treatment of acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS).
If someone thinks a viral disease which can be spread through needle sticks somehow has something to do with morality, they should discuss this idea with their medical doctor or nurse and listen to what they have to say about plagues that arise by "immorality." Better yet, find one of the many children born with the disease and tell them how they are immoral before they know the meaning of it. Now that the inane and tedious medieval fingerpointers have been given their aggrandizements, the science can be returned to:
Here is the body of the text in regular html on Vitamincfoundation.org:
VITAMIN C IN THE TREATMENT OF ACQUIRED IMMUNE DEFICIENCY SYNDROME (AIDS)
"Why eradicate a disease when you can profit by selling non-working pills for it and weaponize its stigma as a sociopolitical gambit" - The body of fiscal corporate thought.
Sunday, November 23, 2014
IMPROVE-IT study: Desperation of the Statin Industry
IMPROVE-IT touts ezetimibe and simvastatin therapy results as guidance to load up patients with ever higher doses of statins, satisfying the mythical NNTI of 100 patients dosed per 2 magical, precise, exact reductions of CVD incidence over 6 years. Common sense would indicate that if you did nothing, normal variation would generate the same results given that there will never be 100% incidence of anything. The impact of various statins piled one on top of each other in cardiovascular medicine is already being exaggerated based on a literal 1% decrease in incidence which could also easily be had by statistical manipulation.
Stopping short of cutting cholesterol synthesis altogether, the ever lower recommendations for LDL to definitive hypocholesterolemia levels, which generates its own set of diseases such as increased infection and hemorrhagic type cerebral stroke, the ludicrous idea offered seriously to lower LDL levels in the populace to 60mg/dL and below will cause a whole swath of new death by low cholesterol. What it says to the astute observer is that the normal range of LDL has never been culprit to atherosclerosis leading to ischemic events and that other unrecognized factors are causal, such as oxidation of cholesterol and proteins.
We're not seeing a remarkable 50% reduction here, just a flutter. Moreover, the rate of death is exactly the same, barring a 0.1% difference. For other drugs in oncology, this would be considered an unmet endpoint, and the drug would be canned, but not for the statin industry, whose sales must always increase year over year in order to inflate their stock price like other unrelated products.
IMPROVE-IT results
The real world data is that serum cholesterol levels are not related to CVD disease....at all. Other factors associated with its transport do, but not cholesterol levels. It is misdirected effort to reduce LDL-cholesterol across the board to hypocholesterolemia levels, especially as it pertains to the importance of cholesterol synthesis to cognition. The thing with statins is that they are not targeted to particles, proteins, glycoproteins, etc. They are designed to poison the mevalonate pathway, indiscriminately lowering cholesterol synthesis everywhere, having nothing to do with ApoB, ApoA, ApoE, ApoC, ApoJ, apo(a), triglycerides, phospholipids, plasmalogens, particle number, particle size, etc. They have been proven dozens of times to have zero effect on the particle that is extremely more atherogenic than LDL, Lp(a), which nobody seems to check for. One day in the future, it will be considered medical negligence not to check for Lp(a). Statins do sometimes offer an anti-inflammatory mechanism, which may actually be their mode of action rather than poisoning the cholesterol synthesis enzyme chain. The fact that lowering cholesterol lower and lower and lower had no benefit against heart disease says something to the tune of "obvious."
cholesterol-heart-disease-there-is-a-relationship-but-its-not-what-you-think
Real world data: Zero correlation (0.0) between cholesterol and heart disease.
Stopping short of cutting cholesterol synthesis altogether, the ever lower recommendations for LDL to definitive hypocholesterolemia levels, which generates its own set of diseases such as increased infection and hemorrhagic type cerebral stroke, the ludicrous idea offered seriously to lower LDL levels in the populace to 60mg/dL and below will cause a whole swath of new death by low cholesterol. What it says to the astute observer is that the normal range of LDL has never been culprit to atherosclerosis leading to ischemic events and that other unrecognized factors are causal, such as oxidation of cholesterol and proteins.
We're not seeing a remarkable 50% reduction here, just a flutter. Moreover, the rate of death is exactly the same, barring a 0.1% difference. For other drugs in oncology, this would be considered an unmet endpoint, and the drug would be canned, but not for the statin industry, whose sales must always increase year over year in order to inflate their stock price like other unrelated products.
IMPROVE-IT results
The real world data is that serum cholesterol levels are not related to CVD disease....at all. Other factors associated with its transport do, but not cholesterol levels. It is misdirected effort to reduce LDL-cholesterol across the board to hypocholesterolemia levels, especially as it pertains to the importance of cholesterol synthesis to cognition. The thing with statins is that they are not targeted to particles, proteins, glycoproteins, etc. They are designed to poison the mevalonate pathway, indiscriminately lowering cholesterol synthesis everywhere, having nothing to do with ApoB, ApoA, ApoE, ApoC, ApoJ, apo(a), triglycerides, phospholipids, plasmalogens, particle number, particle size, etc. They have been proven dozens of times to have zero effect on the particle that is extremely more atherogenic than LDL, Lp(a), which nobody seems to check for. One day in the future, it will be considered medical negligence not to check for Lp(a). Statins do sometimes offer an anti-inflammatory mechanism, which may actually be their mode of action rather than poisoning the cholesterol synthesis enzyme chain. The fact that lowering cholesterol lower and lower and lower had no benefit against heart disease says something to the tune of "obvious."
cholesterol-heart-disease-there-is-a-relationship-but-its-not-what-you-think
Real world data: Zero correlation (0.0) between cholesterol and heart disease.
Monday, July 7, 2014
1957: The Scurvy-Atherosclerosis Connection is Observed in Guinea Pigs
Dr. G.C. Willis made some of the first observations of this phenomenon in 1957.
The Reversibility of Atherosclerosis (In Guinea Pigs)
Below is a picture of intimal hemorrhage induced by scurvy.
Below on the left is lipid accumulation (red) in a scurvy guinea pig liver,
and a normally supplemented liver on the right for comparison.
Dr. G.C. Willis' catalog of Vitamin C-Atherosclerosis work spanning back to 1957 is free for review here:
The Free Site for Dr. G.C. Willis' Work
Monday, June 2, 2014
Vitamin A Deficiency Causes an Irreversible Immunodeficiency??
Now, let's read this carefully again. "A significant unresolved question is how vitamin A deprivation causes, and why retinoic acid fails to reverse, immunodeficiency.
When depleted of vitamin A, T cells undergo programmed cell death
(PCD), which is enhanced by the natural competitor of retinol,
anhydroretinol."
But the TV pop-docs told us that vitamins have absolutely nothing to do with immune system function and that this vitamin-immune system connection is some kind of charlatan's ploy..
Wait a minute, now. Vitamin A deficiency causes immunodeficiency?
Vitamin A depletion causes oxidative stress, mitochondrial dysfunction, and PARP-1-dependent energy deprivation.
While the title says one thing, the abstract clearly states another. The disease is clearly multifactorial, but one cannot actually claim that vitamin deficiency has nothing to contribute to immunodeficiency because that would be simply false. In fact, there is a 1-to-1 causality between various single nutrient deficiencies including macronutrients and immunodeficiency. Nearly all nutrients are important to immune system function in one aspect or another. It doesn't mean a well-nourished person will never get sick, just the same as living in the USA doesn't mean everyone will win the lottery. It does mean that nutrient deficiency is an important causal factor to immunodeficiency, especially in impoverished countries and that there is no denying this fact.
But the TV pop-docs told us that vitamins have absolutely nothing to do with immune system function and that this vitamin-immune system connection is some kind of charlatan's ploy..
Wait a minute, now. Vitamin A deficiency causes immunodeficiency?
Vitamin A depletion causes oxidative stress, mitochondrial dysfunction, and PARP-1-dependent energy deprivation.
While the title says one thing, the abstract clearly states another. The disease is clearly multifactorial, but one cannot actually claim that vitamin deficiency has nothing to contribute to immunodeficiency because that would be simply false. In fact, there is a 1-to-1 causality between various single nutrient deficiencies including macronutrients and immunodeficiency. Nearly all nutrients are important to immune system function in one aspect or another. It doesn't mean a well-nourished person will never get sick, just the same as living in the USA doesn't mean everyone will win the lottery. It does mean that nutrient deficiency is an important causal factor to immunodeficiency, especially in impoverished countries and that there is no denying this fact.
Sunday, June 1, 2014
Single Nutrient Deficiencies Known to Cause Cancer
Despite the "Reader's Digest" style expert "news" and other pop-sci mass media outlets that would lead one to believe this is some kind of quackery, it is well established in conventional global science that various single nutrient deficiencies are carcinogenic to the same degree as environmental carcinogens. On the contrary, various single nutrient deficiencies may lead to severe cancer and the causal link has been established and known for a long time among conventional scientists. Obviously, a compound nutrient deficiency could only worsen and aggravate carcinogenic processes.
Rather than go into a massive enumerated list-o-mania, or amazingly irrelevant political tirade, here are a few solid examples of independent conventional studies having proven the fact for a long time.
Selenium deficiency causes disseminated pyogranulomas.
Methionine and choline deficiency cause liver cancer.
Methyl donor nutrient deficiency causes liver cancer.
Vitamin B-12 deficiency causes genetic damage to B-cells.
Folate deficiency causes mitochondrial DNA deletions and chromosome breaks.
Zinc deficiency causes aberrant DNA damage repair.
Causing liver cancer by fighting glioma by depleting methionine??
Iodine deficiency causes dysplasia and neoplasia.
Riboflavin deficiency predisposes to cancer.
Riboflavin deficiency causes increased susceptibility to carcinogens.
Low Vitamin A causes Wilms tumor.
Experimental Vitamin A deficiency causes increased nephroblastoma.
Of course we don't ever forget about Vitamin C (ascorbate).
Rather than go into a massive enumerated list-o-mania, or amazingly irrelevant political tirade, here are a few solid examples of independent conventional studies having proven the fact for a long time.
Selenium deficiency causes disseminated pyogranulomas.
Methionine and choline deficiency cause liver cancer.
Methyl donor nutrient deficiency causes liver cancer.
Vitamin B-12 deficiency causes genetic damage to B-cells.
Folate deficiency causes mitochondrial DNA deletions and chromosome breaks.
Zinc deficiency causes aberrant DNA damage repair.
Causing liver cancer by fighting glioma by depleting methionine??
Iodine deficiency causes dysplasia and neoplasia.
Riboflavin deficiency predisposes to cancer.
Riboflavin deficiency causes increased susceptibility to carcinogens.
Low Vitamin A causes Wilms tumor.
Experimental Vitamin A deficiency causes increased nephroblastoma.
Of course we don't ever forget about Vitamin C (ascorbate).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)