3 VIDEOS deconstructing 2 fraudulent "studies designed to fail' from JAMA regarding antiviral nutrition
Competence in Pharmacology is selectively annihilated in service of the drug paradigm to maximize pharmaceutical sales
By making antiviral nutrition appear ineffective, these medical organizations corral doctors/politicians/public into thinking that the only effective options are medical services and pharmaceutical solutions such as vaccines and so-called “vaccine passports.”
Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) recently published two studies that demonstrate complete incompetence in study design (fault of the authors) and editorial quality control (fault of the journal, reviewers, and editors). The result of these garbage publications—which most doctors, media and general public would assume are good research based simply on where they were published, aka the genetic/origin logical fallacy—is that therapeutic options such as antiviral nutrition were intentionally misrepresented as inefficacious.
JAMA 2021 February: They lied about the dosing by stating that “50 mg of zinc gluconate” is “high-dose” when in fact it provides only 7 mg of elemental zinc, which is not a therapeutic amount especially for acute illness
Citation: Effect of High-Dose Zinc and Ascorbic Acid Supplementation vs Usual Care on Symptom Length and Reduction Among Ambulatory Patients With SARS-CoV-2 Infection: The COVID A to Z Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Netw Open 2021 Feb 1;4(2):e210369 PMC7881357 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.0369
Technique(s) of Demolition: They lied about the dosing
The goal they accomplished by publishing bogus research: By making antiviral nutrition appear ineffective, these medical organizations corral doctors/politicians/public into thinking that the only effective options are medical services and pharmaceutical solutions such as vaccines and so-called “vaccine passports.”
JAMA 2021 March: They deprived the patients of treatment for 18 days when the illness had a duration of 14 days, then they stated that the treatment failed
Controlled demolition of vitamin D against Cv19 by 1) failing to start treatment for at least 11 days into an infection that typically has a duration of 14 days, and 2) using large unphysiologic “bolus” dosing of vitamin D3 a) which has already been demonstrated to be less effective or ineffective against respiratory infections per a meta-analysis published in the BMJ in 2017, and b) requires at least 7 days to normalize vitamin D levels.
Citation: Effect of a Single High Dose of Vitamin D3 on Hospital Length of Stay in Patients With Moderate to Severe COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA 2021 Mar 16;325(11):1053-1060. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.26848. PMCID: PMC7890452. The exact same idiocy was published as “Effect of high-dose parenteral vitamin D3 on COVID-19-related inhospital mortality. Eur J Clin Nutr 2021 July” as I previously reviewed.
Technique(s) of Demolition: Thus, by starting the treatment 11 days late when they knew the treatment needed 7 days to become effective (eg, 11 days + 7 days = 18 days) the authors essentially provided no treatment for these severely ill patients who had a respiratory infection of an expected duration of 14 days. Yes, they effectively delayed treatment for 18 days for an infection with a duration of 14 days.
The goal they accomplished by publishing bogus research: By making antiviral nutrition appear ineffective, these medical organizations corral doctors/politicians/public into thinking that the only effective options are medical services and pharmaceutical solutions such as vaccines and so-called “vaccine passports.”
Sources of accurate information: see links and videos provided
PDF article and infographic on vitamin D pharmacology (data and images also included in the video below)
PDF “Vitamin D Bolus Reconsidered: Physiologic Dosing versus Pandemic Consequences of Codified Confusion”
PDF compilation “Compilation of Vitamin D articles and letters 2004-2020 by Dr Alex Vasquez”
