On Health

[Skybird]

More on SWEETENERS:

https://translate.google.com/transla...fwechselrisiko

I came across this text from the Deutsches Ärzteblatt, summarising some studies that I have not further explored, but some of the mentioned details, namely the relevance of the guts for indirectly helping to trigger an insuline resistence, had some alarm lights flashing up on my desk. Plus the relevance of certain sweeteners reducing the diversity of the microbiome in the guts. But especially the possibility of insuline resistence being helped to get boosted by sweeteners, what somewhat counters the reason why you would consume them in the first, has me in an raised state of attention-paying, where before I was always relatively relaxed. I expressed in the first post on sweeteners that I am relaxed about that "alarmism" and could not imagine how it should be true. Maybe I must change my view on that topic very substantially. Which would be bad news, of course.

I really would like to see research results on to what degree the insuline production caused by refined sugar equals, is higher or is lower than that caused by various kinds of sweeteners. Dr. Fung mentioned that some seem to trigger higher insuline reaction than white sugar, but did not further elaborate that at the text position where he wrote it in a book.

Dr. med. Kristina Rother criticizes the fact that for a long time the discussion about the safety of a sweetener was largely based on cancer risk and teratogenicity. The sweetener expert, who comes from Germany, is doing research at the renowned US National Institutes of Health (NIH) in Washington and now sees the problem of sweeteners elsewhere: "We also have to talk about metabolic safety." In her opinion, there is clear evidence that that artificial sweeteners can promote insulin resistance. In fact, overweight subjects showed signs of insulin resistance after being given a drink containing sucralose, as measured in the oral glucose tolerance test ( 5th). This was confirmed again in a recently published randomized control study in healthy people of normal weight ( 6 ). Dr. med. Stefan Kabisch, doctor and researcher at the German Institute for Nutritional Research in Potsdam, is skeptical: “The new study is certainly an important aspect, but not yet proof.” For Rother, however, the matter is clear: “The connection between sucralose and insulin resistance is practically proven. ”She is of the opinion that this also applies to other sweeteners such as saccharin and acesulfame-K.

Edit: P.S.

Found something. And I do not like what I read.

https://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/36/9/2530

In the conclusions they describe in how far their study is different from earlier such studies which came to opposing results. This study here was done with obese black Americans, while before most such studies were done with non-obese Caucasians. Both race and obesity status are relevant differences in the body's metabolism and physiology, not drmatic, but such differences are real (for exmaple there is medications that help white people, but would almost kill an African, Africans need for the same purpose a different drug, that has nothing to do with "latent racism", but just is reality). Still, something tells me that there nevertheless is something very relevant in this study that points beyond just obese black Americans.


Why is it that the good tasting things so often are unhealthy, and the healthy things so often are less tasty? Its mean. The devil must have made things so.

[Skybird]

Myth Busting: Does Fasting burn Muscle?

This is a very popular myth, even my old doctor (changed him earlier this year) told me that bollocks, amongst some other nonsense.

Take note of the links in the text that lead you to some dedicated studies on the matter.

And no, fasting DOES NOT burn muscle or weaken you. Quite the opposite. Maybe you do not turn into a muscular Schwarzenegger, but you become more energetic, enduring, physically lasting.

https://www.dietdoctor.com/does-fasting-burn-muscle

Beginners who find it hard to keep it, can ease it a bit by allowing a fatty coffee (but not as fatty as a bullet proof coffee) once per day, say 1-2 table spoons of cream 30+%. If that is what maintains your compliance, its worth the price ( I could not drink black, bitter coffee, not for my life). No sugar and no sweeteners, however, both trigger the insuline. Coffee and fat does not. Take salt, lots of water, consider supplementing vitamines and minerals, if you are concerned by that. It should not play a role if you fast only 2-3 days and maybe not even as often as I do (3-4 days in a row, then 4-5 eating days, plus daily intermittend fasting 17/7).

The food industry does not want you to fast. They cannot sell food to a person that does not eat. Instead they tell you you shoudl eat "frequently", and often, spreading over the whole day, or you should eat their wonderful "light" products, or special food designed to help you loosing weight. You could as well believe in the stork bringing the babies! I read nonsense like having 5 or better 6, no: even up to 9 small meals with vegetable and (fructose enriched) fruits, the magazines and daily press are full of this drivel - that borders physical assault, and recommending dangerous health hazards as a healthy cure! And from insuline spike to insuline spike your journey goes that way...

[Skybird]

On SOY:


https://translate.google.com/transla...soja-ungesund/

This nicely sums up why I have come to avoid soy (since years already) although I liked Tofu roasted in the pan after being marinaded for some hours in soy sauce, roasted sesam oil and sherry. I also avoid meat "surrogates" made of soy. Only soy sauce is something i cannot do without in my kitchen, ketjap manis is somehting i cannot do without and cannot replace. But then, it is heavily fermented soy beans, so that is a bit of a difference than natural soy beans (same for Natto (grim taste and consistence, I happily skip it) and other Japanese fermented soy foods, fermentation really changes things, same for fermented milk products). We Westerners live under this impression that Japanese eat Tofu all day long, but they don'T, I knew Japanese people, and they had it rarely and said it is not common to eat often - and if so, then only in context of certain meals helping with Tofu's "fallout".

I also remind of that originally soy beans were not farmed for human consumption but as animal fodder. (Comparable to canola/rap originally getting produced to win lamp oil and ingredients for soap prduction exclusively, usiong it to feed humans came later, it was originally not farmed in huge quantities for human consumption).

Eat meat of god fat quality. Omega 6 and transfats are to be avoided. The concerns about saturated fats are no longer supportable, forget it, like we learned to forget about food cholesterol raising blood cholesterol - it doesn't. The surrogates made of soy imo never came even close to the taste and consistency of meat, not to mention that their nutrient mix is completely different. We should stop to talk of "meat surrogates", so far there are none, that simple the truth is. Like there is no surrogate for cow milk (I do not mean to say you should drink plenty of cow milk, you probably shouldn'T, but in cheese and curd and cream, milk gets processed, if it should taste well, you cannot avoid milk for this). Cereal-water mixes are no milk, do not taste like milk, and if you want to cook with them or put them in your coffee you immediately realise they also do not behave like milk. Try to cook a pudding with them, but don'T be too disappointed with the result!
All this babbling about "alternatives" in the end is just lame excuses for promoting a certain ideology and worldview.

Always watch out for, ask for, check for the quality and type of included fats and oils. I find that when I do that, 9 out of 10 "alternative" food surrogates immediately land in the waste bin. Spend more, east less, eat quality, gain health. To me that rates as just industrially processed food, often with included health hazard.

[Catfish]

^ all quite interesting.

Vitamin D update though - have been taking very high doses of Vitamin D, around 10,000/week for more than a year. Talking to several doctors (one of the MHH Hannover) they advised to immedately reduce the quantity now. Vitamin D is not harmless in a way that you can take as much as you want – it is not only about Calcium levels.

It is better to get the blood levels, stage up the D-level until the fat reservoirs are filled up with Vit. D again, and then stop.
Also better to take Vitamin D in the winter, since UV radiation during summer boosts the Vit. D level and can lead (together with pills) to an overdosage with resulting kidney insufficiency, and even failure.

Vitamin D is "good for you", but do not use too high doses over time, it can indeed lead to kidney failure and the need for regular dialysis.

[Skybird]

Catfish, traditional doctors raised by the classic, industry-influenced paradigm at university all warn of how dangerous supplements are in general. The food and pharmaceutical industry pay over 95% of all medical studies underttaken! There lobbyists are in politics, media and educaiton, and they influence massively the training curriculae at unversities. That is as classical a conflict of interests as "classical" can mean.

I said a lot about Vit-D in the past 12 months, and all what I said I quote from academic, medical, practioner sources, nothing of it has grown on my own intellectual property. In the Wuhan virus thread I mentioned it repeatedly as well. I have three thick books just on vitamine D on my shelves now, two of them by the Einstein of Vitamine D research, Michael Hollick, he is the driving force behind it since 50 years.

Thate doctors who warned you, most likely told you BS, due to his own limited understanding of it (nutrition and prevention play almost no role in studying medicine at university). Especialyl in germany,l the generla atottude ion nutrient supplementation is extrneely phobic, and oriented towards mininmalist doses that do not even cover the minimum biological needs. Endless German concerns, concerns, and more concerns. If you really want to blow up in anger, just read the garbage released be the DGE(German Food Association), it really gets me fuming nowadays. Dubious, obscure, suspicious, I would even call it almost criminal, but its Am erican counterpart is not any better, what they still publish on "healthy"fats and limiting salt and grains and cereals, kills people by the many thousands every year via karciovascular deseased, hypertension, strokes, obesity, and diabetes. THEY MAKE PEOPLE ILL.

At 10.000 iE of Vit-D daily, and assuming you are blessed with non-ill organs, you must not fear problems. There are still the old myths floating around sometimes, namely the risk of hypercalcemia, and yes, Vitamine D can effect other variables as well in the metabolism, in the blood fats, the glucose metabolism. Heck, what else to expect, it is a bloody steroid-hormone, it is of omnipotent relevance! I have written so often now on why taking higher doses and why these still are safe to take, that I do not repeat it all another time here once again. I have linked to videos by Dr. Serheult (last tiem he was asked he said he takes 5 or 6 thousand units although living in some sunshine place: he had low calcidiol levels nevertehless, he said) and I think I listed some others in the Wuhan thread. I gave a head-up on this book (in German): https://www.amazon.de/Vitamin-Heilkr...s&sr=1-3-spell. The authors are not just any unknowns from outer space, they are luminaries in their branches. Hollick was the Big Bang of Vitamine D research in modern time.Severla of the key discoveries sinc the 780s, have been booked by him and his team.


I just say this (again): the body is prepared by nature to handle 20.000 IE per day. taking more is safe, but most likely useless (costs more money for nothing). A growing risk is not to be expected below up to 40.000 IE per day over any months, or as one-time-doses of 100-150 thousand IE in one day (fully reversible symptoms in case of the latter). Vitamine D must be combined with Magnesium, the storage form of it that you swallow in a pill or produce via the sun can metabolically not be used, must be activated before that, and for that Magnesium is a must. Vitamine K2 helps additionally, but is, at these doses, not really essential. Its maximum dose beyond which K2 turns poisonous is still not knowm, but the ylooked very high already, and did not yet find the limit, so you risk nothing there except a few pennies. It helps to keepo the Calcium mint he biones, and get Calcium in the blood transported into the bones (and teeth). But it is not the only but essential actor for this.

And I also say this: if you want to be safe, then do not speculate, but measure. A Vitamine-D test can be asked for easily, can even be ordered for use at home, at the doc it costs around 25-30 Euros. My dentist offers it as well, that relevant he considers good Calcidiol levels! Wer wissen will, muß messen. . Many Vitamine-D doctors say they want Calcidiol levels of at least 40-60 ngr/ml, and your daily dose to reach that depends on your ammount of body fattness, and metabolic rate. I have taken since long time 10,000-15,000 IE per day, on average 12500 over the past 6 months or so, and this March, as I reported in the Wuhan thread I think, I had a robust Calcidiol level of 73 ng/ml, which is a bombastically good value: it is above the mere academically wanted minimums of 40-60, and still significantly below threat levels that according to some sources are starting to become a valid concern from 100 on, others say 120 or even 150.

If your doctor tells you taking 10.000 IE per day is a rik for you but he does not give you a valid diagnosis for any health conditions of yours that organically put you at risk, then do like I did early this year: say him farewell and find yourselfelf a new doctor. Dogmatical defenders of outdated paradigms and business lobbies designed to protect the profit interests of industry, are not a benefit for your health. Doctors are only humans, you know. They can err, and they can not know something. Absolutely possible.

Avoid Calcidiol levels of 30 or deeper at all cost. They should be seen as very serious health risks.

I aimed at 70-80, and with 73 I landed right on the mark: 12500 IE per day, metabolically usable Magnesium ca. 800 mg, Vit-K2 200 mcgr, I am male, age 54, 177cm, weight back then was 87 kg (slightly overweight at that time, now am at 76 and falling ), abdominal girth 104 cm (back then). This gives you an idea.

I do not worry about calcidiol levels up to 80-90, at worse I produce expensive urine. The body by nature is made to handle 20.000 IE per day, this is established knoweldge and verified in practice, and this is what correpspnds with the Calcidiol levels in primtive tribes beign exposed to high-UV light all day long while walkign around almost naked. I probably reduce to 10000 any time soon, due to my no longer existent fat reserves.

Never forget one thing: if you are healthy, the industry cannot make economic profit from you. And vitamines and minerals cannot be patented, cannot be used to make fortunes with. They want to sell expensive drugs with long lists of health risks and side effects. At your expense.

Dont worry, dont be so easily intimidated. Use your reason, get some education on the matter, and then add 1 and 1 together.

Nutrition, food, nutrients, supplementation is a wide field. University and medical paradigms do not even get close to adequatly reflect their relevance. Prevention and healing and maintaining health is not high on the agenda, the big money lies in endlessly treating symptoms only - while leaving the causes untouched. That maintains the customer base.



Check your Calcidiol level once a year. Thats how I do it now. He who wants to know, must measure.

[Skybird]

Heck, I just realised you did not write "10000 units per day", but "10000 units PER WEEK".



What the hell are you even worrying about...??? 1500 IE per day - That is nothing!

P.S. Fauci, when asked said he takes 5000 per day. The German DGE, idiots that they are, still stick to 800 per day (I thoguht they had raised it to 2000 meanwhile...) : and since your dose, catfish, is twice as much than that, your doctor believes in the official recommendationsand takes them as ultimate truth because they are precious always trustworthy official recommendations and so must be right. And so he hits your alarm button.

Do not believe him. (I say this assuming there are no inherent health conditinsn or deseases in your system that indeed could recommend limiting several nutrients. cancer patients for exmapelk wpould nto nwant to take all nutrient that strengthen cell health, since they woudl also strenghten cancers vcells when taking them).

Get up and have a Calcidiol test in your blood serum. If you have less than 60 ng/ml, raise your daily dose.


Vitmaine D doe snot directla affect the kidney, only indirectly via the calcium in a hypercalcem ia. So, if you think you are sufferinbg from Vitamine D intoxication , then you would need to have extrenely, very extremely high elvels, anmd then it wpould affect your calcium metabolsim becasue then the Vitmaine D would extract much more calciuum form the food you digest. So an altenative is - and I have that form adoctor, not just my imagination - check not or not only you Calcidiol level, but your calcium level as well. Its cheap. If you calcium is fine, then there is no chance that Vitamine D affects your kidneys negatively (kidney stones, kidney inflammation).



Down the street where i live there is a man who won the lottery last summer. I heard he takes Vitamine D. Other people get kidney problems, and also took Vitamine D. - So...?

The health system is not about healt, but making money. Healthy people are a n annoyance for that task.

[Skybird]

On Cholesterol and Carbohydrate Reduction:




https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https://kochketo.de/cholesterin-und-keto/

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https://foodpunk.de/alles-ueber-cholesterin/

Things are a bit different than just "high cholesterol cloggs your arteries". From some age on, higher cholesterol levels are even associated with smaller risks for death, whereas low levels that were considered "healthy " until some years ago seem to increase the risk for certain types of cancer and heart attacks.

If you want to check with your doctor, do not be satisfied with just learning total cholesterol levels, but ask for a specialised analysis of how your LDL is composed: how much small density LDL (sdLDL) and oxidated LDL (oxLDL) do you have (you want them to be low), and how is your HDL level (you want it to be rather high)? Big larticle LDL is not so much a cocnern, and that is what usually gets raised by cionsuming keto fatty diats and MCTs. sdLDL and oxLDL are the more relevant data.


Worth to remember: if you fast, or eat keto style and thus more healthy fats/oils, your LDL MUST rise, and it is wanted, because all the fat and lipids and keton bodies must get transported from the liver to the parts of the body where they are needed. Thats what the LDL does, whereas HDL works the other way around, collecting unused components and transporting them back to the liver for recycling. Think of it like christmas time. People raise the amounts of parcels due to the gifts and presents they sent, and so the mail and logistics services are more present with their vans on the street, they even do additonal shifts: you see more vans on the streets. Its just logical.

[Skybird]

Hope for celiac desease patients:


https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2032441


In Germany, around 1 in 100 is affected. Just years ago, it were 1 in 500. A new generation of technical encymes used in industrial bread-baking, helping to reduce the fermentation times and thus not doing the job anymore that fermentation (and that means necessarily: time) is meant to do, has entered the industrial baking factories. I see at least a timely correlation with the increase in numbers of people being affected by celiac desease (and claimed Gluten sensitivity, which however is over-diagnosed by a factor of around 30) and digestive problems after having eaten such bread. These encymes are so incredibly potent that they must be dosed with a precision in the range of 1-2 mg per 1 ton of flour. Imagine what they do in your body if they are not properly mixed and evenly distributed, but reach your system accidentally in an even just marginally concentrated form.

Many people do not know that EVERY consummation of wheat leads to inflammatory events in the guts, every single bite of wheat. Its just that in the healthy person and with wheat in a properly treated form (long fermentation), these inflammations usually stay below a treshhold level (above which we indeed would notice them in form of pain in the guts).

Eat less cereals. I eat a loaf of bread, am done with it after 2 or 3 days - and then do not eat any bread for the coming 10 days or so. I love the taste of good, fresh bread, I will not completely abandon it therefore - but I have reduced the consummation levels, its no longer a daily food of mine (even more reocmmended sinc I aolos eat pizza... ). And if you do, eat cereals in a fermented form, and that means: longer fermentation times (doughs!) is better than short ones. Industry bread I would avoid, ready baking mixtures from the supermarket shelves for home baking I would avoid as well.



Thats one of the two reasons why I let my pizza doughs rest for 2-3 days (the other is improved elasticity and consistency of the dough, and a bit more of arome and a reduction of yeast and its unwanted taste). Its also the reason why after 3, 4 years of laziness I am moving back to baking my bread myself (which I did for over 25 years already, almost 30 years). I do not tolerate the baker's bread too well. Oh, it tastes good, some of them at least, but since I eat them, I have again and again ininflammatory events in my guts, pain that lasts for 1-3 days. When I do not eat this short-time-fermented bread, which happens a lot over the past 12+ months, I have no problems at all. And its not the gluten. I use lots of gluten for my own baking, since it improves the dough when I grind my own flour freshly: bread or pizza, you cannot get an elastic, soft, juicy dough without gluten). I use a household bread baking machine where you put in the ingredients and the rest does the machine. The problem is that its programmes has the bread ready 4-5 hours later - super short fermentation time, that means. Therefore, I interrupt the process, I let it work the dough and mix it for the initial 20 minutes or so - and then switch the machine off. I come back to it 18-24 hours later, and then activate directly the baking program. 25 hours this way, 4-5 hours the automatic program's way. Go figure.


In the old days, the use of sour dough was right about this: long fermentation times, and having the chemical agents and molecules by which the grain defends itself against its enemies eating it (us), getting neutrlaised. Toda,y this tiem is not invested anykore sinstea dhighly aggressiove encymes get used to skip it, and these encymes enter your system. Bon appetite, dont complain.

[Skybird]

A prominent health issue: Cancer.

I just finished the latest book by Dr. Jason Fung, and it was probably the best I have red on the topic so far. British Amazon thus has it at 4.8 of 5.0 stars with over 700 filed reviews. Its really a very good view with a very reasonable though kind of "unusual" perspective. His arguments are, as always, solid and convincing. I give the link. Its available in German, too.

Good to learn that there are reallyreally good doctors out there as well.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Cancer-Code...ps%2C66&sr=8-2

[Skybird]

A 40 minute give-and-take dialogue on the need and worth of nutrition supplements, between a former German radiologist and hospital chief physician who now specialises in preventive medicine and nutrition medicine, and a high-profile research pharmacologist. Its in German, sorry, you can see to what degree Youtube's English translation subtitles (in the options) do helpful magic for you.

[Skybird]

Depression, thyroid and iodine

7 minutes of insight. See this as a heads-up on that mental and mood problems and psychological issues not necessarily must or should be "tackled" by psychopharmaceuticals and heavily abused anti-depressants, but then also not only by endless talking therapoies and behavioural therapies, but - food, and nutrition. If I would still work as a ps<chologist today, I would not be a psychologist and therapist anymore, but most likely as a general counselor (to avoid legal probelksm with the law and health insurrances) with a strong focus also on nutrition (and Buddhist models of the human mind and consciousness). In New Zealand they have a "mental asylum" were they seem to treat patients not so much with drugs and medications, but with nutrition and supplements, and I do not talk just about neurosis and bad moods, but schizophrenia and worse. That is fascinating and amazing.

[Skybird]

Health Wars in US schools. This one made me chuckle.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...chools/432201/

Compare to this translated essay:

https://www-faz-net.translate.goog/a...pp#pageIndex_2

Everything with reason, and eye measure, please. Too much ideology is in the the game, too much incompetently handled pseudoscience and method abuse. Too many nutrition myths that already are debunked and still get held up - or got replaced by new myths not any less erratic.

As with other convenient topics, climate for example, health and nutrition nowadays too often get abused for ideological reasons, displaying one's own world view and determination to impose it on others, and enforcing social and civilizational change and replacement of social order, a new form of class conflict, by making ecology and nutrition weapons that get swung in the war against those who stick to the "old order".

Last time I was in a "Bio-Supermarkt" over here, was short after New Years Eve, I wanted a certain salt, and I quickly regretted to have gone there again. The typical audience often is easy to recognise, but the vegetable on display was shabby, old, and withered. To compensate for it, it was expensive.:LOL: No way I waste money or time on such stuff. But those who buy it often push their proudly swinged chest like a polished harness when they go to pay, and there they then stand with that poor looking strunk of withered leek and hold it as if it were the sword Excalibur.

Absurd.

Some basic things should be known about food. Some endlessly repeated myths and lies should be objected to as often as they get repeated. But many now turn it into a religion, a form by which they express what they consider their core identity, their group context. Psychologically, that leads to camp-building and polarization, sectarianism. And regarding eating, it leads to loss of enjoyment, taste, and - health.

[Skybird]

Medcram'S Dr. Seheult on a new and bomb-proof study showing that Vitmaine-D (and to lesser degree Omega 3) helps to significantly redcue auto-immune diseases of various kind.



This is not specifically on Covid-19, but several different serious autoimmune diseases.




A very solid study design, very solid methodology, and high "n."

The conclusions on the positive effects sound not like much (although they are anything but small), but I want to remind of that the study used still very low doses of Vitamine D (2000 IU) and Omega 3 (1 gr) only, whereas many experts for both would say that the real therapeutical relevance starts at 4-6 thousand IU Vit-D and 2-3 gr EPA+DHA. I am very confident that higher doses than those they used would have shown a much higher effect over time, especially in case of Vit-D, because we know that the number of genes Vitamine D can activate and switch for the positive, does not rise just linear with increasing of doses but exponentially.

Also, both nutrients are interacting heavily with other nutrition supply status that they depend on to work best,. and depend on for resorbation. Apparently the study unfortunatey, like I see so often in ecotrophology, did not pay attention to this, so the nutrients supply status of the almost 29000 participants is unknown. Considering that these days the nutrition standard is not good, I absolutely would expect that if the other nutrients would have been optimized to interact best with the given Vit-D and Omega 3 doses, even these given low doses would have shown even better effects. Thats a theory I claim, but I think its a very well founded, reaosnable consideration thta almost recommends itself.

Nutrients of maximum interest for this study would have been Omega-6 status, Arachidon status, Magnesium, Calcium, Vitamine C, Vitamine A, and parat hormone (not a nutrient but an importan index) Then this good and solid study would have been even better.

The study I did not read, I trusted in Dr. Seheult to have summarized it correctly. Doing such things is the bread and butter of his lectures, isn't it.

[Skybird]

How the Americna way of life makes peope fat and lets them die younger, in a nutshell. What the author misses in his list is the relevance of sugar, sweeteners, fructose and glucose, soft drinks, and HFCR (high fructose corn syrup, the worst of all sweet stuff).

https://www.nzz.ch/international/fet...&_x_tr_sl=auto

[Skybird]

Absolutely stunning data! Phenomenal.



The risk reductions reported in this meta analysis are absolutely awesome.

This is a ver ybig story, at leats it should be, and it should be so sinc eman years becasue I know its not the firts time the foudn such stunning results regarding Vitamine D.

We have a pandemic running in the western world - and everywhere in the world where Western food habits, and especially American food habits with its excessive consummation of sugars, corn syrups, fructose, high-fructose-corn-syrup (HFCS) and so forth dominate people's eating.

And making me giggling again: these studies found no raise in hypercalcemia, no rais ein kidney stones. These are the two oiverkill arugments many doctors still make against prescribing or privately using Vit-D. I called that bollocks three years ago, and it was bollocks already before, and it is still bollocks today. You need to EXCESSIVELY overdose, and over longer times, several months, to have at least the chance to produce these side effects. America, India are terrible palces for diabetes, its expldiouing ther,e and millions do not even know they have it and slide deeper and deeper into it doing all kind of severew damnages to their bodies and organ systems.

YOU SHALL NOT TRUST YOUR DOCTOR BLINDLY.

YOU SHALL NOT TRUST YOU GOVERNMENT'S HEALTH OFFICIALS AT ALL.

Listen what they tell you, but then weigh it, do some research on it yourself, use your brain. Be aware of to what degree big pharama interests and food industry lobbbyism are interfering with policy making and curriculum-forming for university students. On this issue, and many others, governments completely fail us all, and we, the people, pay for it with our health, and shortened life expectancy, and deaths. It gets worse today now that even eco and climate aguments are used to tlel people how to misfeed themselves and run into certain nutritional deficits stemming from a food pratcice that rules out certain things for "the higher cause". Krank werden fürs Klima! could become a German slogan.

Its capital crime at work, plain and simple. Conspiracy to not only protect the profits of the food and pharma corporations, but to even boost them further. At the cost of our health. The little doctor down your street must not even be a guilty one, he just practices what he has been taught when he was a student and had no choice. He is just a human, his day has just 24 hours, and his job maybe did not show up to be like he expected it to become. Also, he is entangled in a network of procedures and rules by the law makers and health insurers that do not leave him too many freedoms.

At risk is your health and life expectancy. Whether you follow the doctor's advice or not - the consequences good or bad will always be lived by you, by nobody else, and certainyl not by the doctor.

Listen, but do not blindly trust into just everything just because he is a doctor. Check. Question. Research yourself.


I have a whole long list of medical topics now already ion whcih I would refuse to just blindly obey the official recommendations and practices and drug advices. Onc you start to do your won research on such things you soon find that it doe snto stop again and that the list of dubious contrsdictiosna nd questionable assumptions becomes longer and longer. First its alarming, then it becomes scary.



There is no reason and no excuse for just blindly trusting.


I learned that at the latest during the Covid pandemic and the way they cheated on it. One of the biggest fraudulent schemes ever in the history of medicine. It took me some time. But in the end I got there.