Health is Life
  • Seminars
  • Blog
  • Training
  • Entering Wedge Media
  • Donate

Disclaimer: TheSE Articles ARE for educational purposes only (Not Medical Advice)

Does IT Really "Stay in The Arm?"

8/22/2021

2 Comments

 
Over the past year, public health authorities have repeatedly assured potential vaccine candidates that the Pfizer and Moderna mRNA COVID-19 injections "stay in the arm." Although a basic understanding of physiology and pharmacokinetics of intramuscular (IM) injections would seem to cast doubt on this claim, a number of research studies have already weighed in on this topic:

“IM [or intramuscular] injections yielded expression at the injection site (68%), liver (12%), and kidneys (11%)” (2).

“Given this innovative vaccine platform, we examined the bio-distribution of the mRNA vaccines for both routes of administration [in male rats] […] Following IM administration, the maximum concentration (Cmax) of the injection site muscle was 5,680 ng/mL, and the level declined with an estimated t1/2 of 18.8 hr. Proximal lymph nodes had the second highest concentration at 2,120 ng/mL[…], suggesting that [the] mRNA distributes from the injection site to systemic circulation through the lymphatic system. The spleen and liver had a mean Cmax of 86.9 ng/mL […] and 47.2 ng/mL […], respectively. In the remaining tissues and plasma, H10 mRNA was found at 100- to1,000-fold lower levels” (3).

“while mRNA mainly transfects cells near the injection site it could hypothetically reach any cell in the body (Maugeri et al., 2019; Pardi et al., 2015)” (4).

To sum up these findings, as in other lipid nanoparticle studies featuring the intramuscular injection route, the majority of the vaccine does in fact reside near the injection site, however, to a lesser yet potentially significant extent these substances can migrate to the liver, spleen, adrenal glands, and other organs. How do we know this? Partly because of the larger body of evidence we’ve just discussed, but also specific insight from a study shared by Pfizer at the behest of the Japanese government (1).​

Here's what they disclosed: Figure A shows all significant distribution sites plotted, Figure B shows distribution curves without reference to the injection site (to get a better view of the sites of lesser concentration). 
Picture
Figure A
Picture
Figure B
​According to the charts above, the liver holds the lion’s share of the systemic spread. Just for the record, the Pfizer lipid nanoparticle was actually designed to target hepatocytes (liver cells) though it can transfect others as well (5).  Thus, we can see from the above data, the lipid nanoparticle injection traveled to other areas of the body as well (one would assume through the bloodstream). However, here's where things get sketchy, an important consideration is that the logical route of transmission in listed sites (via the circulatory system) that occurs from .25 hours to 8 hrs does not account for the area under the curve (or total amount of LNP) in the organs  saturated with LNP from about 2 hours to 48 hours. Here are two data plots (scaled for actual elapsed time and devoid of the injection site data points) that show this disturbing trend. Figure C shows the same data as above, only now scaled for elapsed time. Figure D shows total area under the curve (a quantitative depiction of how  nanoparticle concentration).
Picture
Figure C
Picture
Figure D
​Therefore, if these nanoparticles are not traveling through the blood in significant amounts beyond 8 hours, there must be a novel distribution method such as translocation along axons of the peripheral nerves or uptake/ transport by mononuclear cells- both observable with other types of nanoparticles (6, 7, 8, 9). However one thing is for certain: injection site to organ/ tissue transport is somehow occurring beyond the initial circulatory diffusion timeline. This leads to some rather important questions... Why didn't Pfizer show what happened to these mice after 48 hours? Why did they only reveal part of the data? Maybe they ran out of mice since the rodents were killed at set points during the study? Another idea could be that they were simply trying to show possible translocation via the circulatory system. But we have already shown that this is false- that there would have to be some other major route of translocation besides the circulatory system.

So, if we could see the data post 48 hours we would expect more of this potentially dangerous trend. Potentially most disturbing is that by this time an alarming percentage of LNP’s had made their way to the most vital of the female reproductive organs: the ovaries. This is a strange occurrence considering that these organs are not a site of massive blood perfusion like the spleen or liver. To make matters worse, this increase follows an exponential curve: a trend that could lead to tremendously increasing concentration of nanoparticles in these specific organs in a much shorter amount of time as previously shown.

A study in the scientific journal Controlled Release, sheds some further insight into this phenomenon  In fact, researchers found that, over time, nanoparticle injections do lead to inordinate accumulation in the ovaries:

"Several nanocarrier systems are frequently used in modern pharmaceutical therapies. Within this study a potential toxicity risk of all nanoscaled drug delivery systems was found. An accumulation of several structurally different nanocarriers but not of soluble polymers was detected in rodent ovaries after intravenous (i.v.) administration. Studies in different mouse species and Wistar rats were conducted and a high local accumulation of nanoparticles, nanocapsules and nanoemulsions in specific locations of the ovaries was found in all animals” (10).

Furthermore, these researchers issued a warning that interventions utilizing nano-technology for drug/ vaccine delivery should not be approved for use on females before results of long-term studies could be analyzed:

"The findings of this study emphasise[sic] the role of early and comprehensive in vivo studies in pharmaceutical research” (ibid).

Having established the fact of: #1) the potential for systemic spread of mRNA vaccines; and, #2) the ovaries may receive a disproportionate amount of the payload, the next important question would be: what effect do the lipid nanoparticles and spike protein mRNA have on the ovaries (and, for that matter, other tissues as well)?

First of all, lipid nanoparticles themselves show ability to disrupt cellular integrity by triggering inflammation: 

“Here we show that the LNPs used for many preclinical studies are highly inflammatory” (4).

Secondly, the actual transfection of affected cells could have consequences leading to tissue destruction:

“[After transfection of a cell with Spike Protein mRNA] the resulting translated protein could be presented on MHC-I in the form of peptides or displayed as a whole protein in the cell membrane. In both cases, cells with the vaccine peptide/protein on their surfaces could be targeted and killed by cells of the adaptive and innate immune system” (ibid).

In other words, every cell that is “transfected” by the Covid-19 spike protein-producing mRNA would be a potential target for immune-mediated cellular destruction. Additional vaccine boosters would increase this risk dramatically, as well as prior Covid-19 infection, due to the fact that antibodies and immune memory against the spike protein would intensify the attack on cells expressing this whole protein or subsequent segments in MHC-1.

Additional risks could potentially stem from this physiologic phenomenon: initiation of autoimmune disease, immune cell programming issues dealing with self-recognition, stem cell abnormalities, spontaneous abortion of pre uterine-implanted embryos, and many more.


Furthermore, organs and tissues not normally at risk by an actual SARS-CoV-2 viral infection could be put in harms way. Whereas the latter needs certain receptors to infect a cell (ACE II) lipid nanoparticles could potentially be absorbed into almost any cell in the body (5, 11).

The implications of this happening on a population-wide scale are extremely troubling. To make matters worse, there are currently no studies showing the confounding effect of other variables: such as physiologic factors affecting pharmacokinetics of the vaccine. For one, the massive population based public health measures such as the hypercapnia (elevated CO2) associated with prolonged occlusive masking (12). Studies indicate that the corresponding effect upon a compound known as NADPH oxidase could decrease the oxidation of LNP’s, in this case ALC-0315, the lipid encasing the spike protein mRNA- potentially slowing excretion/ elimination and increasing systemic spread (13, 14).

Another factor would be increased vascularity occurring at the injection site (deltoid muscle) among athletes that would greatly increase systemic spread (15). This 
phenomenon could be part of the underlying basis for the increase risk of myocarditis seen among healthy athletic individuals following vaccination (16).

Although much is still to be ascertained regarding the potential long term side effects of these novel mRNA vaccines, two things are certain: #1) the shot does not simply stay in the arm (although we still don't know exactly how it translocates to distal organs and tissues or what damage it causes during this process); and #2) the inherent inflammatory and immune-mediated cytotoxicity give a number of additional reasons to be concerned. Can you really blame me for being Covid-19 "vaccine hesitant?"
​

Healthy Regards,

Ron Meinhardt
Executive Director
Entering Wedge Media
www.enteringwedgemedia.com

P.S.If you havent already seen our eye-opening COVID-19 interview with Dr Jim Meehan click here to watch and share!



References:

1) https://www.pmda.go.jp/drugs/2021/P20210212001/672212000_30300AMX00231_I100_1.pdf

2) Hajj KA, Melamed JR, Chaudhary N, Lamson NG, Ball RL, Yerneni SS, Whitehead KA. A Potent Branched-Tail Lipid Nanoparticle Enables Multiplexed mRNA Delivery and Gene Editing In Vivo. Nano Lett. 2020 Jul 8;20(7):5167-5175. doi: 10.1021/acs.nanolett.0c00596. Epub 2020 Jun 9. PMID: 32496069; PMCID: PMC7781386.

3) Bahl K, Senn JJ, Yuzhakov O, Bulychev A, Brito LA, Hassett KJ, Laska ME, Smith M, Almarsson Ö, Thompson J, Ribeiro AM, Watson M, Zaks T, Ciaramella G. Preclinical and Clinical Demonstration of Immunogenicity by mRNA Vaccines against H10N8 and H7N9 Influenza Viruses. Mol Ther. 2017 Jun 7;25(6):1316-1327. doi: 10.1016/j.ymthe.2017.03.035. Epub 2017 Apr 27. PMID: 28457665; PMCID: PMC5475249.

4) Ndeupen S, Qin Z, Jacobsen S, Estanbouli H, Bouteau A, Igyártó BZ. The mRNA-LNP platform's lipid nanoparticle component used in preclinical vaccine studies is highly inflammatory. Preprint. bioRxiv. 2021;2021.03.04.430128. Published 2021 Jul 23. doi:10.1101/2021.03.04.430128

5) Ryan Cross (2021). "Without These Lipid Shells, There Would Be No mRNA Vaccines for COVID-19". Chemical & Engineering News: 16–19. doi:10.47287/cen-09908-feature1. 

6) Katiyar, N., Raju, G., Madhusudanan, P. et al.Neuronal delivery of nanoparticles via nerve fibres in the skin.Sci Rep11, 2566 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-81995-x

7) Ahmad E, Feng Y, Qi J, Fan W, Ma Y, He H, Xia F, Dong X, Zhao W, Lu Y, Wu W. Evidence of nose-to-brain delivery of nanoemulsions: cargoes but not vehicles. Nanoscale. 2017 Jan 19;9(3):1174-1183. doi: 10.1039/c6nr07581a. PMID: 28009915.

8) Mistry A, Stolnik S, Illum L. Nanoparticles for direct nose-to-brain delivery of drugs. Int J Pharm. 2009 Sep 8;379(1):146-57. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2009.06.019. Epub 2009 Jun 23. PMID: 19555750.

9) Suk JS, Xu Q, Kim N, Hanes J, Ensign LM. PEGylation as a strategy for improving nanoparticle-based drug and gene delivery. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2016;99(Pt A):28-51. doi:10.1016/j.addr.2015.09.012

10) Andreas Schädlich, Stefan Hoffmann, Thomas Mueller, Henrike Caysa, Cornelia Rose, Achim Göpferich, Jun Li, Judith Kuntsche, Karsten Mäder, Accumulation of nanocarriers in the ovary: A neglected toxicity risk?, Journal of Controlled Release, Volume 160, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 105-112, ISSN 0168-3659

11) Liu M, Wang T, Zhou Y, Zhao Y, Zhang Y, Li J. Potential Role of ACE2 in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Prevention and Management. J Transl Int Med. 2020 May 9;8(1):9-19. doi: 10.2478/jtim-2020-0003. PMID: 32435607; PMCID: PMC7227161.

12) Roberge RJ, Coca A, Williams WJ, Powell JB, Palmiero AJ. Physiological impact of the N95 filtering facepiece respirator on healthcare workers. Respir Care. 2010 May;55(5):569-77. PMID: 20420727.

13) Kogan AKh, Grachev SV, Eliseeva SV, Bolevich S. Uglekislyĭ gaz--universal'nyĭ ingibitor generatsii aktivnykh form kisloroda kletkami (k rasshifrovke odnoĭ zagadki évoliutsii) [Carbon dioxide--a universal inhibitor of the generation of active oxygen forms by cells (deciphering one enigma of evolution)]. Izv Akad Nauk Ser Biol. 1997 Mar-Apr;(2):204-17. Russian. PMID: 9190222.

14) Vlasova II, Kapralov AA, Michael ZP, Burkert SC, Shurin MR, Star A, Shvedova AA, Kagan VE. Enzymatic oxidative biodegradation of nanoparticles: Mechanisms, significance and applications. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 2016 May 15;299:58-69. doi: 10.1016/j.taap.2016.01.002. Epub 2016 Jan 6. PMID: 26768553; PMCID: PMC4811710.

15)  
Jensen L, Bangsbo J, Hellsten Y. Effect of high intensity training on capillarization and presence of angiogenic factors in human skeletal muscle. J Physiol. 2004 Jun 1;557(Pt 2):571-82. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.2003.057711. Epub 2004 Mar 12. PMID: 15020701; PMCID: PMC1665084.

16) Hudson B, Mantooth R, DeLaney M. Myocarditis and pericarditis after vaccination for COVID-19. J Am Coll Emerg Physicians Open. 2021 Jul 26;2(4):e12498. doi: 10.1002/emp2.12498. PMID: 34337595; PMCID: PMC8313036.



2 Comments

National Emergency

5/21/2021

2 Comments

 
A growing body of evidence suggests that the COVID-19 spike protein (and therefore the vaccine) is neurotoxic. Furthermore, it is possible that the synthetic mRNA sequence itself could trigger an autoimmune attack upon the neurons.  A number of individuals have asked “how can I reduce neuroinflammation and stimulate brain cell repair and regrowth?” I will definitely address this concern. But first, some have suggested that the COVID-19 vaccine serum doesn’t leave the injection site... That it somehow stays in the muscle (and thus only muscle tissue and regional lymphatic vessels are effected). However, this is based upon a strange assumption. For decades medical science has known that drugs given via this route (IM)  find their way into the bloodstream. Indeed, studies looking at the specific type of solution (lipid encapsulated mRNA) have shown systemic diffusion:

“Given this innovative vaccine platform, we examined the bio-distribution of the mRNA vaccines for both routes of administration. Male CD-1 mice received 6mg formulated H10 mRNA either IM or ID. Following IM administration, the maximum concentration (Cmax) of the injection site muscle was 5,680 ng/mL, and the level declined with an estimated t1/2 of 18.8 hr (Table 1). Proximal lymph nodes had the second highest concentration at 2,120 ng/mL (tmax of 8 hr with a relatively long t1/2 of 25.4 hr), suggesting that H10 mRNA distributes from the injection site to systemic circulation through the lymphatic system. The spleen and liver had a mean Cmaxof86.9 ng/mL (area under the curve [AUC]0–264of 2,270 ng.hr/mL)and 47.2 ng/mL (AUC0–264of 276 ng.hr/mL), respectively. In the remaining tissues and plasma, H10 mRNA was found at 100- to1,000-fold lower levels.” (Mol Ther. 2017 Jun 7;25(6):1316-1327. doi: 10.1016/j.ymthe.2017.03.035. Epub 2017 Apr 27.)

“IM injections yielded expression at the injection site (68%), liver (12%), and kidneys (11%). " (Nano Lett. 2020 Jul 8;20(7):5167-5175. doi: 10.1021/acs.nanolett.0c00596. Epub 2020 Jun 9.)

“When mRNA-LNPs were injected intramuscularly and intratracheally, similar to intravenous and intraperitoneal deliveries, a large portion of the luciferase activity was detectable in the liver, demonstrating systemic spread of the nanoparticles. Also similar to intravenous and intraperitoneal deliveries, the high levels of protein produced in the liver occurred over a short duration with the majority of translation ceasing at day 2 post-injection (Fig. 2). Interestingly, significant bioluminescent signal could be measured in the lungs and muscles, as well, with the latter lasting for up to 8 days post injection.” (J Control Release. 2015 Nov 10;217:345-51. doi: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2015.08.007. Epub 2015 Aug 8.)

Of additional concern, the standard of administration (both by manufacturers and public health entities) does not include aspiration of the syringe (to determine if the needle has entered a blood vessel) before administering the injection. If the injection is properly placed, this is a rare occurance. However it could lead to greater systemic spread if injected directly into the bloodstream.

This summary of above findings were aggregated by a respondent (see comments section) to the following article: https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2021/01/11/rna-vaccines-and-their-lipids (a good discussion of both sides of the question are found here).

Furthermore, as Dr Jim Meehan, MD, discussed in his "Emergency Declaration" email:

"Introduction of spike proteins to in vitro models of the blood-brain barrier (BBB) showed significant changes to barrier properties. Key to our findings is the demonstration that S1 promotes loss of barrier integrity in an advanced 3D microfluidic model of the human BBB, a platform that more closely resembles the physiological conditions at this CNS interface. Evidence provided suggests that the SARS-CoV-2 spike proteins trigger a pro-inflammatory response on brain endothelial cells that may contribute to an altered state of BBB function. Together, these results are the first to show the direct impact that the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein could have on brain endothelial cells; thereby offering a plausible explanation for the neurological consequences seen in COVID-19 patients."

These facts taken together would indicate that a second follow-up dose of these mRNA vaccines would potentially cause even more neurological risk due to the initial shot compromising the Blood Brain Barrier, thus allowing much more mRNA to cross into the nervous tissue and bring about the MHC-Spike Protein tagging in effected cells.

Why is this significant? As I reported previously:

"according to my research, producing the Covid-19 spike protein as a “self” protein means it is eventually encoded into the outer cell membrane (as MHC-I molecules). These tell T-cells to attack and destroy upon discovery… And it may take time for this to occur and symptoms to manifest. I saw a comment recently in a scientific forum that we will see an epidemic of ALS and MS if the mRNA gets past the blood brain barrier. At the very least disorder of hypothalamic function. Also that the mRNA can diffuse into the organ parenchyma (unlike COVID-19 itself) thus setting up for organ-specific autoimmune disease."

So if you haven’t taken the second dose… Pray about it and make an informed decision. Remember that your health is your responsibility. According to a Olga, T Jonas, a Senior Advisor to the World Bank, many will fall for the “myth" that “Health authorities will protect us from pandemics”
(http://www.worldbank.org/content/dam/Worldbank/document/HDN/Health/WDR14_bp_Pandemic_Risk_Jonas.pdf).

Furthermore, we have but to look to the past to realize that governmental entities are not infallible in terms of public health intervention during pandemics. In the 1918 Avian Influenza Pandemic the US government reportedly “badly mishandled the epidemic,” “control[led] public perception” with domestic propaganda with restrictions on freedoms of speech (enforced by the threat of lengthy incarceration), and the telling of “half-truths or outright lies.” Furthermore, this propaganda found a welcome abode with the free press  “which although not censored in a technical sense cooperated fully with the government’s propaganda machine.” -Institute of Medicine. 2005. The Threat of Pandemic Influenza: Are We Ready? Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/11150.

And lastly, here are a few things that I would do myself if I desired to reduce neuroinflammation: (disclaimer: this is not intended as doctor-client personalized medical advice)

1) Trust that God is able to heal any disease or health condition if it is His will to do so (Matthew 9:35).

2) Establish a regular early bedtime (this is when the brain heals itself) maximizing delta wave and REM sleep stages. Please watch my YouTube video on this subject: https://youtu.be/0GJjGJnf9gY. This video is an important starting place as deep sleep (delta wave sleep) is when the brain actually heals. Many people with neuroinflammation or degenerative brain diseases are deficient in this type of sleep.

3) Sometimes prescription drugs are used to increase alter neurotransmitter levels than may be contributing to the cognitive disturbance (especially “acetylcholinesterase inhibitors”). Due to the side effects of the pharmacologic acetylcholinesterase inhibitors, I would personally go for the natural alternatives. 

     a)                   Lemon peel essential oil, in small doses, was just as effective as the pharmaceutical prostigmine (an acetylcholenstease inhibitor)  J Oleo Sci. 2014;63(4):373-81. I would cut an organic lemon into small slices and eat at least one slice of lemon peel, organic, per day. Or I might take a couple drops of lemon essential oil (food grade) and drink with a small glass of lemonade :) Yum!

     b)                   Sage essential oil has also shown potential in this area. However one study revealed “there is a major synergistic effect among the constituents.” This would indicate that the components of the whole oil work together to bring about the acetylcholinesterase inhibition. (2a) J Pharm Pharmacol. 2000 Jul;52(7):895-902. Sage oil could be diluted with a carrier oil like coconut and rubbed onto the hands and feet, the skin’s most porous areas, to be absorbed into the circulation.

     c)                    Alpha and Beta Pinene (found in abundance in many evergreen essential oils- especially pine scotch and rosemary essential oil) have been shown to very effectively cross the blood-brain barrier and therapeutically block the action of acetylcholesterase. (3a) Nat Prod Res. 2015 Feb;29(3):213-22. doi: 10.1080/14786419.2014.942305. I would use these oils as inhalants (using an ultrasonic vaporizer). 

4) Go on an antiviral/ and possibly even a mild anticancer regimen. Both viral infection and cancer can lead to neuroinflammation. This occurrence (viral cause) may be more common than we would think. Aside from Covid-19 infection, many viruses can have neurological side effects. For instance, West Nile virus has been shown to cause low grade encephalitis and is commonly carried by mosquitos in North America. Also, even a low grade varicella (chicken pox or shingles) infection can cause localized neuroinflammation. The use of the pine essential oil as inhalant is potentially a huge boost to the efforts here. Also, I would take oregano oil (comes in capsules if you do not appreciate the burning sensation of swallowing this prediluted essential oil blend). Carvacrol, the active component in this oil is amazing in it’s ability to fight many types of viral threats. I would also consider using elderberry extract daily. 

5) Go gluten-free. I know this sounds difficult, but if you actually have a gluten sensitivity and you are eating gluten you will potentially develop neurodegeneration that could lead to cognitive impairment. As a trial, a couple weeks of a GF diet should bring some improvement. Here is the study that references this possibility: J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2002 May; 72(5): 560–563.

6) Use turmeric and honey mixture daily to reduce neuroinflammation.Studies have shown this amazing root may significantly reduce inflammation. Turmeric's active compounds block production of two of the bodies' inflammatory substances: prostaglandin E2 and leukotrienes. For best absorbency of the active compounds in this root, I combine 1 tsp turmeric powder with 1 tsp honey, form a paste and chew thoroughly (30 sec to 1 min) before meals. I know a turmeric capsule would be easier but you actually absorb any food better if it is mixed well with saliva. Furthermore, studies reveal absorption of the anti-inflammatory compounds begin in the mouth. Clin Cancer Res. 2011 Sep 15;17(18):5953-61. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-11-1272.
Using a sweetener (honey in this mixture) helps to open channels in the blood brain barrier allowing for increased uptake of anti-inflammatory curcumin compounds.
I like to make a paste with 1 tsp liquid sunflower lecithin, 1 tsp turmeric, and 1 tsp honey. Mixture should be chewed thoroughly to increase absorbency of active ingredients. This provides a potent blend of anti-inflammatory action along with building blocks for encouraging brain recovery. 

7) Heal the gut (endotoxins such as Lipopolysaccarides (LPS) can easily cause cognitive impairment). See my 4-part series on this subject here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfIlATsifEc

8) Detoxify the blood. Chlorella is a potent eliminator of heavy metals, like mercury, that can cause issues with nervous function. The chlorella can be taken with water or just simply chewed as well (in tablet form). 

9) Engage in a regular (daily) moderate exercise regimen - studies have shown this increases blood flow to the hippocampus (memory center of the brain) and long term benefits include an increase in actual size and capacity of the hippocampus. This would indicate an enhancement in memory function. Walking is a good option. 

10) Last, but not least, get more Oxytocin (the Love hormone). Studies looking at nasal administration of oxytocin showed a reduction in apathy among individuals with dementia. However, we have a natural source of this amazing compound: loving, trusting relationships. Ther Adv Psychopharmacol. 2017 Jan;7(1):48-53. doi: 10.1177/2045125316672574.

Regards,
Ron
2 Comments

The Potential Danger of Using N-Acetylcysteine (NAC) for Covid-19

4/2/2020

2 Comments

 
Picture
Does N-Acetylcysteine (NAC) increase the severity of Covid-19? 
E-Published 3/31/2020 Author Manuscript

Introduction:
Claims of the efficacy of the compound N-acetylcysteine (NAC) in improving Covid-19 outcomes have been circulating of late in health and wellness circles. When asked of my own personal opinion with NAC in supplement form, I replied that I had ceased taking or recommending its use because of the risk for cancer initiation often accompanying protein isolate or amino acid supplementation (1,2,3,4). However, since very recently being challenged on this hypothesis, I have looked deeper into the voluminous amount of research surrounding this substance. The purpose of this report is to share some of my findings. If you are currently taking this as a dietary supplement I strongly encourage you to read this article in its entirety.

NAC - A little hairy?
Here’s a little background info I found surprising… L-cysteine, the main ingredient in N-Acetylcysteine, has been historically manufactured in foreign countries (in particular China) from human hair (a potent source of the amino acid). Other sources may include bird feathers or even synthetic derivation (5). One of the more popular processes in which L-cysteine is then “acetylated" into NAC is described as follows: “we have prepared […NAC…] using 1 equiv. of acetic anhydride [which is basically vinegar without moisture] and a variety of acid acceptors in aqueous tetrahydrofuran)” (6). Furthermore, undesired byproducts (from 35-20%) will need to be removed although even higher purity varieties may contain some degree of contaminants (7).

Therapeutic effects:
There are many studies showing benefit in vitro (outside the body) and vivo (inside the body), of the indirect free radical scavenging effects of NAC (8). However as one researcher wrote: “NAC should not be considered to be a powerful antioxidant in its own right: its strength is the targeted replenishment of GSH [Glutathione] in deficient cells and it is likely to be ineffective in cells replete in GSH” (9). 

The role of NAC in the treatment of many diseases is still unclear and controversial. Therapeutically, it has been shown to possess strong mucolytic properties (by breaking the disulfide bonds in mucus) and is frequently given in cases of acetaminophen overdose to decrease liver toxicity (10). However, one article, reviewing over one hundred and three research studies related to the clinical use of this compound, found that “numerous, mainly small clinical trials with variable doses have yielded inconsistent results in a wide variety of diseases” (11). Furthermore, some of the reported benefits of NAC were shown to be due to dosages that would be difficult to achieve in the clinical setting, in particular with oral supplementation (12).

Unexpected side effects:
Besides potentially increasing the risk of cancer (1,2,3,4), NAC has been found to decrease the cancer-fighting effectiveness of a large class of naturally medicinal substances, such as curcumin (13), berberine (14), vitamin D (15), melatonin (16), selenium (17), and cucurbitacin (18). This is due to the fact that these compounds utilize oxidation (aka production of free radicals) to initiate cancer cell death (apoptosis) (13,14,15,16,17,18) and the robust and persistent repletion of glutathione by NAC neutralizes this effect.

This point deserves further elaboration due to the misconception that antioxidants are usually seen as “good” and free radicals “bad.” While persistently disarming free radicals (aka reactive oxygen species or R.O.S.) is a great idea in many disease processes it can be dangerous in others. In the case of pulmonary disease: “based on this knowledge, some researchers suggested that a faster clearance of ROS could reduce lung damage and improve lung function.” (19) However, “ROS generation by […] pathogens has also been established in respiratory epithelial cells, and the modulation of ROS was reported to be important for respiratory virus–induced innate immune mechanisms” (ibid).

An example of the positive effects of NAC’s action are the studies showing significant reduction of the severity of some influenza infections (20, 21, 22). This may be due largely to the fact that the virus is spread readily through replication (multiplication inside the cell) and consequent rupture of the cell membrane (apoptosis) (23). According to one study: “apoptosis induction is an antiviral host response, however, influenza A virus (IAV) infection promotes host cell death” (ibid). This allows the virus, after sufficient intracellular replication, to exit the cell in masse. Apoptosis is triggered by the overwork of the virus-hijacked cell’s organelles (mitochondria and endoplasmic reticulum) and production of large amounts of oxidative stress. NAC can suppress these free radicals and reverse the trend toward apoptosis and subsequent release of virons, thus slowing the spread of the Influenza virus.

While this process may be potentially beneficial in influenza infection, it may actually be dangerous in human coronavirus infection. One reason is that the coronavirus can efficiently exit the host cell via the process of viral budding instead of apoptosis (24). In fact, cells infected with coronavirus can even adhere and fuse with neighboring cells “..lead[ing] to the formation of giant, multinucleated cells, which allows the virus to spread within an infected organism without being detected or neutralized by virus-specific antibodies” (Ibid). In theory, this could lead to a much greater risk of asymptomatic transmission of the virus.

During the replication of coronaviruses "massive amount[s] of structural proteins [are] synthesized to assembly progeny virions. The production, folding, and modification of these proteins undoubtedly increase the workload of the ER [endoplasmic reticulum]” (24). However, coronaviruses naturally block a critical pathway (the integrated stress response) that would normally trigger a decrease of viral replication and apoptosis of the infected cell. This is at least in part by limiting the secretion of the cell’s red alert compounds known as “interferons” (Ibid). However, interferon (alpha) production can still occur (leading to apoptosis) due to the massive amount of oxidative stress generated by viral production (ibid). Thus, production of functional interferon after infection with SARS-CoV-1 is purported to be "essential for the control of potentially lethal coronavirus infections” (25, 26).

NAC and coronavirus replication:
Reducing the free radical generation by stressed organelles with N-acetylsysteine (a potent and persistent replenisher of intracellular glutathione) has been shown to potentially encourage an environment supporting enhanced viral replication in human coronavirus infection (resulting in enhanced endoplasmic reticulum folding capacity) (27). To make matters worse, NAC may alter the profile of the normal production of cytokines (chemical messengers mediating the inflammatory response) (19, 27). The latter is concerning seeing that immune dysregulation is already a hallmark of coronavirus infection. A study in the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases “observed leukopenia in 47% of patients, lymphopenia in 84%, and T lymphopenia in 95%. CD4(+) T lymphocyte levels were reduced in 100% of patients, CD8(+) T lymphocyte levels were reduced in 87%, B lymphocyte levels were reduced in 76%, and natural killer cell levels were reduced in 55%” (28).

Also of interest, in HIV infection, dosages of NAC typical of oral administration, but not intravenously, caused an increase in the infection rate of monocytes (27). After viral infection these giant immune cells are themselves at increased risk for aberrant behavior, potentially letting go of their munitions in the lungs and causing a devastating condition known as cytokine storm- the single most deadly end result of Covid-19 infection (29, 30)

Recommendations:
Ultimately we will need to weigh the evidence ourselves and make an educated decision. The good news is that we can safely enjoy the benefits of dietary bioavailable cysteine and thereby ensure healthy normalization of glutathione levels. For example, raw garlic contains natural forms of this amino acid, such as S-allyl-cysteine, which also shows potent anti-cancer effects (31, 32, 33). Furthermore, adequate amounts of vitamin D have been shown to safely regulate levels of glutathione (34).

In summary:
The Biblical concept of temperance is shown to apply even at the molecular level: moderate use of that which is good, and abstinence of that which is harmful. Normal levels of intracellular glutathione have a positive effect upon our health, however, given the raw materials, the body can do a better job of managing the fine line of production so that the compound is not used as a cloak for cancer or viral development.

​References:
1) JCI Insight. 2019 Oct 3;4(19). pii: 127647. doi: 10.1172/jci.insight.127647.
2) Sci Transl Med. 2014 Jan 29;6(221):221ra15. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.3007653.
3) Rejuvenation Res. 2014 Jun;17(3):306-11. doi: 10.1089/rej.2014.1577.
4) Sci Transl Med. 2015 Oct 7;7(308):308re8. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aad3740.
5) https://oukosher.org/…/consumer-kosher/what-could-be-wrong…/
6) N-Acylation of Cysteine Tellis A. Martin, John R. Corrigan, and Coy W. Waller
The Journal of Organic Chemistry 1965 30 (8), 2839-2840 DOI: 10.1021/jo01019a509 

7) https://www.sigmaaldrich.com/catalog/product/sial/a7250…
8) Oxid Med Cell Longev. 2018; 2018: 2835787.
9) Pharmacol Ther. 2014 Feb;141(2):150-9. doi: 10.1016/j.pharmthera.2013.09.006. Epub 2013 Sep 28. 
10) Sci Transl Med. 2015 Feb 25; 7(276): 276ra27. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.3010525 
11) Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2006 Jan; 61(1): 5–15.
12) J Cardiovasc Pharmacol. 2009 Oct;54(4):319-26. doi: 10.1097/FJC.0b013e3181b6e77b.
13) Korean J Physiol Pharmacol. 2010 Dec;14(6):391-7. doi: 10.4196/kjpp.2010.14.6.391. 
14) Int J Oncol. 2011 Feb;38(2):485-92. doi: 10.3892/ijo.2010.878. 
15) J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol. 2011 Jan;123(1-2):85-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jsbmb.2010.11.010. 
16) Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol. 2011 Jan;108(1):14-20. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-7843.2010.00619.x. 
17) J Trace Elem Med Biol. 2003;17(1):19-26. 
18) Anticancer Agents Med Chem. 2014;14(8):1146-53. 
19) Am J Respir Cell Mol Biol. 2013 Nov; 49(5): 855–865.
20) Biochem Pharmacol. 2011 Sep 1;82(5):548-55. doi: 10.1016/j.bcp.2011.05.014. Epub 2011 May 25. 
21) J Negat Results Biomed. 2011 May 9;10:5. doi: 10.1186/1477-5751-10-5. 
22) Eur Respir J. 1997 Jul;10(7):1535-41. 
23) Cell Death Dis. 2013 Mar 28;4:e562. doi: 10.1038/cddis.2013.89. 
24) Front Microbiol. 2014; 5: 296.
Published online 2014 Jun 17. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2014.00296. 

25) Blood. 2007 Feb 1;109(3):1131-7. Epub 2006 Sep 19.
26) J Virol. 2007 Aug; 81(16): 8692–8706. 
27) JCI Insight. 2016 Dec 8; 1(20): e88255. 
28) Clin Infect Dis. 2003 Sep 15;37(6):857-9. Epub 2003 Aug 28. 
29) Intensive Care Med. 2020 Mar 3. doi: 10.1007/s00134-020-05991-x. [Epub ahead of print].
30) Semin Immunopathol. 2017; 39(5): 529–539.
31) Exp Ther Med. 2020 Feb;19(2):1511-1521. doi: 10.3892/etm.2019.8383.
32) Int J Mol Sci. 2020 Feb 6;21(3). pii: E1090. doi: 10.3390/ijms21031090. 
33) Int Immunopharmacol. 2019 Apr;69:19-26. doi: 10.1016/j.intimp.2019.01.026. Epub 2019 Jan 18. 
34) J Neurochem. 1999 Aug;73(2):859-66.


2 Comments

Gut/ Brain Health Tip #3 - Got Worms?

3/5/2017

2 Comments

 
Picture
OK. So this is not a topic you really want to bring up at the dinner table, but although not as common as in developing countries, many Americans have worms (and not just in their backyard). Good news is there are some really amazing natural remedies that fight these unwelcomed “after-dinner guests.” For instance, both raw pumpkin and papaya seeds have been found to fight both larger “worms” and even smaller blood-born parasites. Here is some insightful information from few studies:
 
“The time of [worm] paralysis was 1.88±0.52 minute and 1.93 ±0.57 minute whereas the time of [worm] death was 3.45 ±0.17 minute and 4.90±0.18 minute in the case of Carica papaya (papaya seeds) and Cucurbita (pumpkin seeds) maxima respectively” (1).
 
Furthermore, phyto-chemicals known as cucurbitacins (found in both pumpkin and squash seeds) have been found to fight Plasmodium berghei-simulated malaria infection in animals by shutting down the parasite’s inter-cellular development (2).
 
What does this mean? That active compounds in these edible seeds can potentially paralyze, inhibit the growth, and actually destroy intestinal/ blood-born parasites! Amazing!
 
Not afraid of worms? Pumpkin seeds and oil have shown good effect on reducing an enlarged prostate gland (3). Don’t have a prostate? Even on a general note… these seeds are nutrient powerhouses! Enjoy!

We are days away from releasing our "The Gut/ Brain Connection & Beyond" video series to YouTube (for a limited time) and DVD. Click here to order your copy today!
 
1) Sengupta Rupa et al / Int. J. Res. Ayurveda Pharm. 4(4), Jul–Aug 2013
2) Bioorg Med Chem. 2011 Dec 15;19(24):7474-81.
3) Urol Int. 2015;94(3):286-95.


2 Comments

Gut/ Brain Health Tip #2 - Lactobacillus plantarum

3/1/2017

2 Comments

 
Picture
According to a number of studies, this amazing probiotic bacteria may help to decrease issues with permeability of the large intestine (leaky gut) and dramatically reduce gas/bloating (1,2). Found in the saliva of healthy individuals, and primarily sourced from plant foods, this organism produces a substantial amount of lactate and cobalamin (vitamin B-12), both of which are known to be neuroprotective agents (3,4,5). Furthermore, when passing through the small intestine, L. plantarum has also been found to cause immune cells to secrete an anti-cancer and anti-viral substance known as interferon, an added bonus (6)!

1) J Nutr Biochem. 2017 Mar;41:20-24.
2) Am J Gastroenterol. 2000 May;95(5):1231-8.
3) Oral Dis. 2000 Jul;6(4):227-33.
4) Biotechnol Lett. 2010 Apr;32(4):503-6.
5) Brain Res. 2002 Feb 22;928(1-2):156-9.
6) Int Immunopharmacol. 2011 Dec;11(12):2017-24. doi: 10.1016/j.intimp.2011.08.013. Epub 2011 Sep 3.

Overnight Cabbage Salad (high in L. plantarum):
Lactobacillus plantarum is found NATURALLY growing on CABBAGE and other edible plants. However, ordinary sauerkraut (fermented cabbage) has the potential for some undesirable bacterial and fungal growth and subsequent toxic by-product contamination. Here’s how to make a better probiotic food using cabbage:

Ingredients:
Shredded Cabbage (1 Cup)
Purified Water (chlorine in tap water will kill the bacteria) (2 Cups)
Salt (½ tsp)
Honey (½ tsp)
Lemon Juice (1/4 cup) (VERY IMPORTANT as it will prevent heterofermenting bacteria from taking the lead in growth leading to alcohol and eventually vinegar production - more info available on this subject in our Gut/ Brain Connection & Beyond DVD series)

Combine all ingredients in 2 quart mason jar with lid. Shake well and let sit out in room temperature. May use within 12 hours but should refrigerate after 24 hours to slow bacterial growth and reduce potential for production of unwanted by-products. Enjoy!


2 Comments

Gut/ Brain Health Tip #1 - Garlic & H. Pylori

2/27/2017

3 Comments

 
Picture
H. Pylori is a bacterial species with a notable distinction: it is the #1 communicably infectious agent in the world! While most people infected with this nasty little bug show little symptoms, in others it may cause stomach ulcers and chronic digestive disorders. Don't be dismayed, God has provided plenty of natural remedies to deal with this offender.

Firstly, one of the most prominent members of the Allium family: garlic to the rescue (again)!
Research has shown that garlic possesses wonderful anti-microbial and anti-inflammatory qualities that could persist throughout the digestive tract (1) and even substantially reduce levels of H Pylori (2). However, garlic also contains large amounts of inulin (a fiber than can be broken down by beneficial bacteria in the gut), therefore it can actually stimulate the growth of more desirable probiotic bacteria while killing off more pathogenic (disease causing) species (3). As far as dosage is concerned... you can have too much of a good thing: raw garlic on an empty stomach is a powerful emetic. Play it safe and enjoy with food in small quantities (less than 2 raw cloves per meal).

Disclaimer: a garlic clove is not an entire bulb. Please don't eat two bulbs of raw garlic. I once had a seminar attendee get these terms confused. He went home at ate two "cloves" of garlic... For the remainder of the series no one was sitting within a six foot radius of this poor guy :)

1) Mol Nutr Food Res. 2015 Mar;59(3):434-42.
2) Avicenna J Phytomed. 2016 Sep-Oct;6(5):495-501.
3) Int J Food Sci Nutr. 2009 Dec;60(8):717-27.

Interested in this kind of information? Watch for the release of our new series "The Gut/ Brain Connection & Beyond!"


3 Comments

The Real Causes of Hypertension

12/1/2015

 
Picture
Approximately one out of every three, or 67 million, American adults have high blood pressure (1). The astounding aspect about these numbers are that high blood pressure is largely preventable... and reversible! Could it be that we need a little more knowledge regarding the cause of this dangerous condition? Well... here it is...

Know Thyself - Anatomy and Physiology of the Circulatory System
(in brief):

The circulatory system, consisting of the heart and blood vessels, is responsible for the distribution of blood and its necessary components to bodily tissues. Blood consists of water (83%), red blood cells, immune cells (also known as white blood cells), nutrients, dissolved gases, hormones, and waste products. The most important nutrient, being oxygen, is transported by the red blood cells. The body's waste gas, carbon dioxide, is scavenged by these cells and taken back to the oxygen rich environment in the vessels of the lungs. It is here that gas exchange occurs: carbon dioxide is exchanged for oxygen. The heart is the "middle man" in this process as it acts as a pump from the body's vessels to the lungs while simultaneously pumping blood received from the lungs back to the body.

From the heart the blood flows through the aorta (the largest artery in the body) through smaller branching arteries, then into smaller vessels known as arterioles, and then into the vast network of microscopic blood vessels known as capillaries (60,000 miles to be exact). It is in these tiny vessels that the blood actually delivers its gas/nutrient payload to the cells. Interestingly, the entire network of capillaries are capable of holding 4-5L of blood if all were opened at the same time. but because an average individuals total blood volume is only approximately 5L, only about 5% of the blood is actually found in capillaries at any given time. Therefore, to ensure adequate pressure in the high pressure arteries and adequate blood return to the heart in the low pressure veins, capillary beds or networks are systematically opened and closed, depending on need.   

The amazing task of pressure regulation is accomplished by a complex interaction of nerves in the heart and blood vessels (baroreceptors), the kidneys, and the brain as well as hormonal influences by organs such as the adrenal glands, lungs, liver, and pituitary gland. Numerous stimuli can act as vasodilators, which cause the smooth muscle in the blood vessel lining to relax. This relaxation effect decreases blood pressure due to the vessels expansion. In turn, the constriction of blood vessels can be accomplished by the actions of vasoconstrictors. See the list below for more information:

Common Vasodilators - heat, high levels of carbon dioxide, Nitric Oxide (NO), Adenosine, bradykinin (associated with trauma), potassium ions, etc.

Common Vasoconstrictors - cold, high levels of oxygen, adrenaline, insulin, antidiuretic hormone (a hormone produced by the kidneys), angiotension II (resulting from renin secretion by the kidneys), calcium ions, etc.

Symptoms of Hypertension: High Blood Pressure is known as the "silent killer" due to it's oft lack of distinguishing symptoms. However, some individuals notice headaches, dizziness, bounding heartbeat (can be felt as pulsations in chest, neck or ears), and vision changes due to increased blood pressure.

Common Causes of Hypertension: Stress, lack of rest, diet, and dehydration are all common causes of high blood pressure.

STRESS: Continual exposure to stressors with corresponding mental anxiety leads to stress-induced hypertension. This is why: the autonomic nervous system's sympathetic nervous response, which is activated during periods of stress, restricts blood flow to digestive organs, and prepares the body for intense physical exercise ("flight or fight"). Unless you do plan to exercise, this physiologic response does not contribute to good blood pressure regulation.

LACK OF REST: Poor sleep has a number of detrimental effects on blood pressure. Some people with hypertension have reduced their systolic blood pressure by as much as 40mmHg just by going to sleep!

DIET: One of the most powerful antihypertensive agents are plant-based foods. Fresh fruits and vegetables are rich in phytonutrients (especially antioxidants) which help to limit the damage done to the Nitric Oxide (NO) compounds in the blood vessels responsible for vasodilation. Diets low in antioxidants have the reverse effect, causing a condition clinically known as post-prandial hypertension (after-meal high blood pressure).

DEHYDRATION: Our bodies are 70% water by volume. When the kidneys sense a drop in blood volume due to dehydration they secrete anti-diuretic hormone (decreases urine production) and initiate a hormonal process known as the renin-angiotension-aldosterone response. This response constricts the blood vessels in the extremities (arms and legs) and limits the further loss of water through the urine. The result is that blood pressure is elevated but the purifying work of the kidneys is limited. A high salt diet compounds this problem by bringing more of the body's water into the bloodstream via osmosis and, thus, further elevating the blood pressure.

Treatment:

It has been said that "the cure is in the cause." Thus, eliminating the causative agency will often, in time, normalize the blood pressure.

(1)
CDC. Vital signs: awareness and treatment of uncontrolled hypertension among adults—United States, 2003–2010. MMWR. 2012;61(35):703–9.


Nutritional yeast a good source of b-12?

11/30/2015

 
Picture
Nutritional yeast is actually not a natural source of B-12. There are a lot of people who are confused about this fact. Some nutritional yeast is fortified, but with an inferior form of the vitamin (cyanocobalamin). A better B-12 supplement is a methylcobalamin variety such as: Jarrow Formulas Methylcobalamin (Methyl B12), 5000mcg, 60 Lozenges (available fairly inexpensively at Amazon.com).
These supplements can even be whole foods based: some studies report that dried green and purple "lavers" (a.k.a. "nori") & chlorella (edible algea) are potent sources of biologically functional B-12 (1).

An important consideration with B-12: it needs to be chewed and well mixed with saliva to be absorbed when it passes through the digestive system (salivary r-proteins adhere to and protect cobalamin compounds from HCL induced degradation). B-12 is naturally produced by bacteria (this is where animals get it). We do get some B-12 from our saliva because we naturally have small amounts of bacteria present in the mouth. This is, however, a very small amount of B-12 potential. The fact that diary and meat products are high in B-12 reveals a significant inherent bacterial contamination. A better source of bacteria for human consumption is that found growing on raw fruits and vegetables - especially broccoli, cabbage, kale, cauliflower, etc., because these vegetables have crevices for the healthy bacteria to congregate (2,3). Also, you would want to avoid over-washing your fresh fruits and vegetables (you can easily wash away most of these healthy bacteria). The bonus with getting your B-12 from plant based sources is that these bacteria are non-pathogenic to humans (unlike bacteria that feed on dead animal tissue) and could also be termed “probiotics."

Dr. Diane Burnett, a physician specializing in lifestyle medicine, related that when her patients would test low on B-12 she would put them on a raw diet for a week or so. She said that it was often amazing how much their levels improved! I take a B-12 supplement every now and then but I also try to have some raw food component in each meal. Even with these raw foods, the B-12 contained therein will only be absorbed if it is thoroughly chewed (and mixed with the saliva in the mouth).

1)
J Nutr Sci Vitaminol (Tokyo). 2002 Oct;48(5):325-31.
2) Biotechnol Lett. 2010 Apr;32(4):503-6.
3) Food Microbiol. 2012 Aug;31(1):116-25.

'Tis the Season... To Go Viral? 

12/2/2014

4 Comments

 
Picture
It all seems to start close to the year’s end... However, seeming to make up for its delayed appearance, it explosively imposes itself upon the populace like an army of unwelcomed door-to-door salesmen (1)! Then comes the inconvenience of having to pick up your child from school because little Johnny, your son’s classmate, brought more than his lunch (and a runny nose) to school the week before. If in a managerial position, you no doubt experience the inevitable last minute “I can’t come in today’s” even while you yourself begin to sniffle… All in all the flu season is a holiday-time event we would like to do without.

What if we could simply wish away this annual annoyance? Think of it. More people would be apt to celebrate with double decker ice cream cones, sugar laden snack cake binges, and polar bear sporting events– with no threat of illness, why not? No need for the questionably effective flu shots, we could all do without the mercury anyway, right? We could be tempted to splurge just a little more in the frenzied year end sales events­ and venture out in the late-night crowds to grab that last minute gift– all with no thoughts of the dread “airborne” menace. ­­Thus, to make a seemingly good scenario even better, our wintertime domestic economy would flourish!

Okay. Back to reality… As much as we may wish the above situation to be true, of all the assurances in life few are actually more certain than death, taxation, and, well, the return of seasonal influenza…

Estimates vary, but each year roughly 5-10% of the US population will get the “flu” and an estimated 200,000 will get so sick they have to be hospitalized (2).  Then, just a short time after it makes its dread appearance, it vanishes clear out of sight! Why this sudden departure? Well, researchers have been asking this question for decades, and, incidentally, while they have not figured out exactly where the virus vacations, they do know the reason for it’s apparent disappearance­­– It has a lot to do with something called “absolute humidity.”

Absolute humidity, like the more commonly known term “relative humidity,” refers to the amount of moisture in the air– only that absolute humidity takes into account air temperature as well. Therefore, as a general rule, absolute humidity increases with increased temperatures. Why is this important? Well, because researchers have found that the lower the absolute humidity, the higher risk of contagious “aerosolized” influenza (3, 4).

Before we go any further, let’s make sure we clear up any confusion regarding the definition of “aerosol.” Simply put, an aerosol is actually a combination of “airborne” and “droplets”. Airborne simply means that something is borne on the air. Scents, smells, and fragrances for instance are actually airborne particles that reach your sensory organs (olfactory bulb, etc.). However, a 747 jumbo jet is also “borne on the air.” The difference between the two is obvious- the 747 will quickly lose altitude because of its mass- a similar event occurs with very large droplets. What is a droplet? It’s actually a vague term used to describe an unspecified, but relatively small, quantity of liquid. It is possible for the human sneeze, cough, or breath to produce airborne droplets of various sizes: from a “few millimeters to less than 1 micro-meter in diameter” (5). How long these stay aloft, the distance they travel, and their infective potential will depend upon several factors: 1) their size; 2) force of expulsion; 3) and environmental conditions.

Now for the science behind the risk… Studies have found that “large droplets (>50 [micrometers] in diameter) settle on the ground almost immediately, and intermediate-sized droplets (10–50 [micrometers]) settle within several minutes.” “Small particles (<10 [micrometers]), including “droplet nuclei” from evaporated larger particles, can remain airborne for hours and are easily inhaled deep into the respiratory tract” (ibid). Since most viruses, including Influenza and Ebola (6), are less than 1 micrometer in diameter, they possess an inherent ability to be dispersed in aerosolized droplet form and, as the above definition states, “can remain airborne for hours and are easily inhaled deep into the respiratory tract” (ibid).

The frightening thing is that studies have revealed that as many as 87% -97% of particles in the breath can be of the smaller (< 10 micrometer) variety (7, 8). Traveling at tremendous velocities, up to 40 meters per second (9), the human sneeze, which contains up to 20,000 of these tiny droplets, is a significant aerosolization event! Comparatively speaking, although only several hundred droplets are usually produced by coughing (10), these potentially infectious particles are propelled at, an alarmingly fast, 100 meters per second (9)! Thus, given the fact that influenza grows so well in the upper respiratory system (in low absolute humidity environments), humans can become living “nebulizers”­– scattering virus-laden droplets far and wide.

The good news is that, consequently, for certain viruses like influenza, rising absolute humidity occurring during the spring, summer, and fall significantly lessens infectivity. Therefore, during more humid conditions influenza is more readily transmitted by “close personal contact”– or through larger droplets of body fluid. Of note, researchers have cited the fact that it also takes an over two-hundred times larger dose of virus to cause an infection through this route, as compared to “airborne” inoculation (11, 3). Thus it becomes “harder to catch” - a term which sounds oddly familiar…

If influenza has a season is it possible that other viruses could operate in the same way? Could it be that other viruses that are “hard to catch” during the summer months, or, let’s say, in hot and humid sub-Saharan Africa, also spread like wildfire this winter? Let’s not postulate any longer. If you really want to know read on!

Is it possible that we have overlooked a potential threat that the domestically vanquished Ebola virus may return with a vengeance? Let's examine this possibility and "let the science lead us" to a logical conclusion...

First of all, studies have shown that, unlike what has been purported in the press, the Ebola virus itself has some degree of durability. It can be frozen, freeze-dried, exposed to varying pH changes, withstand substantial UV irradiation, and persist on certain mediums like plastic and glass for up to 46 to 50 days– all while still retaining the potential to cause illness (12, 13, 14). Also, contrary to what has been adamantly declared by public health officials, as one researcher put it “Filoviruses [such as Ebola] are relatively stable in aerosols” (ibid).

Furthermore, one article actually revealed the following: “human pathogenic filoviruses [like Ebola] may survive in an aerosol in the dark to detectable levels for at least 1.5 [hours]. If filoviruses were deliberately or accidentally aerosolized during normal laboratory or clinical practices they may pose a significant threat to humans, as they are able to remain infectious over a significant period of time” (13). Studies also reveal that “they [filoviruses] are highly infectious as respirable particles under laboratory conditions” (15) and “laboratory studies with monkeys demonstrate that the disease could potentially be transmitted through respirable [or inhalable] particles” (16).

If aerosolized Ebola virus is so dangerous, why then are the “experts” now so sure that Ebola does not spread via the air? For instance, months before the pandemic the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) reported that Ebola could be spread by aerosolized droplet (see figure A below). Why did they, after almost forty years of research and scientific evidence, suddenly change their stance?

Picture
Figure A: before the American Ebola outbreak, the CDC stated that Ebola could possibly spread through small aerosolized droplets. They now deny this risk: http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/pdf/infections-spread-by-air-or-droplets.pdf
Conspiracy theories aside, here are the probable reasons for this now common assumption:

I) It is reported that the typical route of current Ebola transmission is direct contact with Ebola-infected blood, body fluids, or large droplets.

II) Though numerous studies in animals have shown Ebola to infect lung tissue (17, 18, 19, 20), in humans it does not appear as though the lungs are a primary target of the virus (21, 22).

Let’s see how these arguments stand up to what has been previously reported in the scientific literature…

But first… a simple analogy: What if the CDC issued a statement that the “influenza virus is not spread via coughing, sneezing, or breathing?” Well, I believe that we would all wonder about the truth of such a claim. However, if the statement were issued during the summer months of heat and high absolute humidity, they would be correct. But, only until temperatures and humidity dropped again in the fall and the influenza virus became able to again thrive in the air. Ebola could have this same “seasonal” aerosol capability. Why? Because studies have shown that, unlike it’s native hot and humid African climate, Ebola is stable and infective at low absolute humidity (17).

Also, the fact that “we can’t believe it because we haven’t seen it” is also somewhat of a flawed argument. Given the magnitude of the current epidemic in sub-Saharan Africa and the fact that cases are underreported by a magnitude of up to 2.5 times (23), it is impossible to know how each infection occurred; and b) according to one study involving aerosol-based infection: “clinical signs” and “time to death” were “comparable” to infections caused by direct contact with infected blood or body fluids (24). Therefore, it is completely unreliable to base the “impossibility of aerosol transmission” upon the report of the patient or the apparent physical condition of the victim. That leaves only one argument left…

Can Ebola infect human lung tissue? To truly answer this question we to need examine Ebola “pathophysiology” or the way in which the disease operates… In humans, the Zaire Ebola virus seems to especially target the immune system and the liver (25). However, it is also documented that a lengthy Ebola infection can infect the cells that line blood vessels and the intestines, and then spread throughout the bloodstream reaching and infecting tissue in the vital organs (26, 27). The onslaught of the infection is so rapid, however, that most individuals die rather quickly from complications of the initial stages of infection: specifically from shock related to massive fluid loss caused by diarrhea, vomiting, and internal hemorrhage (21). Thus, in many cases, because of Ebola’s lethality, the infection may not significantly progress to the cells lining the airways– at least not enough to cause dramatic aerosol spread of the virus.

However, given the fact that the virus can reach high levels in the bloodstream and causes profuse internal bleeding throughout the body- including the lungs-  (20), there is a very real danger of producing blood-tainted aerosolized respiratory droplets and secretions  (28, 29, 30). This occurrence is, in particular, a major risk for healthcare workers caring for patients on ventilators. Furthermore, it is sufficient justification for the respiratory isolation of every Ebola patient. This is a sobering truth considering the fact that we have relatively few respiratory isolation units in modern hospitals. Thus, while we may be able to safely handle a few of these cases, we are definitely not ready for a pandemic scale event…

Another piece of the puzzle: in a strange and unexpected twist of logic, the widespread use of experimental medication, such “miracle drug” Zmapp, may be more of a hindrance than help. Why? It turns out that research scientists have found “that treatment [with monoclonal antibodies, and other experimental therapies] extended the time course of the disease and permitted the virus to infect tissues not usually affected in the typical model”…“in the brain, eye, pancreas, thyroid, and lung“ (31). Another similar study found that, although an experimental therapy may have helped a small percentage of monkeys to overcome the virus, these treatments lengthened the average fight against the fatal infection from 8 days to almost 13 days (32). Thus, by increasing the duration of the disease process, the virus has a much greater potential to reach higher levels in the lungs– a dangerous event highly favoring the airborne spread of the virus.

Thus we see that, indeed if we base our conclusions on the research, it is possible– even without further viral mutation (which is occurring at phenomenal rates)– to have an airborne-derived Ebola infection… With one stipulation, the infection will only occur under the “right” conditions. This would be in an environment with low absolute humidity, cooler temperatures, a victim that is being treated by experimental drugs, weakened immune systems, and, lastly, a population that does not believe it is possible to spread the virus through the air. Although we now meet much of the above criteria here in the United States, allow me to introduce Ebola’s highly probable “perfect storm…”

The Harmattan usually begins in late November and lasts until mid March (33). What is Harmattan? It describes a yearly phenomenon in which trade winds blow continually into western Africa from the Sahara desert– also marking the beginning of the dry season. These powerful gusts literally carry tons of mineral dust, much of which is actually blown across the Atlantic and settles in the Caribbean, Central America, and the southeast United States (34).

Furthermore, scientists have discovered that these giant dust clouds move tiny respirable (or inhalable) particles relatively quickly– reaching the southern United States in about seven days (ibid). Scientists have even postulated that viruses, especially after binding to dry desert mineral dust, in optimal climatic conditions (wintertime), may be moved from one continent to another through these winds (35, 36, 37, 38). Though many would think this scenario highly unlikely, consider the following researcher’s insight: “an entire city experiencing an epidemic could produce staggering amounts of virus aerosols, yielding something not unlike the medieval concept of infective miasma. It has been suggested that this mass of infective particles is responsible for the seasonality of influenza by using global convective currents” (35).

Interestingly, most US influenza outbreaks appear during Harmattan season and begin in the Caribbean and southeastern states (39). Could this be a coincidence? Although this is admittedly a source of debate, the Harmattan winds do, without a doubt, cause much harm in Sub-Saharan Africa.

Numerous studies document the fact that Harmattan season is also the time for western Africa’s yearly seasonal influenza pandemic. Researchers have found that “numerous studies of respiratory diseases, including those caused by influenza viruses, have suggested a closer correlation with the dry Harmattan season” (40, 41). These cases “increased at the onset of Harmattan” (42) and seem to peak around January (43, 44). This appears to line up with the finding that, during the Harmattan, temperatures and absolute humidity decrease from December through March – with coolest and driest period occurring in January (45).

As we have previously discussed, Influenza is not a major airborne threat unless these types of climatic changes occur. However, the Harmattan winds increase the potential for infection even further due to the inhalation of the dry airborne desert dust (11). Could this play a role in increasing Ebola risk? Well, one study revealed that inhaling high levels of particulate matter caused an inflammatory response in the lungs, which brought large numbers of white blood cells, and triggered the overproduction of the compounds tumor necrosis factor and nitric oxide (46, 47). These are same two chemical compounds is largely responsible for the Ebola’s hemorrhagic effects (48, 49). Thus, this increased lung inflammation would further raise the risk of infective aerosolized respiratory droplets.

Think this is bad? Just wait. There’s more to this risk than meets the eye. Seriously...

Because the Harmattan winds are a disruption of normal trade winds and pass through arid desert landscapes, the air molecules lose their vitality or electrical charge. This process is referred to as “positive ionization” and has disastrous consequences upon physical and mental health. For the sake of brevity, we will only focus upon two aspects: viral illness and mental stability.

Studies have shown that influenza infected mice exposed to positively ionized air had accelerated infections and greatly increased mortality rates (50, 51). Furthermore, exposure to atmospheric positive ions has been documented to increase the productions of stress hormones– notably norepinephrine– even to a “state of exhaustion” after several days (52). Researchers have found that high levels of norepinephrine suppress the innate immune response (53), which is a critical component in the fight against Ebola (54).

Increased stress hormones and a disruption of the normal breakdown of a neurotransmitter, known as serotonin, also cause significant mental disturbances. These include irritability, increased suspicion, aggression, and even criminal behavior– not a good combination with the law and order necessary to curtail this pandemic (55, 56). To make matters worse, disruption of the normal breakdown of serotonin can correlate into lower melatonin levels, the nighttime “healing hormone”, which can further depress innate immune system function (35).

If you think all of these factors are reason for concern we have not even mentioned the fact that the Harmattan causes widespread temperature fluctuations (57)– which have been shown to potentially increase all-cause mortality rates by up to 50% depending on geographic location (58). And, another yet unmentioned factor is that these dry desert winds increase the likelihood of dehydration: which just happens to be one of the most lethal complications of Ebola infection (59, 60, 61). The dry skin, dry mucous membranes, frequent nosebleeds, and chapped bleeding lips experienced by West Africans during this season all increase risk for disease spread (62).

And now– the ultimate danger… This danger is not as significant of a threat in Sub-Saharan Africa… but indeed much closer to home…

A strange phenomenon occurs when a population is warned of an occurrence that does not immediately appear– known officially as the “cry-wolf” effect. As the US has now been “officially cleared” from Ebola infection, have we relaxed our vigilance? Seeing that an optimally functioning immune system easily defeats Ebola (63, 64, 27), are we advising our population as to the need to engage in health promotion activities? Considering the fact that our healthcare system is decades behind in this area– with little focus and expenditure on population-based public health promotion (65, 66)– wouldn’t it be wise to take this pandemic threat as a wake-up call? Yes, we know things are still bad in Africa, but who is still sounding the warning back here at home? Or, are we still looking at the handful of cases we have successfully “treated” here in the US as evidence that there is really no threat from Ebola after all…


With flu season right around the corner the CDC has issued a startling acknowledgement that: "it is usually not possible to determine whether a patient has seasonal influenza or Ebola infection based on symptoms alone" (67). Thus, new Ebola cases have a high likelihood of being mistaken and treated as seasonal influenza– making conditions rife for an unpredictable outbreak... Meanwhile, when new potential Ebola cases arise, health officials are assuring the public that they are "perfectly safe" and that "fear is not going to help you make good decisions"– exactly the same message that greatly increased the casualties from the last major worldwide viral pandemic in 1918 (68, 69). When will we learn from our mistakes?

As one research scientist put it “the consequences of failure to warn can be serious for society overall, for example, significant economic losses, heavy infrastructure and environmental damage, large number of human casualties, and social disruption” (70). Are we ready to face such consequences? 


Now is the time to prepare– but most of us have been lulled into a potentially fatal apathy…


References:
1) http://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/season/flu-season-2014-2015.htm
2) http://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/qa/disease.htm
3) http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/12/11/pdfs/06-0426.pdf
4) Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009 Mar 3;106(9):3243-8. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0806852106. Epub 2009 Feb 9.
5) Adv Virol. 2014;2014:859090. doi: 10.1155/2014/859090. Epub 2014 Aug 13.
6) http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/lab-bio/res/psds-ftss/ebola-eng.php
7) BMC Pulm Med. 2012 Mar 21;12:11. doi: 10.1186/1471-2466-12-11.
8) PLoS One. 2008 Jul 16;3(7):e2691. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0002691.
9) J Hyg (Lond). 1946 Sep;44(6):471-9.
10) http://www.influenzareport.com/ir/pathogen.htm
11) Environ Int. 2013 Sep;59:384-8. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2013.06.022. Epub 2013 Aug 1.
12) Vopr Virusol. 1995 Mar-Apr;40(2):74-6.
13) J Appl Microbiol. 2010 Nov;109(5):1531-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2672.2010.04778.x. Epub 2010 Jun 10.
14) Viruses. 2012 Oct 15;4(10):2115-36. doi: 10.3390/v4102115.
15) Biosecur Bioterror. 2004;2(3):186-91.
16) Appl Environ Microbiol. 2008 Feb;74(3):555-63. Epub 2007 Dec 7.
17) Int J Exp Pathol. 1995 Aug;76(4):227-36.
18) J Infect Dis. 2011 Jul 15;204(2):200-8. doi: 10.1093/infdis/jir077. Epub 2011 May 12.
19) Sci Rep. 2012;2:811. doi: 10.1038/srep00811. Epub 2012 Nov 15.
20) J Pathol. 1985 Nov;147(3):199-209.
21) Pol Merkur Lekarski. 2003 Feb;14(80):146-9.
22) N Engl J Med. 2014 Nov 5. [Epub ahead of print]
23) http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/su6303a1.htm?s_cid=su6303a1_w
24) Microbes Infect. 2011 Oct;13(11):930-6. doi: 10.1016/j.micinf.2011.05.002. Epub 2011 May 25.
25) J Infect Dis. 2011 Nov;204 Suppl 3:S957-67. doi: 10.1093/infdis/jir326.
26) Virology. 2007 Jul 20;364(1):45-54. Epub 2007 Mar 27.
27) Nat Med. 1999 Apr;5(4):423-6.
28) Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2014 Nov;11(9):1341-1350.
29) http://www.purdue.edu/newsroom/releases/2014/Q3/purdue-expert-showed-ebola-can-enter-cells-that-line-the-trachea-and-lungs-says-airborne-transmission-is-not-an-impossibility.html
30) J Virol. 2003 May;77(10):5902-10.
31) J Infect Dis. 2007 Nov 15;196 Suppl 2:S323-8.
32) J Infect Dis. 2007 Nov 15;196 Suppl 2:S390-9.
33) http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/255457/harmattan
34) Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999 Mar 30;96(7):3396-403.
35) J Virol. 2007 Jun;81(11):5429-36. Epub 2006 Dec 20.
36) Arch Environ Health. 2003 Aug;58(8):498-504
37) Microb Ecol. 2012 Nov;64(4):973-85. doi: 10.1007/s00248-012-0088-9. Epub 2012 Jul 4.
38) Rev Infect Dis. 1989 May-Jun;11(3):494-7.
39) http://gis.cdc.gov/grasp/fluview/main.html
40) J Infect Dis. 2012 Dec 15;206 Suppl 1:S121-8. doi: 10.1093/infdis/jis584.
41) http://af.reuters.com/article/topNews/idAFJOE81706Z20120208
42) Health Place. 2014 Jan;25:47-55. doi: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2013.09.009. Epub 2013 Oct 21.
43) BMC Public Health. 2014 Sep 20;14:981. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-14-981.
44) Influenza Other Respir Viruses. 2014 Sep;8(5):524-9. doi: 10.1111/irv.12259. Epub 2014 Jul 29
45) Abdulhamid G. 2011. Relationship between some meteorological parameters in Ilorin, North Central Nigeria. Comp. Eng. Intell. Sys. 2: 46–52
46) J Toxicol Environ Health A. 2002 Oct 25;65(20):1571-95.
47) J Toxicol Environ Health A. 2002 Oct 25;65(20):1597-613.
48) J Virol. 2005 Aug;79(16):10442-50.
49) J Virol. 2004 Oct;78(19):10370-7.
50) Int J Biometeorol. 1970 Sep;14(3):247-60.
51) Science. 1976 Sep 24;193(4259):1209-13.
52) Zentralbl Bakteriol Mikrobiol Hyg B. 1982 Apr;176(1):72-8.
53) Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014 May 20;111(20):7379-84. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1322174111. Epub 2014 May 5.
54) J Exp Med. 2004 Jul 19;200(2):169-79. Epub 2004 Jul 12.
55) Science. 1976 Sep 24;193(4259):1209-13.
56) Fortschr Med. 1977 Mar 17;95(11):746-52.
57) J Equine Sci. 2014;25(1):1-6. doi: 10.1294/jes.25.1. Epub 2014 Apr 22.
58) Kalkstein, L.S., and R.E. Davis, 1985: The development of a weather/mortality model for environmental impact assessment. Proceedings of the 7th Conference of Biometeorology and Aerobiology, 334-336.
59) N Engl J Med. 2014 Nov 12. [Epub ahead of print]
60) Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2014 Oct 1;190(7):733-7. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201408-1514CP.
61) Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2014 Nov 4. [Epub ahead of print]
62) Eur J Epidemiol. 1997 Oct;13(7):807-15.
63) Lancet. 2000 Jun 24;355(9222):2210-5.
64) Clin Exp Immunol. 2001 Jun;124(3):453-60.
65) https://archive.org/details/forhealthynation00unse
66) http://www.healthislife.org/why-healthislifeorg.html
67)
http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/outbreaks/2014-west-africa/qa.html
68)
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/2014/12/02/suspected-ebola-patient-being-treated-boston-hospital/kjQngynamiuqmmLOi3lrVN/story.html
69)
http://www.healthislife.org/health-news/ebola-can-you-handle-the-truth
70) Am J Disaster Med. 2013 Autumn;8(4):243-52. doi: 10.5055/ajdm.2013.0130.


4 Comments

Ebola– Can You Handle The Truth?

11/20/2014

3 Comments

 
Picture
In a recent announcement dealing with the apparent eradication of Ebola in the US, United States President Barak Obama stated: “Although we should feel optimistic about our capacity to solve the Ebola crisis, we cannot be complacent simply because the news attention on it has waned. We have to stay with it" (1).
Okay… We see that, as before, our president’s focus is on stemming the tide of the disease in Africa. However, many of you may be wondering why the headlines are no longer dominated by news of the potential for an American Ebola outbreak. For some, this silence would appear to indicate that we, in the seemingly disease-free refuge of the United States of America, may now breathe a sigh of relief… A strange phenomenon though, considering that the pandemic still rages on in Africa, with an estimated 71% of infected individuals still succumbing to arguably the worst plague to hit the world since AIDS (2).

Well, one reason for this newly bolstered optimism could be that we recently witnessed the rehabilitation of three Ebola patients in record time (3). We’ve seen them bearing broad-faced grins as government officials have declared “all clear…” Undated publicly released “smartphone selfies” showing these overnight celebs looking their best coupled with the praise and scripted hugs of high-ranking politicians have done a work on the American public (4,5,6). Even undertones of cover-ups and intentional media underreporting of potential US Ebola cases don’t seem to budge us from our “the worst is over” mindset (7,8). Truth be told, we really are not as afraid of the E-word anymore…

This week, however, we received another wake-up call… As most of us have already heard, we now have a second US Ebola victim. Dr. Martin Salia, a surgeon with American ties, working in Sierra Leone, passed away despite a frantic effort to save his life– an effort that officials say was hampered by the substantial inroads of his infection (9). How could this happen to someone who was so familiar with human physiology?

As it turns out, while working at a hospital in this pandemic-ravaged country, Dr. Salia experienced Ebola-like symptoms but subsequently received a negative viral test result on November 7th. His medical peers were so overjoyed at the news that they reportedly threw caution to the wind and embraced him… Now Salia’s comrades are being closely monitored under quarantine after a second test three days later revealed that Salia was indeed infected with the virus (10).  Said Komba Songu M’Briwa, Salia’s caretaker at Hastings Ebola Treatment Center: “We were celebrating…” “Then everything fell apart” (11).

Officials have declared that the initial test could have been conducted when there were lower levels of the virus in the doctor’s system– enough to cause symptoms, but not enough to be clinically detectable (ibid). Somewhat of an unnerving announcement considering the fact that a number of persons have been “cleared” by these same Ebola tests here in the US. Interesting as this line of thought may be, however, this is not the focus of our article.

In fact, the real focus of our investigative journalism is not on Dr. Salia or even the effectiveness of modern Ebola tests. The main question we seek to answer is: how do we know what to believe? Is Ebola really a threat to the US or not? And furthermore, is Ebola really on the decline in Africa?

Recently the World Health Organization (after making “revisions” to Ebola-blamed fatalities and reassigning several hundreds of deaths to other causes) declared that Ebola death rates in Liberia were decreasing– while also admitting the probable under-reporting of cases by a factor of 2.5 times (12, 13, 14)! As ludicrous as this sounds the report prompted Liberia’s president, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, to lift the “state of emergency” presumably instated to limit the spread of the virus (15). Logically, while no one in his or her right mind would go to a used car dealership, negotiate on a price and then purchase the vehicle for 2.5 times more, headlines citing “decreasing Ebola cases” have dubiously swayed public opinion.

However, a recent front-lines report from Africa would seem to indicate the situation is far from over… Rony Zachariah, from the humanitarian group “Doctors Without Borders”, recently reported that cases are indeed drastically under-reported. Zachariah reports that, in Sierra Leone, “The situation is catastrophic. There are several villages and communities that have been basically wiped out. In one of the villages I went to, there were 40 inhabitants and 39 died…" “Whole communities have disappeared but many of them are not in the statistics. The situation on the ground is actually much worse” (14).

Could it be that we are being led to believe that the Ebola epidemic is on the downturn whilst it is actually far from being over? A wise man once said “there is nothing new under the sun…” A look into the historical accounts of the 1918 “Spanish Flu”, which claimed more victims than WWI, reveals that authorities and health officials repeatedly attempted to paint a picture much different from that of actual occurrence.  Why? Because, as one public health official in Chicago stated: “It is our duty to keep the people from fear. Worry kills more people than the epidemic” (16).

Was this the correct approach? A recent advisory report from national academies press disagrees, citing that, in the US, both federal and state governments “badly mishandled the epidemic”. How was this accomplished? The report describes the allied forces attempt to “control public perception” with domestic propaganda, restrictions on freedoms of speech (enforced by the threat of lengthy incarceration), and the telling of “half-truths or outright lies.” Furthermore, this propaganda found a welcome abode with the free press  “which although not censored in a technical sense cooperated fully with the government’s propaganda machine” (17).

As a consequence of this deception,

“as influenza approached a city or town—one could watch it march from place to place—local officials initially told the public not to worry, that public health officials would prevent the disease from striking them.[..] As the epidemic exploded, officials almost daily assured the public that the worst was over” (ibid)

Corroborating and expanding this phenomenon are the following accounts from the must-read book, The Great Influenza: The Story of the Deadliest Pandemic in History, by John Berry:

“Those in control of the war’s propaganda machine wanted nothing printed that could hurt morale.” In one instance in New England, “two physicians stated flatly to newspapers that [men who had succumbed to the virus] had not died of influenza. They were lying.” In another account, on the same day that England announced that the Influenza epidemic was over, a British naval hospital was over-run with victims- so many that the hospital was forced to shut down! And yet another account was when a ship laden with influenza-stricken passengers arriving at New York City’s harbor provoked the following response by the head of New York’s health department: that there was “not the slightest danger of an epidemic” – an assumption that later proved fatal (18).

And now, back to Ebola… Is this scenario from yesteryear really applicable to us today? Well we are at war on a number of fronts (against terrorism, militant states, etc.). However, we may be treating Ebola more like a terrorist than a sub-microscopic strand of RNA and glycoproteins (a virus). While it is true that raising our national morale will help our drowning economy stay afloat– are we willing to sacrifice human lives for short-lived domestic prosperity?

Indisputably, the American public was falsely reassured back in 1918 through propaganda and deception. But, being in an era of enlightenment, the information age after all, could we fall prey to the same tactics? Moreover, are not we protected from such things as propaganda? Don’t count on it. Allow me to introduce the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012. Embedded in this matrix of propositions dealing with the appropriations of billions of dollars in defense spending is a reversal of the long-standing ban on the governmental promulgation of domestic propaganda. While I would hope that our elected leaders and health officials wouldn’t lie to us today… They now have the “authority” (and funding) to do so.

One source, commenting upon the implications of this act, reveals that:

“the new law would give sweeping powers to the government to push television, radio, newspaper, and social media onto the U.S. public. “It removes the protection for Americans,” says a Pentagon official who is concerned about the law. “It removes oversight from the people who want to put out this information. There are no checks and balances. No one knows if the information is accurate, partially accurate, or entirely false.” (19)

How do we know if we are being propagandized? Well, in a 2014 report, entitled “Pandemic Risk,” Olga B. Jonas, Economic Adviser, Avian and Human Influenza Response Coordinator with the World Bank lists four commonly promulgated pandemic myths. Heard any of these overly optimistic sentiments lately?

Myth #1 “Nothing can be done to prevent pandemics. It’s just nature.”
Myth #2 “We can deal with it when it comes. There is no risk. Do you want to scare people?”
Myth #3 “Pandemic risk is not a development [or economic] concern.”
Myth #4 “Health authorities will protect us from pandemics.”    (20)

Thus, while we may be confronted with many uncertainties, and perhaps even deliberate deception in terms of the emerging (or receding) Ebola pandemic, we can have a definite plan of action: health preparedness. After all, the incentive to save one’s life from a potential threat is a powerful incentive in promoting healthy behaviors– a dire need in a population already suffering from pandemics of lifestyle related illness such as heart disease, cancer, diabetes, obesity, etc. Furthermore, it is these health-promoting behaviors that help promote the function of the human immune system: to date the most viable scientific suggestion for preventing Ebola’s lethality (21).

Yes, in a catch twenty-two, our economy would suffer during the transition: if people became more conscious of health promotion perhaps no one would buy the destructive merchandise that has contributed to a host of trillion dollar industries (tobacco, alcohol, fast food, etc.). Even the undeniably profit-based healthcare and pharmaceutical industry would suffer tremendously simply due to the decrease in demand (22). Unfortunately, these merchants also wield a huge lobbying influence– a power that will do much to try to perpetuate the confusion and profiteering of the current status quo… A power, however, that will one day be turned to shame and disgrace because, eventually, “no one will buy their merchandise anymore” (see Revelation 18:11).

Well, you may say, even though you have a few valid points, I still don’t see any major reason for concern, after all isn’t the now US Ebola-free? Digressing once more we focus upon a foreboding statement by Author John Berry regarding the short-lived initial disappearance of the 1918 pandemic: “the virus had not disappeared. It had only gone underground, like a forest fire left burning in the roots, swarming and mutating, adapting, honing itself, watching and waiting, waiting to burst into flame” (18).

We can’t prevent forest fires by, in the time of actual risk, optimistically taking down the fire hazard sign. Ignorance, even coupled with positivity, does not reduce danger: it simply makes one positively ignorant. The fact that politicians are hugging Ebola survivors “for the cameras” (23) is a nice gesture… but, more imperatively, what we need to embrace is the truth. The truth is not to be feared– only ignorance, deception, and intolerance. Truth reveals the need to prepare. Deception only delays the inevitable… but if we choose this path, like the late Dr. Salia’s momentarily heedless but now quarantined comrades, we could soon see “everything fall apart”.

“A prudent person foresees danger and takes precautions. The simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences.” Proverbs 27:12 NLT

Ready to get ready? Check out our Prebola© Pandemic Preparedness Course today!

References:
1) http://news.yahoo.com/obama-says-ebola-fight-far-over-w-africa-205735067.html
2) N Engl J Med. 2014 Oct 16;371(16):1481-95. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1411100. Epub 2014 Sep 22.
3) http://www.livescience.com/48498-ebola-dallas-nurse-recovery.html
4) http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ebola-virus-outbreak/ebola-nurse-amber-vinsons-friends-shes-hero-n227251
5) http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/10/13/ebola-nurse-who/17182599/
6) http://twitchy.com/2014/11/07/good-man-george-w-bush-visits-dallas-hospital-meets-sweet-woman-amber-vinson-photos-video/
7) http://blog.ap.org/2014/10/17/advisory-on-ebola-coverage/
8) http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidkroll/2014/11/02/potential-ebola-patient-being-tested-at-duke-results-monday-morning/2/
9) http://www.latimes.com/science/la-sci-ebola-death-zmapp-20141118-story.html
10) http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/11/17/ebola-death-martin-salia/19162043/
11) http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/a-doctors-mistaken-ebola-test-we-were-celebrating--then-everything-fell-apart/2014/11/16/946a84da-6dd5-11e4-a2c2-478179fd0489_story.html
12) http://news.yahoo.com/revises-ebola-death-toll-lower-virus-slowing-liberia-070211677--business.html
13) http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/su6303a1.htm?s_cid=su6303a1_w
14) http://news.yahoo.com/leone-ebola-outbreak-catastrophic-aid-group-msf-223833151.html
15) http://nyti.ms/1sIktEk
16) http://collections.nlm.nih.gov/bookviewer?PID=nlm:nlmuid-101318114-bk
17) http://www.nap.edu/catalog/11150.html
18) Barry, John M. (2005-10-04). The Great Influenza: The Story of the Deadliest Pandemic in History (p. 175). Penguin Group US. Kindle Edition.
19) http://www.buzzfeed.com/mhastings/congressmen-seek-to-lift-propaganda-ban
20) http://www.worldbank.org/content/dam/Worldbank/document/HDN/Health/WDR14_bp_Pandemic_Risk_Jonas.pdf
21) J Exp Med. Jul 19, 2004; 200(2): 169–179.
22) http://www.healthislife.org/why-healthislifeorg.html
23) https://twitter.com/markknoller/status/525725918397227008

3 Comments
<<Previous

    RSS Feed

    Author

    Ron Meinhardt

    Archives

    August 2021
    May 2021
    April 2020
    March 2017
    February 2017
    December 2015
    November 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    May 2013

    Categories

    All

Health Education Resources:
Seminars
Health News
Health Products
Simply Amazing Health Series




Contact Us:
Online Contact Form
Email: founder@healthislife.org
Sign-up for Our Newsletter
All Elements Copyright © 2023 by Entering Wedge Media, LLC
Photos used under Creative Commons from AJC1, Luiz Fernando / Sonia Maria, jeffgunn, Amy L. Riddle, Eric Kilby, Tambako the Jaguar