- Jul 18, 2005
- Melbourne, Australia
well that is indeed interesting, although I'm not sure what to conclude from that.The link is to an abstract published in the AHA journal "Circulation". It makes interesting reading.
It makes sense because I guess if you go along with the recognized medical opinion it's hard to sell any kind of snake oil. I would think the money would be in being contradictory which appeals to people wanting to think they know "What is really going on..." And then you sell them something you....Some definite red flags about the author, Steven Gundry. It seems he has a history of taking postitions that experts in the field view as non-scientific, then using his claims to profit his personally owned clinic and by selling expensive supplements, meant to cure something which is probably not really an issue to begin with:
Dr. Steven Gundry gives dangerous advice to sell ridiculous products to con people. Read how this fraudulent quack operates on Gripeo.www.gripeo.com
" His Plant Paradox diet suggests avoiding all foods containing lectins. Scientists and dieticians have classified Gundry's claims about lectins as pseudoscience. He sells supplements that he claims protect against or reverse the supposedly damaging effects of lectins. "
T. Colin Campbell, a biochemist and advocate for plant-based diets, states that The Plant Paradox contains numerous unsupported claims and denies that it makes a "convincing argument that lectins as a class are hazardous." Robert H. Eckel, an endocrinologist and past president of the American Heart Association, argues that Gundry's diet advice contradicts "every dietary recommendation represented by the American Cancer Society, American Heart Association, American Diabetes Association and so on" and that it is not possible to draw any conclusions from Gundry's own research due to the absence of control patients in his studies. Writing in New Scientist, food writer and chef Anthony Warner notes that Gundry's theories "are not supported by mainstream nutritional science" and that evidence of the benefits of high-lectin containing diets "is so overwhelming as to render Gundry’s arguments laughable".
Gundry sells supplements that he claims protect against the damaging effect of lectins. Although Today's Dietician acknowledges evidence that consuming lectins in some raw foods like kidney beans can be harmful, it concludes that "preliminary studies have revealed potential health benefits of lectin consumption and minute evidence of harm.""
Indeed. Look for him to come out with a list of supplements for sale which will ostensibly reverse this claimed inflammation, which he discovered all on his own from his own "research".t makes sense because I guess if you go along with the recognized medical opinion it's hard to sell any kind of snake oil. I would think the money would be in being contradictory which appeals to people wanting to think they know "What is really going on..." And then you sell them something you....
Well of course the vaccine will likely not work as well and people who have less robust immune systems. Obviously that's a bit ironic because they're the ones who would need it more but my, albeit limited, understanding of vaccines is that they work by introducing either a weekend virus or part of a virus and your immune system develops a response so that when you come in contact with the real deal you're ready for it. Obviously it just doesn't mean they're useless as he seems to be implying.A little more on Dr. Gundry. It turns out that he is on record as a vaccine skeptic, even before the Covid vaccine came out. Because, he says it won't work for old people. See below. His solution? Supplements. Oh, did I happen to mention that he sells supplements? So, in that he profits from his supplement solutions for Covid, he has a conflict of interest for any review or clinical trial based on vaccine outcomes. I do not see any such disclosures in his paper.
See below, the bold is mind. I have linked the entire podcast as well.
"Dr. Steven Gundry 16:28
it helped none of them. And so it really doesn’t matter to me, if the virus does get a vaccine to this virus, and it works in a monkey or it works in a 21 year old. That’s not gonna help me very much because our immune system as we get older and older begins to get in a tank as a heart transplant surgeon. One of the things that was exciting was I did little babies, newborn babies and did a heart transplant and we could fool their immune system pretty well. And We could take a 75 year old man or woman and do a heart transplant and we didn’t need much immunosuppression because their immune systems didn’t work. So the idea that we’re going to have an effective vaccine, hmm. So we have to arm ourselves. And we can do that. So vitamin D, number one, number two, vitamin C. Now the problem with vitamin C is you, you lose most of the vitamin C, you swallow very quickly, three or four hours it’s gone. It’s water soluble, so you pee it off. Well, should you take a ton of vitamin C problem with that is gives you diarrhea, and that’s no fun. "
Dr. Steven Gundry 15:40 Yeah, I mean imagine World War Two Churchill telling everybody Well, let’s just stay in our bunkers until you know the Manhattan Project is finished and then we’ll have the bomb. And it’s the same thing. Do you really think we’re going to have a vaccine that’s going to...tscpodcast.com
this is pretty close, and is actually the way it was done years ago ... even then its not weakened its killed (which because its not one virus is a statistical thing).understanding of vaccines is that they work by introducing either a weekend virus or part of a virus and your immune system develops a response so that when you come in contact with the real deal you're ready for it
Yeah I'm aware of the spike protein thing which to me does seem like a better mousetrap. One guy I work with went with the Johnson & Johnson which I think is the older method but I'm not sure. He's not anti-vax but I personally think he was a little skeptical of the new technology, however he claims he has an allergic reaction to something in the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines.this is pretty close, and is actually the way it was done years ago ... even then its not weakened its killed (which because its not one virus is a statistical thing).
New methods are even more safe, as they introduce only parts (such as the spike protein) which are manufactured and packaged into a "shipping container" for delivery into the body. This container is the adenovirus (which is as I understand it what triggers a mild short duration fever as a reaction to its presence).
The Adenovirus delivers its contents (parts, not whole virus) to which the immune system gets a look at what a virus looks like (from the outside).
The body is a complex bundle of molecular micro machines
PS: when I did my degree in Biochem we had to imagine all this in our minds, wonderful detailed simulations like this were simply unavailable.