mRNA vaccine AHA abstract

Help Support ValveReplacement.org:

Zoltania

VR.org Supporter
VR.org Supporter
Joined
Feb 16, 2015
Messages
227
Location
SF Bay Area, California
This does not look like a peer-reviewed paper. According to Wikipedia, the author, Steven Gundry, "is a former cardiac surgeon and currently runs his own clinic, investigating the impact of diet on health." The first Google hit on his name takes you to his personal website where he sells his own books.
 

juniper

New member
Joined
Aug 7, 2021
Messages
1
There is an attachment to it from the AHA ("Expression of Concern") that says the following:
"Soon after publication of the above abstract in Circulation, it was brought to the American Heart Association Com- mittee on Scientific Sessions Program’s attention that there are potential errors in the abstract. Specifically, there are several typographical errors, there is no data in the abstract regarding myocardial T-cell infiltration, there are no statisti- cal analyses for significance provided, and the author is not clear that only anecdotal data was used. We are publishing this Expression of Concern until a suitable correction is published to indicate that the abstract in its current version may not be reliable."
 

Chuck C

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 5, 2020
Messages
1,176
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:


" His Plant Paradox diet suggests avoiding all foods containing lectins.[6] Scientists and dieticians have classified Gundry's claims about lectins as pseudoscience.[6][7] He sells supplements that he claims protect against or reverse the supposedly damaging effects of lectins.[8] "
"
Criticism[edit]
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."[8] 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".[24]

Gundry sells supplements that he claims protect against the damaging effect of lectins.[10][8][24][7] 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."[4]"


 
Last edited:

cldlhd

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 9, 2014
Messages
1,693
Location
Levittown ,Pa 19054
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:


" His Plant Paradox diet suggests avoiding all foods containing lectins.[6] Scientists and dieticians have classified Gundry's claims about lectins as pseudoscience.[6][7] He sells supplements that he claims protect against or reverse the supposedly damaging effects of lectins.[8] "
"
Criticism[edit]
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."[8] 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".[24]

Gundry sells supplements that he claims protect against the damaging effect of lectins.[10][8][24][7] 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."[4]"


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....
 

Chuck C

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 5, 2020
Messages
1,176
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....
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".

If you take a look at his book warning about lectins- found in beans, he comes up with a problem in our diet, apparently missed by all of medicine and nutrition science. Lectins, as found in beans, are causing major health problems. Never mind that beans (legumes) correlate with longevity in almost every study done and are a major staple in the diet of virtually every Blue Zone population- those that have the highest number of people living to 100 years old. He alone has discovered this dangerous element about beans. Oh, and by the way, for a hefty price he will sell you the supplements on his website which will reverse these ostensible problems caused by lectins. If it sounds like a duck- quack quack, it probably is.


By the way, I have had both moderna vaccines and have had an inflammation panel since being vaccinated. My inflammation markers are very good- below average and have not increased at all since being vaccinated. Perhaps I should forward the good doctor my data so that he can tell me how the lab must have erred.
 
Last edited:

Chuck C

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 5, 2020
Messages
1,176
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. "

 

cldlhd

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 9, 2014
Messages
1,693
Location
Levittown ,Pa 19054
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. "

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.
 

pellicle

Professional Dingbat
Joined
Nov 4, 2012
Messages
9,101
Location
Queensland, OzTrayLeeYa
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
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.

HTH
 
Last edited:

cldlhd

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 9, 2014
Messages
1,693
Location
Levittown ,Pa 19054
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.

HTH
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.
 

cldlhd

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 9, 2014
Messages
1,693
Location
Levittown ,Pa 19054
Personally, I vote for more dog pictures.... There's my little buddy. Just don't call him little though. Actually he's my favorite happy hour partner these days, don't know if that says a lot about him or a lot about me.
 

Attachments

Last edited:
Top