Pancreatic problems often develop silently, showing up first as subtle digestive issues like greasy stools, fatigue after meals, or nausea when eating fatty foods
Early warning signs such as upper abdominal pain, back pain, or unexpected weight loss signal that your pancreas is struggling and needs immediate attention to prevent lasting damage
Experts warn that even mild, persistent changes in stool color, texture, or frequency can reveal enzyme deficiencies that, if untreated, lead to malabsorption, diabetes, or cancer
Everyday habits like eating processed foods, consuming seed oils, and drinking alcohol overwork your pancreas and trigger chronic inflammation that slowly impairs its function
Supporting your pancreas with simple dietary changes, steady blood sugar habits, and early detection of symptoms allows your body to heal naturally and maintain long-term digestive and metabolic health
Your pancreas is one of your body’s most overworked and overlooked organs. It sits quietly behind your stomach, regulating digestion and blood sugar day after day without complaint. Yet when it begins to falter, the warning signs are so subtle that many people don’t notice until serious damage has already occurred.
Unlike organs that make their distress obvious, your pancreas fails silently. A few vague digestive changes, a dip in energy, or unexplained changes in weight are often the only early hints. Because these symptoms seem harmless, they’re easy to ignore — until inflammation or disease takes hold.
Pancreatic problems don’t happen overnight; they build slowly through years of dietary stress, toxin exposure, and metabolic strain. By the time pain or jaundice appears, the gland has often been struggling for months or even years. Paying attention to early shifts in digestion and metabolism gives you the power to intervene long before irreversible damage sets in.
Your Pancreas Speaks in Whispers Before It Cries for Help
Your pancreas — an organ responsible for both digestion and blood sugar control — frequently begins to fail long before symptoms become obvious. An article from The Valley Vanguard explains that the gland’s dual role makes it especially vulnerable to chronic inflammation and cancer, which often progress unnoticed until advanced stages.1 The authors describe pancreatic cancer as “stealthy,” often discovered too late for surgery, with 14,000 new cases diagnosed in France each year.
• The early red flags of pancreatic disease that most people overlook — When your pancreas begins to fail, it struggles to produce the digestive enzymes needed to break down fats, proteins, and carbohydrates. This leads to malabsorption — a condition in which nutrients pass through your body instead of being absorbed.
The first signs often include greasy or oily stools, bloating, and fatigue after meals. These are subtle but meaningful clues that your digestive system is under stress. Recognizing these signs early allows you to act before inflammation worsens.
• Pain patterns hold powerful diagnostic clues — Abdominal pain, especially in the upper middle area, is one of the most common symptoms of pancreatitis — an inflammation of the pancreas that often radiates to your back. This occurs in roughly 85% to 90% of cases. Unlike stomach pain from indigestion, pancreatic pain usually intensifies after eating and often eases when you sit up or lean forward.
• Jaundice signals that bile flow has been obstructed, often by a tumor — Yellowing of your skin and eyes, paired with dark urine or pale stools, points to bile backing up into your bloodstream because of a blockage in the bile duct. This blockage frequently occurs when a tumor compresses the duct, stopping bile from draining into your intestines. The result is a visible yellow tint — a visual warning not to ignore.
• Rapid weight loss is your body’s SOS signal — The inability to digest food properly leads to significant, unintentional weight loss. This is not healthy weight reduction — it’s a sign your body is starving for nutrients. Because fat digestion fails first, your stool becomes lighter and greasy, and you lose energy rapidly. In severe cases, this malnutrition cascades into fatigue, weakness, and blood sugar imbalance.
• Blood sugar swings reflect deeper pancreatic dysfunction — Your pancreas doesn’t just aid digestion — it’s your body’s blood sugar regulator. When your pancreatic endocrine cells are damaged or inflamed, they fail to release insulin and glucagon in proper balance.
The result is hyperglycemia — blood sugar that stays too high. This often presents as intense thirst, frequent urination, and exhaustion. For some people, these early blood sugar irregularities are the first clue of hidden pancreatic strain.
Doctors Warn That Subtle Clues Often Point to Hidden Pancreas Problems
A news piece from Prevention features insights from two medical experts — Dr. Andrew Hendifar, medical director of pancreatic cancer at the Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Center in Los Angeles, and Dr. Ted Epperly, president and CEO of Full Circle Health in Idaho.2
Their shared message is straightforward: most people ignore pancreatic distress because its symptoms mimic harmless digestive problems. Recognizing these subtle signs early is key to preventing irreversible pancreatic disease or catching cancer before it spreads.
• Stool appearance offers an important diagnostic clue — Hendifar explained that pale or floating stools often mean your pancreas isn’t producing enough enzymes to break down fats.
Those missing enzymes cause fat to remain undigested, which leads to oily residue in the toilet. You might even notice a shiny film on the water’s surface. The practical takeaway: when your stool starts looking greasy or light-colored on a regular basis, your pancreas is signaling distress.
• Radiating back pain is a silent red flag for pancreatic cancer — According to Epperly, discomfort that begins in the middle of your abdomen and spreads to your mid or lower back, lingering for weeks, deserves immediate attention. He explained that patients often mistake this for reflux or muscle tension.
Many even receive prescriptions for proton-pump inhibitors like Prilosec or Nexium — drugs that treat acid reflux — but fail to improve. That lack of improvement should prompt a deeper investigation of your pancreas. Acting on that insight could help identify a tumor or inflammation before it becomes life-threatening.
• An unexpected diabetes diagnosis often signals pancreatic imbalance — Your pancreas controls blood sugar through insulin and glucagon release. When these hormones fall out of balance, blood sugar levels spike and diabetes develops.
If you maintain a healthy weight and diet but suddenly find yourself diagnosed with Type 2 diabetes — or notice your existing diabetes becoming harder to manage — your pancreas deserves a closer look. Hendifar warned that such sudden shifts often accompany early pancreatic cancer, long before imaging scans confirm it.
• Nausea and vomiting after eating high-fat foods reveal enzyme failure — Foods like hamburgers, pizza, and avocados are often “nausea triggers” for those with pancreatic dysfunction. Because these foods rely heavily on pancreatic enzymes for digestion, people with weakened pancreas function struggle to break down fats.
The result is nausea, bloating, or vomiting soon after meals. Recognizing these specific food patterns helps you connect the dots faster — if fatty meals suddenly start making you sick, your pancreas is likely involved. Persistent fatigue often follows because your cells aren’t getting enough nutrients from food.3 The takeaway: if eating leaves you nauseated or drained instead of energized, your pancreas might be signaling distress.
• Rapid weight loss is not a fitness success — it’s a metabolic warning sign — If weight drops quickly without effort, it likely stems from digestive failure rather than healthy metabolism. Research published in Clinical and Translational Gastroenterology showed that 24% of people with acute pancreatitis lost more than 10% of their body weight within a year of diagnosis.4
This isn’t just fat loss — it’s nutrient starvation from poor digestion. When paired with fatigue, back pain, or stool changes, it signals that your body is breaking down faster than it can rebuild.
The Digestive Institute of Arizona also notes that when enzyme and hormone production collapse, your body loses its ability to digest nutrients or regulate glucose levels. This leads to two outcomes: sudden, unintentional weight loss and rising blood sugar levels that progress toward diabetes.5
• Early testing helps prevent irreversible complications — Blood work, ultrasound, MRI, and specialized imaging like ERCP (endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography) help identify structural or hormonal pancreatic problems before they become severe.
The Digestive Institute of Arizona urges individuals who experience persistent symptoms — especially abdominal pain, greasy stool, or unexplained fatigue — to request these diagnostic tools early.6 Timely detection allows for simpler treatments like enzyme replacement or dietary changes, rather than complex surgical interventions later.
5 Steps to Protect and Restore Your Pancreas
Your pancreas is far more delicate than most people realize. It’s the control center for your digestion and blood sugar, and it reacts strongly to what you eat, drink, and expose yourself to. Whether your goal is to heal from inflammation or simply protect this important gland, focus on addressing what caused the damage in the first place — poor diet, toxin exposure, or chronic metabolic stress. Once those triggers are removed, your pancreas begins to recover.
1. Stop overworking your pancreas with processed foods and hidden oils — The first step is to remove anything that keeps your pancreas inflamed. Industrial seed oils — like soybean, corn, sunflower, safflower, and canola — are at the top of that list. These oils contain high levels of linoleic acid (LA) that interfere with cellular energy production and make your pancreas work harder than it should.
Replace them with clean, stable fats such as tallow, ghee, and grass fed butter. Avoid restaurant foods, most salad dressings, and packaged snacks. If you’re used to eating out often, try cooking simple meals at home for a few weeks — you’ll notice your digestion feels lighter, and your energy steadier.
2. Eat foods that support digestive enzyme function — A struggling pancreas produces fewer digestive enzymes, which makes nutrient absorption more difficult. To support enzyme activity, eat smaller meals, chew your food thoroughly, and include gentle, enzyme-rich options like ripe papaya or pineapple.
Both contain natural compounds that help your body break down proteins and fats. If you’ve had greasy or floating stools, that’s your signal that your pancreas needs extra support breaking down fats. Stick to simple, whole foods until your digestion feels normal again.
3. Balance your blood sugar naturally — The endocrine side of your pancreas controls insulin and glucagon, which regulate blood sugar. When you eat erratically or rely on refined carbohydrates, your pancreas works overtime.
Focus on steady energy instead: start your meals with protein and whole-food carbs such as fruit, white rice, or root vegetables, if tolerated. If you struggle with energy crashes or sugar cravings, eat on a consistent schedule rather than skipping meals. This steadiness trains your pancreas to respond efficiently instead of in crisis mode.
4. Avoid alcohol and reduce gut inflammation —Alcohol is toxic to pancreatic cells — it directly damages their structure and weakens your ability to digest fats. Even small amounts create oxidative stress inside your pancreas. Along with eliminating alcohol, support your gut with healthy carbs like fruit and white rice. Once your digestion stabilizes, gradually reintroduce higher-fiber foods to rebuild a healthy microbiome without overwhelming your system.
5. Watch for early warning signs and act fast — Your body always tells you when something is off — you just need to pay attention. Greasy stools, upper abdominal discomfort, unexplained weight loss, or sudden fatigue are not normal. Keep a daily note of your digestion, stool consistency, and energy for a week. If you notice changes, take it as feedback from your pancreas to slow down, simplify your diet, and rest your digestion. The earlier you respond, the faster your pancreas recovers.
When you remove what harms your pancreas and feed it what supports it, healing begins quickly. Every meal becomes a form of medicine, and every symptom becomes useful feedback that guides you toward balance and resilience. If your symptoms persist, worsen, or include jaundice, severe pain, or rapid weight loss, seek medical attention promptly — these are signs your pancreas needs immediate help.
FAQs About Pancreas Warning Signs
Q: What are the early warning signs of pancreatic problems?
A: Early pancreatic distress often shows up as greasy or floating stools, upper abdominal pain that radiates to your back, fatigue after eating, nausea following fatty meals, and unexplained weight loss. These symptoms indicate your pancreas is struggling to digest food or regulate blood sugar. Ignoring them allows inflammation or disease to progress silently.
Q: Why does the pancreas fail without obvious symptoms?
A: Your pancreas performs its work deep within your abdomen and doesn’t have many pain-sensitive nerves. Because of this, inflammation and enzyme loss happen quietly over time. By the time noticeable symptoms like jaundice or severe pain appear, the gland has usually been under stress for months or years.
Q: How does diet affect pancreatic health?
A: Industrial seed oils, refined carbs, and processed foods overwork and inflame your pancreas. Replacing these with stable fats such as tallow, ghee, or grass fed butter, and eating simple, whole-food meals helps reduce inflammation and restore balance. Foods like papaya and pineapple also support digestion by boosting natural enzyme activity.
Q: What daily habits support a healthy pancreas?
A: Eat smaller, consistent meals, limit alcohol, and avoid seed oils and processed foods. Keep blood sugar steady by pairing protein with unprocessed carbohydrates like fruit or root vegetables. Record any digestive changes — tracking symptoms like energy dips or stool changes helps you recognize when your pancreas is under strain and take corrective steps early.
Q: When should I seek medical attention?
A: If you develop persistent abdominal pain, yellowing of your skin or eyes, oily stools, or unexplained weight loss, seek medical evaluation immediately. These symptoms suggest significant pancreatic dysfunction that requires prompt testing to prevent lasting damage or detect cancer at an early, treatable stage.
According to research, consuming as little as 1 gram of bay leaves daily can lower fasting glucose by up to 26% and reduces LDL cholesterol by 40%, offering natural support for metabolic health
Insulin sensitivity improves with regular bay leaf intake, as studies show it protects pancreatic beta cells and enhances the body’s ability to regulate blood sugar
Liver and kidney function benefit from bay leaf extract, which reduces inflammation, improves enzyme balance, and prevents diabetes-related organ damage
Powerful antioxidants in bay leaves fight oxidative stress and inflammation, lowering the risk of metabolic dysfunction, heart disease, and complications linked to diabetes
Try adding bay leaves to your meals, brewing them into tea, or using them in powdered form to provide an easy, natural way to regulate blood sugar and improve overall health
Bay leaves (Laurus nobilis L.) have been a staple in traditional medicine and cooking for centuries, but modern research now reveals something far more important about this common herb. Studies show that bay leaves significantly lower blood sugar levels and improve cholesterol, making them a powerful tool for managing your metabolic health.
Bay leaves also contain beneficial compounds that help protect cells from oxidative stress, which is one of the key drivers of inflammation and chronic disease. This ability to support both glucose metabolism and lipid balance makes them an overlooked but valuable addition to a health-conscious diet.
Bay Leaves Protect Your Organs While Lowering Blood Sugar
A 2021 animal study published in the Annals of Medicine and Surgery journal1 examined how bay leaf helps mitigate the damage caused by diabetes, particularly in the pancreas, liver and kidneys — organs that are often severely affected by the disease. Over four weeks, diabetic rats were given bay leaf extract, and their blood sugar levels, insulin response and organ function were closely monitored.
Bay leaf extract led to a significant drop in blood sugar — The rats that received the bay leaf extract experienced a significant drop in blood sugar, bringing their glucose levels much closer to normal compared to diabetic rats that received no treatment.
Pancreatic beta cells were better preserved — These cells are responsible for producing insulin. In untreated diabetic rats, these insulin-producing cells were severely damaged, leading to insulin dysfunction and uncontrolled blood sugar. In contrast, rats that received bay leaf extract showed stronger insulin production and healthier pancreatic tissue.
Untreated diabetic rats had severe liver damage — The liver, which helps regulate glucose and lipid metabolism, often becomes inflamed and overloaded with fat in diabetics. The researchers found that rats that didn’t receive bay leaf extract had liver necrosis (cell death), fatty deposits and structural degeneration.
Bay leaf extract-treated rats had improved liver function — Their liver enzyme (AST, ALT, and GGT) levels, key markers of liver function, improved significantly, suggesting reduced liver stress and better overall metabolic control. Liver enzymes are critical for detoxification and metabolic health, and when elevated, it means the liver is under strain. Bay leaf-treated rats had levels that were closer to those of healthy rats.
Remarkable improvements were also seen in kidney function — Diabetes causes kidney damage due to high blood sugar and inflammation, often resulting in diabetic nephropathy. In this study, untreated diabetic rats had kidney damage, inflammation, and abnormal structural changes. Bay leaf extract prevented much of the damage, helping reduce cellular stress and maintain normal kidney architecture in the treated rats.2
What Makes Bay Leaves So Powerful?
Bay leaves have a positive effect on insulin signaling, which is one of the key mechanisms behind its antidiabetic effects. Insulin is the hormone responsible for moving sugar from the bloodstream into cells, but when you have diabetes, your cells become resistant to insulin’s effects.
Bay leaves improve insulin signaling — In the animal study above, bay leaf extract was found to enhance insulin sensitivity. This leads to lower blood sugar levels and improves glucose metabolism, key factors in preventing long-term complications of diabetes.
Potent antioxidants in bay leaves — 1,8-cineole, α-terpinyl acetate and linalool in bay leaves help reduce oxidative stress, which is a major driver of diabetic complications. High blood sugar generates free radicals, unstable molecules that damage cells and accelerate disease progression. Bay leaf’s potent antioxidants help neutralize free radicals.
Bioactive compounds in bay leaves help regulate lipid metabolism — In diabetes, cholesterol and triglyceride levels often become dangerously unbalanced, increasing the risk of heart disease. The study showed that rats treated with bay leaf extract had better lipid profiles (reduced LDL cholesterol and triglycerides and increased HDL cholesterol), which helped support heart health and overall metabolic stability.
This research provides compelling evidence that bay leaves are more than just a spice — they’re a powerful tool for metabolic health. “We believe that further preclinical research into the utility of L. nobilis treatment may indicate its suitability as a potential treatment in diabetic patients,” the study authors wrote.3
Previous research has demonstrated these effects in humans as well. A study published in the Journal of Clinical Biochemistry and Nutrition4 examined the effects of bay leaf consumption on blood sugar and cholesterol levels in Type 2 diabetics. Their primary goal was to determine whether bay leaves could naturally help control glucose levels and improve lipid profiles in people who are at risk of diabetes and heart disease.
Different bay leaf doses were tested over a 30-day period — The study involved 40 participants, all diagnosed with Type 2 diabetes. They were divided into four groups, each receiving a different amount of bay leaves (1, 2 or 3 grams of ground bay leaves in capsule form) or a placebo. After just 10 days, significant changes were already evident in the groups taking bay leaves, and more significant improvements were seen after 30 days.
Bay leaves help regulate glucose more effectively over time — Participants consuming bay leaves saw fasting blood sugar levels drop by 21% to 26%, with the most significant reductions occurring in those taking 1 or 3 grams daily. Even more interesting, these lower blood sugar levels persisted for 10 days after stopping bay leaf consumption, indicating a lasting effect.
Cholesterol levels also saw major improvements — Across all bay leaf groups, total cholesterol levels dropped between 20% and 24%, with the biggest reductions seen in LDL cholesterol (“bad” cholesterol). LDL levels plummeted by as much as 40%, a decrease that rivals the effects of some cholesterol-lowering medications.
Triglycerides decreased significantly — In the 1-gram group, triglycerides dropped by 34%, while the 2-gram group saw a 25% reduction. Even after stopping bay leaf consumption, their levels remained lower than before the study, reinforcing the long-term benefits.
HDL cholesterol levels soared — The researchers found that HDL “good” cholesterol rose by 19% to 29%, improving participants’ overall heart health. This shift in cholesterol ratios is crucial, as high LDL and low HDL levels are key drivers of heart disease, stroke and other cardiovascular problems.
The researchers noted that none of the participants were taking insulin, and they all continued their usual diabetes medications and diets during the study. This setup allowed them to identify how bay leaves affected the diabetics’ health beyond the effects of their existing treatments.
Another interesting aspect is that the most notable benefits were observed in the 1-gram group. They had the most consistent improvements across blood sugar, cholesterol, and triglycerides. This suggests that even a small daily amount of bay leaves provides meaningful health benefits, making it easy to incorporate into a regular diet.5
What Else Is Bay Leaf Good For?
Bay leaves are an excellent source of vitamins A and C, iron, manganese, copper and calcium — all of these are antioxidants with free radical-scavenging abilities, and positively impact your eyesight, bones, blood and more.6 Below are other health benefits associated with bay leaves.
Pain relief — In traditional medicine, bay leaves are used for alleviating digestive issues, like ulcer pain, heartburn, gas and colic. It’s also helpful in easing arthritis and headaches.7
Protects against pathogenic bacteria — A study published in the Journal of Pathogen Research tested the antimicrobial and antioxidant properties of bay leaves against multiple bacterial strains, including Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli (E.coli) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. The results revealed strong antibacterial effects, particularly against S. aureus and E. coli.8
Bioactive compounds provide immune support — Researchers attribute these effects to the flavonoids (kaempferol, myricetin and quercetin), polyphenols, and essential oils found in bay leaves, which all have well-documented anti-inflammatory and immune-supporting properties.
Inhibits bacterial growth — The monoterpenes and sesquiterpenes in bay leaves also disrupt bacterial membranes and inhibit their ability to grow and multiply.9
If you’re looking for a natural way to improve your blood sugar levels and cholesterol, adding bay leaves to your diet is one of the easiest steps you can take. The best part? You don’t need much. As the studies above demonstrate, even a small amount daily makes a big difference. Here are tips to get the most out of bay leaves and improve your overall health:
1. Use whole bay leaves in cooking — The simplest way to start using bay leaves is to cook with them regularly. Add a couple of whole bay leaves to soups, stews, rice or slow-cooked meats. The leaves will infuse your food with their beneficial compounds while enhancing flavor. Just remember to remove them before serving, as they are not meant to be eaten whole.
2. Brew bay leaf tea — If you prefer a more direct way to consume bay leaves, make a tea by simmering two or three dried bay leaves in hot water for 10 minutes. This allows the active compounds to extract fully. Drink this tea daily to help regulate blood sugar and reduce oxidative stress. You can also add a squeeze of lemon or a teaspoon of raw honey if you want to enhance the taste.
3. Use ground bay leaves for maximum benefits — If you want a more concentrated effect, use ground bay leaves instead of whole ones. Sprinkle a small amount into sauces, curries or even mix it into a smoothie. This method ensures you consume the beneficial compounds directly without having to remove the leaves later.
4. Combine bay leaves with other antioxidant-rich foods — Bay leaves work even better when paired with other antioxidant-rich foods. Since oxidative stress contributes to insulin resistance and cholesterol imbalances, eating more fresh fruits, vegetables, and healthy fats alongside bay leaves further reduces inflammation and protects your cells.
5. Be consistent and give it time — The studies on bay leaves showed significant improvements within 30 days, but these benefits are best sustained through long-term use. Make bay leaves a regular part of your meals and be patient as your body gradually improves insulin sensitivity, lowers LDL cholesterol and balances blood sugar levels. Like any natural approach, consistency is key.
Bay leaves offer a simple, natural way to support metabolic health, and incorporating them into your diet requires minimal effort. Whether you add them to your meals, brew them into tea, or use them as a seasoning, they are a powerful tool for improving glucose regulation and protecting your heart.
If you’re struggling with diabetes, there are other herbs and spices that will help manage your blood sugar levels. Read “These Herbs and Spices Can Help Deter Diabetes” for more information.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) About Bay Leaves
Q: How do bay leaves help lower blood sugar?
A: Bay leaves improve insulin sensitivity, allowing the body to use insulin more effectively. This leads to better glucose control and lower fasting blood sugar levels by up to 26%.
Q: Can bay leaves improve cholesterol levels?
A: Yes, studies show bay leaves reduce LDL (“bad”) cholesterol by up to 40% while increasing HDL (“good”) cholesterol by 19% to 29%, supporting heart health and metabolic balance.
Q: How do bay leaves support liver and kidney function?
A: Research found that bay leaf extract reduces liver inflammation, improves enzyme balance, and prevents kidney damage linked to diabetes, helping protect these organs from long-term deterioration.
Q: What is the best way to consume bay leaves for health benefits?
A: You can use whole bay leaves in cooking, brew them into tea, or take them in ground form. Studies suggest 1 to 3 grams daily for optimal metabolic support.
Q: Do bay leaves have other health benefits beyond blood sugar and cholesterol control?
A: Yes, bay leaves contain powerful antioxidants that fight oxidative stress and inflammation, which helps reduce the risk of heart disease, metabolic dysfunction, and bacterial infections.
The therapeutic actions of dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) make it well suited to treat challenging conditions throughout the body, including many of the internal organs
DMSO effectively protects organs from injury, such as poisoning or blood loss, and has been shown to treat many life threatening conditions (e.g., heart attacks, ARDS, or pancreatitis)
DMSO has been shown to treat disorders of the urogenital tract and reproductive system, such as kidney stones, nephritis, enlarged prostates, prostatitis, cystitis, epididymitis, genital pain, urethral syndrome, tubal infertility, and endometrial inflammation or fibrosis
DMSO has also been shown to repair damaged organs (e.g., liver cirrhosis, pulmonary fibrosis, smoke inhalation damage) and improve blood sugar control
Dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) is a remarkably safe1 naturally occurring compound that can treat a variety of challenging conditions. Since DMSO is incredibly effective for treating chronic pain, arthritis, and injuries like sprains or burns2 (discussed further here), it quickly spread across America as a miracle drug.
Thousands of studies were conducted to confirm its value, and before long, hundreds of thousands of people considered it to be the most important therapeutic ever discovered. Unfortunately, due to politics, the FDA turned against DMSO and refused to relent3 even once:
• DMSO was shown to effectively treat strokes, traumatic brain injuries, spinal cord injuries, and many circulatory disorders (discussed here).
• DMSO was shown to cure a variety of “incurable” autoimmune and connective tissue disorders (discussed here).
• DMSO was shown to treat a variety of challenging (and often incurable) eye, ear, sinus, and dental conditions such as tinnitus and blindness (discussed here).
Since publishing those articles, I’ve received over a thousand reports from people of the remarkable effects DMSO has had on them (which can be read here), that while unbelievable, are almost identical to what people across America reported before the FDA buried DMSO.
Reversing Organ Degeneration
The following process underlies many disease states:
In rapid cases, this is easy to recognize (as cells will rapidly die after a traumatic injury or having their blood supply cut off), whereas in slower cases (e.g., those arising from a chronic illness or toxicity), the issue often is that the cellular repair process becomes frozen and unable to bring the cells back to normal functioning.
DMSO is uniquely suited to reversing this process as, especially when done early in the rapid cases following a severe injury (whereas the more gradual and chronic ones we often see frequently require systemic regenerative therapy). This is because:
1. DMSO protects the blood supply of the body,4 and disperses the microclotting, which often follows injury (e.g., burns) and leads to tissue death.5 Simultaneously, it also protects tissues from dying during periods of inadequate blood supply (ischemia) or being injured when that blood supply is rapidly restored (reperfused).
Numerous animal studies have demonstrated DMSO’s protective effect in organs that rapidly die once they lose their blood supply, such as the heart6,7,8,9,10,11,12 and brain13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23 (and even DMSO maintaining their function24,25,26 during periods of ischemia).
Likewise, DMSO has also been shown to prevent ischemia and reperfusion injuries to the liver27,28 kidney,29,30,31,32 lungs,33,34 ovaries35 and small intestine.36
2. DMSO protects organs from toxins that would otherwise be lethal to them or permanently damage them. This has been shown with the heart,37 kidneys,38,39,40 liver41,42,43,44 lungs,45 pancreas.46,47,48 Additionally, DMSO has also been repeatedly shown to mitigate radiation damage to tissues (e.g., in the kidneys).49
3. DMSO has been shown to protect the brain50,51 liver,52 and lungs53 from the tissue damage that develops after blunt trauma or surgical excisions.
Note: This was also repeatedly demonstrated in humans with severe blunt head trauma.54,55,56
4. DMSO dampens the destructive autoimmune process and swelling that often follows tissue trauma.57,58 In addition to protecting organs from injury, and reversing that degenerative process, DMSO has also been shown to help with a variety of challenging medical conditions.
Heart
The majority of the pertinent studies evaluating DMSO’s interactions with the heart (e.g., the previously mentioned ones) evaluated its ability to protect the heart from ischemic events like heart attacks and to improve the circulation within the body.59
Numerous randomized controlled trials conducted in Iraq found DMSO was highly beneficial for gastrointestinal diseases:
One evaluated 136 patients with recurrent attacks of proctosigmoid ulcerative colitis that were not being prevented by their prophylactic medical regimen. For those receiving standard care, 51% recovered in two weeks compared to 84% of those also receiving DMSO. Over the next year, 25% of those continuing to receive standard care had a relapse rate, whereas only 5% of those receiving DMSO did.60
One evaluated hospitalized patients with pelvic fractures or hypovolemic shock who were at risk for a stress induced gastric ulcer. Of the 58 controls, 22% developed an ulcer, whereas of the 57 receiving DMSO, only 4% did. Additionally, none of those receiving DMSO deteriorated or required emergency surgery, whereas 8 controls and 1 allopurinol recipient did (of whom 3 then died).61
One evaluated 302 consecutive patients with previous symptomatic duodenal ulceration that was shown to have healed, and who were smokers and social drinkers, to receive four different treatments. Of the 220 available for evaluation, 65% who received a placebo had a recurrence of the ulcer, 30% of those who received cimetidine, and 13% of those who received oral DMSO.62
Note: Similar results have been obtained by American physicians in a smaller number of patients.63
One evaluated 363 consecutive patients whose duodenal ulcers that did not heal despite 3 months of treatment with cimetidine (and who were cigarette smokers or social drinkers), were given either cimetidine twice a day alone or with DMSO or allopurinol. In 315 patients who were evaluable for analysis, at 8 weeks, 60% of those who had cimetidine recovered, whereas 100% of those who received DMSO recovered.
Additionally, the one year relapse rate was 29% for cimetidine alone and 7% in those who took DMSO.64
One evaluated 238 patients with symptomatic acute duodenal ulceration who were smokers and social drinkers were randomized to receive for 8 weeks cimetidine or 8 weeks of a half dose of cimetidine plus oral DMSO (400mg two times a day) or allopurinol. After 8 weeks, 69 of the 87 (79%) who only received cimetidine recovered, whereas all of the 85 who received DMSO did.
Additionally, 67% of those who received cimetidine over the next year relapsed, compared to 6% of those who took DMSO.65
One evaluated 101 patients presenting with hematemesis (coughing up blood) due to erosive gastritis (a fairly dangerous condition). It gave them either saline or oral allopurinol and DMSO orally every 6 hours for 5 days.
Of the 50 controls and 48 who were treated (along with 2 who left because they could not tolerate the treatment), 29% of the controls and 8% of who were treated had further episodes of hematemesis (with three of the controls requiring subsequent surgery — one of whom died). Of those who remained stable, a subsequent endoscopy showed evidence of hemorrhagic inflammation in 44% of controls and 9% of those who were treated.66
Finally, DMSO also has been shown to help with irritable bowel syndrome, acute or chronic gastritis, peptic ulcers, enterocolitis, and mucomembranous colitis.67
Liver
In addition to DMSO protecting the liver from injury, DMSO can sometimes heal the liver. For example, 12 patients who had terminal liver cirrhosis who agreed to stop drinking all alcohol for the duration of the program were put on daily DMSO program.
Of the 8 who chose to continue the program for 6 months, all had improved health, significantly reduced vomiting, and improved liver function tests, and rather than all being dead within one year as expected, they were in better condition than they had been at the start of the study.68
Gallbladder
A rat study created obstructive jaundice by ligating (cutting off) the common bile ducts and found that laboratory values showed DMSO mitigated the expected pathologic effects.69
A Japanese study found that injecting 90% DMSO mixed with 5% hexametaphosphate into the biliary tract effectively dissolved gallstones within the liver and was safe for the patients.70
Lungs
Additional data supports the protective role of DMSO for the lungs:
•After sheep experienced a lung injury from inhaling smoke, nebulized DMSO (with heparin) was found to reduce the damage to their lungs significantly.71
Note: Some unresolved questions exist regarding the safety of long term DMSO nebulization.72
•DMSO was found to prevent oxygen deprivation and inability to exchange gasses through the lungs which results from an Ehrlichia ruminantium infection (which is typically fatal).
DMSO has also been shown to treat acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), a challenging condition that frequently results in being placed on a ventilator (e.g., this happened throughout COVID-19).
In a hamster study and a mouse study, where a toxin was used to induce ARDS, DMSO significantly reduced the resulting lung damage and fluid leakage (which effectively drowns ARDS patients).73,74 A third mouse study found DMSO prevented all of them from dying (whereas 58% of controls died).75
In the one human study where IV DMSO was used for ARDS (given intravenously at concentrations under 10%) it was found to produce a dramatic improvement in all three patients who received it (e.g., one patient’s lungs were completely normal after a week) and prior to receiving DMSO all three were near death.76
Note: In the one case when DMSO was nebulized, the improvement occurred in 1 hour.
Finally, DMSO can help chronic lung conditions.
• One study found DMSO reduces chronic pulmonary fibrosis, and this beneficial effect was increased when it was mixed with zinc.77
• For older patients with chronic respiratory insufficiency (leading to chronically low blood oxygen levels, elevated carbon dioxide levels and an abnormal acid base balance, especially during exercises) due to issues in the lungs or bronchi, DMSO was found to bring about a recovery without the need for hospitalization in 35/43 (81%).78
• Human studies also have shown DMSO can treat asthma.79
Pancreas and Diabetes
Diabetics have reported that DMSO reduces (but does not eliminate) their need for insulin and that DMSO is particularly helpful for the condition since it can also alleviate the pain from diabetic peripheral neuropathy.80 Studies in this area include:
• Alloxan is toxic to the insulin producing cells of the pancreas and can be used to induce diabetes. A 1977 study found that DMSO prevented alloxan from causing diabetes.81
• DMSO has been shown to prevent the immune system from attacking transplanted insulin secreting cells (suggesting DMSO has significant potential for Type 1 diabetes).82
• GLP-1 is a key hormone the body uses to regulate satiety and blood sugar (and which diabetes drugs like Ozempic mimic). One study found that 0.5% to 2.5% DMSO increased GLP-1’s production of insulin by 2 to 2.5 times. This suggests DMSO could help treat diabetes or allow GLP-1 users to use a lower dose of the medication.83
• Exposing insulin secreting cells to DMSO was found to enhance glucose-induced and tolbutamide-stimulated insulin secretion without significant effects on basal secretion or potassium responsiveness.84
DMSO (along with ultraviolet blood irradiation) has also been shown to help pancreatitis, a challenging and dangerous condition85 (as there are no conventional treatments besides supportive care for most types of pancreatitis). For example, three rat and mice studies found DMSO significantly improved experimentally induced pancreatitis.86,87,88
Additionally, a randomized double-blind trial took 78 patients with chronic recurring pancreatitis (and no other confounding gastrointestinal disorders) who presented within 2 hours with signs of pancreatitis but did not have signs of generalized peritonitis. Of them, 26 received 10% DMSO rectally, and at least 57% were free of pain after 12 hours (compared to 17% of controls), and all were free of pain after 24 hours (whereas 48% of controls were still in pain).
As a result, all DMSO subjects were discharged within 3 days, whereas only 22% of controls were discharged after 5 days of hospitalization.89
Kidneys
In most circumstances, DMSO has been shown to be safe for the kidneys, to function as a potent diuretic, and to increase the kidney flow rate.90 In addition to protecting the kidneys from ischemia and toxins like mercury, many studies have also shown DMSO protects the kidneys from amyloidosis.91
Many kidney autoimmune diseases result from immune deposits in the kidneys (one of which is Heymann nephritis, an experimentally induced form of nephritis92 where antibodies that target the kidneys are injected causing immune deposits on the glomerular walls). In three rat studies of Heymann nephritis, DMSO was found to protect the kidneys and their function.93,94,95
Similarly, a study of 56 DMSO treated rats (and 48 controls) with lupus nephritis found that those who received DMSO had nearly normal kidneys, whereas the controls had significant damage to their kidneys.96 DMSO, likely due to its effects on zeta potential,97 has also shown promise for kidney stones:
• A study fed rats a diet designed to create kidney stones, and found that after two months, 40 of the 45 water-drinking rats had developed stones in the kidney, bladder or ureter, while only 11 of the 46 DMSO group did.98
• A study of 6 patients with kidney stones (5 of which were confirmed by ultrasound) found IV DMSO99 resolved the condition in 2 to 3 treatments (although one patient had a complete resolution after a single infusion).100
DMSO is extremely helpful for inflammation of the bladder, particularly “interstitial cystitis” (also known as painful bladder syndrome), a challenging condition which results in very frequent, painful (and often bloody) urination. DMSO, however can also help many other parts of the urinary tract. For example one study found:101
Likewise, a study of inflammatory conditions of the urinary tract, in addition to showing significant benefit for interstitial cystitis, also found:102
• Of the 12 patients with radiation cystitis (e.g., from prostate cancer therapy) 50% had a good response to it.
• Of the 35 patients with chronic prostatitis, 75% benefited significantly, with 12 having an “excellent” response, 14 a “good” response, and in 90% of cases, inflammation of the prostatic urethra improved.
• Another study gave 4 men with chronic excessive (and untreatable) urination due to bladder or prostate issues DMSO, 3 of whom had an excellent response.103
• A Polish study found urethral syndrome (chronic irritation of the urethra without signs of an infection) responds to DMSO being put into the urethral tract.104
Note: Many other remarkable reports exist of DMSO’s value for prostatitis (e.g., one DMSO doctor recently shared that it treated 40 out of 40 cases of bacterial prostatitis).105
Additionally, while no formal studies have been conducted on prostate enlargement many anecdotal reports (including from readers of the Forgotten Side of Medicine) have found DMSO is remarkably beneficial for this condition.106
Reproductive Disorders
• A 1975 Chilean study at a Navy hospital took 69 women who were infertile due to an obstruction in their fallopian tubes and injected a DMSO mixture into their fallopian tubes six separate times (and then repeated the series if the tubes had not opened). Out of 47 patients, 27 (57.4%) subsequently became pregnant, including one who got pregnant twice (without any further assistance).
Of the 27 pregnancies, 12 resulted in successful deliveries, 7 had a normal pregnancy at the time of publication, 4 patients chose to have abortions, and 3 had spontaneous abortions, and 1 had an abnormal pregnancy requiring a surgical intervention, and 0 had ectopic pregnancies (one of the risks of surgically opening the fallopian tubes).
Additionally, out of the 426 DMSO hydrotubations which were performed, only 7 (1.5%) had side effects all of which were minor.107
Note: 25% to 35%108 of infertility is due to tubal obstructions (typically from inflammation there). The current surgical approach for opening a tubal obstruction and restoring fertility (which bears some risks) has a 10% to 30%109,110 success rate.
• One study administered 10% to 30% DMSO into the uteruses of horses that could not get pregnant. It found no harm occurred to the lining of the uterus and that 18 out of 27 had significant improvement to the lining of their uterus (compared to 2 out of 18 who received a saline placebo), such as a reduction of chronic inflammatory cell infiltrates and reduction of periglandular fibrosis.
Additionally, there were signs their fertility improved, but the trial’s design made it impossible to be sure this improvement occurred.111
A New Therapeutic Principle
When DMSO was discovered, Stanley Jacob quickly realized that it represented a new therapeutic principle since it made so many things which had previously seemed impossible in medicine suddenly possible — and even more remarkably, 60 years later, many of the things DMSO can address the medical system still struggles to deal with.
For example, in the same way DMSO could significantly improve surgical outcomes,112 the data here makes good case that DMSO should be a mainstay therapy whenever someone is at risk of organ failure from being poisoned (e.g., due to a drug overdose). Likewise, the data here shows how numerous immensely challenging diseases that require a hospital or intensive care admission could be dramatically improved with DMSO.
However, while the FDA’s war against DMSO was immensely unfortunate, I am extremely hopeful the unprecedented political climate we are now entering we will at last make it possible to reform a medical system that has always put profits before people.
Much of that is thanks to the incredible work many of you have done throughout the pandemic to bring awareness to the crimes of the medical industrial complex and I am profoundly grateful to each of you for helping to make it happen and giving me the voice to as well.
Author’s note: This is an abridged version of a longer article that goes into greater detail on the data discussed here, how DMSO is used for each of the conditions mentioned (along with other approaches we’ve seen help them), and provides guidance for personal DMSO use (e.g., dosing, therapeutic precautions and where to obtain it). That article and its additional references can be read here.
A Note from Dr. Mercola About the Author
A Midwestern Doctor (AMD) is a board-certified physician from the Midwest and a longtime reader of Mercola.com. I appreciate AMD’s exceptional insight on a wide range of topics and am grateful to share it. I also respect AMD’s desire to remain anonymous since AMD is still on the front lines treating patients. To find more of AMD’s work, be sure to check out The Forgotten Side of Medicine on Substack.
Enzymes are catalysts that accelerate biochemical reactions in your body. Digestive enzymes are important for proper digestion and nutrient absorption, but the benefits of enzymes do not end there
Researchers have discovered enzymes for all sorts of uses, from boosting athletic endurance by optimizing digestion and nutrient uptake to treating cancer
To optimize enzyme function, eat plenty of fresh, raw and/or fermented foods. Sprouts are a particularly excellent source. Fasting has also been shown to conserve enzymes
As the name implies, digestive enzymes are important for optimal digestion and nutrient absorption. But their functions and benefits do not end there. Enzymes are actually necessary for most cellular functions and biological processes.
Enzymes — proteins composed of amino acids — are secreted by your body to catalyze functions that normally would not occur at body temperature, making them vital to good health and longevity.1,2
Science has identified more than 3,000 different enzymes, yet we’ve likely only scratched the surface. There are at least 75,000 enzymes in our bodies.3 Each organ has its own set of enzymes, and each enzyme has a different function. In essence, they act like specialized keys cut to fit specific locks. In this analogy, the locks are biochemical reactions.
Enzymes Do More Than Aid Digestion
Over the years, researchers have discovered enzymes for all sorts of uses, from boosting athletic endurance by optimizing digestion and nutrient uptake4 to treating cancer. According to some researchers, enzyme preservation is an important aspect of longevity, as younger people have far higher levels than older ones.
For example, young adults have about 30 times more amylase in their saliva than 69-year-olds, and 27-year-olds have twice the amount of lipase as 77-year-olds. Chronically ill people also tend to have much lower levels of enzymes.5
In one recent animal study,6 the nicotinamide mononucleotide (NMN) — an enzyme involved in energy metabolism, found in broccoli, cucumbers and cabbage — helped regenerate aging cells, making them behave as younger cells and preventing certain age-related genetic changes.
As a result, the NMN-treated mice gained less weight than untreated ones (likely a result of increased energy conversion) and experienced improved eyesight. Fortunately, optimizing your enzymes is as easy as eating plenty of fresh, raw and/or fermented foods. Sprouts are a particularly excellent source of live enzymes.
Fasting has also been shown to conserve enzymes. If you do not eat, you will not produce digestive enzymes, allowing metabolic enzyme production and activity to proliferate instead.
Types of Enzymes and Their Functions
Enzymes can be broadly divided into the following categories:7
• Digestive enzymes, involved in digestion; the breaking down of foods into nutrients and elimination of waste products. Digestive enzymes are extra-cellular, meaning they’re found outside your cells.
There are eight primary digestive enzymes, each designed to help break down different types of food:
Protease — Digesting protein
Maltase — Converting complex sugars from grains into glucose
Amylase — Digesting carbohydrates
Lactase — Digesting milk sugar (lactose) in dairy products
Lipase — Digesting fats (If you have IBS, cystic fibrosis , celiac disease, no gallbladder or gallbladder dysfunction and/or obesity, you may benefit from higher levels of lipase.
Also beware that fluorinated water may decrease lipase and protease production)8
Phytase — Helps with overall digestion, especially in producing the B vitamins
Cellulase — Breaking down fiber
Sucrase — Digesting most sugars
• Metabolic enzymes, involved in energy production and detoxification. Metabolic enzymes are intra-cellular, meaning inside your cells, where they help the cell carry out a variety of functions related to its reproduction and replenishment.
• Food-based enzymes, contained in raw, uncooked/unprocessed foods and/or supplements. Dietary enzyme supplements are derived either from plants or animals.
For example, enzymes can be extracted from certain fungi and bacteria, raw foods, such as the bromelain in pineapple and papain from papaya. Pancreatic enzyme supplements, such as pepsin and trypsin, are obtained from the stomach, small intestine and pancreas of animals.
People who may benefit from eating more raw foods and/or taking a food enzyme supplement include those who:
• Eat cooked, microwaved or processed foods. The more raw foods you eat, the lower the burden on your body to produce the enzymes it needs, not only for digestion, but for practically everything.
Whatever enzymes are not used up in digestion are then available to help with other important physiological processes.
• Are over the age of 30. Studies show your body’s production of enzymes decreases by about 13% every decade. So by age 40, your enzyme production could be 25% lower than it was when you were a child.
By the time you’re 70, you could be producing only one-third of the enzymes you need for good health. Making matters worse, your stomach produces less hydrochloric acid as you age, and hydrochloric acid is crucial in activating your stomach’s digestive enzymes.
When digestion of foods requires such a heavy demand, enzyme supplies run short and your enzyme-producing capacity can become exhausted.
• Struggle with toxicity.
• Are acutely or chronically ill, including those with digestive problems, endocrine gland imbalances, high blood sugar, diabetes, obesity, high cholesterol, stress-related problems, arthritis and other inflammatory conditions.
Supplements containing amylase, lipase and proteases (enzymes that help break down starches, fats and proteins respectively) have been shown to benefit those with food sensitivities.9 For optimal digestion, you need all three. Other less well-known digestive enzymes include ribonuclease and deoxycyribonuclease-I, which digest nucleic acids and DNA/nuclease respectively.
Enzymes and Coenzymes Play Important Roles in Health
Enzymes are catalysts that cause biochemical reactions to happen. In other words, they assist and accelerate reactions, sometimes to a mind-boggling several million reactions per second. In this way, enzymes significantly lower the amount of energy needed for a reaction to occur. And, without them, some reactions would not even be able to take place at all. Here’s a sampling of activities in your body that require enzymes in order to occur:
Energy production
Carrying away toxic wastes
Absorption of oxygen
Dissolving blood clots
Fighting infections and healing wounds
Breaking down carbohydrates, proteins and fats, and regulating cholesterol and triglyceride levels
Reducing inflammation
Hormone regulation
RNA/DNA functioning
Nerve impulse regulation
Getting nutrients into your cells
Slowing the aging process
As important as they are, enzymes do not work alone. They rely on other elements to accomplish their tasks, such as certain vitamins and minerals. These elements are called coenzymes.10 One of the most well-known coenzymes is coenzyme Q10 (CoQ10), found in the mitochondria (power centers) of your cells where it is involved in making ATP, a principal energy source. Another example is magnesium, which participates in over 300 enzyme reactions.
However, while your body produces its own enzymes, this ability begins to decline as early as your late 20s. The situation is worsened if you eat primarily processed foods, as viable enzymes are only found in fresh foods. This is yet another reason why diet has such a tremendous impact on disease risk, as enzyme imbalance or deficiency can significantly raise your risk of cancer and autoimmune diseases.
Annesse Brockley’s and Kristin Urdiales’ book, “Autoimmune,” explores the link between digestive enzyme deficiency and autoimmune disease. While still controversial, the link between digestive enzymes and immune dysfunction is quite compelling, and helps us understand why and how diet can be such a powerful intervention.
Cancer-Fighting Benefits of Pancreatic Enzymes
A large portion of your digestion occurs in your duodenum, the early part of your small intestine. Your pancreas secretes digestive juices in response to food in your stomach. These digestive juices contain the eight groups of enzymes responsible for breaking down carbs, protein, fats and other nutrients.
When your pancreas is not working well, a deficiency in pancreatic enzymes can lead to malabsorption of nutrients and overgrowth of bacteria in your small intestine, a condition that presents itself as gas and bloating, fatigue and constipation. It may also play a role in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS).11 Pancreatic insufficiency may be treated by taking a pancreatic enzyme supplement.
Interestingly, pancreatic enzymes may also be very useful in the treatment of cancer. When used for this purpose, pancreatic enzymes are taken between meals rather than with them. When taken at a time when they’re not needed for digestion, the enzymes have been shown to go to work systemically, affecting your body organs via your blood.
One of the mechanisms by which enzymes fight cancer is by stripping away the fibrin coating that cancer cells protect themselves with. Fibrin is a fibrous protein that cancer cells wrap themselves with in order to protect themselves against attack by your immune system. Due to its fibrous nature, this coating is 15 times thicker than the outer layer of a normal, healthy cell.
By stripping off this layer, enzymes help your immune system detect the antigens contained within the cancer cell, thereby allowing your immune system to kill the cell and dispose of it naturally. Moreover, certain enzymes trigger macrophage to release tumor necrosis factor (TNF), which plays an important role in downregulating an overactive immune system, thereby helping those with autoimmune conditions.
Enzymes Used in Leukemia Treatment
L-asparaginase, an enzyme isolated from the bacteria Escherichia coli and Erwinia chrysanthemi, has a long history of use in the treatment of acute lymphoblastic leukemia, the most common form of childhood leukemia in the U.S.
It’s also widely used in veterinary medicine to treat certain types of cancers in cats and dogs, specifically cancers involving the immune system.12 L-asparaginase works by “starving” the cancer cell of asparaginase, an enzyme needed in the production of proteins.
Healthy cells need only a small amount of asparaginase, and can produce what it needs internally. Cancer cells not only need hefty amounts; they also cannot produce this enzyme internally and must obtain it from outside sources.
L-asparaginase works by eliminating asparaginase and, by depriving the cancer cell of it, the cell dies since it cannot produce what it needs to thrive. Researchers have now found an L-asparaginase-like enzyme found in baker’s yeast may be a less toxic alternative to the bacteria-derived enzyme. As reported by Medical News Today:13
“First study author Iris Munhoz Costa … explains that unlike bacteria, yeast is eukaryotic. This means that it contains a membrane-covered nucleus consisting of genetic material, as is the case with human cells. As such, it is hypothesized that yeast-derived enzymes are less likely than bacterial enzymes to trigger severe immune responses.”
The Kelley Treatment — Cancer Treatment Using Enzymes
In 2011, I interviewed Dr. Nick Gonzalez, a prominent cancer doctor who specialized in alternative treatment methods. Gonzalez died in 2015 from what appears to have been a heart attack. Prior to his untimely death, he’d had remarkable success treating cancer patients with a three-pronged nutritional approach based on the groundbreaking work of Dr. William Kelley, a dentist who cofounded nutritional typing.
Many of these patients were diagnosed with highly lethal forms of cancer that conventional medicine cannot effectively address, including pancreatic cancer, brain cancer and leukemia. Gonzalez’s program consisted of three basic components:
Individualized diet based on nutritional (metabolic) typing
Individualized supplement program, which includes vitamins, minerals, trace elements and pancreatic enzymes
Detoxification, which included coffee enemas and colon cleanses
In regard to the enzymes, he stressed the importance of taking the correct ratio of active and inactive enzymes. Interestingly, the inactive precursors are particularly active against cancer. They also have a far longer shelf life, and are more stable than the active ones.
According to Gonzalez, pancreatic enzymes not only are useful as treatment for active cancer but are also one of the best preventive measures. Before his death, Gonzalez published two highly rated books, “The Trophoblast and the Origins of Cancer,” and “One Man Alone: An Investigation of Nutrition, Cancer, and William Donald Kelley.”
The Many Benefits of Seaprose-S
Seaprose-S (also known as protease-s) is one proteolytic, meaning systemic, enzyme with powerful health benefits.14 It’s particularly effective for breaking up of mucus15 and reducing inflammation.16 Some studies also suggest it may have antibiotic properties. Its anti-inflammatory and mucus-dissolving activities have been shown to benefit conditions such as:
Arthritis
Edema
Pleurisy (inflammation of your lung lining)
Peritonitis (inflammation of your abdominal lining)
Thrombophlebitis
(pain and inflammation in your veins following a blood clot)
Pulmonary tuberculosis
Bronchitis
Pulmonary emphysema
COPD
Bronchiolitis
Bronchial asthma
Wound complications following vaginal birth or C-section17
Venous inflammatory disease18
This enzyme is one you would take in-between meals, not with your meals, as it’s not aimed at improving digestion but rather doing its work systemically. By passing unused into your digestive tract, seaprose-S can enter your bloodstream, thereby reaching all the tissues in your body.
How to Boost Your Enzyme Levels Naturally
There are four ways to naturally increase your enzyme levels:
Increase your intake of raw, living foods
Fast
Chew your food thoroughly
Avoid chewing gum
The very best way to get enzymes into your body is by consuming at least 75% of your foods raw. For many of you, you’ll have to work toward this goal gradually. While all raw foods contain enzymes, the most powerful enzyme-rich foods are those that are sprouted (seeds and legumes). Sprouting increases the enzyme content in these foods tremendously. Besides sprouts, other enzyme-rich foods include:
Fish sauce19,20,21 and other fermented fish products22
By eating these types of foods, you supply your body with the amino acids and the enzyme co-factors needed to boost your own natural enzyme production. Another way to lower your body’s demand for enzymes is to reduce your caloric intake. Did you know the average person spends 80% of his available energy simply digesting food?
By reducing overall consumption, as well as introducing more living foods, you reduce your need for digestive enzymes, which allows your body to put more of its energy into producing metabolic enzymes, which brings us to chewing: Quite apart from the esthetic pleasure of an unhurried meal, there are important physiological reasons to chew your food well.
Chewing stimulates saliva production, and the more time you spend chewing, the longer your saliva enzymes have to work in your mouth, lessening the workload of your stomach and small intestine. This is also the reason for the recommendation to avoid chewing gum. Chewing gum fools your body into believing it is digesting something, so it pumps out digestive enzymes unnecessarily.
Digestive Enzyme Supplementation
If you suffer from occasional bloating, minor abdominal discomfort and/or occasional constipation and suspect your enzyme production is low, you might want to consider a digestive enzyme supplement in addition to eating more of your foods raw.
Keep in mind that digestive enzymes should be taken WITH a meal, whereas systemic enzymes, taken for other health reasons, are taken between meals (see following section). There are hundreds of digestive enzymes on the market. Ideally, look for an enzyme formula with the following characteristics:
It should contain a mixture of different types of enzymes, to help digest all of the different components of your diet (including lipase, protease and amylase)
The ingredients should be high-quality, all-natural and free of allergens and additives
The supplement should be labeled as to the enzymatic strength of each ingredient, not just its weight
It should be made by a reputable company with rigorous quality control and testing for potency
Use of Systemic Enzymes May Improve Your Health
Besides digestive enzyme supplementation, oral enzymes can be used systemically. This requires taking enzymes on an empty stomach between meals so they can be absorbed through your gut into your bloodstream, where your cells can use them metabolically to clear away debris and accumulated metabolic buildups.
However, getting enzymes from your digestive tract into your bloodstream isn’t as easy as it would seem. Enzymes are very susceptible to denaturing and must be helped to survive the highly acidic environment in your stomach. For this reason, they’re often given an “enteric coating” to help them survive the journey through your digestive tract.
Systemic oral enzymes have been used to treat problems ranging from sports injuries to arthritis to heart disease and cancer, particularly in European countries. But most of the research has been published in non-English language journals.
This systemic use of enzymes is still in its infancy in the U.S. Keep in mind that in order for enzymes to be used systemically, they must be ingested on an empty stomach. Otherwise, your body will use them for digesting your food, instead of being absorbed into the blood and doing their work there.
Vitamin D supplementation cut risk of death from COVID-19 by 51% and reduced risk of admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) by 72%
The results were deemed “conclusive” and suggest “a definitive association between the protective role of vitamin D and ICU hospitalization” from COVID-19
Vitamin D may protect against COVID-19 by maintaining pulmonary barrier function, boosting the innate immune response and reducing the production of proinflammatory cytokines
In another study, none of the patients with severe COVID-19 who received high-dose vitamin D died; instead, 100% of the group improved
Regulatory agencies around the world are largely industry-funded, which is likely why they aren’t recommending vitamin D — a “dirt cheap” intervention — for COVID-19
I launched an information campaign to raise awareness about the use of vitamin D for COVID-19 back in June 2020. My own vitamin D review was published October 31, 2020, in the high-impact, peer-reviewed journal Nutrients.1
At the time, 14 observational studies suggested vitamin D levels are inversely linked with the incidence or severity of COVID-19, and my paper concluded, “The evidence seems strong enough that people and physicians can use or recommend vitamin D supplements to prevent or treat COVID-19.”2
I was widely vilified and discredited in the media for bringing attention to vitamin D’s potential for COVID-19. The New York Times, in their July 2021 front-page hit piece,3 even dubbed me, “The most Influential spreader of coronavirus misinformation online,” in an attempt to minimize my efforts. The reporter claimed she could not verify my published study on vitamin D, even though I sent her a link to it, and it’s easy to find online.
Now, however, as is usually the case, the truth is being set free. An increasing number of studies are confirming what I said in 2020 — that vitamin D is a potent and highly effective intervention for COVID-19.
New Studies on Vitamin D and COVID-19
Giving vitamin D to people with COVID-19 cut risk of death from SARS-CoV-2 by 51% and reduced risk of admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) by 72%.4 This was the finding of a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA), which weighs errors in order to assess if further studies are needed5 — or the results are so solid they’re unlikely to be affected by other studies.
The TSA revealed “the protective role of vitamin D and ICU admission showed that, since the pooling of the studies reached a definite sample size, the positive association is conclusive.”6 To put it another way, the results suggest “a definitive association between the protective role of vitamin D and ICU hospitalization.”7
Words like “conclusive” and “definitive” aren’t typically used lightly in scientific research. So, this finding is indeed impressive — although not altogether surprising, since a wealth of other data also shows vitamin D’s protective effect against COVID-19.
What does raise eyebrows, however, is why the study, which has major implications for public health, isn’t being talked about — and vitamin D isn’t being widely recommended for COVID-19.
Vitamin D Offers Serious Protection Against COVID-19
In the video above, John Campbell, a retired nurse and teacher based in England, details the study, which was published in the journal Pharmaceuticals.8 He believes regulatory authorities are acting unethically by not recommending vitamin D for COVID-19. Not only did COVID-19 patients supplemented with vitamin D have lower rates of ICU admission and fewer mortality events, but they also had lower rates of COVID-19 infection, by 54%.9
In other words, vitamin D provided significant protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection. Meanwhile, throughout the pandemic, “high-risk interventions were carried out. Very, very safe interventions, like vitamin D, zinc — basically ignored. It really is a scandal. A total scandal. Absolute disgrace,” Campbell says.10 The study laid out a number of reasons why it makes perfect sense that vitamin D fights COVID-19, stating:11
“COVID-19 is characterized by high levels of inflammatory markers, including C-reactive protein (CRP), and increased levels of inflammatory cytokines and chemokines. In this sense, various data have demonstrated the anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, and immunomodulatory properties of vitamin D, in addition to the importance of vitamin D for bone health, as well as its role in extra-skeletal function.”
Specific examples of how vitamin D may be beneficial in the case of COVID-19 show that it:12
Maintains pulmonary barrier function
Determines the production of antimicrobial peptides
Enhances neutrophil activity, which boosts the innate immune response
Shifts that adaptive immune response to a more T helper cell-2 type
Reduces the production of proinflammatory cytokines
Increases the anti-inflammatory response
Taken together, the researchers again stated that an “indisputable association between vitamin D supplementation and the protective effect on ICU admission can be considered definitive evidence.”13
Another study investigated the effect of the drug tocilizumab and other factors, including high-dose vitamin D, in people with severe COVID-19.14 Perhaps most revealing was Table 3,15 which showed the effects of co-management agents including vitamin D, anticoagulants, steroids and antivirals. Among the seven patients who received high-dose vitamin D, none died. Instead, 100% of the group improved. According to the study:16
“100% of the patients with a low vitamin D status (less than 20 ng/mL) receiving high doses of vitamin D (50,000 IU every other day for two weeks or one intramuscular shot of 300,000 IU) showed clinical improvement compared to those receiving the usual treatment doses (10,000 IU daily or less) or those who did not receive it.”
In response, science journalist Simon Goddek, Ph.D., tweeted, “What happens if you administer high doses of Vitamin D to severe COVID-19 patients? They simply won’t die, as this study shows.”17
Vitamin D Lowers COVID-19 Infection and Death
Yet another study — this one published in Scientific Reports18 — shows the association between vitamin D, a “safe, widely available and affordable treatment,”19 and COVID-19 protection cannot be ignored.
Researchers from Johns Hopkins University, the University of Chicago and the Department of Veterans Health Affairs conducted a large-scale pharmacoepidemiologic study of the association between vitamin D3 and D2 supplementation and the probability of COVID-19 infection and mortality.20
“Vitamin D deficiency has long been associated with reduced immune function that can lead to viral infection. Several studies have shown that vitamin D deficiency … increases the risk of infection with COVID-19,” they wrote.21
The study involved a large population of veterans, including 220,265 patients supplemented with vitamin D3 before and during the pandemic, and 407,860 untreated patients.22 Those taking vitamin D3 had a 20% lower risk. Death from COVID-19 was also lower among those taking vitamin D — 33% lower among those taking vitamin D3.23
“These associated reductions in risk are substantial and justify more significant exploration and confirmation using RCTs [randomized controlled trials],” the researchers explained. “This is particularly important given the high rates of vitamin D deficiency in the U.S. population and COVID-19.”24
About half the U.S. population has insufficient or deficient levels of vitamin D, and rates of vitamin D deficiency are even higher in people with darker skin, those living in higher latitudes in the winter, nursing home residents and people with reduced sun exposure. Among groups with low levels of vitamin D, rates of COVID-19 are higher.25
“In response to these findings, physicians might consider regularly prescribing vitamin D3 to patients with deficient levels to protect them against COVID-19 infection and related mortality. The 50,000 IU dosage may be especially beneficial,” according to the study.26
Why Isn’t Vitamin D Recommended for COVID?
The fact that vitamin D helps combat COVID-19 was widely censored and deemed “misinformation” during the pandemic. And despite the “conclusive” evidence, the U.K.’s National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) states, “Do not offer a vitamin D supplement to people solely to prevent COVID‑19, except as part of a clinical trial.” It added:27
“Based on direct evidence from the NICE evidence review and indirect evidence from the SACN [Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition] rapid review of vitamin D in acute respiratory tract infection (which did not include COVID‑19 as an outcome), the panel agreed that there was not enough evidence to recommend vitamin D supplements solely for preventing COVID‑19.”
Yet, vitamin D is typically nontoxic, representing a low-risk option that could have significant positive public health outcomes. When the researchers of the Scientific Reports study extrapolated their vitamin D findings to the entire U.S. population in 2020, they found supplementation with vitamin D3 would have prevented 4 million COVID-19 cases and 116,000 deaths.28 Campbell asks:29
“Now, why is this not being used despite the definitive evidence … why is it not being advised? Why is it not being shouted from the hilltops? … Medicines & Healthcare products Regulatory Authority in the United Kingdom is 86% industry-funded. Of course, they have no vested interest.
This is the national body that represents medicine … throughout all of the United Kingdom, and it’s 86% industry-funded. Coincidentally, vitamin D, which is basically free — it’s dirt cheap — and is essentially completely safe is not recommended. Other interventions, which are associated with high levels of risk are recommended … When is this going to be addressed? This is outrageous.”
This conflict of interest isn’t unique to the U.K., however. Significant portions of regulatory agencies’ budgets around the world come from the pharmaceutical industry that these agencies are supposed to regulate. For instance:30
Australia’s Therapeutic Goods Administration — 96% of budget derived from industry
Europe’s EMA — 89%
U.K.’s MHRA —6%
Japan’s Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency — 85%
U.S. FDA — 65%
Health Canada — 50.5%
Vitamin D Even Improves Pancreatic Cancer
Another little-talked-about benefit of vitamin D relates to pancreatic cancer, one of the deadliest forms of cancer with a five-year survival rate of just 7.2%.31 Researchers published the case of an 83-year-old woman with pancreatic cancer “who errantly took supratherapeutic doses of vitamin D 50,000 U daily, achieving a serum 25(OH)D level of more than 150 ng/mL, with no appreciable side effects.”
Eight months after diagnosis — and consistent daily intake of high-dose vitamin D — scans revealed “no evidence of disease progression.” Further, the researchers noted, “Currently she describes as feeling quite well with no difficulty accomplishing her activities of daily living.” They called for further research to investigate:32
“One cannot conclude that her vitamin D dose was in any way related to this outcome. There is only one CT scan before the initiation of vitamin D, and there is no way to know what her pace of disease would have been in the absence of vitamin D supplementation. In addition, she was taking several other supplements such as shitake mushrooms, although inconsistently and for a shorter duration, which were also intended to treat her malignancy.
Nonetheless, given the poor prognosis of pancreatic cancer and the limited treatment options for patients, this case should stimulate further investigation. The daily dose of 50,000 U of vitamin D3 was well tolerated in our patient for over 10 months at the time of writing. Consideration should be given to a clinical trial that evaluates a similar dose.”
I’ve long recommended a vitamin D level of 40 to 60 ng/ml for optimal health and disease prevention. However, higher levels of 60 to 80 ng/ml may be even better, while a level upward of 100 ng/mL appears safe and beneficial for certain conditions, especially cancer.33
Ideally, Get Your Vitamin D From the Sun
Optimizing your vitamin D levels isn’t only about preventing COVID-19; it supports health in multiple ways. It’s been shown that people genetically predisposed to vitamin D deficiency were 25% more likely to die from any cause compared to those with different genetics conducive to healthy vitamin D levels.34
To optimize your levels, regular sun exposure is the best option, as not only will it naturally raise your vitamin D levels to healthy levels, but it will provide numerous other benefits, such as enhanced production of melatonin — a potent anticancer agent.35 However, if you’re unable to get adequate sun exposure each day, supplementation may be necessary.
The only way to determine how much sun exposure is enough and/or how much vitamin D3 you need to take is to measure your vitamin D level, ideally twice a year. When supplementing, also remember vitamins D and K2, calcium and magnesium all work together and must be properly balanced for optimal health.
Once you’ve confirmed your vitamin D levels via testing, adjust your sun exposure and/or vitamin D3 supplementation accordingly. Then, remember to retest in three to four months to make sure you’ve reached your target level.
Since hormones can have slow and systemic actions, a dysfunctional or damaged endocrine system will generally be slow in its symptom onset and recovery, warned Dr. Flavio Cadegiani, a Brazilian endocrinologist.
Dr. Flavio Cadegiani, a Brazilian endocrinologist, suspects that the worst has yet to come for spike protein-induced diseases in the endocrine system.
The endocrine system, colloquially known as the hormone system, is critical for our health. It regulates growth and development, mood, metabolism, reproduction, immunity and functions of other organs through the secretion of hormones.
Hormones are one of the three biggest messengers in the body. Compared to the two other messengers — neurotransmitters and cytokines — hormones are slower in responding, and have systemic functions across the body rather than localized actions.
While cells can usually respond to neurotransmitters in milliseconds and cytokines in minutes to hours, cells that respond to hormones can take hours or even weeks.
Since hormones can have slow and systemic actions, a dysfunctional or damaged endocrine system will generally be slow in its symptom onset and recovery.
Studieshave shown that spike proteins from COVID-19 infection and the vaccines can damage endocrine glands, including pituitary, thyroid and adrenal glands, as well as reproductive organs and many more.
Cadegiani raised a concern that the slower onset of endocrine pathologies may pose difficulties in diagnosis and treatment.
Depletion of hormonal reserves
Endocrine pathologies can take longer to become apparent because endocrine glands have “reserves,” according to Cadegiani.
“What we’re going to see in the future [for endocrine diseases] is a little bit different from the other fields, because glands have reserves and the decrease of the reserve will not be clinically seen right now, but it may be in the future,” said Cadegiani at a Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance conference in Kissimmee, Florida.
Therefore, affected individuals may show no symptoms until their reserves have been depleted.
Cadegiani said that most of his concerns for the future are speculative and based his own clinical observations. But since the pandemic and the administration of COVID-19 vaccines began, there have been increasing reports that implicate endocrine pathologies.
Hormonal axis and systemic dysfunction
Hormones regulate the entire body, so once the reserves are depleted and underlying endocrine pathologies are unmasked, there may be cases of systemic dysregulation.
Endocrine glands control the function of many organs across the body, and each endocrine organ is also connected through a feedback loop, also known as a hormonal axis.
At the top of this chain is the hypothalamus, which is a diamond structure in the brain and acts as a master switchboard. It sends messages to the pituitary glands, a small, oval structure tucked behind the nose.
The pituitary gland is colloquially known as the master gland; it regulates other endocrine organs, together with the hypothalamus forming hormonal axes.
The pituitary gland is part of the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal (HPG) axis which regulates the reproductive organs including the ovaries and the testes. In females, it is responsible for regulating the release of ovarian hormones as part of the menstrual cycle, and in males the axis regulates spermatogenesis.
The hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis is a neuroendocrine axis that mediates the adrenal glands, an organ that produces hormones that trigger the fight or flight response.
The fight or flight process is a stress response that occurs in response to harmful threats, and can reduce metabolism, suppress immunity as well as activate the sympathetic nervous system.
Another major axis is the hypothalamic-pituitary-thyroid axis. This regulates the thyroids and the hormones it secretes. Thyroid hormones are essential for biological functions of growth, regulation of the cardiovascular system, bone replacement, liver function and metabolism.
Spike protein particularly favors tissues and organs that express ACE2 and CD147 receptors. Many endocrine glands display ACE2 receptors, including the pancreas, thyroid, testes, ovaries, adrenal glands and the pituitary gland, making the endocrine system particularly vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2.
The key driver behind spike protein-induced disease is inflammation.
Upon entering cells, spike protein can activate pro-inflammatory pathways by inducing DNA damage, inhibiting DNA repair, causing stress to the cell’s mitochondria, which is critical for cell energy production and many more. All of this lead to cellular stress, injury and possible cell death.
When many cells are affected, it can cause problems in tissues and organs, affecting individual endocrine glands and the system.
Spike proteins also inhibit autophagy, the cellular “recycling system,” thereby preventing the cells from clearing the toxic protein out, leading to prolonged damage.
Spike proteins may also contribute to autoimmunity. Since it shares many similarities with common human tissues and proteins — known as “molecular mimicry” — it has the potential to cause immune cells to mount an attack against their own cells and organs, leading to endocrine damage.
As the master gland of the endocrine system, the pituitary gland secretes many hormones, including ones that regulate other endocrine glands:
Adrenocorticotrophic hormone (ACTH) targets the adrenal glands and is responsible for producing cortisol, which stimulates the stress response.
Thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) regulates the thyroid.
Growth hormone is responsible for growth and metabolism.
Melanocyte-stimulating hormone boosts the production of melanin when exposed to UV rays and increases appetite.
Anti-diuretic hormone is responsible for retaining water and producing less urine.
Luteinizing hormone (LH), follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) and prolactin are important for reproduction.
Oxytocin plays a role in childbirth, metabolism and happiness.
Studies in cell culture have shown that the spike protein is able to suppress the production of LH and FSH in pituitary cells, with unknown long-term consequences in humans.
Cadegiani said that pathologies in the pituitary are difficult to diagnose; they are often masked by other conditions, therefore there is little literature on pituitary pathology presentation after COVID-19 vaccinations.
Adrenal glands
There is published literature with data that may be used as evidence to suggest spike protein injury at the adrenal glands.
The adrenal glands, located above the kidneys, produce hormones responsible for the stress response. This includes adrenaline, cortisol and aldosterone. The release of these three hormones is critical for maintaining energy and other needs during stressful situations.
Studies on COVID-19 have shown that the adrenal glands are major sites of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA accumulation and spike protein production.
The glands are also likely to be involved in post-vaccine myocarditis events that are often seen in young males. Cadegiani reasons that this type of myocarditis may be a sign of adrenal dysfunction.
Cadegiani authored a peer-reviewed study on post-vaccine myocarditis and concluded catecholamines are the main trigger for these events. Catecholamines are a group of neurohormones and includes dopamine, noradrenaline and adrenaline.
While dopamine mostly acts within the nervous system, both adrenaline and noradrenaline play important roles in stress responses.
Adrenaline activates the fight or flight stress response and noradrenaline supports the response by increasing heart rate, breaking down fats and increasing blood sugar levels.
Intense and prolonged exercise triggers the fight or flight response, which is why catecholamines are usually elevated in athletes. Males in particular tend to have higher levels of catecholamine. Testosterone is also suspected to play a role in the higher incidence of myocarditis following vaccination.
Cadegiani linked catecholamines with myocarditis by analyzing autopsy reports of two teenage boys who died three to four days after mRNA vaccination from myocarditis events.
Their heart damage was different from normal myocarditis pathology, with clear similarities with stress-induced cardiomyopathy; Cadegiani observed clear characteristics of catecholamine-induced myocarditis.
He hypothesized that vaccines triggered a hyper-catecholaminergic state by elevating levels of adrenaline, causing hyperactivation of adrenaline.
Studies on mRNA-vaccinated athletes also found that after exercise, those who were vaccinated had higher heart rates and noradrenaline levels than those who were not vaccinated.
Dysfunctions in the adrenal glands are likely to lead to adrenal insufficiency.
Cadegiani hypothesized adrenal insufficiency — a condition that the adrenal glands become unable to produce enough hormones — to be a possible consequence of spike protein injury.
There is already a report of adrenal insufficiency following infection; in the case of long COVID-19 where there are spike protein remnants, it is likely that the damage will be prolonged, possibly leading to chronic damage.
In the case of vaccines, a report evaluating spike protein production after COVID-19 mRNA vaccination found that the adrenal glands were one of the highest spike protein-producing tissues, and the spike protein production in these glands increased with time.
The thyroid is a butterfly-shaped gland located over the throat. It has a lot of functions, primarily regulating growth and metabolism.
It makes two hormones, thyroxine and triiodothyronine. Deficiencies in triiodothyronine results in hypothyroidism, characterized by a large thyroid; over-secretion of it can cause hyperthyroidism.
The thyroid also plays a role in regulating the immune system. COVID-19 infection is often a sign of underlying thyroid problems, and damage from infection can exacerbate thyroid problems, creating a negative cycle.
An autopsy study on 15 people deceased from COVID-19 found that 13 of them had viral RNA and proteins in their thyroid tissues. ACE2 receptors, previously thought to be not presented on the thyroid, were also detected, indicating a possible route for SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Though the research shows that thyroids can be implicated in infection, thyroiditis, which is inflammation of the thyroid, has currently only been reported in relation to the COVID-19 vaccine.
A study from Turkey stated that the COVID-19 vaccine can induce thyroiditis. The study evaluated 15 patients who developed thyroiditis following vaccination.
Four of the patients also developed Grave’s disease, which is an autoimmune disease and a complication of hyperthyroidism. Hashimoto’s disease, another thyroid autoimmune condition, has also been reported following vaccinations.
It is possible that spike proteins produced from vaccinations may attack the thyroid cells by binding to ACE2 receptors. However, looking at the high reports of autoimmune diseases, Cadegiani suspects that the pathogenesis of thyroid dysfunction is likely autoimmune.
The spike protein has also demonstrated its autoimmune capacity due to high incidences of “molecular mimicry.”
Pancreas
The pancreas produces glucagon and insulin, two important hormones that regulate our blood sugar levels. Dysregulation of blood sugar levels is an indication of pancreatic dysfunction and may lead to complications such as diabetes.
Spike protein both from the vaccine and the virus has shown a potential to disturb glucose metabolism.
There have been reports of a sudden onset of type 1 diabetes, which is a form of autoimmune disease where the body attacks its own pancreatic beta cells.
A study evaluating EudraVigilance safety surveillance reports has also found reports of dysregulation of blood glucose with transient worsening of hyperglycemia reported after vaccinations.
Therefore Cadegiani proposed that there could be a loss or malfunction of pancreatic beta cells as studies have shown that the spike protein is able to directly affect and damage these beta cells, likely resulting in their death.
Reproductive organs
The harms of COVID-19 on male reproductive organs are well established.
A study from Thailand showed that in 153 sexually active men, around 64.7% experienced erectile dysfunction during COVID-19 infection, with 50% persisting in these symptoms three months after recovery.
Erectile dysfunction has been established in research to be due to dysfunctions of the endothelial cells, and the spike protein impairs endothelial cells.
Studies linking COVID-19 and erectile dysfunction have largely blamed it on the virus’s interaction with ACE2 receptors displayed on the surface of endothelial cells. Endothelial cells are abundant in ACE2 receptors, making them one of the most targeted in COVID-19 infections.
A study evaluating adenovirus DNA vaccines showed that cells exposed to the vaccines also produced spike proteins that could interact and bind with ACE2 receptors, suggestive of equal endothelial damage.
Since the vaccine rolled out in 2021, the CDC data reported 193 cases of erectile dysfunction following COVID-19 vaccination.
An Israeli study on sperm donations has also noticed a reduction of 15% in sperm concentration and 22% in motile sperm count following COVID-19 mRNA vaccination.
The authors confirmed in a later response that the people tested had no underlying health conditions, and therefore the reduction could not be due to any underlying health conditions that were existent prior to the vaccination.
Though sperm count gradually made a recovery after 145 days, sperm concentration and motility did not return to pre-vaccination levels, with unknown long-term effects.
Concerns of reproductive problems have also been reported in women, most particularly after vaccinations rather than after infection.
Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) data showed that over 60% of adverse event reports came from women, indicating that women are more vulnerable to post-vaccine symptoms.
Dr. Paul Marik, critical care expert, also observed that women were at a greater risk of presenting with post-vaccine symptoms in the clinic.
During the pandemic, many women reported menstrual abnormalities following vaccination. A study on Middle Eastern women found almost 70% of them reported menstrual irregularities after vaccination.
A study published on the website titled My Cycle Story reported over 290 women experienced decidual cast shedding after the COVID-19 vaccines rolled out, even though less than 40 such cases have been documented over the past 109 years.
This also indicated that many of the reproductive symptoms women were suffering from may be vaccine-related, rather than related to COVID-19 infections.
Cadegiani predicted greater adverse events in pregnancies for the coming future.
He cited a study that concluded “no association” between COVID-19 vaccines and fertility. The data however showed that unvaccinated women had a higher rate of pregnancy than the vaccinated, both for clinical and biochemical pregnancy.
The authors of the paper reviewed 10 studies and found that unvaccinated women have a clinical and biochemical pregnancy rate of 47 and 60% respectively, while the COVID-19-vaccinated had a rate of 45 and 51%.
Cadegiani predicts more cases of endocrinopathologies as a result of spike injuries in the future.
“Endocrine diseases progress slowly and then only clinically appears in the severe states,” said Cadegiani. “So it’s not possible to tell this [anytime] beforehand.”
Research suggests time-restricted feeding (intermittent fasting) drastically reduces a woman’s risk of breast cancer, in part by lowering insulin
Intermittent fasting releases ketones into your bloodstream, which help preserve brain function and protect against epileptic seizures, cognitive impairment and other neurodegenerative diseases
By improving your insulin sensitivity, intermittent fasting can both prevent and reverse Type 2 diabetes, which is rooted in insulin resistance
When intermittently fasting, it’s critical to avoid processed foods, particularly refined carbohydrates, sugar/fructose and grains. Focus on vegetable carbohydrates, healthy protein in moderate amounts and healthy fats such as butter, eggs, avocado, coconut oil, olive oil and raw nuts
My new book, “KetoFast,” presents a modified form of water-only fasting (in combination with a cyclical ketogenic diet) that is easier to do, and provides greater benefits because you’re able to do it more frequently
According to research1 presented at the Endocrine Society’s annual meeting, March 23, 2019, intermittent fasting, where you eat all your meals for the day within a narrow window of time — in this case eight hours — drastically reduces a woman’s risk of breast cancer. According to Dr. Manasi Das, a postdoctoral fellow at the University of California, San Diego, who led the research team:2
“Improving the metabolic health of postmenopausal women with obesity may mitigate their risk for breast cancer. Time-restricted eating may be more successful than calorie restriction in controlling the negative effects of obesity, due to the hunger and irritability that makes it more difficult to stick with long-term calorie restriction.
The results suggest the anti-tumor effect of time-restricted eating is at least partially due to lower levels of insulin, suggesting this intervention may be effective in breast cancer prevention and therapy.
Exploring the ability of time-restricted eating to prevent breast cancer could provide an inexpensive but effective strategy to prevent cancer impacting a wide range of patients and represents a groundbreaking advance in breast cancer research.”
Link Between Insulin Resistance and Cancer Strengthens
The team conducted three separate experiments on mice whose ovaries had been removed to simulate a postmenopausal state. In the first, the mice were first fattened up with a high-fat diet, after which they were divided into two groups: One had access to food around the clock, while the other had eight-hour access to chow at night (the time of highest physical activity).
The control group consisted of lean mice given access to a low-fat diet 24 hours a day. Three weeks into the experiment, all of the animals were injected with breast cancer cells. Results showed time-restricted feeding, also known as intermittent fasting, reduced tumor growth in the obese mice to levels similar to those in the lean mice.
In the second experiment, they used mice that were genetically modified to develop breast cancer. As before, half of them had round-the-clock access to a high-fat diet while the other had access to food for eight hours. Here, they also assessed the impact of insulin by artificially raising insulin in some mice using an insulin pump, while lowering it in others using the drug diazoxide.
In the third experiment, mice fed a low-fat diet were either given insulin via an insulin pump or saline as a control, while mice on a high-fat diet were either given diazoxide to lower their insulin levels, or no drug as the control. As you’d suspect, higher insulin levels fueled tumor development, while lower levels inhibited cancer growth. As reported by the New York Post:3
“The results add to a growing body of evidence that indicates obesity and metabolic syndrome, a collection of risk factors that increase the chance of developing heart disease stroke and diabetes, are also risk factors for cancer, particularly postmenopausal breast cancer.”
Indeed, other studies have found intermittent fasting is a powerful anticancer strategy, and researchers are even working on getting it approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration as an adjunct to cancer treatment to improve long-term survival rates.
Benefits of Intermittent Fasting
Intermittent fasting, i.e., following a meal-timing schedule where you’re fasting for at least 16 hours every day and eating all of your meals within eight consecutive hours, has a long list of confirmed health benefits.
There are also other intermittent fasting plans where you dramatically cut back on your calories for a certain number of days each week, while eating normally during the remainder. The 5-to-2 intermittent fasting plan is one such example. The fasting mimicking diet, developed to match the effects of water-only fasting, is another.
Most if not all of these plans have similar benefits, which include the following.4,5,6,7 For a rundown of the science behind some of these benefits, see Chris Kresser’s article “Intermittent Fasting: The Science Behind the Trend.”8
Releasing ketones into your bloodstream, which help preserve brain function and protect against epileptic seizures, cognitive impairment9 and other neurodegenerative diseases
Boosting production of brain-derived neurotrophic factor, which stimulates creation of new brain cells and triggers brain chemicals that protect against brain changes associated with Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease10
Increasing growth hormone by as much as 1,300 percent in women and 2,000 percent in men,11 thereby promoting muscle development and vitality
Lowering insulin and improving your insulin sensitivity; studies have shown intermittent fasting can both prevent and reverse Type 2 diabetes, which is rooted in insulin resistance12,13,14,15
Increasing levels of the neurotransmitter norepinephrine, which helps your body break down fat to be used as fuel and benefits your metabolism16,17,18
Upregulating autophagy and mitophagy,19 which will help protect against most disease, including cancer20 and neurodegeneration21
Shifting stem cells from a dormant state to a state of self-renewal
Boosting mitochondrial energy efficiency and biosynthesis
Lowering oxidative stress and inflammation22
Improving circulating glucose23 and lipid levels
Reducing blood pressure
Improving metabolic efficiency and body composition, modulating levels of dangerous visceral fat and significantly reducing body weight in obese individuals
Reproducing some of the cardiovascular benefits associated with exercise
Regenerating the pancreas24 and improve pancreatic function
Protecting against cardiovascular disease
Reducing low-density lipoprotein and total cholesterol
Improving immune function25
Synchronizing your body’s biological clocks26
Eliminating sugar cravings as your body adapts to burning fat instead of sugar
Increase longevity — There are a number of mechanisms contributing to this effect. Normalizing insulin sensitivity is a major one, but fasting also inhibits the mTOR pathway, which plays an important part in driving the aging process
Intermittent Fasting Considerations
While intermittent fasting is likely to be beneficial for most people, here are some points to consider:
• Intermittent fasting does not have to be a form of calorie restriction — It’s a practice that should make you feel good. If your fasting strategy is making you feel weak and lethargic, re-evaluate your approach.
• Sugar cravings are temporary — Your hunger and craving for sugar will slowly dissipate as your body starts burning fat as its primary fuel. Once your body has successfully shifted into fat burning mode, it will be easier for you to fast for as long as 18 hours and still feel satiated.
• When intermittent fasting, it’s important to eat real food — While intermittent fasting may sound like a panacea against ill health and excess weight, it alone may not provide you with all of these benefits. The quality of your diet plays an important role if you’re looking for more than mere weight loss.
It’s critical to avoid processed foods, particularly refined carbohydrates, sugar/fructose and grains. Focus your diet on vegetable carbohydrates, healthy protein in moderate amounts, and healthy fats such as butter, eggs, avocado, coconut oil, olive oil and raw nuts.
My book, “KetoFast,” is the follow-up to my best-selling book “Fat for Fuel.” As I mention in the Q&A video above, you really need to implement the strategies laid out in “Fat for Fuel” first (which include daily intermittent fasting and cyclical nutritional ketosis), before you move on to “KetoFast.”
I wrote “KetoFast” because I strongly believe multiday water-only fasting is a profoundly effective intervention. However, while extended water fasts have been used for centuries, modern day life presents us with toxic exposures that can actually make water fasting problematic, as fasting very effectively releases toxins. Most people today are severely toxic, and the sudden release of those toxins could potentially be harmful.
So, “KetoFast” essentially presents a modified form of water fasting (in combination with a cyclical ketogenic diet) that is easier to do, and provides greater benefits because you’re able to do it more frequently. As mentioned though, it’s best to have implemented a month of six- to eight-hour daily intermittent fasting and nutritional ketosis as laid out in “Fat for Fuel” first before you get into this longer type of fasting.
Once you’re metabolically flexible and can burn fat for fuel, the combination of cyclical nutritional ketosis and cyclical fasting is phenomenal for weight loss and optimizing your health and longevity. As I’ve discussed in previous articles, I’ve done several five-day water-only fasts in the past, but with this modified strategy, I likely won’t do a longer water fast like that again, as I don’t believe it’s necessary.
In summary, the modified fasting method I describe in “KetoFast” involves daily intermittent fasting for 16 to 18 hours five to six days a week. Then, once or twice a week, you have a single 300- to 500-calorie meal that day, followed by a 24-hour water-only fast. In essence, that means you’re only eating 300- to 500 calories in 42 hours. In the book, I also make dietary recommendations to ensure you’re getting the nutrients your body needs to support your detox pathways.
In the video above, I answer a wide variety of fasting related questions from readers, covering specific nutrients and more general timing recommendations, as well as some questions about cyclical ketosis.
How to Implement Cyclical Keto and Fasting
Fasting and nutritional ketosis provide many of the same benefits, and both work best when implemented in a pulsed fashion. Together, I believe cyclical keto and intermittent fasting is a near-unbeatable combination capable of really maximizing the health benefits of both. Here is a quick summary of how to implement these two strategies as a cohesive program:
1. Implement an intermittent fasting schedule — Eat all of your meals — either breakfast and lunch, or lunch and dinner — within a six- to eight-hour window each day. Fast for the remaining 16 to 18 hours. If all of this is new to you and the idea of making changes to your diet and eating habits seems too daunting, simply start out by eating your regular diet on this timed schedule.
Once this has become routine, move on to implement the ketogenic diet (step 2), followed by the cyclical component (step 3). You can take comfort in knowing that once you reach step 3, you will be able to cycle in some of your favorite healthy carbs once again on a weekly basis.
2. Switch to a ketogenic diet until you can create measurable ketones — The three-part key is to 1) restrict net carbohydrates (total carbs minus fiber) to 20 to 50 grams per day, 2) replace the lost carbs with healthy fats so that you’re getting anywhere from 50 to 85 percent of your daily calories from fat, and 3) limit protein to one-half gram of protein per pound of lean body mass.
(To determine your lean body mass, subtract your body fat percentage from 100, then multiply that percentage by your current weight.)
Vegetables, which are loaded with fiber, can be eaten without restrictions. The primary carb sources that need to be cut out are grains and all forms of sugar, including high-fructose fruits. (Healthy net carbs will be cycled back in once you’ve entered ketosis.)
Examples of healthy fat sources include avocados, coconut oil, animal-based omega-3 from fatty fish, butter, raw nuts (macadamia and pecans are ideal as they’re high in healthy fat while being low in protein), seeds, olives and olive oil, grass fed animal products, MCT oil, raw cacao butter and organic pastured egg yolks.
Avoid all trans fats and highly refined polyunsaturated vegetable oils. Adding these harmful fats27 can cause more damage than excess carbs, so just because an item is “high in fat” does not mean you should eat it.
Maintain these ratios of net carbs, fat and protein until you’ve achieved ketosis and your body is burning fat for fuel. Keto testing strips can be used to confirm that you’re in ketosis, defined as having blood ketones in the range of 0.5 to 3.0 mmol/L. Keep in mind it can take anywhere from a couple of weeks to a few months before your body is able to effectively burn fat again.
Also remember that precision is important when it comes to these nutrient ratios. Too many net carbs will effectively prevent ketosis as your body will use any available glucose first, since it’s a much faster-burning fuel, so make sure you have some basic measuring and tracking tools on hand.
This includes a kitchen scale, measuring cups and a nutrient tracker (www.cronometer.com/mercola is a free, accurate nutrient tracker that is already set up for nutritional ketosis).
3. Once you’ve confirmed that you’re in ketosis, begin cycling in and out of keto by eating higher amounts of net carbs once or twice a week. As a general recommendation, triple the amount of net carbs on these high-carb days. Cycling in and out of nutritional ketosis will maximize the biological benefits of cellular regeneration and renewal, while minimizing the potential drawbacks of continuous keto.
While higher net carb amounts are allowed once or twice a week at this stage, I would advise you to still be mindful of what’s healthy and what’s not. Ideally, you’d forgo potato chips and bagels, and focus on adding in healthier alternatives such as digestive-resistant starches.
High net-carb foods such as potatoes, rice, bread and pasta all become more digestive-resistant when they’re cooked, cooled and then reheated, and this is one way of making such indulgences a bit healthier.
4. At this point, you’re ready to move on to the modified water-only fasting regimen described in “KetoFast” — Again, this involves daily intermittent fasting for 16 to 18 hours on days you are not KetoFasting. Then, once or twice a week, you have a single 300- to 500-calorie meal that day, followed by fasting until your next normal meal. For a six-hour eating window this means you’d only eat 300 to 500 calories in a 42-hour period.
A biodistribution study of the Pfizer Covid-19 injection suggests a suspension of the use of mRNA ‘Vaccines’ is urgently required and blood donor organisations need to take a long hard look at their policies surrounding the acceptance of donations of blood from people who have received an mRNA based Covid-19 injection.
The Exposé is now censored by Facebook & Twitter. Let’s not lose touch, subscribe today to receive the latest news from The Exposé in your inbox…
Do you remember when public health and government officials assured everyone that the mRNA ‘vaccines’ function like traditional vaccine technologies? …meaning that they largely remain in the shoulder muscle where they are injected, with some portion going to the draining lymph nodes where an immune response is initiated.
Well, back in May 2021, I, along with some international colleagues, looked at a document that Pfizer had submitted to the Japanese health regulatory agency. It was a pre-clinical biodistribution study. This means it was an experiment done with an animal model to predict where the vaccine formulation might go when injected into people.
What I saw was startling.
Most of Pfizer’s vaccine spread throughout the body instead of staying at the injection site. This also meant there was the potential for toxicities that would never occur with traditional vaccines that largely remain at or close to the injection site. To ensure people could make a fully informed decision about whether to take the jab I went public with this information in a radio interview.
I wasn’t surprised by the systemic distribution of the vaccine per se. Being a vaccinologist, I knew that lipid nanoparticle delivery systems were originally designed to spread far and wide throughout the body with the hopes they could be a vehicle for gene therapy and/or drug delivery.
Instead, my surprise came from the fact that the data confirmed my historical understanding and contradicted public health messaging that the mRNA jabs behaved like traditional vaccines. Public statements by health officials made me assume the lipid nanoparticles had somehow been modified to stay at the injection site, which was news to me. This highlights one of the first rules of thumb when practicing science.
Transparently presented raw and/or peer-reviewed data are the cornerstones of objective science; not personal proclamations or data disseminated via media releases. In May 2021 I realized two things: 1. There was a lack of transparency about data supporting COVID-19 inoculations. 2. Incorrect messaging was being relayed to the public. As an academic public servant with relevant expertise, I spoke up when enquiries came from the public. I spoke the truth then and continue to do so.
As a result of this, a public campaign to impersonate and discredit me was mounted; it has not stopped and has likely caused irreparable harm to my career. Nobody involved in these personal attacks has ever been willing to talk to me about the scientific basis for my concerns. It is unfair to discredit a scientist based on a short interview for a lay audience in which only a tiny fraction of the messaging could be relayed.
My challenge to detractors then remains the same now: if you want to prove that I don’t know what I am talking about, then debate me in a moderated public forum. I contend that a real-time back-and-forth discussion of the science will show that I know exactly what I am talking about; I’m not sure the same would hold true for most of those participating in the smear campaign against me.
In that interview back in May 2021 I was asked if there might be a link between mRNA vaccines and cases of myocarditis that were being observed at increased frequency, especially among young males. My answer was yes and I started to present some potential mechanistic explanations for this, including Pfizer’s Japanese version of their biodistribution study.
Now, myocarditis is a publicly acknowledged side-effect of mRNA vaccines. Sadly, I have not received an apology from anyone who attacked me. Forgiving people is much easier when apologizing and seeking forgiveness is part of the resolution process. But this is no longer popular in our society, so I continue to struggle with forgiving those who relentlessly harass me. I need to do this to effectively move on.
In the meantime, the US Food and Drug Administration has been ordered by a court to release the data that they reviewed when authorizing Pfizer’s vaccine for emergency. Health Canada almost certainly would have reviewed the same information. It is unfortunate that the scientific community is only now starting to see reasonably transparent core data that were used to justify the rushed rollout of SARS-CoV-2 inoculations; an only due to a court order.
On March 1, 2022 an English version of the biodistribution study was released. It contains much more information than the Japanese version I had looked at. Also, this accurate English language translation has revealed inappropriate biases in the conclusions drawn by the study director. You can obtain the document from the website of Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency. Once at the website, enter the search term “185350”, which is the study number. What follows is a step-by-step breakdown of this study to help you understand its implications (page #s refer to this hyperlinked report).
Taking a Close Look at Pfizer’s Full Report of the Biodistribution Study
The study looked at the distribution of lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) manufactured by Acuitas Therapeutics, British Columbia, Canada. LNPs are essentially very tiny bubbles of fat that are used to deliver genetic material into our cells. In the case of Pfizer’s ‘vaccine’, the payload is a messenger RNA molecule that encodes the spike protein from SARS-CoV-2, which is the causative agent of COVID-19. When the mRNA gets into a cell, it uses the existing manufacturing capacity of the cell to make copies of the spike protein.
Of concern, Pfizer was never required to run a biodistribution study with the same ‘vaccine’ formulation that is being used in people. Instead, the study focused on the LNPs, which carried a mRNA encoding a protein that can be used in imaging studies; not the spike protein. Unfortunately, the expression of this protein was not evaluated, so we can not assess where the protein ended up in the body; only where the LNPs went.
Page 6: The title of the study is “A Tissue Distribution Study of a [3H]-Labelled Lipid Nanoparticle-mRNA Formulation Containing ALC-0315 and ALC-0159 Following Intramuscular Administration in Wistar Han Rats.” Rats are a commonly used animal model for pre-clinical research. In this case, three males and three females were euthanized at each of multiple timepoints to harvest a variety of tissues to quantify the amount of LNPs in them.
The mRNA in this study encoded ‘luciferase’; a protein that can be used to visualize where the mRNA is being converted into proteins. However, this analysis was not done in this particular experiment. “[3H]-labelled” means the LNPs were tritiated, or tagged with tritium. Tritium is a radioactive form of hydrogen.
This allowed the LNPs to be quantified in tissues by measuring radioactivity. “ALC-0315” is a fat-based molecule that helps to compact mRNA into a nanoparticle and also promotes the introduction of the mRNA into a cell. “ALC-0159“ is a molecule that contains polyethylene glycol (PEG). You might have heard a lot about PEG in the context of COVID-19 ‘vaccines’ since it is the component that has been most associated with causing anaphylactic shock (a severe hyperacute allergic reaction) in some recipients. It serves a couple of functions:
1. This is the commonly mentioned purpose: It helps to stabilize the mRNA molecules; if mRNA degrades before it gets into a cell, the protein that the immune system is supposed to target will never be produced.
2. This is the other function of PEG that you may never have heard about (but those who have followed mRNA vaccine technologies have known about for many years): It helps the LNPs avoid the immune system to promote wide-spread dissemination throughout the body. Yes, you read that correctly. But, don’t take my word for it. Check out this published peer-reviewed science as a few examples:
Watters, R.J., Kester, M., Tran, M.A., Loughran, T.P. & Liu, X. Chapter five – Development and Use of Ceramide Nanoliposomes in Cancer. In: Düzgüneş, N. (ed). Methods in Enzymology, vol. 508. Academic Press, 2012, pp 89-108
Suk, J.S., Xu, Q., Kim, N., Hanes, J. & Ensign, L.M. PEGylation as a strategy for improving nanoparticle-based drug and gene delivery. Advanced drug delivery reviews 99, 28-51 (2016)
Gabizon, A. & Martin, F. Polyethylene glycol-coated (pegylated) liposomal doxorubicin. Rationale for use in solid tumours. Drugs54 Suppl 4,15-21 (1997)
Papahadjopoulos, D. et al. Sterically stabilized liposomes: improvements in pharmacokinetics and antitumor therapeutic efficacy. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 88,11460-11464 (1991) Check out this quote: “This effect is substantially greater than that observed previously with conventional liposomes and is associated with a more than 5-fold prolongation of liposome circulation time in blood.”
Systemic distribution of LNPs was needed to try to replace genes in cells throughout the body, including the brain in order to treat things like Alzheimer’s disease and Parkinson’s disease. It was also necessary to deliver chemotherapeutic drugs to cancers that could have metastasized anywhere in the body, including the brain. However, this is not anywhere close to how a traditional vaccine technology behaves. Also, this wide distribution is accomplished by helping the LNPs avoid uptake by phagocytic cells, which are the cells of the immune system that promote induction of immune responses! I postulate that the mRNA inoculations would function better as vaccines if mRNAs could be stabilized without PEG.
Page 11 (section 5; Introduction): I have two serious concerns about this part.
The aim of the study was to evaluate a single dose of the surrogate ‘vaccine’. This is very odd and suggests this experiment was run as an afterthought and was overly rushed. The proper way to do this type of study is to test a range of doses. The ideal situation is to reach a dose that is too high (i.e., it causes undesirable results) while simultaneously capturing ‘safe’ doses. This helps to inform proper dosing for subsequent studies, including those conducted with humans.
Something is revealed here that was never revealed in the Japanese version of the document; namely that the first attempt to run the study was a failure due to overt toxicity. Rats were supposed to receive 100 μg of mRNA, but the study had to be truncated because the selected dose was causing obvious harm to the rats (see section 7.1 on page 19 of the report). The results were not formally discussed but some raw data were provided in the appendices.The study director noted that “a subsequent review of the data showed concentrations [of LNPs] were well detected in tissues”. The treatment caused an acute body weight loss of ~7% . Of the three males that were due to be euthanized at 48-hours post-inoculation, the treatment proved lethal for one, which was euthanized at 30 hours. Of the remaining two rats, they were showing clear signs of distress at 48 hours.As stated, “Additionally, animals 019M and 020M were hunched and piloerect from approximately 30 h post-dose onwards”. “Onwards” means up to 48 hours when they were euthanized to harvest tissues. In other words 3/3 (100%) of the rats were clearly sick by 30-hours post-jab and we have no idea whether this would have got worse or resolved beyond 48 hours.Only males were tested at the 100 μg dose, so we don’t know what it would have done to females.I have a real problem with this experiment. I conduct these kinds of studies all the time.If only a single dose of a treasured new medical intervention is going to be tested, one would always try to predict a dose that is going to place it in the ‘best light’. As such, Acuitas and Pfizer must have been confident in the safety of the 100 μg dose. The fact that they were wrong on this gamble is disconcerting and does not speak well of their knowledge of the safety margin of their own product.The study director contacted Acuitas to tell them the study was failing and the decision rendered was to repeat it at half the dose; multiple doses were still not considered, nor was expansion of the scope of the study done, despite obvious safety concerns, and signals that the experiment was too short. On the basis of this failed first attempt and an unwillingness to adjust course, regulatory agencies never should have let Pfizer proceed with their vaccine until a large array of safety questions were addressed experimentally.
Page 14 (section 6.3): Urine and fecal samples were collected but never analyzed (also see section 6.9.4). This is a shame considering the world-wide debate about potential shedding of mRNA ‘vaccine’ components and/or the spike protein they encode.
Page 15 (section 6.7): Blood cells were discarded from the blood samples. Therefore, the amount of LNPs in blood cells was presumably estimated by taking the total in whole blood and subtracting the amount in the plasma. This is unfortunate because an inappropriate conclusion was drawn about the irrelevance of blood cells as a destination for the LNPs. This is discussed below.
Pag 16 (section 6.8): It appears that some samples were analyzed while fresh; others were frozen, stored at -20oC for an unknown period of time, thawed and then analyzed. This would not be ideal for the stability of mRNAs, which might be one reason they and their protein products were not assessed in this study. These may also be less than ideal conditions for LNPs, but, presumably, they were OK for the radioactive tritium, which is what was measured. However, none of these issues were discussed nor were data provided to alleviate the concerns.
Page 18 (section 6.11): The wrong bones were taken from some rats so the correct ones were harvested from frozen and thawed carcasses. Again, it would be helpful to see analyses of LNP concentrations in tissues with and without a freeze-thaw to assure that they are equivalent. This should be standard practice when analyzing samples that have been handled differently.
Page 19 (section 7.1): Another aspect unique to the FDA’s version of the Pfizer biodistribution study is that it provides separate data for males and females. The data were pooled in the Japanese version, which hid important sex differences. Because the 100 μg dose of RNA was overly toxic, the study was truncated and re-started with a dose of 50 μg of RNA. However, the clinical observations reveal something disturbing.
Even at this lower dose, the mRNA ‘vaccine’ proved to be acutely toxic to one of the three females that was monitored beyond 24-hours post-injection. No obvious signs of illness were observed with the three males that were allowed to live past 24 hours (the endpoint was 48 hours).
Some may say it was only one female rat, but it is 1/3 (33.3%) of the female rats. Further, it is unknown whether others would have become visibly sick had the observation period been extended beyond 48 hours; especially when one understands that concentrations of LNPs were still rising in many female tissues (discussed below). Remember, in Canada, AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 ‘vaccine’ was deemed to be too unsafe for adults when public statements suggested it was causing dangerous blood clots in 1:55,000 people. So, writing off a 1:3 incidence of obvious toxicity in the pre-clinical study was unwise.
Also, although the numbers of rats used were far too small to draw any firm conclusions, these results suggest the mRNA ‘vaccine’ may have been more toxic in females, which could be due to a sex- or size difference. This is yet another reason why the study should have been repeated several times to build up the statistical power for proper analyses.
Biodistribution
Now for the biodistribution data. Table 1 spanning pages 23-24 is the same as the one in the Japanese document that I highlighted in May 2021. More telling, however, is table 2, spanning pages 25-26, because this separates the data for males and females. In assessing these data I will highlight some conclusions that were drawn by the study director.
Page 20: “The overall injection site concentrations and % dose values were higher in males than in females. Since concentrations in other tissues were broadly similar between the sexes, it is likely that the higher injection site values in males were a result of its more consistent identification and collection in males.” This fails to account for the fact that concentrations in tissues tended to peak or plateau at relatively early time points in males and were still climbing at the last time point in females. It also doesn’t consider the possibility that the LNPs might have been accumulating at higher concentrations than males in tissues that were not evaluated in the study.
Page 20: “the greatest mean tissue concentration and, in most instances, % of injected dose was found remaining in the injection site at each time point in both sexes.” Although technically true, the percentage of the injected dose was higher in the livers of males and females at 8- and 48-hours, respectively.
Further, this statement is highly misleading in that it draws attention away from the obvious. We were told that most of the dose would stay at the injection site. However, there was only one out of seven time points in males (i.e., 1-hour post-injection) where most of the dose was at the injection site (69%).
For the other seven time points and at all times in females, only a minority of the dose was detected at the injection site. In females, as little as 7% of the injected dose remained at the site of inoculation. This means the vast majority of the dose went somewhere else. Where did it go? The short answer is everywhere.
When I publicized these data from the Japanese study, many people tried to get the public to focus on the low percentages of the overall dose in most tissues. They were missing the point. These low percentages were because the ‘vaccine’ had spread so far and wide throughout the body; a little bit sprinkled everywhere.
Indeed, near the top of page 21, the study director concluded “Over 48 hours, [3H]-08-A01-C01 [this is the surrogate vaccine] distributed from the injection site to most tissues”. It is cherry-picking to try to compare the percentage of the total dose in something like the tiny adrenal glands to the large muscle in which the ‘vaccine’ bolus was injected. When the public were told that most of the dose remains at the injection site but only 7% of it could be detected there at a mere 15 minutes post-injection, then the messaging was wrong.
The proper way to assess distribution of a drug when telling people that most of the bolus is supposed to remain at the injection site would be to assess the percentage at the injection site versus ‘not at the injection site’. Here is this assessment for males (everything above the grey line represents the fraction of the dose that went somewhere else)…
Here is how much of the dose remained at the injection site in females…
The average proportion of the dose at the injection site across all time points for both sexes was only 29.7%. On this basis, I would not conclude that most of the dose stayed at the injection site.
Also, focusing on the percentage of the dose that went to individual tissues loses sight of the fact that it is the concentration that matters. And the concentrations of LNPs in many tissues cannot be defined as insubstantial, especially when a safe concentration has never been established. Here is an illustration that I put together to highlight why the percentage of the total dose should not be used as a distraction from the concentration of the drug…
Here is an analogy to provide additional help…
Think about the risk of an accidental drug overdose in two people. One is a 250-pound man, the other is a 50-pound boy. They each accidentally consume the same high dose of a drug. In other words, 100% of the dose was found in the body of the man and 100% of the dose was found in the body of the boy. The percentage of the dose is equal but are they at equal risk of experiencing toxicity from an overdose? Obviously not. The tiny boy is at enhanced risk because the same high dose in a smaller body equals a higher concentration of the drug. The percentage of the drug given to the boy would have be scaled back a lot to avoid toxicity.
Looked at another way, let’s say the boy has consumed the minimum dose of a drug that causes toxicity. Would the same dose cause toxicity in the man? No, it would require a higher dose to be toxic.
In the same fashion, that is why dosage recommendations are lower for younger/smaller people. To prove this, go to your medicine cabinet and pull out a bottle of Aspirin or Tylenol or something similar. Look at the recommended dose for a child versus an adult. Children need lower total doses to achieve the same concentration of the drug once it is distributed in their body. Adult doses can potentially be toxic in children.
This same principle applies to the biodistribution of the lipid nanoparticles used to make mRNA vaccines. If a toxic dose were to be reached in the liver, the dose needed to cause toxicity in the vastly smaller ovaries would be much lower. Because the concentration of a drug is what matters.
Interestingly, the study director ignored that fact that the two-times higher dose of the mRNA ‘vaccine’ (100 μg) resulted in approximately two-times higher concentrations (that were toxic) in the various tissues as compared to the 50 μg dose; a classic dose-response effect. The percentage of the total doses reaching the tissues was almost equivalent between the 50 μg and 100 μg doses, but the latter proved more toxic because the concentrations were higher.
Page 20: “Mean plasma concentrations peaked by 4 hours post-dose in males and by 1 hour post-dose in females”. This is evidence of rapid systemic distribution with the kinetics accelerated in females.
Pages 20-21: “Concentrations were higher in plasma than in blood, with mean blood:plasma ratios generally ca. 0.5-0.6, indicating that the majority of the total radioactivity is associated with the plasma fraction.” Page 22: “and [3H]-08-A01-C01 did not associate with red blood cells.” But approximately one-third of the LNPs circulating in the blood were found in the cell fraction! Plus, the study director’s conclusion is based on the assumption that the ratio of cells to plasma in whole blood is ~50:50, but it is not; plasma represents a higher percentage. Here is a nice illustration from the University of Washington, Dept. of Laboratory Medicine, Specimen Procurement Section:
This means the amount of the LNPs in the cellular fraction was more likely ~40% of the total dose in the blood. How can one write this off as irrelevant? Further, the conclusion was that red blood cells weren’t a significant destination of the LNPs. Not only do the data contradict this assertion, it also fails to recognize that white blood cells and platelets make up <1% of whole blood. What if all the LNPs in the cellular fraction were in the white blood cells and/or platelets? This would represent a very high concentration of LNPs. Why wasn’t this studied? Instead, the cellular fraction was discarded. This is a very important question because white blood cells constitute a major component of the immune system. If they were to be negatively impacted, this would impede the vaccination effect. And if they aren’t killed but take up the mRNA, they would express the spike protein, which would then make them a target for spike-specific antibodies and/or T cells. Also, there have been reports of bleeding, blood clots, and thrombocytopenia (low platelet counts) post-‘vaccination’. The common factor with all of these is that they involve platelets, another component of the cellular fraction that was ignored. The question regarding the impact of LNPs on cells in the blood should have been addressed before there was any consideration of proceeding into human trials.
Page 22: The study director drew this overall biased conclusion: “The concentrations of [3H]-08-A01-C01 were greatest in the injection site at all time points”. Pardon me?!? Am I supposed to forget the statement on page 20 of the report, “the greatest mean tissue concentration and, in most instances, % of injected dose was found remaining in the injection site at each time point in both sexes”. This statement could only be applied to the data where results for males and females were pooled (i.e., the only data shown in the Japanese document), thereby hiding the fact that the % of the injected dose was higher in the liver than at the injection site at different times in males versus females.
Page 22: “The concentrations of [3H]-08-A01-C01 were greatest in the injection site at all time points, with levels peaking in the plasma by 1-4 hours post-dose and distribution mainly into liver, adrenal glands, spleen and ovaries over 48 hours.” I was lambasted by colleagues when I expressed concerns about biodistribution of LNPs to ovaries after seeing the Japanese document. But in the version of the document that was released by court-order, the study director concludes that the ovary is a main target organ for distribution of the LNPs! This concern is only enhanced when one looks at the kinetics of this biodistribution to the ovaries…
…the concentration of LNPs were rising almost exponentially at the conclusion of the study. How high would it have gone?
Page 21: “Maximum concentrations (Cmax) in liver and spleen were observed at 8 hours post-dose in males and 48 hours post dose in females, but were broadly similar and appeared to plateau at 8 hours post-dose when considering variability.” This conclusion needs to be corrected. The highest concentrations in female livers and spleens were observed at 48-hours post-treatment. But there is no way of knowing that these were maximal concentrations. In fact, the data suggest that maximum concentrations could be reached some time after 48 hours…
This idea of capturing a concentration plateau is based on averaging the values from males and females. In many of the male tissues, apparent peaks or plateaus appear to have been captured within 48 hours post-injection. However, the kinetics were different in females, with concentrations still rising in many cases. If one averages the post-peak values of males with rising values from females, it gives the false impression that a plateau has been captured.
This is very important because one of the key purposes of a biodistribution study is to determine when peak concentrations occur. Concerns related to potential toxicities can obviously not be allayed if only pre-peak concentrations have been captured; and this appears to be what happened with the females. Look at the following LNP concentrations over time in various tissues, with an emphasis on females (I already showed several other tissues above) and ask if you feel confident that a peak or plateau was captured. In other words, how confident are you that the concentrations would go no higher beyond 48 hours?
I question whether a peak was reached in male muscles…
All the Data are Indicative of Systemic Distribution
If a drug gets into the blood, one of the first places you should look for uptake is the spleen. This is because the spleen filters the blood. Indeed, with Pfizer’s ‘vaccine’ we see a rapid influx of LNPs into the blood and subsequent seeding of the spleen. Also, lymph nodes are designed to drain fluids from local tissues. So, if a drug seeds a tissue, one would expect to find it in the regional lymph nodes. In this study, the LNPs were found in two lymph nodes that were studied.
These lymph nodes drain distinct tissues (one drains the jaw region and the other drains fluids around the intestines). Although it was not stated, I assume the surrogate ‘vaccine’ was likely injected into one of the large muscles of the hind legs as this is what is commonly done. If true, the most relevant draining lymph node would be the popliteal node. Surprisingly, it looks like lymph nodes draining the injection site were not evaluated.
The fact that two ‘irrelevant’ lymph nodes had LNPs accumulating in them is suggestive of widespread dissemination into various tissues. I hypothesize that LNPs would have been found in most, if not all the lymph nodes in the rats. These results confirm a distribution pattern that is very different from traditional vaccine technologies where the dose would be concentrated at acute time points at the injection site, with some taken to the local draining lymph nodes.
6% of the Dose was in the Blood at Two Hours Post-Injection
No attempt was made by those conducting the biodistribution study to estimate the total amount of the dose of LNPs that were circulating in the blood, so I did this. We know the concentration per milliliter in the blood of males and females at each timepoint. So I took the average concentration across both sexes and picked the peak, which was at two hours after treatment. I estimated the total blood volumes (BV) in males and females using the formula BV (mL) = 0.06 x body weight + 0.77, which was derived from this study using the same strain of rats.
After plugging in the relevant numbers, I came up with a total average dose of blood-borne lipids of 1,290 μg; or ~6% of the total dose. This is substantial considering it represents a single time point in a dynamic tissue in which the LNPs are entering and exiting the blood throughout the duration of the study.
How the Study Should Have Been Conducted
As an expert in pre-clinical experimentation, I can assure you that Pfizer’s biodistribution study was of poor quality. It appears to have been rushed, with many corners cut, possibly in an effort to meet a deadline at ‘warp speed’. If one of my graduate students presented the data in Pfizer’s biodistribution study to their advisory committee and proposed to include it in their thesis, they would immediately be advised that it represented no more than a preliminary experiment; the type that is used to design much more informative and conclusive experiments. They would be required to expand its scope and repeat it multiple times. Here are some things I would recommend:
The experiment should have been conducted independently at least three times to ensure the findings could be replicated and to provide sufficient statistical power to facilitate objective analyses.
The experiment should have been run longer; specifically, until peak concentrations were clearly captured in all tissues.
More doses should have been evaluated to determine when unwanted effects began and whether they could be mitigated.
More tissues should have been assessed since there was evidence of extremely broad distribution. This should have included the lymph nodes draining the injection site, white blood cells, red blood cells, platelets, etc.
Tissues should have been assessed for the presence of LNPs, plus the mRNA, plus the protein product; not just the LNPs. It would be helpful to know how long the mRNA remains intact versus how long the protein product and LNPs can be detected.
Samples should have been analyzed to detect potential shedding. These samples should have included saliva, urine, feces and skin swabs.
The study should have been run with the same formulation that is being used in people.
A small-scale biodistribution study should have been incorporated into a phase I human clinical trial. If nothing else, it would have been very easy to monitor distribution in serial blood samples, as well as shedding samples, since these are all easy to obtain.
Repeated Dosing With Lipid Nanoparticles is Dangerous
Here is some information that is of concern considering that many people have already received three or four doses of an mRNA ‘vaccine’ in less than one year, with the potential for more on the horizon…
This might be news to many members of the public, but it is a long-accepted scientific fact that lipid nanoparticles used to deliver the mRNA in ‘vaccines’ can be toxic. In fact, that is the very reason why some big pharmaceutical companies strategically focused on using them as vaccine technologies instead of for gene therapies and to deliver drugs. A good quality vaccine, such as those used in the mandated childhood series, only require one or two doses for a person’s lifetime. It was assumed the same would hold true for mRNA vaccines. Repeated administration of lipid nanoparticles, especially over a limited period of time, is known to be toxic.
This was openly discussed with the media prior to the declared COVID-19 pandemic, but many people are either unaware of this or have forgotten. This included an interview with the Chief Executive Officer of Moderna and others in the biotechnology industry. Here are quotes from the hyperlinked article:
“In nature, mRNA molecules function like recipe books, directing cellular machinery to make specific proteins. Moderna believes it can play that system to its advantage by using synthetic mRNA to compel cells to produce whichever proteins it chooses. In effect, the mRNA would turn cells into tiny drug factories. It’s highly risky. Big pharma companies had tried similar work and abandoned it because it’s exceedingly hard to get RNA into cells without triggering nasty side effects.”; “Delivery — actually getting RNA into cells — has long bedeviled the whole field. On their own, RNA molecules have a hard time reaching their targets. They work better if they’re wrapped up in a delivery mechanism, such as nanoparticles made of lipids. But those nanoparticles can lead to dangerous side effects, especially if a patient has to take repeated doses over months or years. Novartis abandoned the related realm of RNA interference over concerns about toxicity, as did Merck and Roche”.
Indeed, there are many peer-reviewed scientific publications that have highlighted serious safety issues related to the administration of lipid nanoparticles used to deliver mRNAs. Some examples of toxicities that can be caused by lipid nanoparticles can be found here, here, and here. Remarkably, lipid nanoparticles used to deliver mRNAs have even been shown to be toxic to cells of the immune system that play a critical role in promoting vaccine-mediated immune responses. This would counteract the very immunization effect that is being sought. It could even, in theory, potentially cause counterproductive acute immunosuppression. A key question is to what degree are these toxicities additive? Unless lipid nanoparticles are definitively proven safe in humans, their repeated administration to people should be avoided.
Implications for Blood Donations
Blood donor organizations conduct fabulous, life-saving work. However, they need to take a long look at their policies surrounding mRNA-based vaccines. For example, Canadian Blood Services has the following policy: “Consistent with our eligibility criteria for other non-live vaccines, Canadian Blood Services accepts donations from otherwise eligible donors who have received a Health Canada-authorized COVID-19 vaccine, with no required deferral period following vaccination”. The problem is that mRNA ‘vaccines’ don’t function like traditional non-live vaccines. Pfizer’s own data suggest that their mRNA ‘vaccine’ circulates in the blood (in both the plasma and the cellular fraction) for at least 48 hours post-inoculation. Should blood containing variable quantities of a mRNA ‘vaccine’ that is still in its initial phase 3 human clinical trial be used in patients?
I strongly recommend that a simple time-course study evaluating the duration of circulation of lipid nanoparticles, mRNA, and the spike protein be conducted. This would allow a safe waiting period to be determined prior to accepting donations from individuals who have received a mRNA ‘vaccine’.
Practical Applications
What should be done with all this information? Well, I would suggest that you investigate the myriad of questions raised by Pfizer’s biodistribution study. Ask yourself if you have been presented with sufficient scientific evidence to address your queries. Do not settle for personal opinions, no matter how much of an ‘expert’ the person or organization appears to be. If you are not confident that systemic biodistribution of mRNA vaccines in people is a non-issue, then consider encouraging the promotion of research to provide definitive answers. Expecting public health officials to practice the precautionary principle is reasonable.
Further, encourage uncensored public discussions of the science between experts on both sides of the debate. After all, the full spectrum of scientific information should not be hidden from the public.
Finally, encourage health regulatory agencies to recruit unbiased scientists with pre-clinical research skills to carefully evaluate these early types of studies. It is challenging for a large company that is responsible for vast amounts of investor dollars to change course in the human clinical trial stages of research where massive amounts of money are one the line; much like trying to turn an oil tanker around. In contrast, there is much less invested at the earlier pre-clinical and translational stages due to the much lower cost of that type of research.
Changing course at this point is more akin to turning a speedboat around. Pre-clinical studies can be very informative and, if carefully critiqued, can be used to formulate important questions that can be answered with new, relatively inexpensive, easy and rapid experiments.
Unfortunately, most regulatory agencies and advisory committees that have been evaluating COVID-19 ‘vaccines’ have focused on the recruitment of clinically focused researchers. The many problems with Pfizer’s biodistribution study should have been obvious to a pre-clinical scientist.
Ideally, places like Health Canada should offer their regulatory scientists the equivalent of tenure in academia to ensure that they can maintain job security no matter how unpopular their reviews of submitted data may be.
In my continued effort to correct mis/dis-information, present information with greater transparency, and promote informed decision-making,
While studies suggest the health of Americans suffers due to excessive, unnecessary and/or ineffective medical tests and treatments, certain lab tests can offer truly important clues about your health
Some of the most valuable tests are rarely ordered by conventional physicians. These include the omega-3 index, ferritin, RBC magnesium, homocysteine and LDL particle number
Other important lab tests include vitamin D, fasting insulin and C-reactive protein
You may also consider doing a GGT test. Not only will it tell you if you have liver damage, it’s also an excellent marker for excess free iron and is a great indicator of your sudden cardiac death risk
As of 2014, individuals (or a person designated by the patient) have the right to gain direct access to their laboratory test reports without having to have them sent to a physician first
This article was previously published September 24, 2018, and has been updated with new information.
While studies suggest the health of Americans suffers due to excessive, unnecessary and/or ineffective medical tests and treatments, certain lab tests can offer truly important clues about your health. Unfortunately, some of the most valuable tests are rarely ordered by conventional physicians.
What’s more, the reference ranges provided on lab test reports are often misleading, as what’s considered “normal” is not necessarily ideal for optimal health. So, which lab tests are really worth getting on an annual basis, and what are the ideal reference ranges you’re looking for?
I wrote this chapter for my new book on partial fasting that is coming out in the spring, but it was so important that I wanted to give it to you now for free. So, below is a list of eight of the most important lab tests that are frequently overlooked.
Optimizing your vitamin D is one of the easiest and least expensive things you can do for your health. My recommendation is to get your vitamin D level tested twice a year, when your level is likely to be at its lowest (midwinter) and highest (midsummer).
This is particularly important if you’re pregnant or planning a pregnancy, or if you have cancer. Based on the research done and data collected by GrassrootsHealth, 40 ng/mL (100 nm/L) is the cutoff point for sufficiency to prevent a wide range of diseases.
For example, most cancers occur in people with a vitamin D blood level between 10 and 40 ng/mL,1,2 and published data suggests a whopping 80% of breast cancer recurrences — 4 out of 5 — could be prevented simply by optimizing vitamin D and nothing else.3
For optimal health and disease prevention, a level between 60 and 80 ng/mL (150 to 200 nm/L) appears to be ideal.4 While the American Medical Association claims 20 ng/mL is sufficient, research suggests 20 ng/mL is barely adequate for the prevention of osteomalacia, and clearly far too low for other disease prevention or improvement.
When it comes to dosage, you need to take whatever dose required to get you into the optimal range, with 40 ng/mL being the low-end cutoff for sufficiency. Research5 suggests it would require 9,600 IUs of vitamin D per day to get 97.5% of the population to reach 40 ng/mL, but there’s a wide variance in individual requirements.
If you’ve been getting regular sun exposure, have eaten vitamin D-rich foods such as beef liver, mushrooms and organic free-range egg yolks6 and/or taken a certain amount of vitamin D3 for a number of months and retesting reveals you’re still not within the recommended range, then you know you need to increase your dosage.
Over time, with continued testing, you’ll find your individual sweet spot and have a good idea of how much you need to take to maintain a year-round level of 40 to 60 ng/mL. GrassrootsHealth offers vitamin D testing at a great value through its D*Action study, and has an online vitamin D calculator you can use to estimate your vitamin D3 dosage once you know your current serum level.
No. 2 — Omega-3 Index
Like vitamin D, your omega-3 level is also a powerful predictor of your all-cause mortality risk and plays a vital role in overall health, especially your heart and brain health.
Recent research7 funded by the National Institutes of Health found having a higher omega-3 index was associated with a lower risk for cardiovascular events, coronary heart disease events and strokes. Omega-3 also helps improve pain, especially when combined with vitamin D.
(Omega-3 fats are precursors to mediators of inflammation called prostaglandins, which is, in part, how they help reduce pain. Anti-inflammatory painkillers also work by manipulating prostaglandins.)
The omega-3 index is a blood test that measures the amount of EPA and DHA omega-3 fatty acids in your red blood cell (RBC) membranes. Your index is expressed as a percent of your total RBC fatty acids.
The omega-3 index reflects your tissue levels of EPA and DHA and has been validated as a stable, long-term marker of your omega-3 status. An omega-3 index over 8% is associated with the lowest risk of death from heart disease. An index below 4% puts you at the highest risk of heart disease-related mortality. If you’re below 8%, increase your omega-3 intake and retest in three to six months.
You can save money by getting the combined vitamin D and omega-3 index testing kit, offered by GrassrootsHealth as part of its consumer-sponsored research.
Your best sources of animal-based omega-3 are small, cold-water fatty fish such as anchovies, herring and sardines. Wild Alaskan salmon is another good source that is low in mercury and other environmental toxins. These fish are also a decent source of vitamin D, making them doubly beneficial.
If you’re not eating these foods on a regular basis, your alternatives include fish oil and krill oil. Krill is my preferred choice, as it contains DHA and EPA in a form that’s less prone to oxidation. The fatty acids in krill oil are also bound to phospholipids, which allow the DHA and EPA to travel efficiently into your hepatic system; hence they’re more bioavailable. Studies8 have shown that krill oil may be 48 times more potent than fish oil.
No. 3 — Fasting Insulin
Insulin resistance is a driving factor for virtually all chronic disease, making fasting insulin testing a really important health screen. Any meal high in grain and sugar carbs typically generates a rapid rise in your blood glucose. To compensate, your pancreas secretes insulin into your bloodstream, which lowers your blood sugar.
If you did not have insulin to do this, you would go into a hyperglycemic coma and die. Insulin, however, will also catalyze the conversion of excess sugar into fat cells.
Typically, the more insulin you make, the fatter you become. If you consistently consume a high-sugar, high-grain diet, your blood glucose level will be correspondingly high and over time your body becomes desensitized to insulin, requiring more and more insulin to get the job done.
Eventually, you become insulin resistant and prone to weight gain, then prediabetic, and then you enter full-blown diabetes. Prediabetes9 is defined as an elevation in blood glucose over 100 mg/dL but lower than 125 mg/dl, at which point it formally becomes Type 2 diabetes.
However, any fasting blood sugar regularly over 90 mg/dL is really suggestive of insulin resistance, and the seminal work of the late Dr. Joseph Kraft — considered the father of the insulin assay10 — suggests 80% — 8 out of 10 — Americans are in fact insulin resistant.11 Although he recommended an oral glucose tolerance test, which also measures insulin, this is a far more challenging test, and for most a fasting insulin test will suffice.
The fasting blood insulin test is far better than a fasting glucose test as it reflects how healthy your blood glucose levels are over time. It’s important to realize it’s possible to have low fasting glucose but still have a significantly elevated insulin level. And yes, it must be fasting for at least eight hours, otherwise the results are nearly meaningless.
A normal fasting blood insulin level is below 5, but ideally, you’ll want it below 3. If your insulin level is higher than 3 to 5, the most effective way to optimize it is to reduce or eliminate all forms of dietary sugar. Intermittent fasting, partial fasting and/or water fasting are also effective, and intermittent fasting combined with a ketogenic diet appears to be the most aggressively effective of all.
A ferritin test is a laboratory blood test that measures the amount of ferritin in your blood. Ferritin is the major iron storage protein in your body, so the ferritin test is ordered as an indirect way to measure the iron stores in your body.
For adults, I strongly recommend getting a serum ferritin test on an annual basis, as iron overload can be every bit as dangerous as vitamin D deficiency. While iron is necessary for biological function, when you get too much, it can do tremendous harm by increasing oxidative stress.
When iron reacts with hydrogen peroxide, typically in your mitochondria, dangerous hydroxyl free radicals are formed. These are among the most damaging free radicals known and are highly reactive and can damage DNA, cell membranes and proteins. They contribute to mitochondrial dysfunction, which in turn is at the heart of most chronic degenerative diseases.
Unfortunately, the first thing people think about when they hear “iron” is anemia, or iron deficiency, not realizing that iron overload is actually a more common problem, and far more dangerous.
Virtually all adult men and postmenopausal women are at risk for iron overload since they do not lose blood on a regular basis and since humans are not at all designed to excrete excess iron, it is simply stored for a rainy day when you might need extra iron from some type of trauma resulting in blood loss.
There’s also an inherited disease, hemochromatosis, which causes your body to accumulate excessive and dangerously damaging levels of iron. If left untreated, high iron can contribute to cancer, heart disease, diabetes, neurodegenerative diseases and many other health problems, including gouty arthritis.12
As with many other lab tests, the “normal” range for serum ferritin is far from ideal. A level of 200 to 300 ng/mL falls within the normal range for women and men respectively, but if you’re in this range, know you’re virtually guaranteed to develop some sort of health problem.
An ideal level for adult men and nonmenstruating women is actually somewhere between 30 and 40 ng/mL. (You do not want to be below 20 ng/mL or much above 40 ng/mL.) The most commonly used threshold for iron deficiency in clinical studies is less than 10 ng/mL.13
You may also consider doing a gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase (sometimes called gamma-glutamyltransferase or GGT) test. GGT is a liver enzyme correlated with iron toxicity and all-cause mortality. Not only will the GGT test tell you if you have liver damage, it’s also an excellent marker for excess free iron and is a great indicator of your sudden cardiac death risk.
In recent years, scientists have discovered GGT is highly interactive with iron, and when serum ferritin and GGT are both high, you are at significantly increased risk of chronic health problems, because then you have a combination of free iron, which is highly toxic, and iron storage to keep that toxicity going.14
No. 5 — High-Sensitivity C-Reactive Protein (hs-CRP)
The hs-CRP is a highly sensitive test15 that measures a liver protein produced in response to inflammation in your body, and chronic inflammation is a hallmark of most chronic diseases. The lower your level the better. Goal would be to be below 0.7 mg/dl. I like to keep mine under 0.2 mg/dl.
Conventional medicine will typically treat underlying inflammation with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or corticosteroids. Patients with normal cholesterol but elevated CRP are also frequently prescribed a statin drug. None of these drug treatments address the underlying cause of the inflammation, and can do more harm than good in the long run.
Eating a healthy diet low in added sugars and higher in healthy fats, optimizing your vitamin D and omega-3, lowering your insulin level and exercising on a regular basis will all help to address chronic inflammation. Certain herbs and supplements can also be useful, including astaxanthin, boswellia, bromelain, ginger, resveratrol, evening primrose and curcumin.16
One drug option that is both safe and effective is low-dose naltrexone. Naltrexone is an opiate antagonist, originally developed for the treatment of opioid addiction. However, when takin at very low doses, it triggers endorphin production, which helps boost immune function, and has anti-inflammatory effects on the central nervous system.17
No. 6 — RBC Magnesium
Magnesium deficiency is extremely common, and recent research18 shows even subclinical deficiency can jeopardize your heart health. Magnesium is also important for brain health, detoxification, cellular health and function, energy production,19,20 regulation of insulin sensitivity,21 normal cell division,22 the optimization of your mitochondria23 and much more.
Magnesium resides at the center of the chlorophyll molecule, so if you rarely eat fresh leafy greens, you’re probably not getting much magnesium from your diet. Furthermore, while eating organic whole foods24 will help optimize your magnesium intake, it’s still not a surefire way to ward off magnesium deficiency, as most soils have become severely depleted of nutrients, including magnesium.
Magnesium absorption is also dependent on having sufficient amounts of selenium, parathyroid hormone and vitamins B6 and D, and is hindered by excess ethanol, salt, coffee and phosphoric acid in soda. Sweating, stress, lack of sleep, excessive menstruation, certain drugs (especially diuretics and proton-pump inhibitors) also deplete your body of magnesium.25
For these reasons, many experts recommend taking supplemental magnesium. The recommended dietary allowance for magnesium is 310 to 420 mg per day depending on your age and sex,26 but many experts believe you may need 600 to 900 mg per day, which is more in line with the magnesium uptake during the Paleolithic period.27
Personally, I believe many may benefit from amounts as high as 1 to 2 grams (1,000 to 2,000 mg) of elemental magnesium per day in divided doses, as most have electromagnetic field exposures that simply cannot be mitigated, and the extra magnesium may help lower the damage from that exposure.
The key to effectively using higher doses, however, is to make sure you avoid loose bowels as that will disrupt your gut microbiome, which would be highly counterproductive.
One of the best forms is magnesium threonate, as it appears to be the most efficient at penetrating cell membranes, including your mitochondria and blood-brain barrier. Another effective way to boost your magnesium level is to take Epsom salt (magnesium sulfate) baths, as the magnesium effectively absorbs through your skin.
I prepare a supersaturated solution of Epsom salts by dissolving 7 tablespoons of the salt into 6 ounces of water and heating it until all the salt has dissolved. I pour it into a dropper bottle and then apply it to my skin and rub fresh aloe leaves over it to dissolve it. This is an easy and inexpensive way to increase your magnesium and will allow you to get higher dosages into your body without having to deal with its laxative effects.
Optimizing your magnesium level is particularly important when taking supplemental vitamin D, as your body cannot properly utilize the vitamin if you’re your magnesium is insufficient.28 The reason for this is because magnesium is required for the actual activation of vitamin D.
If your magnesium level is too low, the vitamin D will simply get stored in its inactive form. As an added boon, when your magnesium level is sufficiently high, it will be far easier to optimize your vitamin D level, as you’ll require a far lower dose.29 In fact, research30 shows higher magnesium intake helps reduce your risk of vitamin D deficiency — likely by activating more of it.
No. 7 — Homocysteine
Homocysteine is an amino acid in your body and blood obtained primarily from meat consumption. Checking your homocysteine level is a great way to identify a vitamin B6, B9 (folate) and B12 deficiency.
Vitamins B6, B9 and B12 help convert homocysteine into methionine — a building block for proteins. If you don’t get enough of these B vitamins, this conversion process is impaired and results in higher homocysteine. Conversely, when you increase intake of B6, B9 and B12, your homocysteine level decreases.
Elevated homocysteine is a risk factor for heart disease, and when combined with a low omega-3 index, it’s associated with an increased risk of brain atrophy and dementia.
Vitamins B6, B9 and B12 are also really important for cognition and mental health in general, so identifying and addressing a deficiency in these vitamins can go a long way toward warding off depression and other, even more serious, mental health conditions. If you do take folate and/or B12 it would be best to take the methyl forms of these vitamins.
No. 8 — NMR Lipoprofile
One of the most important tests you can get to determine your heart disease risk is the NMR LipoProfile, which measures your low-density lipoprotein (LDL) particle number. This test also has other markers that can help determine if you have insulin resistance, which is a primary cause of elevated LDL particle number and increased heart disease risk.
Conventional doctors will typically only check your total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol and triglycerides. However, these are not very accurate predictors for cardiovascular disease risk, as it’s quite possible to have normal total cholesterol and/or normal LDL cholesterol yet have a high LDL particle number.
In a nutshell, it’s not the amount of cholesterol that is the main risk factor for heart disease but rather it’s the number of cholesterol-carrying LDL particles. The greater the number of LDL particles you have, the more likely it is that you also have oxidized LDL, which tend to be far more atherogenic.
Oxidized LDL is more harmful than normal nonoxidized LDL because it’s smaller and denser. This allows it to penetrate the lining of your arteries, where it stimulates plaque formation.
Some groups, such as the National Lipid Association, have started to shift the focus toward LDL particle number instead of total and LDL cholesterol, but it still has not hit mainstream. Fortunately, if you know about it, you can take control of your health and either ask your doctor for this test, or order it yourself.
There are several ways to test for your LDL particle number. The NMR LipoProfile is offered by a lab called Liposcience, and is the test used in most scientific studies on LDL particles. If your LDL particle number is high, chances are you have insulin and leptin resistance, as these are driving causes of high LDL particle numbers.
Endotoxins in your gut will also increase your LDL particle number, and thyroid dysfunction may be at play as well. In the video above, Chris Kresser, an acupuncturist and a licensed integrative medicine clinician, explains how LDL particle number is influenced via these and other mechanisms.
2014 Rule Gave Patients Direct Access to Lab Results
While there are hundreds of blood tests and other health screens available, the eight reviewed in this article are, I believe, among the most valuable, arming you with vital information you can then use to take proactive steps to protect and improve your health.
In case you’ve ever wondered if you can get your lab test results directly from the lab that conducted the testing, know that you do have that right. In 2014, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services issued a final rule that grants individuals (or a person designated by the patient) direct access to their laboratory test reports without having to have them sent to a physician first.31
Clearly, doctors should not have exclusive rights to information about your body, but prior to this rule, this wasn’t a guarantee. The final rule updated the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988, allowing laboratories to give patients direct access to their lab results.
Even so, it’s not always as simple as it should be to get your results without going through your doctor. Laboratories may require patients to make requests for lab results in writing, and they may charge you extra to mail or electronically deliver them.
Further, the rule states that most results must be made available to patients within 30 days of the completion of testing, so depending on the contentiousness of the lab, you may have to wait weeks to find out crucial health information. Most tend to be fairly quick, though.
Avocados may help with weight management and blood sugar control, reducing your risk of obesity and diabetes. Avocados help you feel full longer, are packed with fiber and are high in amounts of several essential vitamins and minerals, including the B vitamins, potassium and vitamin K
Researchers have discovered a unique fat molecule in avocados, avocatin B (AvoB), which demonstrates a positive effect on reducing insulin resistance by assisting the body in the complete oxidation of fatty acids in mitochondria. Results were positive in an animal study and human subjects
Factors affecting your risk of diabetes include obesity, high blood pressure, lack of physical activity, depression and a history of heart disease or stroke. Additionally, low levels of vitamin D and magnesium are associated with a higher risk of diabetes
The practice of intermittent fasting, during which you restrict calories for several hours or days, has a positive effect on metabolic flexibility, reducing your risk of diabetes. Consider one of several ways to incorporate this practice in your routine
Avocados are rich in monounsaturated fat your body burns easily for energy. They may be one of the healthiest foods you can eat every day as they help protect your heart and optimize your cholesterol. They also are rich in fiber.
Together with high amounts of several essential vitamins and minerals, including the B vitamins, potassium and vitamin K, the avocado is a fruit you may want to consider for more than guacamole. Adding avocados to salad also helps your body to absorb three to five times more carotenoids, helping your body fight against free radical damage.
An average sized avocado also contains about 10% of the recommended daily value of magnesium, a mineral used by every organ in your body. Insufficient levels may lead to unexplained muscle fatigue or weakness, abnormal heart rhythms or muscle spasms.
Avocados are also surprisingly high in fiber, which plays an important role in digestive, heart and skin health. Fiber is also important in helping to regulate blood sugar and weight management. One study found eating one-half of a fresh avocado with lunch may help you feel full longer and prevent snacking later.
Avocados don’t ripen on the tree, but only after they’re picked. Choose firm avocados, as they will keep in the refrigerator for a couple of weeks, ripening slowly. On your counter, they will ripen within a few days. After you cut it, an avocado will turn brown from oxidation.
If you don’t eat it all, you can keep it fresh longer by leaving the pit with the avocado and storing in an airtight container. Brush lemon juice and olive oil over the cut flesh to help inhibit oxidation. Be aware, though, that the oil can add oiliness to the texture, while the juice will give it a slight lemon flavor.
Avocados at Breakfast May Reduce Hunger Through the Day
Being overweight increases the risk of insulin resistance and Type 2 diabetes, and it’s possible that eating avocados may help address these conditions. When it comes to weight management, some ethnic groups may be more prone to developing both prediabetes and Type 1 diabetes, for example, Hispanic/Latino Americans, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.1
Although this is “a diverse group that includes people of Cuban, Mexican, Puerto Rican and South and Central American,” they all have a higher potential risk of developing diabetes than nonHispanic whites, the CDC says. The increased risk may come from general risk factors including genetics, foods you eat, your weight and your activity levels.
To gain insight into how to affect change, one survey of Hispanic millennials showed that they would be interested in learning about lifestyle changes they could make that could reduce their risk for diabetes without medication.2 The investigation was spearheaded by the Hass Avocado Board, which runs Saborea Uno Hoy, a self-described research program3 that promotes avocados for their health benefits.
A clinical study published in Nutrients4 sought to evaluate how well avocados could satisfy hunger and replace carbohydrates in a meal. Using 31 overweight or obese adults, the researchers used a visual analog scale that matched against serum levels of ghrelin, a hormone associated with appetite, to measure how full the participants felt after consuming one of three different meals.
There was greater suppression of hunger after the participants consumed a whole avocado as compared to the control meal high in carbohydrates and low in fat. They also felt more satisfied after a meal with a half or whole avocado as compared to the control meal.
The researchers wrote, “Replacing carbohydrates in a high-carbohydrate meal with avocado-derived fat-fiber combination increased feelings of satiety …” Although the study size was small, the findings support a growing body of research that eating healthy fats, including those found in avocados, has a positive impact on weight management and glucose control.
A Fat Found Only in Avocado Associated With Glycemic Control
Another intriguing study found that avocados have yet another impact on glucose control and the management of diabetes.5 Researchers from the University of Guelph in Ontario, Canada, discovered a fat molecule found only in avocados, avocatin B (AvoB), has a positive effect on reducing insulin resistance.6
The researchers wrote a diabetic’s inability to properly utilize blood glucose is associated with mitochondrial fatty acid oxidation. When the body completely oxidizes fatty acid, the body can use fat for fuel. However, obesity and diabetes inhibit the body’s ability to completely oxidize fatty acids.
AvoB counters this incomplete oxidation in the pancreas and skeletal muscles, improving insulin sensitivity. As detailed by Science Daily, scientists fed mice fed high-calorie meals for eight weeks to induce obesity and insulin resistance. Then, in the following five weeks, they added AvoB to the diet of half the group.
At the end of the study the treated animals weighed less than those in the control group, demonstrating slower weight gain during the intervention, and exhibiting improved insulin sensitivity. The researchers also engaged human subjects and found AvoB supplement was absorbed safely without affecting kidney or liver function.
The human subjects also enjoyed weight reduction while eating a typical Western diet. The beneficial effects of consuming monounsaturated fats from avocados shown in recent studies support past research7 comparing a diet rich in complex carbohydrates against one rich in oleic acid from avocado and olive oil.
Data revealed replacing complex digestible carbohydrates with monounsaturated fatty acids in those with noninsulin-dependent diabetes improved the participants lipid profile while maintaining glycemic control.
Certain Lifestyle Choices May Increase Risk of Diabetes
In 2015, 9.4% of the U.S. population had been diagnosed with diabetes.8 This is slightly higher than the 8.5% of global prevalence among adults over 18 years of age recorded by the World Health Organization9 in 2014.
Your potential risk of developing Type 2 diabetes is dependent on your lifestyle choices and genetics. While you can’t change your genes, there are certain risk factors over which you have control that can affect your chances of getting diabetes, including:10
In addition to these risk factors, low levels of vitamin D also affect your risk for developing metabolic syndrome, characterized by high triglycerides, low levels of high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, large waist circumference, high blood pressure and high blood sugar and/or insulin resistance.
Vitamin D is a steroid hormone responsible for influencing virtually every cell in your body. Studies have found those who have lower levels of vitamin D have a greater risk of developing metabolic syndrome. Low levels of magnesium also contribute to the development of type 2 diabetes and heart disease.
One review found magnesium deficiency may be the greatest predictor of heart disease, and that even subclinical deficiency may compromise your cardiovascular health. Studies have found those who have Type 2 diabetes are more prone to magnesium deficiency; depletion has been found in 75% with poorly controlled disease.
In addition, magnesium plays an important role in the regulation of high blood pressure, another risk factor for Type 2 diabetes. Studies have also demonstrated supplementation may lower your risk and improve your condition if you currently have diabetes.
You can boost your magnesium by eating foods rich in magnesium, using Epsom salt baths or taking an oral supplement. My personal preference is magnesium threonate, since it appears to be efficient at penetrating cell membranes, including the mitochondria and blood-brain barrier.
Intermittent Fasting Helps You Achieve Metabolic Flexibility
When your body is resistant to insulin it lowers the cells’ ability to use glucose for energy. In response, the pancreas secretes more insulin to overcome the cells’ weak response and maintain blood glucose in a healthy range. Additionally, animal studies have demonstrated that repeated fasting may induce pancreatic beta cell growth accompanied by a marked improvement in blood sugar control.
In one animal study, researchers found pancreatic fat plays a role in the development of Type 2 diabetes, but intermittent fasting helps prevent these fatty deposits. The team found mice undergoing intermittent fasting every other day exhibited better glucose control and less fat in the liver and pancreas than the control group that was allowed unlimited food.
Intermittent fasting encourages your body to burn fat for fuel. By not relying exclusively on carbohydrates, it reduces insulin resistance that can develop in tissues and organs. Your skeletal muscle burns 60% to 80% of glucose thought to be related to the interaction of skeletal muscle and insulin resistance in those with Type 2 diabetes.
An overall metabolic inflexibility may be overridden by fasting and improving mitochondrial capacity. In other words, the ability to use both fat and carbohydrates for fuel is necessary to reduce insulin resistance, maintain weight and achieve optimal health.
What Is Intermittent Fasting and How Do You Practice It?
There are several ways to integrate intermittent fasting. The idea is to forgo food for a specific amount of time. The method you choose will vary by the number of days, hours and calories you allow.
There is no one plan that works for everyone, so it’s likely you’ll find a way to fit it into your lifestyle preferences to improve your metabolic flexibility. I recommend starting with a 12-hour fast from 7 p.m. until 7 a.m. Once you have achieved this for a week, try adding one hour every week for a month. This will help you easily move from a 12-hour daily fast to a 16-hour daily fast.
Before starting, remember intermittent fasting is not necessarily a form of calorie restriction but, rather, eliminating food sources to improve metabolic flexibility. Sugar and hunger cravings will disappear as your body begins burning fat, so the quality of your diet does play an important role in your health.
Reduce or eliminate as much processed food as possible and practice fasting under your physician’s care if you have an underlying medical condition. Here are several different ways of incorporating intermittent fasting into your daily routine:
12-hours-a-day fast — This is often used as a jumping-off point as described above.
16-hours-a-day fast — This is sometimes referred to as the 16/8 method and is a graduation from the 12-hour fast. Many people choose to finish eating by 7 p.m. and do not eat again until noon.
Two days a week — For some it may be easier to restrict food for 24 hours twice weekly as opposed to each day. Men may eat up to 600 calories on the fasting days and women up to 500 calories. To use this type of intermittent fasting successfully, there should be at least one nonfasting day between your fasting days.
Every other day — There are several variations of an every-other-day plan. Some completely avoid solid food and others allow up to 500 calories on fasting days. The authors of one study found this type of intermittent fasting was effective for weight loss and heart health for both normal and overweight adults.
Meal skipping — This is a more flexible approach that works well for those who respond to hunger signals and normally eat when they’re hungry and skip meals when they’re not.
We use cookies to improve your experience on our site. By using our site, you consent to cookies.
This website uses cookies
Websites store cookies to enhance functionality and personalise your experience. You can manage your preferences, but blocking some cookies may impact site performance and services.
Essential cookies enable basic functions and are necessary for the proper function of the website.
Name
Description
Duration
Cookie Preferences
This cookie is used to store the user's cookie consent preferences.
30 days
These cookies are needed for adding comments on this website.
Name
Description
Duration
comment_author_email
Used to track the user across multiple sessions.
Session
comment_author_url
Used to track the user across multiple sessions.
Session
comment_author
Used to track the user across multiple sessions.
Session
These cookies are used for managing login functionality on this website.
Name
Description
Duration
wordpress_logged_in
Used to store logged-in users.
Persistent
wordpress_sec
Used to track the user across multiple sessions.
15 days
wordpress_test_cookie
Used to determine if cookies are enabled.
Session
Statistics cookies collect information anonymously. This information helps us understand how visitors use our website.
Google Analytics is a powerful tool that tracks and analyzes website traffic for informed marketing decisions.
Contains information related to marketing campaigns of the user. These are shared with Google AdWords / Google Ads when the Google Ads and Google Analytics accounts are linked together.
90 days
__utma
ID used to identify users and sessions
2 years after last activity
__utmt
Used to monitor number of Google Analytics server requests
10 minutes
__utmb
Used to distinguish new sessions and visits. This cookie is set when the GA.js javascript library is loaded and there is no existing __utmb cookie. The cookie is updated every time data is sent to the Google Analytics server.
30 minutes after last activity
__utmc
Used only with old Urchin versions of Google Analytics and not with GA.js. Was used to distinguish between new sessions and visits at the end of a session.
End of session (browser)
__utmz
Contains information about the traffic source or campaign that directed user to the website. The cookie is set when the GA.js javascript is loaded and updated when data is sent to the Google Anaytics server
6 months after last activity
__utmv
Contains custom information set by the web developer via the _setCustomVar method in Google Analytics. This cookie is updated every time new data is sent to the Google Analytics server.
2 years after last activity
__utmx
Used to determine whether a user is included in an A / B or Multivariate test.
18 months
_ga
ID used to identify users
2 years
_gali
Used by Google Analytics to determine which links on a page are being clicked
30 seconds
_ga_
ID used to identify users
2 years
_gid
ID used to identify users for 24 hours after last activity
24 hours
_gat
Used to monitor number of Google Analytics server requests when using Google Tag Manager
1 minute
Clarity is a web analytics service that tracks and reports website traffic.
