Post by NFA on Mar 15, 2023 18:30:43 GMT 8
By Ben Bartee 7:08 PM on March 14, 2023
Surely to the chagrin of anti-vitamin D “brought to you by Pfizer” jihadists like CNN, more evidence mounts that increasing your vitamin D levels might be the single most effective strategy for longevity and quality of life.
Via research published by the Alzheimer’s Association:
In this longitudinal study of dementia-free NACC participants, exposure to vitamin D was associated with higher dementia-free survival and lower dementia incidence rates over 10 years. These findings were consistent across each vitamin D formulation: calcium–vitamin D, cholecalciferol, and ergocalciferol. Interaction analyses revealed that while exposure to vitamin D was associated with lower dementia incidence across all strata of sex, cognitive diagnosis, and APOE ε4 status, the rates were lower in females versus males, NC versus MCI, and APOE ε4 non-carriers versus carriers…
Vitamin D exposure was associated with 40% lower dementia incidence versus no exposure.
Vitamin D exposure was associated with 40% lower dementia incidence versus no exposure.
The large-scale study (with over 12,000 participants) spanned ten years — so there’s lots of data over a lengthy time frame that the corporate media is going to have a hard time refuting. In the conclusion, the researchers implored the scientific community to build upon their findings in future research, with more specific analysis of the intriguing differences in the dementia-fighting benefits of vitamin D by sex (women experienced a greater benefit than men).
Given these impressive results — along with numerous other proven benefits of vitamin D supplementation such as stronger bones, enhanced immunity (including against COVID-19), and more — one must wonder what leads the New York Times to declare that “there’s really not much data at all to support the use of most supplements to prevent illness or to boost your immunity.”
Why would Steven Salzberg, professor of biomedical engineering at Johns Hopkins, pen a column in Forbes literally titled “Stop Taking Vitamin D Already!” in which he presents a slanted, cherry-picked case against the essential nutrient? That seems ironically unethical.
Of course, the obvious answer is that vitamin D, which cannot be patented, is serious competition for extremely profitable and less efficacious drugs developed by Big Pharma, which itself sponsors corporate media. If a similarly designed, rigorous study showed one of Pfizer’s products to achieve a 40% reduction in Alzheimer’s risk, it would be frontpage news for months.
Given these impressive results — along with numerous other proven benefits of vitamin D supplementation such as stronger bones, enhanced immunity (including against COVID-19), and more — one must wonder what leads the New York Times to declare that “there’s really not much data at all to support the use of most supplements to prevent illness or to boost your immunity.”
Why would Steven Salzberg, professor of biomedical engineering at Johns Hopkins, pen a column in Forbes literally titled “Stop Taking Vitamin D Already!” in which he presents a slanted, cherry-picked case against the essential nutrient? That seems ironically unethical.
Of course, the obvious answer is that vitamin D, which cannot be patented, is serious competition for extremely profitable and less efficacious drugs developed by Big Pharma, which itself sponsors corporate media. If a similarly designed, rigorous study showed one of Pfizer’s products to achieve a 40% reduction in Alzheimer’s risk, it would be frontpage news for months.
By now, most of us have seen the “brought to you by Pfizer montage,” but let’s beat that dead horse once more:
When you consume the content disseminated by these media outlets, you are absorbing propaganda. Understanding the nature of the beast and the interests these organizations serve is critical to lifting the veil of authority that these groups deceptively wear to conceal their hidden agendas.