Let me call your attention to an important study that looked at the Mediterranean (and MIND) diet and its impact on dementia. People who had the highest intake of green leafy vegetables—7 or more servings per week—had less Alzheimer’s brain pathology than those who ate only 1 or 2 servings weekly (Is this real; are there really people who only eat greens 7 times a week?)

How crazy is a view of nutrition that says eating greens every day is a “plant-based” diet? That’s what’s wrong with so-called “experts”, dieticians and nutritionists in the US; their view is so screwed up that they think not eating steak, eggs, burgers, ice cream, fries and cheese melt every meal is “plant-based” eating!

Ordinary people who rely on them for “expertise” have no chance of getting it right.

I’m referring now to a 2023 paper in the journal Neurology. In a nutshell, their “revelation” is that people who had the highest intake of green leafy vegetables — 7 or more servings per week — had less global Alzheimer’s pathology than those who ate only 1 or 2 servings weekly.

OK, interesting enough. But for neurologists they seem dumb to me. They talk about Alzheimer’s pathology and assume that beta-amyloid plaque, phosphorylated tau tangles, and neurofibrillary tangles are all markers of AD. That’s totally up to dispute: people with masses of plaque show no signs of dementia AND people with quite severe dementia reveal little or no amyloid-burden at autopsy. 

Indeed amyloid is present in normal healthy brains and so must serve some function, other than just to cause dementia! Importantly, severity of dementia correlates better with synaptic loss (loss of brain cell interconnections) and mitochondrial abnormalities than it does with amyloid deposition.¹

Like the “Big Bang” model for the origins of the universe, which is absurdly false and yet clung to by fake scientists who only care about their salaries, so too the amyloid build up model sticks like poo to a wooly blanket. It won’t go away. Nobody dares stand up and say, “What nonsense!”

What is known of course, is that tissue cleaning in the brain, the so-called glymph system (a concatenation of lymph for lymphatics and glial cells, which are the brain’s busy hygiene cleaners) is truly crucial. If that system underperforms or is blocked, there is toxic build up in the brain and that causes damage.

So the take-away from this study is about diet and nutrition, not poorly worked out models of pathology. If you eat well, exercise plenty, don’t smoke and practice the art of loving and caring, you’ll not likely experience any mental decline above the marginal slowing down, at non-pathological levels.

Everything else is pretty irrelevant. In fact this study compensated for almost everything: it controlled for age at death, sex, education, APOE4 gene status, and total calories. Findings persisted when adjusted further for physical activity, smoking, and vascular disease burden.

Conviviality Rules

The Mediterranean diet (MD) is considered one of the healthiest dietary patterns in the world because of its observed association with positive health outcomes. After more than half a century of research, the MD has been recognized by UNESCO as an intangible cultural heritage of humanity, including the dimension of shared meals or commensality in its definition as a symbol of cultural heritage.²

Two aspects that characterize the MD are “what” and “how” we eat. Typical researchers go for “what” and often entirely miss the “how” (what circumstances and surroundings). A great study published on in the National Library of Medicine made things pretty plain:

“Conviviality is the social component of eating involving the sharing of meals, also contributing to the associated health-promoting effects of this lifestyle. Conviviality is a feature in Mediterranean countries where family and food traditions are core activities.”

But researchers remarked, “As far as we know, conviviality has not been studied in the literature of Northern European and English-speaking countries.”³

See, not even considered! Yet it’s absolutely crucial, as my friend the late Stephen Sinatra and I have shared on occasions, when interviewed. 

Here’s the shocking part: it’s not so much about the food at all! It’s about loving family, camaraderie (human fellowship), relaxation and stress reduction at mealtimes. It’s modern science to think “stuff” and numbers (like quantities and percentages). But it’s muddle-headed. The REAL Mediterranean diet is more about immeasurable values, like togetherness and belonging, love and sharing, family values and great cooking!

Conviviality is more than a shared meal, because it relates to “how” we eat. The “how” involves socializing when eating and, as complementary aspects, self-awareness of satiety and hunger signals, eating slowly, and chewing well. Meal satisfaction is not only related to portion sizes or how much is eaten. The activity of cooking, conviviality, and the fact of sitting together to eat the same foods rather than just eating are very typical of the Mediterranean areas and are habits practiced on a daily basis.⁴

Put This In The Reverse

If we switch this around, we get a different perspective on the same phenomenon. People who are always in a hurry at meals, can’t wait to leave friends behind and dash off to some work assignment or another are leading a very unhealthy lifestyle, NO MATTER WHAT THEY EAT.

Similarly, a life of loneliness, disconnection or emotional coldness we know shortens life.

According to new research, people who eat most of their meals alone may be at increased risk for heart disease and diabetes. Men who dined solo at least twice a day were more likely to have metabolic syndrome—a cluster of three or more risk factors including high blood pressure, high cholesterol and prediabetes—compared to those who always dined with others.

In their paper, published in Obesity Research & Clinical Practice, the study authors note that families in many regions of the world have become smaller in recent decades, and there are also more one-person households. “At the same time, eating patterns have become irregular, informal, and individualized in the form of more eating alone,” they write.⁵

The REAL Mediterranean Diet

The Mediterranean diet includes plenty of fruit and veg, salads, and olive oil. But Mediterraneans also eat meat, fish and fowl. They are NOT vegetarians, much less vegans (duh!)

They also drink quite naughty amounts of wine, which US puritanical “researchers” often forget to mention. They try to pretend it’s irrelevant or just an add-on. But wine is a crucial part of the so-called Mediterranean diet. The vast majority of adults in the region drink wine.

It’s not just about catechins and resveratrol either. The Italians have a saying “A day without wine is a day without sunshine.” That sums it up. Wine brings conviviality. The famous Roseto group which came to prominence as part of the Framingham study was all about finding the Italians who lived exclusively in that town (Roseto, Pennsylvania) were a full-on community. Everyone knew everyone else. The family bonds were immensely strong and the food—of course—was as good as it gets back home.

As a result of their strong sense of being together, males experienced HALF the national rate of heart attacks. They brought the Mediterranean world with them… and it wasn’t the pasta that kept them healthy!

¡Salud! Santé! Cin cin! Saúde! Yamas! Sher-i-feh! (Turkish)

To your good health,

Prof. Keith Scott-Mumby
The Official Alternative Doctor      Dementia

Source Notes: Agarwal P, et al “Association of Mediterranean-DASH intervention for neurodegenerative delay and Mediterranean diets with Alzheimer disease pathology” Neurology 2023; DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000207176.

References:

1. Struble, Robert G. et al. ‘Is Brain Amyloid Production a Cause or a Result of Dementia of The Alzheimer’s Type?’ 1 Jan. 2010 : 393 – 399
2. Saulle R., La Torre G. The Mediterranean Diet, Recognized by UNESCO as a Cultural Heritage of Humanity. Ital. J. Public Health. 2010;7:414–415. doi: 10.2427/5700
3. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Mar; 18(5): 2499. Published online 2021 Mar 3. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18052499
4. Morin H.K. The Mediterranean Diet: A Family Affair. Am. J. Matern. Child. Nurs. 2010;35:238. doi: 10.1097/NMC.0b013e3181dd7ef9
5. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1871403X17300960

None of the stupid pharma formulations used to “treat” dementia have anywhere close to this effect! Here’s a summary of the dubious 2 – 3% benefits of Aricept (donepezil): people with mild, moderate or severe dementia due to Alzheimer’s disease treated for periods of 12 or 24 weeks with donepezil experience small benefits in cognitive function, activities of daily living and clinician-rated global clinical state. Benefits on 23 mg/day were no greater than on 10 mg/day, and benefits on the 10 mg/day dose were only marginally larger than on the 5 mg/day dose.

“Small benefits”? “No greater”, “only marginally”? In other words, drugs for Alzheimer’s are rubbish. 

So we all take vitamin D, we’ll all be happier and healthier and see little or no cognitive decline, and no need for drugs, right?

Not so fast buddy. Then along comes the “science”!

Simple revealing facts like these do not suit current “science” which has a financial agenda. It’s very inconvenient to the big shots who really count in life (Big Pharma executives, government shills and self-serving medical “experts”, who don’t want to be found WRONG).

So they waded in and tried to trash this important study, which tells us what we already know: vitamin D has profound effects on brain viability and function. See, vitamin D is not just about rickets and bone strength. Vitamin D has its fingers in just about EVERYTHING!

According to a 2014 study: “Vitamin D is an important calcium-regulating hormone with diverse functions in numerous tissues, including the brain. Increasing evidence suggests that vitamin D may play a role in maintaining cognitive function and that vitamin D deficiency may accelerate age-related cognitive decline.”

Inadequate vitamin D status also correlates with a greater risk for cognitive decline in the elderly, suggesting that optimal levels may promote healthy brain aging.¹ 

Researchers have theorized that, because the brain expresses vitamin D receptors (VDRs) and can synthesize the active form of the hormone, the possible cognitive enhancing effects of vitamin D may reflect a primary action in the brain rather than just a result of secondary health effects.² 

Indeed, showers of studies have shown that vitamin D, as well as the biologically active form of the hormone, 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D, has direct neuroprotective actions and can reduce some biomarkers of brain aging.³

So the shills have a struggle here. They still try and discredit studies which show this effect but the evidence is against them.

Not that mere details stop arch-shill Claire Sexton, DPhil, senior director of scientific programs and outreach at the Alzheimer’s Association in Chicago, from pronouncing vitamin D has no place: “It is not recommended to start vitamin D supplementation to reduce dementia risk,” she told MedPage Today. 

“It is important to note that this study is an observational study, not an intervention, so it cannot establish causation,” she points out. But there are hundreds of other studies which DO, and she ignores those.

Of course orthodox doctors are happy to use an observational when it supports their theories; only when it supports the natural view of things and non-therapy treatments do they get ratty. 

“Also, a significant limitation to the study is that neither vitamin D levels at baseline and follow-up, nor dose and duration of supplementation, were available or analyzed,” she added (as if how long they took supplements was even relevant).

Whatever the length of time participants took vitamin D should not matter, if it’s just a non-causal effect. You don’t have to know how much aspirin patients took, if it has been shown that taking aspirin relieves pain! Duh!

Then Sexton comes up with the classic line: ” …further research is needed in this area.” That’s what they say when they want people to believe the research isn’t conclusive!

To understand this drivel, you need to keep in mind that the Alzheimer’s Association DOES NOT WANT SUCCESSFUL THERAPIES. The Alzheimer’s Association is a font group for Big Pharma, there to push pharmaceutical “solutions”, even when they don’t work.

Even more than that; they are there to trash safe and effective alternatives which would compete with their lucrative market share. I have written before that in 2003 I was scheduled to deliver a talk to the Alzheimer’s Association in Colombo, Sri Lanka (I lived in Colombo at the time). I was to talk about diet and nutrition and natural supplements as a means of blocking or delaying dementia, something very important to a poor country, with an aging population.

But my talk was pulled at the last minute by the US head office. They want to go on exploiting this tiny country, with few or no resources, and nothing must override their message, which is that drugs for Alzheimer’s are totally effective and natural solutions don’t work, so you’d better pay up, or else.

So, for us live-forever Boomers, this latest study showed: five-year dementia-free survival was 83.6% for those exposed to vitamin D and 68.4% for the non-exposed group. That’s a huge difference.

And let me say I find it strange language to talk about people being “exposed” to vitamin D levels. It’s like they are trying to position it as a pathogen or toxin!

But get this: Vitamin D is known to participate in the clearance of amyloid beta (A?) aggregates, one of the hallmarks of Alzheimer’s disease (AD), and may provide neuroprotection against A?-induced tau protein (hyperphosphorylation). Low levels of serum vitamin D have been associated with a greater risk of dementia and AD.⁵

Just boil it down to the essentials: you and me, us older folk, need to ramp up our vitamin D intake; it’s definitely neuroprotective and we need to look after our aging brains.

DECLINE IS NOT INEVITABLE. Hundreds of thousands of centenarians are sharp mentally. But inadequate nutrition is the clear factor which separates “aging” from old-age vitality and living fun, not a meds-deficiency!

How Much? I think 5,000 IU daily is perfectly adequate. More is not necessarily better. Hey, vitamin D is dirt cheap. Yahey! So do not let yourself become deficient.

Love to All,
Prof. Keith Scott-Mumby
The Official Alternative Doctor

Notes:

1. The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), September 29, 2014. 111 (41) E4359-E4366 https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1404477111
2. WE Stumpf, LP O’Brien, 1,25 (OH)2 vitamin D3 sites of action in the brain. An autoradiographic study. Histochemistry 87, 393–406 (1987)] and [E Garcion, N Wion-Barbot, CN Montero-Menei, F Berger, D Wion, New clues about vitamin D functions in the nervous system. Trends Endocrinol Metab 13, 100–105 (2002)
3. ibid.
4. The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), September 29, 2014. 111 (41) E4359-E4366 https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1404477111.
5. Ghahremani M, et al “Vitamin D supplementation and incident dementia: Effects of sex, APOE, and baseline cognitive status” Alzheimer’s Dement 2023; DOI: 10.1002/dad2.12404.

Some social scientists say the analysis is fundamentally flawed and reflects poorly on an organization that champions scientific rigor. How ironic! Social scientists who do surveys for a living say the data don’t pass the smell test (data is plural, remember).

“They are flawed at the most basic level,” says Michael Heaney, a political scientist at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor. “If a student in an introductory statistics class had asked me if they could do this, my answer would have been ‘no.'”¹

Yet they expect us to go on believing facts and figures “because it’s science” and promote the view that only kooks, crooks and idiots don’t bow down to science.

The organizers of the march missed a major point, which is that science today is riddled with fraud, fake data, plagiarism, manipulation of “facts”, and is very far from trustworthy. How is anyone to TRUST science, when fraud has reached rock and roll proportions?

According to professor John Ioannidis at Stanford, who has made himself very unpopular by being frank about baloney science: There is increasing concern that in modern research, false findings may be the majority or even the vast majority of published research claims. However, this should not be surprising. It can be proven that most claimed research findings are false.²

That’s telling ‘em!

Doctored Images in Alzheimer’s Research?

One of the latest scandals to surface is that of faking or doctoring up images with Photoshop.

Matthew Schrag, MD, PhD, neuroscientist, physician and part-time snoop at Vanderbilt, unearthed serious problems with research on a protein subtype of amyloid beta that has been a cornerstone of research and spending on Alzheimer’s for over a decade.

He found that images accompanying highly cited Alzheimer’s studies touting major breakthroughs for the field were very plausibly altered. Using the online platform PubPeer, where scientists flag mistakes in research, Schrag stumbled upon comments on articles published by research-leader Sylvain Lesné, PhD, of the University of Minnesota.

Western blot (protein images) from the articles showed bands of molecules separated by size, but Schrag was able to point to many cases where parts of these bands appear to have been copied and pasted, calling into question the supposed findings.

Smirking Lesné is actually a conman who cheated Alzheimer’s patients

One of Lesné’s papers, published in Nature, has been cited 2,300 times, and related NIH funding for related oligomer and Alzheimer’s research grew to $287 million. Lesné and the lab where he worked won accolades: awards, grants, and prominence. But it was all a scam.³

“You can cheat to get a paper. You can cheat to get a degree. You can cheat to get a grant. You can’t cheat to cure a disease,” Schrag told Science Magazine. “Biology doesn’t care.”

Of course the pharmaceutical industry WELCOMES science fraud; they depend on it! It’s often the only way they can put together a story.

Researchers get into the faking game, because they get bigger and BIGGER grants! They get prizes and prestige.

But what about the Alzheimer’s patients, led up the garden path and then stranded—because the research was faked? Do they not count as a voice?

Fake Data, Plagiarism Detected at Cancer Lab

Nature journal has learned that Ohio State University’s inquiries into papers from the lab of superstar cancer researcher Carlo Croce, MD, proceeded to formal investigations—and two of these discovered multiple instances of research misconduct.

In particular, the investigations found evidence of data falsification and plagiarism by women scientists under Croce, Michela Garofalo and Flavia Pichiorri, both of whom have since left the university.

Pichiorri was found to have falsified research data nine times in three papers, and the university’s investigation committee found 11 instances where Garofalo had plagiarized and falsified images in 8 papers.

Naughty girls. But of course both researchers defended their work. Pichiorri said she was overwhelmed with pressure from Croce and the lab, and had limited imaging skills. Garofalo said she didn’t understand what plagiarism was (lying bitch), and that image flaws didn’t affect the research outcomes (idiot or crook!)

Nature also found that OSU instructed Croce and his former researchers to retract or correct more than a dozen problematic papers. But only one of the 15 papers, which had false data and other mistakes, has been retracted, and two corrected.

Croce, for his part, is suing the university, whose committee said the lab environment Croce had created was inadequate, and that he had “poor mentorship and lack of oversight,” Nature reported.⁴

One Of The Biggest Fraudster Of Modern Times

Between 1996 and 2013, Yoshihiro Sato, a Japanese bone-health researcher plagiarized work, fabricated data and forged authorships — prompting retractions of more than 60 studies in the scholarly literature so far.

Andrew Grey and colleagues at the University of Auckland in New Zealand and the University of Aberdeen, UK, are among the researchers who have raised concerns about Sato’s work over the past decade or so.

Grey has spent years in efforts to clean up Sato’s literature, and presented its analysis of the inquiries conducted by four universities in Japan and the United States ensnared in the scandal (the team published its analysis of three investigations in a paper in February1).

Grey says their findings provide evidence to support a growing view in the academic community: that university investigations into research misconduct are often inadequate, opaque and poorly conducted.

In other words, major institutions are more interested in protecting their name than they are in the search for truth and integrity.

Policing The Guardians

C. K. Gunsalus, a specialist in research integrity at the University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign, has had a hand in creating a 26-point checklist that university officials can use to guide probes into research misconduct, which Grey’s team used to rate the investigations.

Her checklist questions the investigation’s scope, reliability and impact — for instance, whether the investigating committee included external members and whether evidence could have been tampered with. Grey’s team independently assessed each reported investigation this checklist; for example, one report had addressed none of the points adequately and two others properly addressed only two or three points.

“Overall, each report was considered unacceptable,” said Grey and colleagues.

But Japanese medical researcher Yoshitaka Fujii has been discredited as a “world record” holder for data falsification and fabrication, having no less than 183 publications retracted from different journals.

Yoshitaka Fujii, labeled as “The Great Pretender”

The damage to scientific credibility from such behaviors cannot be overestimated. Even I, a stickler for science, am now endlessly skeptical about modern research and find it difficult to take it seriously.

But the shocking part of these scandals is the slovenly and seemingly-uninterested way that misconduct is investigated by the relevant universities and hospitals. It seems that authorities are so embarrassed by cheating and fraud, they would rather cover it up than clean it up!

But even journals too were reluctant to admit their failures in publishing flawed data and, inevitably, exposing them to criticism of their peer review process.⁵

So when someone goes on the march “in support of science”, I wonder why such marches are necessary. The incorruptibility of science should be a given. If it’s not, then a healthy skepticism I would say is normal and to be expected!

That’s not being “anti-science”, it’s being PRO-science, surely?

To your good health,

Prof. Keith Scott-Mumby
The Official Alternative Doctor

References:

1. https://www.science.org/content/article/got-data-survey-2017-march-science-doesn-t-make-grade

2. Ioannidis JPA (2005) Why Most Published Research Findings Are False. PLoS Med 2(8): e124. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124

3. Lesné, S., Koh, M., Kotilinek, L. et al. A specific amyloid-? protein assembly in the brain impairs memory. Nature 440, 352–357 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04533

4. MedPage Today July 27, 2022

5. Nature 570, 287-288 (2019)

Trace chemicals in your environment can damage brain function.  Over the years, I’ve had quite a few patient stories that unequivocally prove what was initially a theory I felt strongly about.

• A patient who entered a carpet store and became quite incapacitated mentally within a few minutes (chemicals in color printing, color fast processing, and flame retardant compounds).
• A patient who struggled when she walked into clothing stores – unable to remember what she’d gone in for almost instantly (formaldehyde-based treatments on clothing).

At the time, colleagues attacked me for what they called “nonsensical” ideas.  Ambient chemicals were “safe” because there was no science proving they were not.

[Many doctors cannot, or will not, think for themselves.  They want “the establishment” to tell them what to think.]

Then, toward the end of the 1990s, the UK Chief Medical Officer (equivalent to the US Surgeon General) issued a directive that chemicals could highly sensitize individuals to allergies.

It was slow but painful progress.  There’s an old joke about the four stages involved in how something is eventually accepted in the medical community…

• You must be mad (or “it’s a fraud”).
• There might be something in it.
• There might be something in it, but where’s the proof?
• We knew that all along.

In regard to chemical overload, we are (finally) at stage 4.  Studies are hammering home what I was criticized for saying over 30 years ago.

The primary cause of Alzheimer’s (and many other diseases) is the chemical blizzard those of us living in the modern world are enduring.

A study published in the journal Neurology showed that intense workplace exposure to chemical solvents may lead to cognitive impairment and it doesn’t diminish over time.

Researchers tested psychomotor speed, semantic fluency, immediate recall, and executive function in men and found major deficits – even decades after their exposure to solvents had stopped.  Until this study, it had been “assumed” (another type of nutty science thinking) that solvents only cause problems in the short and medium term.

Nobody asked the chemical victims.

The lead author, Erika L. Sabbath, ScD, research fellow, Harvard School of Public Health, is reported as saying, “Our study shows that the effects last into retirement, when we know that the person was not exposed anymore, and that if the exposure was high, the effects can last for 30 to 50 years after the last exposure in the workplace.”

This was all enabled by striking data from France’s utility company GAZEL (gas and electricity), which had kept meticulous records.  Researchers were able to analyze the cases of 2143 men (average age, 66 years) who had been retired for about 10 years.

In their working lives, the men had significant exposure to chlorinated solvents, petroleum solvents, benzene solvents, and non-benzene aromatic solvents.

The analysis found that about 33% of the retirees had been exposed to chlorinated solvents, 26% to benzene, and 25% to petroleum solvents. Twelve percent had been highly exposed to 1 solvent type and 11% to 2 or 3 types.  Researchers found a massive correlation between chemical exposure and severity of dementia.

Dementia is one of the two main exits most humans fear (cancer is the other).

Lifestyle and diet changes are not enough. You need to be fully aware of the risks of today’s toxic chemical overload.  It is being systematically connected – not just as a cause of Alzheimer’s – to many diseases and conditions that plague us.

Back in the 1980s, chemical overload mainly affected individuals who were particularly sensitive to these chemical toxins.  In my book, I called them “human canaries.”  In the mines years ago, a canary acting sick (or dropping dead) was a sign for humans to get out, quickly.

I wrote, “It seems to me we have a lot of human canaries! We must start paying attention to the problem.  Sooner or later it will make us all sick.”

To enjoy a good healthy old age, with all your faculties, you need to do something about the chemicals in your environment.

It’s not just urban areas, in case you’re thinking you’ll retire to the country.  I lived briefly in Davis, California.  It’s a large agricultural community.  My wife and I were constantly troubled by crop spraying.  We’d dodge down side roads when the planes flew over to avoid getting pesticides dumped fully on our vehicle.  We moved within 8 months.

IT’S REALLY BAD OUT THERE.

The world has gone crazy and corporations are dumping millions of tons of toxic chemicals into the environment. Don’t listen to the propaganda from chemical companies about “responsible use” because there is no such thing. Everything dumped on the soil is still there, added to the year before, and the year before that…

It’s cumulative and it isn’t slowing down.  For every chemical prohibited, a hundred more “safe” versions are put into circulation – only to cause even more problems down the line.

Chemical overload of your air, water, and soil is the primary cause of Alzheimer’s, cancer, behavioral disorders, and autoimmune disease.

Lower Your Exposure To Dangerous Toxins

It’s time to start doing what you can to avoid these damaging toxins wherever possible.  Rinse your produce, choose organic when you can, and get rid of the toxins inside your home that you have control over.  Read your labels and do your research on what you’re eating or using on your skin!

If something isn’t done about the chemical blizzard, we’re all going to end up being “human canaries” and we won’t make it out of the contaminated mine alive.

REFERENCES

https://www.allergycosmos.co.uk/mcs/

https://www.nhs.uk/news/lifestyle-and-exercise/millions-allergic-to-their-own-home-says-charity/

https://www.aan.com/PressRoom/Home/PressRelease/1285

Statin Drugs Defined

Any pharmaceutical drug that artificially lowers low-density lipoprotein (LDL) – or what is referred to as “bad” cholesterol – is classified as a statin.  These drugs block the production of cholesterol in the liver and lower how much is pumping through your blood.

You probably see commercials on television about the importance of lowering your cholesterol with the use of statin drugs such as Lipitor and Crestor.  The companies that make these drugs make tens of billions in sales annually because more than 32 million adults in the United States are currently taking a statin prescription.

The Complexity and Confusion about Cholesterol

Artificially inhibiting the production of cholesterol in your body affects every single cell because you need cholesterol to live.  It is an essential building block that your body uses to produce the cell membranes, vitamin D, hormones, and the bile you need to digest fat.

Without it, your brain (which contains 25% of the cholesterol inside you) begins to starve.

The Dangers of Statins – Proven Side Effects

• Pains and spasms in muscles, joints, and tendons
• Digestive problems
• Dysfunction with sleep patterns
• Kidney distress
• Liver distress
• Type 2 diabetes and insulin resistance
• Decrease in muscle mass
• Sexual dysfunction
• Changes in mood
• Weakness and fatigue due to interference in CoQ10 production
• Inability to concentrate or decreased cognition

All of these side effects have been proven by scientific research that spans more than 900 studies.  How does the organization that is supposed to monitor drugs to assure their safety in the United States respond to these potentially deadly side effects?

In an unhelpful report from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the proven side effects that include damage to muscles, liver, kidneys, and more are considered “rare,” “mild,” and “small.”  They aren’t even concerned about the increasing reports of statins on memory loss, cognitive impairment, and brain fog!

After all, they looked at all the data…

“[The] FDA has been investigating reports of cognitive impairment from statin use for several years.  The reports about memory loss, forgetfulness, and confusion span all statin products and all age groups.  In general, the symptoms were not serious and were reversible within a few weeks after the patient stopped using the statin.  Some people affected in this way had been taking the medicine for a day; others had been taking it for years.”

The phrase “in general” makes me livid because that means there are people who have had serious cognitive side effects that were not reversible.

They then advise that if you fear statin use might be affecting your brain function, you should, “Talk to your health care professional.  Don’t stop taking the medication; the consequences to your heart could be far greater.”

Statins are hailed as the savior from heart disease yet one of the most commonly reported side effects of their use is damage to muscles.  Your heart is a muscle!  Take a second to consider what that means.  You’re being prescribed a drug to protect your heart that could end up damaging your heart.

The FDA changed the labeling instructions for statin drugs, which has done nothing to slow down how often they are prescribed.

Let’s pretend for a moment that the dangers of statins are worth it because they are helping your heart (they aren’t).  What good is your heart without your brain functioning properly?  What sort of quality of life does that leave you?

New Data about Statins and Memory Loss

In the United Kingdom, researchers with University of Bristol found that statins impaired laboratory rats’ ability to learn, recognize tasks and objects they previously encountered, and perform simple functions.

There have been several studies (one from the Mayo Clinic) that found elderly with highest levels of cholesterol have the lowest risk for dementia and other neurodegenerative diseases.  They also advise that patients considering a statin drug “weigh the benefits and risks.”

The bottom line is that statins are prescribed for one reason – to lower your cholesterol.  This is a compound you need to survive (especially your brain) so this causes a negative chain reaction inside your body.  Worse, it isn’t going to help your heart anyway!

Raise HDL and Lower LDL Naturally

Cholesterol was touted as the “bad guy” in the pursuit of good health.  The medical community laid all the blame for heart disease at its feet and told you to banish it from your diet.

Time has proven that their theories were wrong!

Stripping cholesterol from our diets did nothing to remove heart disease as the #1 killer in the world.  Hand in hand, cancer, obesity, diabetes, and decline in brain function have also risen.

Stop starving your body and your brain!  Eat the foods that feed every cell and deliver an abundance of nutrition.

Best Sources for “Good” Cholesterol

• Fatty fish and fish oils
• Nuts and seeds
• Olive and coconut oil
• Organic beef, poultry, and dairy products
• Eggs (the whole thing!)
• Avocados

Get off the “whole grain” merry-go-round because it’s a myth!  Lose those ridiculous amounts of carbs and sugars from your diet and replace them with fruits, vegetables, and healthy fats.

It isn’t all about food and we both know that, don’t we?  You have to exercise, quit smoking, get plenty of rest, and lower your stress.  Cut the use of statins and memory loss risk is a bit lower.

The real key to a healthy heart and a strong brain is taking control (and being accountable) for your choices.  Knowing that there are no “easy” fixes.

There is no miracle drug (including dangerous statins) that will keep you looking, feeling, and thinking younger for the rest of your life.

It takes work and commitment.  Start today!

For a number of years now I’ve been writing that Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) is most likely an infection. As with any function of the immune system, poor nutrition will have an impact, so some evidence will suggest that certain supplements are beneficial, even if AD turns out to be the result of an infectious pathogen.

But the infectious origin of AD is gaining a lot of traction lately. You probably read a week or two back that gum infections have been found to be statistically significant. The finger has been pointed at a toxic oral microbe called Porphyromonas gingivalis. I doubt it will be the only contender.

In 2017, Dr. Leslie Norins launched Alzheimer’s Germ Quest Inc., a public benefit corporation he hopes will drive interest to the germ theory of Alzheimer’s, and through which a prize of $1million will be distributed. A white paper he penned for the site reads: “From a two-year review of the scientific literature, I believe it’s now clear that just one germ—identity not yet specified, and possibly not yet discovered—causes most AD. I’m calling it the ‘Alzheimer’s Germ.'”

Leslie Norins

Now he’s gone further and Norins says he is willing to hand over $1 million of his own money to anyone who can clarify something: Is Alzheimer disease, the most common form of dementia worldwide, caused by a germ?

By “germ,” he means microbes like bacteria, viruses, fungi, and parasites. In other words, Norins, a physician-turned-publisher, wants to know whether Alzheimer’s is caused by an infectious agent.

Historic

It’s not a new idea. Far from it. Even early 20th century Czech physician Oskar Fischer—who, along with his German contemporary Dr Alois Alzheimer, was integral in first describing the condition—noted a possible connection between the newly identified dementia and tuberculosis.

The evidence that AD is microbe-related has always been there. A 2010 study published in the Journal of Neurosurgery showed that neurosurgeons die from Alzheimer’s at a rate nearly 2.5 times higher than that of the general population.1

How can that be?

Another study from 2010, published in the Journal of the American Geriatric Society, found that people whose spouses have dementia are at a 1.6 times greater risk for the condition themselves.2

It certainly suggests they are “catching” AD.

Yet another study published in Neuron in July suggests that viral infection can influence the progression of Alzheimer’s. Led by Mount Sinai genetics professor Joel Dudley, the work was intended to compare the genomes of healthy brain tissue with those affected by dementia.3

But something kept getting in the way: herpes.

Dudley’s team noticed an unexpectedly high level of viral DNA from two human herpes viruses, HHV-6 and HHV-7. The viruses are common and cause a rash called roseola in young children (not the sexually transmitted disease caused by other strains).

Now this is where American scientists try to pretend everything is their idea. The article I was reading in Medscape made no mention whatever of other researchers. Yet in 2016 I published a newsletter on the British work on this topic, notably the research of Ruth Itzhaki, professor emeritus of molecular neurobiology at Britain’s University of Manchester (where I qualified in medicine!)

Ruth’s research goes back to 1991 (long before Norrins started to get a bee in his bonnet). In fact Dr Itzhaki has probably already earned his million dollars!

In 1997, she came out strongly in favor of the hypothesis that microbes may play a much bigger role in AD than suspected. She and her team named herpes simplex virus Type 1 (HSV-1), Chlamydia pneumoniae and spirochetes. The spirochetes are the spiraling ones that include those bacteria responsible for syphilis (Treponema pallidum) and Lyme disease (Borrelia bugdorferi).

Herpes The Lead Contender

But for Alzheimer’s, HSV-1 could be especially significant. Itzhaki has found that elderly people who carried both HSV-1 in the brain and the e-4 subtype of the APOE gene (responsible for creating a protein that helps transport cholesterol throughout the body) were 12 times more likely to develop Alzheimer’s than people without either. In a 1997 paper in The Lancet, Itzhaki’s group concluded that HSV-1 infection, in conjunction with APOE-e4, could account for about 60 percent of the Alzheimer’s cases they studied. Due to limited funds, however, her group was able to study only a relatively low number of cases.4

Some viruses have the ability to lie dormant in our neurons for decades by incorporating their genomes into our own. The classic example is chickenpox: A childhood viral infection resolves and lurks silently, returning years later as shingles, an excruciating rash. Like it or not, nearly all of us are chimeras with viral DNA speckling our genomes.

But having the herpes viruses alone doesn’t spell inevitable brain decline. After all, up to 75% of us may harbor HHV-6.5

The current obsession of doctors and Big Pharma for AD is the characteristic accumulation of a protein called amyloid in the brain. It’s supposed to be the “cause” of Alzheimer’s but that such “yesterday’s science”, no intelligent scientists would accept it as causative, or even crucial. People can have amyloid and no AD and people can have AD and no amyloid plaques! Go figure.

Maybe the amyloid is just a reaction to the infection that is the real cause of AD? Harvard neuroscientist Rudolph Tanzi suggests that it might be so.6 Along with colleague Robert Moir, Tanzi has shown that amyloid is lethal to viruses and bacteria in the test tube and also in mice. He now believes that the protein is part of our ancient immune system that, like antibodies, ramps up its activity to help fend off unwanted bugs.

On this model, microbes are probably the initial seed that sets off a toxic tumble of molecular dominoes. Early in the disease process, amyloid protein builds up to fight infection, yet too much of the protein begins to impair function of neurons in the brain. The excess amyloid then causes another protein, tau, to form tangles, which further harm brain cells.

But as Tanzi explains, the ultimate neurologic insult in Alzheimer’s is the body’s reaction to this neurotoxic mess. All of the excess protein revs up the immune system, causing inflammation and it’s this that does the most damage to the brain in AD.

So, as I have been telling you for years, you need your immune-enhancers and anti-inflammatories to fight AD: omega-3s, beta-glucans, curcumin, eupatorium and vitamin D.

And don’t forget homeopathy. As I said in a 2016 piece, one of the most devastating outbreaks of disease in history was the 1918 “Spanish Flu” Pandemic. Over a billion people were affected. Nobody knows the exact death toll but estimates put it around 40 – 50 million (perhaps as high as 100 million).

While the mortality rate of people treated with traditional medicine and drugs was 28%, those treated by homeopathic physicians had mortality rate of 1%.

Make no mistake: homeopathy works, despite the derisive bleatings of the ignorant mob. But it is not a simple skill. You need a GOOD homeopath.

Meanwhile, Big Pharma is on a stampede to find any scientific justification for drug treatments of AD. The money they will make for them is a wet dream.

At the very least, antimicrobials are just around the corner.

Look after your little grey cells!

Prof. Keith

References:

Original source article: https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/904650_1

1. Lollis SS, Valdes PA, Li Z, et al. Cause-specific mortality among neurosurgeons. J Neurosurg. 2010;113:474-478
2. Norton MC, Smith KR, Østbye T. Greater risk of dementia when spouse has dementia? The Cache County study. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2010;58:895-900
3. Readhead B, Haure-Mirande JV, Funk CC. Multiscale analysis of independent Alzheimer’s cohorts finds disruption of molecular, genetic, and clinical networks by human herpesvirus. Neuron. 2018;99:64-82.e7
4. The Lancet, Volume 349, No. 9047, p241–244, 25 January 1997
5. Chan PK, Ng HK, Hui M, Cheng AF. Prevalence and distribution of human herpesvirus 6 variants A and B in adult human brain. J Med Virol. 2001;64:42-46
6. Elmer WA, Kumar DK, Shanmugam NK, et al. Alzheimer’s disease-associated ?-amyloid is rapidly seeded by herpesviridae to protect against brain infection. Neuron. 2018;99:56-63.e3