It’s an outrage. You’ll be hearing howls of protest from many sources over the internet. And rightly so. It’s an attack on science. Sadly these are much on the increase.
In 2022 I already wrote up in some detail the scurrilous attack on Dr. Paul E. Marik1. Paul Marik, just to remind you, pioneered large-dose IV vitamin C infusions to save the lives of patients succumbing to dangerous sepsis (septicemia, as it’s known in Europe and the UK). Here’s what I said…
“Infamous Vitamin C Study May Rely on Fraudulent Data” screamed the headlines around the world. Note the word “may” have been. The author of this attack produces no actual evidence. Just a “claim” that there must be false data.
The vitamin C study was in no way “infamous”, it was well presented (better than 90% of Big Pharma “studies”), with startling results that vitamin C was capable of saving millions of lives in cases of sepsis, which of course most doctors would find silly beyond belief. But that doesn’t make it infamous! Once upon a time, virtually all doctors would have found the idea of anesthesia silly beyond belief. But it came, it stayed, and is now a fact of civilized medicine.
Anesthesia was fought (tooth and nail), antiseptic technique in operations (Joseph Lister, who gave his name to Listerine) and even just washing of hands (Ignaz Semmelweis). Every step forward in medicine has been fought tooth and nail. Nothing much changes, does it?
So along comes Kyle Sheldrick, MBBS, Australian statistician and master con-man, who is “completing his PhD” at the University of New South Wales (Just a student then). According to Sheldrick, the data underpinning Marik’s study may be fraudulent because, as this shill alleges, the pre- and post- comparison groups involved in the 94-patient study were too similar to be realistic (notice again, that word “may”). That’s what you say when you’ve NO PROOF but want to bring somebody down.
Worse than that: there is not even a published scientific paper to back up his accusations: Sheldrick chose to just go to the press and social media to attack and slander a very good doctor.
“This is extreme,” Sheldrick told MedPage Today in an interview. “This is probably the most obviously fake data I have seen. These groups are more similar than would be probable.”
More similar than would be probable? Probable: that’s “extreme fraud”? I don’t think so.
The truth is, sadly, there is no depths to which the scumbags who back up Big Pharma will not sink; there is no criminality or depravity to which those who suck up to money and repute will not stoop.
This anti-humanist liar claims the data showing vitamin C to be a life saver “must have been fabricated” because the result of using vitamin C were too good to be believable. That’s just opinion. Spiteful opinion.
He produces no evidence whatever of fraud in the original study (how could he, there was no fraud?) Yet yaps his crooked mouth off saying that what he calls “PROOF” that the data was faked is that vitamin C could not have been so effective. Say what?
Science By Press Release
Now the AMA is trying its hand at side-stepping the niceties of science too, “science by press release” I call it. They too have obviously grasped that you can damage anything or anybody, without any proof, just by issuing a loaded press release.
On March 18, 2024, the AMA made a claim that intermittent fasting is dangerous! As an aside, I have written often that hummingbirds, humpback whales and hibernating bears do exactly the same thing! It’s called time-restricted eating.
Survival of the Fattest! Bears do intermittent fasting naturally: eat and get fat in summer, sleep it off in winter!
They publicized there is an association between an 8-hour time-restricted eating schedule (intermittent fasting) and a 91% higher risk of death by heart attack.2
The problem in this situation is that they don’t have ANY SCIENCE to back up this absurd claim. This very preliminary finding has not undergone full statistical analysis or peer review, and the AHA’s premature release of such information is not scientific and has been criticized as irresponsible and potentially misleading.
It has upset and confused the public at large (who still believe nonsense put out by vested interest groups). They don’t get it: cardiologists don’t WANT people to lose weight and get healthy. That would cut their livelihood by 90%. Can’t have that.
There are several technical issues with the AHA’s announcement:
1.Everything they claim is based on a preliminary survey… just answers to a questionnaire, which had not gone through the required statistical analysis, the necessary meaningful adjustments, before it can be published.
2.The “study” covered the period 2003 – 2018, before the terms time restricted eating and intermittent fasting became common understanding. In fact, the definition of time restricted eating (intermittent fasting) was not clear to both the surveyors and the respondents. This raises obvious questions about the accuracy and validity of the survey results.
3.This study compares a group of 414 people who were surveyed only twice during that 15-year period and who reported their “eating window” within 8 hours a day. The reference group was of 11,831 people who were also surveyed only twice during that period and who reported an eating window within 12-16 hours a day. How could they even remember? Do you know what your eating schedule was over 20 years ago? I doubt it.
4.The difference in size of the study group (414-person) compared to the reference group (11,831-person) is laughable. This requires statistical manipulation to arrive at any meaningful interpretation. Accepting such a huge disparity alone is “clear proof” (to quote Sheldrick, Haha!) that the intentions of this scientific charade were not honest. Even the layman realizes that to have any meaningful conclusion, you have to balance the study group and controls as closely as possible.
5.Worst of all, the study has not been adjusted for confounding factors. Importantly, for example, 27% of the 414-person study group were smokers, compared to 16.9% smokers in the 11,831-person reference group. Smoking status is a KNOWN major cardiovascular and cancer death risk. This huge difference needs to be allowed for during the statistical analysis before any conclusion can be reached. To publish ANY result before making such adjustments is irresponsible and bordering on pseudo-scientific, to quote Dr. Richard Z. Cheng, MD, PhD.
Richard Z. Cheng MD, PhD. inducted into the Hall of Fame of the International Society for Orthomolecular Medicine in May 2022.
Conflict of Interest
Of course this all about money and greed, not about getting to useful medical truths. The American Heart Association is in bed with big food and drug companies. This itself is not good. But they are far from alone in this.
Newly released documents reveal that the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, which endorses various food products, has financial ties with industry leaders.3
Similarly, the American Heart Association has received millions from fast food and processed food manufacturers.4 That’s far from a good idea! They get money for promoting junk food and then get to collect from the sick patients which result!
These cartels also pour $millions into front groups, which they manipulate to oppose government regulation. They do this by lobbying (read bribery) and creating junk science, to deliberately stir confusion, which they then exploit by saying “the science isn’t settled”. That’s exactly what the tobacco industry did for years (and is still doing, incidentally).
Get rid from your mind the idea that these crooked goings on only apply in the USA. The mega-food internationals cartels have their claws into everything, globally: companies like Nestlé, PepsiCo, Hershey, Kellogg’s, General Mills, and others.
The truth is quite the opposite, of course: numerous studies have demonstrated the potential benefits of intermittent fasting for cardiovascular health, weight loss, metabolic health, brain function, longevity, and even autoimmune diseases and cancer.5
As I have said before, intermittent fasting is Humankind’s natural eating mode and clearly is healthy and good for survival… We’re still here, aren’t we?
Well, we won’t be much longer, unless we can shake off the influence of these greedy, corrupt, self-serving reptiles!
To your good health,
Prof. Keith Scott-Mumby
The Official Alternative Doctor
SOURCES:
- https://alternative-doctor.com/this-is-the-end-of-science/
- https://newsroom.heart.org/news/8-hour-time-restricted-eating-linked-to-a-91-higher-risk-of-cardiovascular-death
- https://www.theguardian.com/science/2022/dec/09/academy-nutrition-financial-ties-processed-food-companies-contributions?trk=public_post_comment-text
- Kaplan, J. 2017. https://www.medicaleconomics.com/view/physicians-take-what-health
- Intermittent fasting and health outcomes: an umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials. EClinicalMedicine. 2024 Mar 11;70:102519. doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2024.102519
* I leaned heavily on a release by the Orthomolecular News Service (OMNS), written by Richard Z. Cheng, MD PhD. You can get it here: https://orthomolecular.activehosted.com/index.php.
