Suppressed Treatments for COVID Victims

Here are two videos that could literally save your life if you catch COVID-19 this time around. Please watch them both, especially the second one.

(I have no conflict of interest to declare.)

It turns out there’s a great deal that can be done medically for a symptomatic COVID victim before they require hospitalization. The mainstream “news” has suppressed this information, along with big tech and their precious Dr. Fauci, an MD with apparent funding ties to the Wuhan lab and NO EXPERIENCE in treating COVID patients.

For the full above interview, including the parts that would cause YouTube to cancel the whole video, go here: https://rokfin.com/AlisonMorrow 

If you thought that was a little shocking, here’s a world authority bucking the mainstream “news” filter on science, implying that huge blind spots or perhaps a real conspiracy exists in modern medicine’s response to COVID-19.

No one can write this man off as scientifically uninformed, especially not some TV talking head or a website of self-appointed truth fairies.

Peter McCullough, MD is a rare individual: a highly publishing scientist, a physician treating COVOID patients, and an earnest soul powered by scientifically informed objectivity.

Please forward these two videos to anyone who appreciates the fact that you care about them.

Love and Survival,

Morrill Talmage Moorehead, MD


Conspiracy Theory in Top Science Journal, Nature

Every anchor and talking head on TV “news” uses the term “conspiracy theory” to discredit the people and ideas of the one genuinely stupid political party…

That party is always the Democrats if you’re watching Fox “News,” and it’s always the Republicans if you’re watching any other TV “news” outlet. Of course, we each are fortunate enough to have landed in the political party of truth and goodness, probably since birth.

Talk about blind luck.

The two parties agree on very little, but they hold two fundamental truths in common: 1. the other party is flat wrong about everything. 2. the other party is a conspiracy of idiots.

Beyond that socially acceptable conspiracy theory (made kosher by Hilary Clinton’s “vast right-wing conspiracy” rhetoric) we’ve all been conditioned to feel embarrassment and shame if we find ourselves believing or even exploring a conspiracy theory.

Once a theory has been tarred and feathered with the voodoo adjective “conspiracy,” most intelligent people assume it’s a false theory. They make this leap of faith with absolute emotional certainty, knowing that only weak-minded, gullible people believe conspiracy theories.

Smart people don’t waste time looking at the bogus data behind a theoretical explanation that includes more than one person trying to do the same naughty, secretive thing at the same time. Naughty, secretive people always act independently and alone in the real world. Obviously.

This heuristic is so useful, efficient, and socially acceptable, we carry it around like a cell phone. “Conspiracy theory? Don’t insult my intelligence.”

Unfortunately, those intellectually uninformed PhD’s at Nature, the world’s top scientific journal, must have missed the memo.

Here they are with the audacity to expect us to believe that a theoretical conspiracy exists on the part of those government organizations who provide money to scientific researchers. We know this kind of stuff is impossible, but these gullible geeks at Nature think the research funders are censoring things and forcing researchers to change their results for reasons that are political and unscientific…

Health researchers report funder pressure to suppress results

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02242-x

A few quotes from the article in Nature:

A survey of public-health researchers has found numerous instances of trial results being suppressed on topics such as nutrition, sexual health, physical activity and substance use….

The survey, published in PLoS One1, involved 104 researchers from regions including North America, Europe and Oceania….

the findings bolster those [findings] of previous studies, such as a 2006 survey of government-funded health research that also found many instances of requests to ‘sanitize’ results and block or delay their publication.

A 2016 inquiry into the delayed publication of research commissioned by UK government agencies identified cases in which publication was “manipulated to fit with political concerns”. More recently, the British Medical Journal reported four instances of politicization and suppression of science in the United Kingdom during the COVID-19 pandemic.

It’s all a bunch of conspiracy-theory hogwash, right? But I wonder if the CIA really did have anything to do with making the term “conspiracy theory” popular. Here’s how it really went down:

Imagine it’s 1964 and you’re 19, living in the USSR and working for the SVR, the Soviet’s equivalent of the CIA.

In colloquial English training class your eyes land on a strange new term, “conspiracy theory.” You look it up. An idea pops into your head.

You feel brilliant and powerful rushing to tell your boss.

“Comrade, I am thinking we must make the Westerners feel all the shame in this ‘conspiracy theory’ thing of theirs.”

“What you want, Boris? You see I’m buried here.”

After explaining yourself to the whiskered gnome, he loves your idea.

“Boris, you most brilliant monkey of everyone!” He brings out a shot glass, pours himself a finger of Vodka. “Our existence will be taboos for no discussion. The Americans will no dare thinking we are here — what you said — a real thing.” An iniquitous mirth comes over him. He chuckles and you beam at the floor between your feet.

The Spring brings your fifth field assignment, a big one. You jump a freighter, shiver in wet, cold darkness for almost 4 seasick weeks, then emerge squinting into the morning sunrise to jump the rail and swim past the Statue of Liberty toward your mission. You must infiltrate the CIA.

The ice in your young veins can do this. You can do anything for the great cause of the Motherland.

But it turns out that life is not so bad in the US. Thin-crusted Pizza. Ice cream. A person need not fear hunger in such an oddly selfish world.

You decide you must become a double agent. It’s the one way to be sure you will always have food… fit for a king!

During the second week of routine interrogation for the lowest security clearance, you spill the kidney beans and tell your new American Comrade, Nate, all about the Soviet’s nefarious plans to attach emotional disgrace and shame to the term “conspiracy theory.”

“They think it will help them remain invisible in the West,” you explain to the interrogator who must have cut himself shaving this morning and now has a piece of white toilet paper stuck to his pointy chin. The thinnest, softest paper imaginable. Everyone has it. No such paper ever wiped a bottom in the Motherla… in the USSR.

The door bursts open and the head of the CIA marches in, his eyes fixed on you. You look at Nate who seems frozen.

“You came up with that, did you, kid? What is it… Boris?”

Your head nods without consent.

“Comrade Boris…” The chief leans across the white table and puts a hand on your sweaty shoulder. “CB, we’ll call you, then.” He straightens back and folds his arms. “You’ve just earned yourself mid-level clearance, my boy.” He turns to the interrogator. “Nate, get CB some clothes fast and take him over to meet Smith at the Times. This morning. Tell agent Smith to make this man a reporter on the fast track. And tell him I want to see “conspiracy theory” plastered on every page that even remotely alludes to the Kennedy assignation. You got that?

“Yes, Sir,” Nate says, then looks across the table at you with a brand new expression on his narrow face. Respect.

Lumping all conspiracy theories together in a trash can will obstruct your search for truth because no such binary heuristic can guide you accurately through a complex system like this world, a place where symbiosis dances with predation to a tune by Yin and Yang.

Conspiratorial Love,

Morrill Talmage Moorehead, MD

 

 


Richard Dolan answers Zappa’s eerie question: “WHO ARE THE BRAIN POLICE?”

Remember the Mothers of Invention? Probably not, unless you’re my age and happened to have loved Frank Zappa’s music when you were 11 years old.

Frank Zappa called out the Hippie culture, the (then) conservative establishment, and sometimes himself. He was a great man who died of prostate cancer, a cancer variety which, incidentally, may have a causal relationship to cow’s milk according to a heavily “debunked,” but fascinating and unique correlation study called “The China Study.”

Mr. Zappa’s song, “Who are the Brain Police?” asks us…

What will you do if the people you knew
Were the plastic that melted,
And the chromium too?
WHO ARE THE BRAIN POLICE?

Last night I listened to Richard Dolan’s modern answer. You should probably listen to Richard while you can. He will be cancelled from YouTube when he gains too many subs for Google’s comfort.

Bottom line: Conspiracy Theory (otherwise known as common-sense analysis) has always been essential to informed, critical, independent thinking.

Imagine a criminal on trial for “conspiracy to commit fraud.” The evidence is clear against him, but the judge throws the case out because “conspiracy theories” are false by definition. This is what Google’s “JIGSAW” group and the RAND Corporation are conspiring to make us all believe.

It’s brainwashing for a “higher” purpose…

Our new brain police, following in the footsteps of every revolutionary totalitarian regime, must eradicate independent thinking in the name of protecting us from harm before they can take full control and ownership of a nation.

But this time the Brain Police want global control, one world government, perhaps with the continued existence of “nations” as window dressing, like in the European Union.

Independent love,

Morrill Talmage Moorehead, MD

 


THE IDIOTIC CENSORSHIP OF IVERMECTIN – “As if Silicon Valley knows better than doctors”

One law of simulation that has brought our world’s flawed democracies a better outcome for the poor than the popular forms of totalitarianism is this: Truth must be challenged to survive from generation to generation.

Truth is antifragile. It grows stronger when exposed to rational opposition. Truth is like the memory B cells of the immune system, those nanofactories that produce specific antibodies against antigenic foci on the microscopic predators we encounter. Without repeated exposure, B cells can forget what they’ve learned.

Likewise, without rational challenge and debate, truth fades from humanity’s collective memory.

Falsehood is fragile like some of the dangerous bacteria lurking in hospitals. Clostridium difficile, for example, is a bug that thrives when antibiotics have silenced the balanced competition of the normal gut microbiome. I’ll never forget the horror on my infectious disease doctor’s face when I had C. diff colitis and his first round of IV antibiotics had failed (targeting Clostridium difficile with antibiotics, fighting fire with fire). People sometimes die from the pseudomembranous colitis caused by this opportunistic infection.

My doc’s second round of IV antibiotics worked. Now I’m swallowing probiotics and prebiotics regularly for prevention.

Meanwhile, most MD’s aren’t even sure the microbiome is worth their attention. The drug companies have less than zero motivation to do large blinded, controlled clinical trials on probiotics. And without reports of such trials in the “infallible scriptures” of big-pharma medicine, the faithful congregation of mainstream MD’s must continue to ignore the human gut microbiome. Everyone loses.

Just as broad-spectrum antibiotics kill the gut’s healthy bacteria, censorship kills the truth. Especially censorship of genuinely dangerous, hurtful, triggering, bigoted lies and misinformation. This is counterintuitive, but all human judgement is a matter of perspective. Always and forever.

An easy example of truth vanishing due to censorship is the megalithic evidence of humanity’s prehistoric high-tolerance stonework technology seen in massive ancient stone structures around the world, some weighing hundreds to over a thousand tons. The academics refuse to allow discussion of this evidence in their sacred literature (science journals). As a result, the truth of advanced human technology in ancient history has become invisible to archeology and academia.

Perhaps it’s not invisible to you?

Another example of vanishing data is the entire history of unidentified flying objects. This topic has been denied, shamed and shunned for so many generations that now, even after the US Department of Defense has admitted that UFOs/UAPs are real, many people continue to deny their existence, clinging to “explanations” that betray a lack of reading.

It turns out that we have a simple rule of thumb to help us differentiate falsehood from truth: Just ask, “Do the experts allow published debate on the data or do they dismiss the topic and attack the credibility of those who try to discuss it?” If debate is encouraged, the experts are probably defending a truth. If not, they’re usually defending lies or honest mistakes.

Truth tends to inspire a calm, logical discussion based on evidence rather than personal attack. Truth seems to be antifragile and never ever sides with censorship, name calling, or angry shouts of “shame on you.”

Our culture is forgetting the value of two-sided arguments. More and more we’re forced to accept censorship, cancellation and the personal destruction of all who challenge the amoral, anti-spiritual agendas of Google, YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, mainstream TV Inc., the entrenched academics and all the other mind-police.

For example, as you probably recall, any video with evidence that COVID-19 came from a laboratory in China was deleted by Google’s Nazi AI. This happened because those who created the AI “knew” that any two-sided discussion of COVID origin would give voice to “a political party of racists” and their outrageously evil leader. To Google, the Chinese lab origin theory was an infectious lie that required a broad-spectrum antibiotic — censorship. They honestly believe to this day that the feeble-minded public needs Google’s benevolent protection from liars and the misinformed.

But we don’t.

Even now that the truth of COVID origins is coming out, there are still scientists (@2:14 on this linked video) who seem to imply that the censorship was justified because a “racist” president promoted the Wuhan-lab origins theory.

A more destructive example of our culture banning two-sided arguments is the “woke community’s” effort to change the definition of racism.

Originally racism meant treating anyone unfairly because of their skin color.

Now, under a woke delusion of outrage, racists can only have white skin. People of color cannot, by definition, be racists anymore. How convenient. Any questioning of the fairness of this doubletalk, or its irrational and illogical construction, or the obvious insanity of embracing an evil that you claim to oppose, is halted with the following judgmental sentiment: “If you even ask those questions, you’re a racist and you don’t get it.” No debate, just attack the opponent personally.

It reminds me of the way the “New Atheists” deal with Intelligent Design: attack the people, not the evidence or their logic. Like any one-sided weak argument, the “woke” paradigm requires censorship of rational thought and the skill of shaming.

Wokeness is a mind-virus pandemic that has infected education at all levels and has largely taken over corporate culture. As much as I hate genuine racism, I think “wokeness” is even worse because it justifies one brand of racism, promotes racial hatred, and bans rational discussion of the topic. It looks to me like a blatant example of totalitarian mind control disguised as moral righteousness. It’s like a mood pill that makes you feel morally uplifted when you’re actually participating in evil and violence.

Like the CIA who fights international dishonesty with their own brand of dishonesty, and like the Darwinian Nazi medical doctors of WWII who believed that survival of the fittest was nature’s truest morality, allowing them to systematically torture and kill their human “patients” for a “higher cause,” the woke community of today will occasionally admit that “the value of fairness is overrated” and winning at all costs is an acceptable strategy, at least for now.

Fortunately, the “woke-ban” on thinking rationally about racism is a fragile thing and survives only as long as they can ban debate through shaming, censorship and ruining the careers of their opponents. It’s like a holy war, it can’t last forever.

Another treacherous censorship on the COVID front comes to us now from the binary thinking of Silicon Valley. Google’s Nazi-like AI is banning information on what may actually turn out to be the most highly effective anti-COVID drug so far, Ivermectin. The drug is cheap, so naturally Google/YouTube can’t allow people to hear about its effectiveness. Instead, the G-monopoly silently deletes Ivermectin videos.

But you can watch the video here as Matt Orfalea brings you an MD with international data on Ivermectin’s effectiveness against COVID-19. You really ought to click the link (https://odysee.com/@Orf:b/youtube-censored-the-senate!-(ft.-pierre:4) and watch it. The more we learn about Ivermectin, the more shocking its censorship becomes. (Unfortunately, WordPress software won’t allow me to feature a video from Odysee.com, so I can only link to it.)

Here’s Alison Morrow, a reporter who left the mainstream’s 90-second “news” machine. She interviews Matt Orfalea and discusses parts of his “dangerous” video, highlighting the facts on Ivermectin and noting the irrational behavior of Google’s Nazi censorship monopoly.

At the moment I can’t claim to know whether the current scientific data on Ivermectin should be considered conclusive evidence of its effectiveness. The Big Pharma experts monopolize healthcare in the US and stand to lose billions if a cheap and effective alternative to their drugs-in-testing should arise. They tell us that the data on Ivermectin is “inconclusive.” They don’t have a negative word to say about it as far as I know. It’s just that the holy grail of infallibility has not been achieved yet for this drug’s use against COVID.

Big Pharma has hammered that holy grail message of infallibility into the mainstream MD’s head to the point where almost no one questions the dogma that double-blinded, randomized, placebo controlled, prospective trials of huge size are the only route to medical truth. All other facts, including epidemiologic studies and basic science research, fall into the category of “there is no evidence that treatment A does anything to alleviate disease B.”

Of course, Big Pharma has no intention to study Ivermectin or any other cheap drug. Money is to Big Pharma as air is to a person. The CEO risks corporate death without lots of money coming in. And besides, he works for a higher cause, just like the good folks pushing woke values down our throats.

Since Google has now literally and openly joined the pharmaceutical industry, it must do the logical thing and censor videos on Ivermectin, all for a higher cause.

Nevertheless, Ivermectin has a history of safety, and its current international data shows with overwhelming clarity that it deserves a large clinical trial with open discussions on TV and YouTube.

No, Ivermectin doesn’t deserve this, humanity does. At the very least, COVID patients should be allowed to see the data, discuss it with their doctor, and decide whether to take it or not, along with everything else Big Pharma is pushing on us in their wise benevolence.

Uncensored love,

Morrill Talmage Moorehead, MD

PS: I just want to say, like the “New Atheist” movement that shouts down and ruins the careers of Intelligent Design scientists, the brittle and brutal “woke” movement is composed of good, extremely well-meaning people who are struggling to do what’s right, trying to promote the truth as they understand it, and trying to improve the world. Everyone should respect them for those intentions. If you don’t sense the centrality of this point at the level of the heart, then you miss what I’m struggling to say here. Your opponents in any field are not the real enemy. Censorship via monopoly is the enemy. Whether we are atheistic believers in scientific journals or religious believers in old books, whether we’re woke bigots, sleeping bigots, or just deplorably colorblind bigots, we in the free world are all on the same side of an underlying battle against our own elites who seek totalitarian rule. Politics, race, religion, gender, socio-economic class distinctions, tax wars, all these sorts of things don’t matter to the elites except as they are useful as tools to divide, conquer and control us while bringing in money.

As much as we all may love the way Google’s Nazi AI helps us find fascinating stuff, we should force ourselves to abandon YouTube and the Google search engine. We should support democratic, censorship-free alternative sources of information before it’s too late, before the G-monopoly owns and controls the minds of the entire human race.

If you still trust your favorite political TV flavor, you’re making a mistake. The amoral “news” machine will do its best to control and own you by myelinating the neuronal pathways of outrage in your central nervous system, outrage towards the very people whom you should be meditating upon so you can deepen your capacity to love. (“Neurons that fire together wire together,” and so repetition of the feeling of outrage makes you more and more of an “expert” at feeling that way. Avoid TV “news” and stay loving and lovable.)


Nasty Data on COVID Origins

Ivor Cummins is the genius engineer who uses his expertise in complex systems analysis to save lives by advocating coronary artery calcium scans while he educates the brain-dead portion of mainstream medicine on the science of type 2 diabetes, myocardial infarction (heart attack), and obesity.

Here is Ivor’s YouTube channel and here is his podcast. This man is well worth your time if the mainstream “news” emanating from the outlets on both sides of the political spectrum ever begins to sound dubious to you.

In the video below, Ivor Cummins and Gabor Erdosi go over the scientific data surrounding the question of whether the virus behind COVID-19 came from a laboratory rather than from nature.

Of course, focusing on this data is taboo at Google/YouTube and FaRcebook, so the video below may be deleted before you watch it. If so, you’ll find the audio here on Ivor’s podcast, episode # 110 (Ep110).

Quoting the video’s comment section…

“Fortunately the Truth checkers at Gutube can’t understand [what] these chaps are saying.”

Yes, the discussion is, at times, obscured by technical language, but please hang in for the best part, the evidence that the COVID-19 virus has spent significant time inside a specific lineage of laboratory mouse. (All other lab mice, we’re told, are invulnerable to COVID-19 and cannot be infected by it.)

I found limited information on Gabor Erdosi. He apparently has a Master of Molecular Biology degree, a background in genetics, and is touted as “King of Root-Cause investigation” in the context of genetics. I wish I knew more about him.

 

  1. Although these data indicate conclusively (to me) that the COVID-19 virus (SARS-CoV-2) was produced in a laboratory, one cannot be sure that the virus was made in China. There are other possibilities. For instance, the Wuhan lab in China might have been “framed,” set up by a foreign country to look guilty and take the blame for the pandemic. Who knows? You and I don’t. If one accepts the currently untestable assumption that the virus did come from China, then there would still be uncertainty as to whether the bug escaped the lab accidentally or deliberately. (Of course, why any morally sane individual(s) would concoct this virus in the first place is beyond me.)
  2. The math applied in this video to cast colossal doubt on the possibility that all these rare mutations came from random processes (outside of a lab) can also be used to show the flaw in thinking that random mutations in nature can conceivably generate complex biological systems, that is in a Universe that’s only 13.8 billion years old. (Don’t get angry now. Relax, read Stephen Meyer’s, Signature in the Cell, enjoy the math and draw your own private conclusions. Maybe the Universe is infinitely old, unlimited in volume, or accompanied by an infinite number of “parallel universes.” Any of these options would allow all seemingly impossible chains of interacting natural random coincidence to become reality… but not just neo-Darwinian evolution, also we would have to include the existence of a benevolent being or beings whom we might logically deem worthy of the title, God(s).
  3. Even if everyone decides that the Chinese Communist Party is behind the pandemic, we would be foolish to allow ourselves to hate China or to seek revenge. Without hating anyone, humanity must stop following leaders with limited conscience (sociopaths).  We must rise above hatred and violence or we’ll soon conspire together to bring our species down into the fossil record with countless other extinct species. With all the WMD technology today, including pandemics, our options have shrunken: love each other or die fighting. “Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.” It’s too late for hate.

Geek Love,

Morrill Talmage Moorehead, MD


Bad Cholesterol (LDL) is Innocent of the Crime

For most MD’s, LDL (low density lipoprotein) is “bad cholesterol” because elevated LDL has been associated with atherosclerosis and heart attack (myocardial infarction or MI). As we’ve all heard a million times, “association doesn’t mean causation,” but forgetting this is the mainstream dogma for LDL.

Here’s an important interview that discusses LDL and heart attack (myocardial infarction or MI) in deep but understandable terms.

A few high points:

  1. Doctors who are interested in preventing and reversing type 2 diabetes (not just treating it symptomatically) should measure insulin levels, not glucose levels, because insulin levels become increased many years before glucose levels do, allowing prevention and frequent reversal of type 2 diabetes.
  2. Elevated LDL cholesterol is NOT the cause of atherosclerosis and heart attack. Excess dietary carbohydrate is.
  3. Eating too many dietary carbohydrates over a period of years will chronically elevate insulin until it can no longer get glucose into the cells (insulin resistance). This ultimately causes chronic blood glucose elevation (prediabetes and type 2 diabetes), coronary atherosclerosis and heart attack.
  4. Type 2 diabetics and obese patients are transforming their lives with carbohydrate restriction, intermittent fasting, basic nutrients, and exercise, without counting calories, going hungry or reducing dietary fat.
  5. Mainstream medicine and the drug companies cannot monetize a strategy of fighting diabetes and myocardial infarction at the causal level, so MD’s rarely hear about it or read the literature that explains it.
  6. A coronary artery calcium scan (CAC scan) grades the amount of calcium in arteries of the heart. This tells you how likely you are to drop over dead from a heart attack. None of the other available tests such as lipid panels do this. Some people with normal LDLs have coronary calcification and die of heart attacks while some people with extremely high LDLs have normal coronary arteries and don’t die of heart attacks.
  7. Chronic carbohydrate restriction elevates LDLs (so-called “bad” cholesterol), but does NOT cause coronary atherosclerosis or heart attack.

Here’s a link to all the lectures in this series (while it lasts): https://diabetesessentialsprogram.com/?idev_id=27140.

I’ve listened to four of the interviews, and so far they’re based on peer-reviewed scientific literature. That’s unusual for the alternative health videos I’ve seen in this format.

(I have no affiliation with any of these people, no conflict of interest, and nothing to sell.)

I found the above interview of Dr. Ali on YouTube by googling his name, Dr. Nadir Ali. Hopefully, all the videos in this series will be available on YouTube.

 

Love, longevity, and good health,

Morrill Talmage Moorehead, MD

Disclaimer: Please always consult a health care provider before changing your lifestyle or diet. This post is for educational purposes only, it’s not medical advice.


Genocidal Racism? The case of the missing Vitamin D Research

I just found this important video:

This man, Dr. John Campbell, is a clinical nurse who is apparently using the title “Doctor” appropriately for modern times. I mention this because I mistakenly assumed he was an M.D. in a previous post. Sorry, this just shows my age.

Anyway, in the first part of this video, which is an excellent deep-dive into the groundbreaking paper I spoke of in the last post, Dr. Campbell suggests that there’s something sinister going on at the highest levels of healthcare…

It’s something that could be interpreted as racism with genocidal intent on the part of the international healthcare authorities.

In essence, Dr. Campbell senses conspiracy in the quite apparent reluctance of mainstream medicine to run definitive vitamin D trials on COVID-19 patients, despite the evidence in its favor. Dr. Campbell doesn’t mention racism directly, but points out the disproportionate numbers of deaths in the Black and Hispanic communities. Then he focuses on the inexpensive nature of vitamin D, leaving the listener to connect the dots to Big Pharma and the money they stand to make with a patentable drug cure, vaccine, etc.

This left me thinking about corporate elites, racism, and a conspiracy to commit genocide.

Is it just me? Probably.

Dr. Campbell has been talking on YouTube for many months about the logic and the literature evidence favoring the use of vitamin D for COVID-19 patients, especially those patients with darker skin who are at greater risk of vitamin D deficiency, and at much greater risk of dieing of COVID-19 (not by coincidence, it turns out). In light of the first small clinical trial of Vitamin D, there appears to be a cause-and-effect link here.

Ordinarily, I don’t put the brakes on a perfectly healthy conspiracy theory. To me, genuine conspiracies are common. Unless I’m mistaken, the CIA’s official job is to conspire against all perceived and potential enemies of the US. They didn’t invented the term “conspiracy theory” but there’s an internal CIA memo that uses the pleural form “conspiracy theories” in explaining how to prop up the mainstream version of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. As far as I know, their official job isn’t to influence public opinion, though they seem to believe it is. We’re told that conspiracy theories were considered a normal part of analytical thinking until the late 1950s, when delving deeper than a sports reporter became stigmatised.

But in the case of the missing Vitamin D research, I think we might NOT be dealing with an elite’s racism or genocidal intent. I think there’s a simpler explanation.

One of the first things they drilled into our heads in med school was “supplemental vitamins are hogwash.” There was one exception: pregnant woman needed extra folate to prevent neural tube defects in their babies. It probably pained the professors to admit this, but it was the exception that proved the rule for them.

“Taking vitamins just gives you expensive urine,” they said. The frightened, exhausted students laughed politely, but all such jokes have a powerful indoctrination value.

Remember the shame of letting anyone know you thought UFOs were real five to 15 years ago? That feeling came from jokes at the expense of the “crazy people.” You didn’t want to be one of them.

In the medical community, the vast majority of doctors don’t have time, curiosity or energy enough to read. Big Pharma comes by the office (with food and gifts in the old days) and presents their own funded, peer-reviewed literature about their own drugs. This is the real “continuing medical education” for many doctors in the US.

This is how many, if not most, MD’s have maintained an ignorant certainty about the uselessness of vitamin supplementation. To solidify that certainty, most of us have lectured family and friends on the subject many times, glad to be seen as an authority capable of debunking the entire over-the-counter pill industry.

In the old days at LLUMC, there was one doctor on campus who bravely bucked the anti-vitamin dogma and lectured med students on the benefits of vitamin supplementation. What an unsung hero!

He was the common brunt of jokes among the faculty, residents, and medical students.

Years later, when I was an attending pathologist, I said something positive about vitamin C. A young pathology resident across the scope looked at me incredulously. “You don’t believe in vitamins, do you? You don’t agree with Dr. ____?”

I asked him if he had read a single article of basic research showing the effects of vitamin supplementation on laboratory animals. He admitted he hadn’t. I told him he should read before making up his mind.

“But you don’t think Dr. ____ is right, do you?” he asked.

“He’s more right than the rest of us,” I said.

The resident shook his head in disbelief. What a disappointment I’d become.

And so it goes. The carefully ingrained prejudice against vitamin supplementation, drilled in by Big Pharma for decades, still exists around the world.

This is the true cause of the reluctance of those in authority to run large, so-called “definitive” clinical trials of Vitamin D on COVID-19 patients. Or am I wrong?

The “deep state/cabal/military-congressional-industrial complex” will probably never admit that they’ve been lying to us about UFOs since the 1940s.

Similarly, mainstream medicine couldn’t possibly relish the thought of demonstrating to the world just how fatally wrong they’ve been in their crusade against vitamin supplements.

Why not send a link of Dr. Campbell’s video to anyone you know who might not be taking vitamin D yet? You might save their life.

Love, Sunshine and Vitamin D3,

Morrill Talmage Moorehead, MD


Vitamin D Cuts the Severity of COVID-19 in a Clinical Trial !

The scientific evidence for taking Vitamin D to decrease the severity of COVID-19 continues to come in with this prospective clinical pilot study (randomized and blinded).

Here’s the link: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960076020302764?via%3Dihub

Results…

“Of 50 patients treated with calcifediol, one required admission to the ICU (2%), while of 26 untreated patients, 13 required admission (50%)… p < 0.001.”  

Conclusion…

“Our pilot study demonstrated that administration of a high dose of Calcifediol or 25-hydroxyvitamin D, a main metabolite of vitamin D endocrine system, significantly reduced the need for ICU treatment of patients requiring hospitalization due to proven COVID-19. Calcifediol seems to be able to reduce severity of the disease….”

Note:

The stuff they gave the trial patients in this experiment was Calcifediol (also called “Calcidiol” and 25-hydroxyvitamin D). It is not vitamin D2 or D3.  Instead, calcifediol is the hormonal form of vitamin D that the liver makes from vitamin D2 and D3. This hormonal form is then converted in the kidneys to the active form, calcitriol (25-hydroxyvitamin D).

Ordinarily, vitamin D2 and D3 come from the diet and the sun, but the mainstream is now beginning to admit that many, if not most of us, are NOT getting enough vitamin D without supplementation, whether D2 or D3.

So which is better, D3 or D2 supplements?

There are conflicting studies. The mainstream now says it probably doesn’t matter, but this could change next week.

I take D3 this week.

Keep in mind that genetic SNPs are still being regularly ignored in almost all randomized clinical trials. This is the fundamental weakness of almost all mainstream clinical medical literature, especially when negative findings are touted as proof that a treatment or supplement is worthless to every individual in the entire world.

A possible example of this ubiquitous error might be evident in my experience with ginkgo biloba.

Out there somewhere in the ether there’s a randomized clinical trial that has “proven” (to the mainstream medical community of overworked, under-appreciated drones) that ginkgo biloba doesn’t help anyone’s memory. Don’t waste your money, right?

And yet with my unique list of genetic SNPs, when I took Ginkgo back in the 1990s, I was astonished that I could, for the first time, remember where I had parked my car in the VA’s vast parking lot. I could visualize my parked car and its location effortlessly when I walked out into the darkness after a day’s work.

Anecdotal evidence is not rubbish. They call it “evidence” for a reason.

For what it’s worth, Dr. Amen (of the Amen Clinics) says that in all of his (broad) anecdotal clinical experience, the most normal looking spect brain scans he sees tend to come from patients who have been taking ginkgo biloba.

Rubbish? Not in my book.

Fortunately, the vitamin D clinical trial mentioned above showed strong statistical significance. If it had not, it would have been widely quoted by the mainstream as “proof” that taking vitamin D supplements for COVID-19 is a waste of time.

Since the future studies of Vitamin D and COVID-19 will involve larger numbers of randomized patients whose genetic differences (SNPS and epigenetic markers) will be ignored as usual, as if non-existent, it is likely that the statistical significance of the benefits of taking vitamin D for COVID-19 will be lower (a higher p-value) than we see in this small study with its strikingly significant (low) p-value of less than 0.001. (The higher the p-value, the more likely the results are due to coincidence, of course.)

But if significance disappears in larger trials, don’t let it convince you that Vitamin D supplementation “is now known to be of no clinical benefit for COVID-19 patients.” That would be rubbish.

The more they homogenize the genetic differences of populations by including larger and larger numbers of random individuals in clinical trials, the less likely something that helped a few genetic outliers in a small study will show up as statistically significant. And the thing is, many of us are “genetic outliers” in one way or another, because there are so MANY genes.

Here’s an analogy: in surgical pathology practice it’s common to see rare tumors. But isn’t this a contradiction? If you see them a lot, how could they be rare?

A pathologist sees rare tumors fairly often because there are a huge number or different varieties of rare tumors. You may see only one case of bilateral pheochromocytoma in your lifetime, but the next day you will probably see some other rare tumor that you’ll never see again.

The current black-and-white world (of mainstream clinical trials) that foolishly ignores genetic diversity to everyone’s detriment will someday change and become a joke for first-year medical students.

Not a joke, a grim anecdote.

Like the one about…

How we used to go from the morgue to the maternity ward in the 1840s without handwashing. Mainstream doctors did this, literally killing countless women by inoculating them with bacteria that caused “childbed fever.” All this, while ignoring the fringe voice of Ignaz Semmelweis and doing everything in science’s dark tradition to ruin the careers of the fringe, in this case, the Father of Handwashing.

How dare anyone challenge the settled science of miasmas with this fringy bacterial nonsense?

Love and good health,

Morrill Talmage Moorehead, MD


Six-Minute Workout Miracle

My calm, loving Labrador Retriever, Halo, gets up and runs for a few seconds like a mad dog at full speed around the backyard several times a week with no encouragement or prompting. Seeing her glowing example a few years ago, I suspected there must be some strange health benefit to mad-dog sprinting. I took it up.

Then I came across a woman’s blog who said that her life transformed dramatically after doing high-intensity interval training. So I doubled my efforts on my treadmill. But I didn’t run at full capacity. Rookie mistake.

And I sprinted on my toes, intending to conserve my knees.  It turns out that sprinting on your toes for a year or two gives you Morton’s neuromas. Live and learn.

Here’s a spell-binding, science-based video that shows how to do this entire thing right, and why it’s magic for your mitochondria and brain health.

Professor David Bishop (Victoria University) took muscle biopsies of a test group (high intensity) and a control group (endurance aerobic exercise) and found up to a 30% increase in the test groups’s muscle fiber’s ability to use oxygen to produce energy after 4 weeks of high-intensity interval training. The control group’s muscle biopsies showed NO improvement.

I wonder if this has any relevance to Eliud Kipchoge’s phenomenal running career: The first (and only) man to run the marathon distance in less than two hours was a sprinter in the early years of his career. (Did he increase his mitochondria’s ability to use oxygen more than the endurance runners who likely spent their entire careers in distance training?)

Reading the comments below the video, I noticed that it disappointed several people to learn that the workout Anja Taylor did took “30 minutes” instead of the six minutes set forth in the video’s title. So I left a comment to this effect:

If you rest 4.5 minutes between sprints, as Anja Taylor did, it takes 20 minutes per workout session (not 30).

She did four 30-second sprints with four 4.5 minute rests after each sprint, totaling a workout time of 20 minutes per session. She did three sessions per week for four months.

So each session took 20 minutes. But you don’t have to rest as long as she did. If you rest 1.5 minutes between 30 second sprints, the total workout time per session is 6 minutes, as advertised. To me, resting a minute and a half after sprinting 30 seconds is more than adequate.

The question from a scientific perspective would be whether the resting time between sprints would change the outcome for the mitochondria. Intuitively, I suspect a shorter resting time adds work stress to the mitochondria, causing greater positive adaptation and a more favorable outcome in terms of mitochondrial capacity to use oxygen. But that’s a guess. I could be wrong.

Anyway, you will really enjoy this video. Especially if you’re a writer working at a desk all day.

Summertime love to you and yours,

Morrill Talmage Moorehead, MD

PS. Please check with your doctor before starting this workout routine. But give it a go if she/he says it’s OK for you.


The Airborne Coronavirus

It’s tough to find non-politicized info on COVID-19 (or anything else).

Here’s a lengthy Rogan interview with Michael Osterholm, an internationally recognized expert on infectious disease epidemiology who seems, as best I can tell, to have no political ax to grind, although he’s mainstream black-and-white on vaccinations.

A few essential points from the above interview:

  1. Since COVID-19 is airborne, transmitted early, and has a short incubation period, it is inconceivable that our efforts to contain it will succeed. “This is like trying to stop the wind.”
  2. Transmission from person to person is highly efficient, like a flu virus. Infected individuals with early symptoms carry a potent viral load in their throats (“ten thousand times what we saw with SARS”) and are highly infectious before they feel ill or develop a cough.
  3. Michael Osterholm “conservatively estimates” that there will be over 480,000 deaths due to this virus in the US over the next three to six months or more. He states that this will be “ten to fifteen times worse than the worst seasonal flu you have ever seen.”
  4. Although people over 60 are at greatest risk of death from this virus, they are now seeing an alarming number of “horrible cases” in the 40s age range in Italy.
  5. Here is a message from a cardiologist at one of the largest hospitals in Italy: “They’re deciding who they have to let die. They aren’t screening the staff anymore because they need all hands on deck… Even if they’re positive (meaning that they’re sick) but they don’t have a severe cough or fever, then they have to work.”
  6. The incubation period is 4 days. This gives the virus a short doubling time.
  7. Loose fitting “surgical masks” and gloves offer very little protection, if any. You need a tight-fitting (airtight) mask capable of filtering viruses.
  8. Dr. Osterholm recommends avoiding “large public spaces” if you are over 55 or have underlying health problems such as obesity or a smoking habit. (Smoking is associated with increased mortality in China). “Limiting your contact is about all you can do.”
  9. “We are not going to have a vaccine any time soon.”
  10. “Kids” are getting infected but are not getting sick. In China, only 2.1% of “cases” are under 19 years of age.
  11. This virus jumped from an animal species to humans, probably in the 3rd week of November 2019. It was not the deliberate or accidental product of a weapons laboratory in China. (Dr. Osterholm claims that his unique background allows him to state this with confidence.)

It’s extremely difficult to interest human beings in preventing disasters. The simple existence of a term like “doomsdayer” is enough to keep most people from believing and acting upon a negative prediction, no matter how strong the science.

Add political or other pseudo-religious bias and the hyper-confident voice of a reporter (there are no non-political, unbiased reporters), and you have the secondary gain that leads the majority of humanity to slaughter again and again throughout history.

Don’t let the media’s professional “opinion molding” take your life. Whether your favorite political hacks and quacks are calling this thing “the Trump virus” or shouting with false confidence that COVID-19 is a virus that “kills only people over 80,” please plug your ears to all mainstream political judgments on this virus and heed the expert advice of a qualified doctor like Michael Osterholm, PhD.

“Eyes open, no fear. Be safe everyone,”

Morrill Talmage Moorehead, MD

 

 


The Elephant-Sized Flaw in Large Clinical Trials

Imagine you’re like me and have a genetic variation in your D2 Dopamine receptor code which makes some aspects of “executive functioning” difficult. (I was always the last one to finish my lab work in Chemistry, Biochemistry, and General Physics — though I got the highest final score in Physics Lab, so I’m not claiming to be stupid.)

Anyway, you’ve got this D2 challenge in your brain, you do some reading and discover that organic velvet bean powder has L-dopa that might help you with things like working faster through cookbook recipes.

You buy some velvet bean powder, try it and, wow, you’re not only more efficient, your mood improves.

You should feel ecstatic, right?

But no, you’re vaguely suspicious because you’re a medical doctor. Professors and attendings have warned you that anecdotal evidence is worthless, and the placebo effect is ready and waiting to make a fool of you. 

To avoid embarrassment, you decide you need a double-blinded, prospective clinical trial with a large number of test subjects and proper randomization. Anything less would be rubbish.

Fortunately, this is not a problem. You’re also a multi-billionaire who can fund a complete drug trial.

Of course, you didn’t get rich by ignoring opportunity. You plan to make money with these velvet beans. 

Knowing that your problem starts with genetic D2 variation, common sense tells you to study a few thousand people who have the same genetic makeup.

But what about your target buyer? A businessperson looks there first.

From that perspective, you want the FDA approval to apply to as many people as possible so you can hand out genetically modified velvet bean pills to the broader public and make more money.

You therefore choose the typical mainstream experimental design: Thousands of unselected participants taken in randomly and then randomized and blinded into trial and control groups. You’ll also blind the people administering the bean pills and placebos so no one can fault your study.

Ten years and 1.2 billion dollars later, the trial ends and the stats come back from the math geeks, those rare professionals who honestly understands statistics and can manipulate them dishonestly.

Despite their efforts, they bring you bad news. There is no statistical evidence that your patented velvet bean extract improves executive functioning or mood.

Rats!

You go home and glare at your dog, then apologize with an organic carrot.

If you publish the paper, the entire world of mainstream MD’s, those smart women and men who don’t read the scientific literature or think for themselves because they’re too busy and frightened of lawsuits – those dedicated, exhausted people will hear from their educators, the drug reps, that velvet beans are rubbish. “This is just another example of the functional medicine quacks peddling snake oil.”

But you take organic velvet bean powder every day, it’s made a real difference. In the kitchen now, you’re turning out Molten Lava Cakes faster than the famous TV chefs. You feel more grounded and calm, too.

What should you do?

It’s obvious, isn’t it? Common sense tells you to go back and do a clinical trial using people with the D2 receptor issue, testing the organic velvet bean powder that works for you, not the GMO stuff your lab cooked up for megabucks.

Unfortunately, this common-sense approach rarely if ever happens in the real world. Negative studies like this are routinely published, and the mainstream fails to see the elephant-sized flaw in their assumptions: the human population is vastly more diverse than previously known at the genetic and biochemical level.

Genetic diversity is relevant to every branch of medicine because single nucleotide polymorphisms (genetic SNPs), like the one that affects my D2 receptors, create a huge diversity in disease susceptibility at the root-cause level, as well as a myriad of diversity in personal strengths and weaknesses within every system of the body.

From the central nervous system to the skin, genetic SNPs are the rule, not the exception. And science has hardly begun to uncover them all or understand their complex interplay across systems.

I have another common genetic SNP that reduces my ability to “detoxify” caffeine by about 60%.

With this knowledge, I’ve lowered my caffeine intake from several double mochas a day (at the VA Med Center years ago), to two cups of green tea per day. This reversed an unbearable sensation of vascular congestion in my legs. (n=1)

I also have a SNP that makes me inefficient at converting beta-carotene to vitamin A, a few SNPs that increase my need of several B vitamins for adequate methylation to keep my homocysteine levels down, and numerous others that I won’t bore you with. But despite all my SNPs, I’m still quite healthy for a 63-year-old man.

The thing is, genetic SNPs are so common, you yourself almost certainly have at least one, more likely a handful. So it’s irrational for researchers to lump you into a huge unselected “normal” population when they’re testing something. And it’s misinformed and lazy for MD’s, however busy they are, to ignore your SNPs and follow cookbook-official protocols when treating you. They need to read more broadly and act with integrity even if it costs them.

Genetic diversity is why functional medicine, imperfect as it is, will become central to mainstream medical care someday. The establishment will change the name from functional medicine to something they haven’t already disparaged.

Currently, they say functional medicine is not evidence-based. In some ways that’s true.

But when it comes to reversing chronic disease rather than just controlling its progression, functional medicine is more evidence-based than mainstream medicine because it uses personal genetic data that the mainstream ignores.

Moreover, it understands the elephant-sized flaw in the mainstream’s large clinical debunking trials. 

Morrill Talmage Moorehead, MD

Photo by Rafael on Unsplash