Blog

What is Causing Stress for Seniors?

July 24, 2022 by Martin Neumann - [rt_reading_time label="Reading Time:" postfix="minutes" postfix_singular="minute"]

By the time you’ve reached the twilight of your life, you still face a very unique, yet very real set of stresses. The stress that elderly people face is much different from that of any other age group, and as such, many people younger than them don’t know how to help, because they simply can’t relate as they’ve never experienced these things themselves.

Some people are kind of lost when they retire, because work has been their focal point for all their life, and gave them a certain kind of satisfaction. Once they retire, they kind of lose their purpose and do not know what to do all day long. This is such a kind of change that can cause you an existential stress, even though your responsibilities have diminished all of the sudden.

Others want to catch up on all of the things they had no time to do while they were working. So they pack their agenda with all kinds of activities and are eventually busier than somebody who is on his 9 to 5 job.

One of the most prevalent factors of stress at this age is simply death. Most people don’t live past their eighties, with exceptions, of course. Once you start approaching that age, you realize just how little time you have left.

There’s this constant pressure to make your life feel complete by the time you pass away, so there’s this major stress you have to face in trying to do all of these things you always wanted to do.

Of course, this isn’t always entirely feasible, because chances are, you wouldn’t be as mobile at this point. Once you really start to climb in age, your mobility just gets worse and worse, and in some cases, you might even be wheelchair bound.

Some elderly people remain mobile their entire lives, while others might end up stuck in a wheelchair or bedridden early on. Along with a variety of other health problems, physical health is something very worrying for people this age.

Another cause of stress for people sixty and over is that they often see their circle of family and friends shrinking each year from them passing away. Parents and older siblings may have passed away, or even their spouse.

This can cause an immense feeling of loneliness, with many of the people you once knew no longer being in your life. This also accompanies the first major factor, with people wondering whether or not they’ll be the next one in their circle to pass away.

With that in mind, one of the final causes of stress in older people is that they are often secluded and don’t see much attention. Without the mobility or energy to go out, with so many friends passing away, many older people don’t have a reason to do much – besides sit at home and watch TV or read.

Some are a bit more active, but regardless, it’s very difficult for them to do anything. Some have no form of transportation, even if they did feel like going somewhere. It’s not easy at all to recognize stress in older people, as they typically contain it very well.

They’re often overlooked when it comes to thinking about people who get stressed out, because they don’t necessarily do much. They’re likely retired, and spend most of their time at home watching television.

For many people, that sounds like a great time, but for them, it’s just the only thing they can do for entertainment, since it’s so hard for them to go out and about. One way you can tell that they’re a bit stressed is that they’ll start to eat a lot less.

By ceasing to take good care of themselves, they’ve essentially just given up. This can be dangerous, because if they’re not taken care of, they might end up having some serious health issues, since their bodies aren’t anymore in top physical condition.

Another big sign of stress in older people is that they just kind of stop caring. At some point, when most of the people you once knew were gone, and you will be soon, it’s difficult to find genuine joy in just about anything.

The few things you might have been able to enjoy are often too physically demanding, leaving you with so few options that you’re simply uninterested in anything else. There are some solutions that can make older people’s lives much better.

For example, it’s very important that they continue to be social, even if their old friends aren’t with them any longer. There’s no harm in being social with your kids or grandkids, and it gives you a much needed opportunity to get out of your shell once in awhile.

It’s not healthy to go from being social your whole life to suddenly being reclusive. You’re just not meant to endure that kind of change. It’s very, very important that you come to terms with the life you’ve lived by this point.

Living the later years of your life full of regret is not good, so just learn to be happy or accepting of the life you’ve had. There’s no sense in worrying about the past since you can’t change it, so you might as well do something more enjoyable than just worrying all day.

It can be good to reminisce about old times, but you shouldn’t spend an excessive amount of time on it. Looking back through an old photo album once in awhile with some family or friends and talking about the past can be a great way to fondly remember exactly what your life was like, but if you dwell on it or obsess over it, you’ll just start to become sad that you’re not there now.

It helps to just change things up a little here and there to break up the monotony. Get food from some place new, perhaps take a tour of a place you’ve never been to. Little things like this can make all the difference, because you’ll be able to essentially scratch something off of your bucket list, leaving you with one less thing to be able to regret.

Stress can be at your side through your entire life. As a toddler, you may have endured a volatile family situation, then gone through bullying in school. You followed that up with bad decisions in college, and financial and career stress as a young adult.

As you aged, you experienced relationship stress, health stress and the looming stress of getting older. Because it’s something that everyone deals with in one form or another, it’s important that you learn to recognize when you, yourself are stressed as well as your loved ones.

Knowing stress is getting out of control can alert you that it’s time to seek out a solution or remedy. Because everyone is different, the treatment that works for one person may not work for another.

You might need professional help, or be able to handle it on your own, naturally. You also may need to experiment with a variety of stress relief solutions and find one or a combination of things that work best to alleviate your concerns and help you enjoy life and remain calm on a consistent basis.

Do you need a guide to help you understand how to cope with Stress in an all inclusive approach? Learn how to combat stress, mentally, physically, emotionally and strategically in your life.

Get Me the Guide

What is Happening with COVID-19? Myths and Facts

July 17, 2022 by Martin Neumann - [rt_reading_time label="Reading Time:" postfix="minutes" postfix_singular="minute"]

The pandemic has affected the life of all of us in very dramatic ways. While dealing with that crisis, we have seen much of conflicting advice, changes in polices, questionable statements, and a counterreaction in the population leading to a widespread distrust and all kinds of conspiracy theories. What are the facts? What are the myths? How can we know?

What is Happening with COVID-19? Myths and Facts

Although it will be difficult to get a final answer to all the questions raised, we want to give a critical look at the evidences and try to discern a little bit on what might be going on behind the scenes.

Is the pandemic already over?

Since mask mandates were lifted for the most part, the impression may arise that the pandemic is coming to an end. Although some countries have seen a significant reduction of infections and deaths, the pandemic is far from being over. On a worldwide scale we are still seeing about 850,000 new infections and 1,500 deaths registered daily. Furthermore, reduced testing is kind of skewing our statistics of real cases. And even in the US, there are still about 100,000 registered cases every day, which is close to the average we have seen during the entire year of 2021. Daily deaths have though declined quite a bit.((Statistics: Worldometers
USA: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/
Worldwide: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/))

How is the Pandemic going to end?

This is a question that has been on everyone’s mind since the COVID-19 pandemic started. The good news is that it seems to be slowly ending. The bad news is that we don’t really know how it will end. There are several possible scenarios for how the pandemic will end.

At the moment, new variants tended to be more infectious, but less dangerous. If a large number of the population gets infected, it is probable that a large enough number reaches some kind of immunity, the number of new infections decreases and we reach endemic levels. In this scenario, the number of new infections decreases until it reaches a point where there are just enough new cases to sustain the disease. It’s possible that this could happen, but it’s also possible that a new wave will appear after an unexpected new mutation of the virus.

What is complicating the situation is, that constant mutations and dwindling antibodies make it quite unlikely that herd immunity will stop the spread of the virus. We probably have to coexist with this virus for a while, but most likely it is going to be less of a problem as time goes on.

What are the treatments for COVID-19?

A WHO study done pretty early in the pandemic was testing a few promising treatment options in hospital settings, including hydroxychloroquine. Patient in intensive care did not get any improvement from any drug applied, including Remdesvir, an antiviral drug widely applied during the pandemic. This created a widespread belief that hydroxychloroquine is not efficient for COVID-19 treatment. Interestingly Remdesvir was continued to be applied, even showing its inefficiency in intensive care setting.((WHO Solidarity Trial))

An intubated patient at the Intensive Care Unit

In early treatment, the situation is completely different. For Ivermectin, several independent meta-analyses showed benefits for prevention and treatment alike.((Hill A et.al. Meta-analysis of randomized trials of ivermectin to treat SARS-CoV-2 infection. DOI:10.21203/rs.3.rs-148845/v1
Ivermectin is effective for COVID-19: real-time meta analysis of 49 studies. https://ivmmeta.com/
Lawrie T. Ivermectin reduces the risk of death from COVID-19 – A rapid review and meta-analysis in support of the recommendation of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance. https://www.e-bmc.co.uk/)) But still, Ivermectin continues to be the most praised and most criticized drug of the pandemic and there is still lots of controversy how efficient it really is. Hydroxychloroquine had a similar fate. Even though I am not aware of any solid meta-analysis, some studies showed some slight benefits of its use. It is known that it helps the transport of zinc into the cell, which is essential for immune function, but no study was attempted to test hydroxychoroquine in combination with zinc. It seems that political motives are having a strong influence on science. One motive to downplay those treatment option was probably, that an emergency authorization of vaccines and drugs would not have been possible, if effective treatment options were available.

Going away from drugs, we have studies showing efficiency of Propolis even in hospital settings.((Duarte Silveira M A et. al. Efficacy of propolis as an adjunct treatment for hospitalized COVID-19 patients: a randomized, controlled clinical trial. Doi https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.01.08.20248932)) We know that Vitamin D is highly effective in preventing and treating a COVID-19 infection, and many other supplements and herbs could be just as effective, even no studies are available to prove this. We have an article on COVID-19 treatment going more into details on many of those points.

Are vaccines really protecting against COVID-19?

Well, that is a tricky question, involving many different parameters. First trials of the Pfizer vaccine showed an efficacy of 90% to protect from infections. However, a study from Israel suggests that protection for infection is reduced to 75% after 3 months and it dwindled to 16% after 6 months.((Jeffay N. Israeli, UK data offer mixed signals on vaccine’s potency against Delta strain. The Times of Israel, June 22, 2022)).

How do we explain this difference? We know that antibodies against COVID-19 are dwindling with time. That means, a vaccine will prevent you fairly well from infection in the first 3 months, but after 6 months, the protection against catching the virus is minimal. However, as antibodies are dwindling, memory B Cells are still keeping a memory of the virus, and can quickly produce antibodies during a subsequent infection. For this reason, protection against hospitalization is still around 80% to 90% and will probably stay so for years to come, until the virus mutates too much, turning current vaccines inefficient.(( Jeffay N. Israeli, UK data offer mixed signals on vaccine’s potency against Delta strain. The Times of Israel, June 22, 2022
Craig E. Pfizer’s Covid vaccine efficacy against infection plunges to just 20% after six months – but protection against severe illness barely dips, study concludes. Daily Mail, October 6, 2020))

Do I need a booster shot to be protected?

We basically answered the question by looking on how immunity works. Even if you get a booster shot every 6 months, for half of the time you are still pretty much unprotected against catching the virus. However, the intensity of the infection will be less because of memory B cells kicking in. That will be true with or without a booster shot.

Some studies suggest that booster shots are increasing the protection against variants like Omicron. Looking closer at the data you will see that a booster shot with the Pfizer vaccine gives only 2% improvement in immunity compared to somebody who got the 2 dose vaccine recently. Boosting a Pfizer vaccine with a Moderna shot gave an improvement of 8%. For a completed 2 dose Moderna vaccine, protection for Omicrom was at 74.1% the first 2 weeks after completing the 2 dose regime. After the booster shot it was only 66.3% 2 weeks after the booster. In practical terms, the booster shot can just refresh your antibodies, which are again dwindling over time. Besides that, it does not really provide better protection for the Omicron variant.((Andrews N et. Al. Covid-19 Vaccine Effectiveness against the Omicron (B.1.1.529) Variant. N Engl J Med 2022; 386:1532-1546 DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2119451)) Protection against severe disease should be valid again without any booster shot. In Germany, the vaccination commission does not recommend a second booster shot, because it is not going to improve your long term protection.((„Impfung bietet keinen längerfristigen Schutz vor Infektion“, betont Stiko-Chef welt.de, 24.10.2022))

If I was infected from COVID-19, do I still need to be vaccinated?

In some countries, being infected is considered to have equal rights as getting the vaccine, for the first 3 to 12 months after the infection. Similar to the vaccine, antibodies will diminish over this time, but memory B cells will give a long-lasting immunity, protecting against severe disease outcome. The immunity aquired by an infection is therefore very much comparable to a vaccine.((Turner, J.S., Kim, W., Kalaidina, E. et al. SARS-CoV-2 infection induces long-lived bone marrow plasma cells in humans. Nature 595, 421–425 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03647-4
Rodda LB, et.al. Functional SARS-CoV-2-specific immune memory persists after mild COVID-19. Res Sq [Preprint]. 2020 Aug 13:rs.3.rs-57112. doi: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-57112/v1.))

Some studies suggest that an infected person can increase the immunity still more by getting the vaccine, concluding that a combination of acquired immunity from the disease and vaccination will give the best form of protection. Nevertheless, the infection by itself is already giving the same immunity then the vaccine by itself, some studies showing even stronger protection than the vaccine. Having been infected will make a vaccination unnecessary. A recommendation to get vaccinated after being infected is based more on politics then on scientific evidence.((Dra. Sheena Meredith. Covid-19: Por que estamos ignorando a imunidade adquirida com a infecção? Medscape, July 14, 2022))

What are the risks of COVID-19 vaccines?

Some vaccines like CoronaVac or Covaxin are using the inactivated virus to create an immune response. The technology involved is not much different than any other vaccine we used during the last few decades. This kind of vaccines should be fairly safe in relation to side effects. CoronaVac was though criticized quite a bit because of limited efficacy to prevent against disease and hospitalization.

At the other hand, mRNA vaccines like Pfizer and Moderna and viral vector vaccines like the AstraZeneca and Johnson&Johnson vaccine are new technologies that include gene-manipulated substances that are instructing body cells to replicate the spike protein. These are technologies that never have been deployed in large scale to the public, since technological problems were still manifold. During the need of the pandemic, approval of this new technologies has been fast-tracked in order to help to resolve the crisis. There is much that is still unknown about long-term side effects of those technologies, and anybody who is concerned about putting GMO foods into their stomach, will be probably concerned about injecting a gene-manipulated substance into the bloodstream as well.

There was much discussion whether those technologies will manipulate the DNA of the human body. For the mRNA vaccines this is quite unlikely, since they are replicating the spike protein through channeling a RNA structure into some of your body cells, and instructing them to replicate the virus. In this technology the substance is not entering the DNA at all. The viral vector vaccines are different, since they are really entering the DNA and instructing that way the cell to produce the spike protein, very similar than many viruses will do. This would be potentially the riskiest among those vaccine technologies involved.

While those questions of the unknown may be a concern for many, let’s focus on something we know to be a problem, and that are the spike proteins. Studies have shown that this spike protein is able to damage cells independently of the virus itself.((Lei Y et.al. SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Impairs Endothelial Function via Downregulation of ACE 2. Circulation Research. 2021;128:1323–1326 https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.121.318902))

Another study showed that spike proteins are able to influence cell signaling and could lead to PAH, a serious lung disease, blood clotting, coronary artery disease, hypertension and stroke.((Suzuki Y et. al. SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Elicits Cell Signaling in Human Host Cells: Implications for Possible Consequences of COVID-19 Vaccines. Vaccines (Basel). 2021 Jan; 9(1): 36. doi: 10.3390/vaccines9010036)) The spike protein can also damage the blood brain barrier and cause unpredictable brain damage, that shows up in several symptoms, for the disease and the vaccine alike.((Buzhdygan TP et.al. The SARS-CoV-2 spike protein alters barrier function in 2D static and 3D microfluidic in-vitro models of the human blood-brain barrier. Neurobiol Dis. 2020 Dec;146:105131. DOI: 10.1016/j.nbd.2020.105131))

With an inactivated virus, like used in CoronaVac, the exposure to the spike protein will be quite limited. The newer vaccine technologies instruct though the body cells to produce spike proteins, and literally inundate the entire body with this damage causing substance.

It is important to note that the spike protein of vaccines was modified in order to cleave to cells and not enter into them, so not all findings of the studies may apply equally for the spike protein of the vaccines. It would be interesting to make some studies with both spike proteins to have a clear comparation between the two, but as far as I know this was not done so far.

Now what do we have on real world statistical data? There is a reporting system, that collects potential side effects of any vaccine applied or produced in the US, called VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Effect Reporting System). In normal years there are reported around 150 deaths for all 70 registered vaccines combined. Now for the COVID-19 vaccines we have already close to 16,000 deaths reported in the US alone, during the 1 ½ years that the vaccines were applied.((Original VAERS dataset: https://wonder.cdc.gov/controller/saved/D8/D173F192)) Data from other countries who have a reporting system in place is not much different.

Of course, we know that a reported incident in the system does not prove that it was really caused by the vaccine. There may be some deaths reported, that were randomly happening after the vaccination, but were not directly caused by the event. At the other hand, the reporting system is completely voluntary, and only a small percentage of all incidents are getting really reported. Some estimates will go that the real number would be about 5 times higher. Even though it is very hard to come up with any exact numbers, we can deduce that the COVID-19 vaccines are not quite as safe as your common flu shot.

In order to be fair, we need to put this numbers into perspective. Even if we estimate somewhere around 100,000 deaths by the vaccine, we need to contrast that to about one million deaths by the virus in the US territory. Going with the assumption that the vaccine helped to control the spread of the virus, the vaccine still helped to save lives.

At the other hand, the statistics of side effects and deaths are high enough to be of a serious concern, and should cause a constructive discussion in scientific circles. This discussion though is not happening. In the media, any mention of serious vaccine side effects is actively suppressed. On Facebook, groups reporting vaccine side effects are getting deleted. The government did a simplified reporting system called V-Safe, where anybody could report side effects of the COVID-19 vaccines from their cell phone, but the data is not made publicly available. Censorship prevails at every corner. And it seems that even scientific studies are tweaked in order to support the politically correct narrative. If there is any discussion at all about vaccine safety, it is most likely to be emotionally loaded, with everybody defending their position and no constructive dialogue involved.

Robert Malone is a scientist that was involved in the invention of the mRNA technology. He made on a LinkedIn post the following statement about the current COVID-19 vaccines:

Once again I feel it necessary to make a clear and unambiguous statement. The data strongly indicate that the experimental genetic vaccines, including the mRNA and recombinant adenoviral vaccines, have saved lives. Many lives.

But it is also increasingly clear that there are some risks associated with these vaccines. Various governments have attempted to deny that this is the case. But they are wrong. Vaccination-associated coagulation is a risk. Cardiotoxicity is a risk. Those are proven, and discussed in official USG communications, as well as communications from a variety of other governments.

Based on what I have seen, I believe that other toxicity risks will become more apparent. These include menstrual irregularities, development of thrombocytopenia, cerebrovascular effects, and reactivation of latent viruses such as clinical shingles.

But we do not know how prevalent these are, and the spectrum of severity is unknown and possibly unknowable because the V-Safe database is not being shared outside of CDC, the VAERS systems is deeply flawed, and we just do not have the comprehensive safety data necessary to accurately evaluate risk/benefit for the various cohorts – elderly, healthy normal adults, immunocompromised, pregnancy, adolescents, children, and infants. Particularly the long term safety data necessary to evaluate risks such as autoimmune complications that may manifest months or years post-vaccination. That is just a sciencefact.
Robert Malone

This is just one example of many thinkers in scientific circles who call for an unbiased scientific discussion of vaccine safety, especially in some more vulnerable subgroups.

Are COVID-19 vaccines safe for pregnant women?

There are several studies who tried to evaluate exactly this question. While there is some adequate data for vaccine safety in the second and third trimester, it gets more complicated in the first trimester of pregnancy, which is exactly the most critical phase.

A silhouette of a pregnant woman at a sunset

One study assessing the safety of the vaccine during pregnancy concluded that the abortion rate of women vaccinated in the first trimester would be 12.6% and the published rate for the normal population 10-26%. Looking at this data, they concluded the vaccine was totally safe, even in the first trimester of pregnancy.((The results are in table 4 of this study:
Shimabukuro TT, Kim SY, Myers TR, et al. Preliminary Findings of mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine Safety in Pregnant Persons. N Engl J Med. 2021;384(24):2273-2282. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2104983
Find the data of the uncorrected chart in this note:
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMx210016))

A reader of the journal found some faults with that and commented the following:

In table 4, the authors report a rate of spontaneous abortions <20 weeks of 12.5% (104 abortions/827 completed pregnancies). However, this rate should be based on the number of women who were at risk of a spontaneous abortion due to vaccine receipt and should exclude the 700 women who were vaccinated in their third-trimester (104/127 = 82%). We acknowledge this rate will likely decrease as the pregnancies of women who were vaccinated <20 weeks complete, but believe the rate will be higher than 12.5%. However, given the importance of these findings we feel it important to report these rates accurately. Additionally, the authors indicate that the rate of spontaneous abortions in the published literature is between 10% and 26%. However, the upper cited rate includes clinically-unrecognized pregnancies, which does not reflect the clinically-recognized pregnancies of this cohort and should be removed.

Let us analyze this comment a bit closer. The study came up with a 12.5% risk of abortion by dividing the 104 abortions in the first trimester with 827 completed pregnancies. Just the completed pregnancies included women that were vaccinated in the second and third trimester. This is obviously not statistically correct. Like the reader pointed out, only 127 women that were vaccinated in the first trimester completed the pregnancy, since the rest was still pregnant and their outcome was still unknown. The reader concluded that the real rate would be somewhat higher than 12.5%, but definitely below the 82% she was mentioning in this note.

Now the manipulation of the reference values is critical. The study mentioned a first trimester abortion rate of 10% to 26% in the normal population. Just the 26% rate is including clinically unrecognized pregnancies, who aborted without the pregnant women ever realizing that they were pregnant. Obviously, the vaccinated women in the study knew that they were pregnant in order to be included into the study. The correct rate to be applied would be therefore 10%, thus showing an increased risk of abortion even with the statistically wrong calculation of 12.5% risk. That smells very much like deliberate manipulation! This note was sent to the journal but was not getting published.

The story continues. The anti-vaccination defender Steve Kirsch got news about this letter and published in his article that the study has proven an 82% abortion rate within the first trimester.((Steve Kirsch. Should you get vaccinated? Trialsitenews, December 15, 2021)) This is obviously not what the reader said and equally wrong. It is sad to see that distortion of the facts are applied by both parties alike. I wonder when we can come to the point of defending the truth instead of bending it for political reasons, in order to make our viewpoint look better.

The critique had though some effect. Finally, the paper published a correction of the study and removed any definite statistics about first trimester pregnancies. It took them though from June till September to publish this correction, and probably only to avoid the criticism received by the opposition. Interestingly, until today I am not aware of any study that really settles vaccine safety during the first trimester of pregnancy.

Shall I get vaccinated after all?

This is a very individual question that nobody can answer for somebody else. We have seen that there are risks at both sides. You may be inclined to recommend a vaccine to a person in the at-risk group, like the elderly, diabetics, obese, immunocompromised etc. At the other hand, this is exactly the same group that will be more vulnerable for vaccine side effects. I would be very hesitant to recommend a vaccine to a 98-year-old grandma, being diabetic and so weak that she spends most of time in her bed. She may not be able to resist the side effects of the vaccination, and it may be safer to simply protect her from exposure to the virus.

Lets look at another criteria to help in this decision, which is probability of exposure. If you a salesperson that sees so many persons every day, and you do not take good care of your lifestyle in order to strengthen your immunity, then vaccination could be of interest for you. If you are living on a farm, way out in the country, you visit town only once a week and you take good care of your immunity, then you may get by very well without vaccination.

We already said that if you were infected from COVID-19 you already created sufficient immunity and you can safely go without vaccine. As a fact, getting vaccinated within 1-2 month after being infected, can even increase your risk for vaccine side effects. If you want to get vaccinated, you should definitely wait if you got infected recently.

Vaccination of mostly healthy children is something that probably will bring more harm than benefits as well. Some do argue, that children should be vaccinated in order to protect adults, but we have shown already, that protection from infection is not very effective, even with booster shots every 6 months. Nobody protects somebody else by getting vaccinated. Hospitalization and deaths from the virus are quite rare amongst healthy children, and there is no need to expose them to the vaccine.

Booster shots are another thing that is probably causing more harm than benefit. Even without a booster shot, you have adequate protection against hospitalization and death, and every booster is going to expose you anew to a load of spike protein, causing potential damage to your body.

At the end of the day, you should be well informed about the pros and cons and make an informed decision for yourself. Those who are vaccinated do not need to be afraid of the unvaccinated, because the vaccine is protecting yourself, and not the other person. We have clearly stated that a vaccine does not adequately limit the spread of the virus. And whoever is refusing vaccination, should be sure about his decision and not criticizing those who think differently. I hope the day of throwing stones can come to an end and we can simply live out the convictions we have about the subject. And hopefully, one day we can start a constructive discussion of risks and benefits of the vaccine.

What else can I do to be protected?

As a preventive measure, all efforts should be made to strengthen your immune system. A study conducted in Madrid, found that people who did at least 2 times per week a 30-minute exercise session had an 8 times higher COVID-19 survival rate compared to the inactive group.((Salgado-Aranda R et.al. Influence of Baseline Physical Activity as a Modifying Factor on COVID-19 Mortality: A Single-Center, Retrospective Study. Infect Dis Ther (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40121-021-00418-6))

Nutrition has an equal importance. A study of healthcare workers in 6 countries found, that those who were on a plant-based diet had a 3.7 times better protection against moderate to severe COVID-19 infections. Interestingly, those who were on a low carb diet had a 1.5 times higher risk.(( Kim H, et. al. Plant-based diets, pescatarian diets and COVID-19 severity: a population-based case-control study in six countries. BMJ Nutr Prev Health. 2021 Jun 7;4(1):257-266. doi: 10.1136/bmjnph-2021-000272.))

Even though there are no studies around in relation to COVID-19, there are benefits of good sleep, proper hydration and other healthy habits as well. We know quite a bit of the importance of proper Vitamin D levels for immunity. A study showed that vitamin D deficient individuals had twice as much a risk of hospitalization for COVID-19 compared to normal levels.(( E Merzon et.al. Low plasma 25(OH) vitamin D level is associated with increased risk of COVID-19 infection: an Israeli population-based study. FEBS J. 2020 Sep;287(17):3693-3702. DOI: 10.1111/febs.15495))

If you just practice those 3 lifestyle factors, your immunity is already better than any vaccine can offer for you. And we did not talk yet about reduction of sugar, proper vitamin status and several other things we are able to do as a preventive measure.

I think it is time to think seriously about our lifestyle. If we do the right thing, we are not only so much better protected against COVID-19, but as well against heart disease, cancer, diabetes and other lifestyle diseases that cost many more lives than COVID-19 at this point in time. If you want to learn how to strengthen your immunity with a sensible lifestyle, follow the Coronavirus Immunity Challenge on our website. So stop arguing, and decide to do the right thing!

We have a special opportunity just for you. If you want to receive practical and up to date advice on how to implement an immunity-boosting lifestyle, simply join the Coronavirus Immunity Challenge and prepare yourself to face the pandemic with a bullet-proof immune system.

Coronavirus Immunity Challenge

Is salt good for you after all? Checking the Evidence!

July 10, 2022 by Clare Collins - [rt_reading_time label="Reading Time:" postfix="minutes" postfix_singular="minute"]

Salt is the most common form of sodium and is added to food during manufacturing, home cooking or at the table to enhance the taste or to extend the shelf life. Most people have heard the advice to cut down on salt. That’s because high sodium intakes are associated with high blood pressure, a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease, heart attacks and strokes.((Graudal NA, Hubeck-Graudal T, Jurgens G. Effects of low sodium diet versus high sodium diet on blood pressure, renin, aldosterone, catecholamines, cholesterol, and triglyceride. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Dec 12;12(12):CD004022. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004022.pub5.))

Is salt good for you after all? Checking the Evidence!

So the recent headline “Food myths busted: dairy, salt and steak may be good for you after all” was bound to grab-attention.((Food myths busted: dairy, salt and steak may be good for you after all. The Guardian, September 6, 2021))

I'll file this one under good newshttps://t.co/LVKrP2lZfD
— 🌻 Franck (@Franck_chester) September 26, 2021

In the research article this headline is based on, the authors examined whether advice to substantially lower sodium intakes was supported by robust evidence.((Mente A. Sodium Intake and Health: What Should We Recommend Based on the Current Evidence? Nutrients2021, 13(9), 3232; https://doi.org/10.3390/nu13093232))

The article’s premise is that current advice to limit sodium consumption to 2.3 grams a day is unachievable for most people in the long term. And it claims there isn’t good quality evidence to show lower salt intakes reduce the risk of heart attacks and strokes.

The authors suggest that current global sodium intakes, which range from 3-5 grams per day, are associated with the lowest risks for a heart attack, stroke or dying prematurely. And that heart attacks and strokes increase only when sodium intakes are higher or lower than this.

Graph illustrating that supposedly a medium amount of sodium consumption is the healthiest. — The researchers argue there’s a ‘sweet spot’ for salt intake and heart disease risk. We will check the evidence.

But there are a number of controversies about these claims, and the existing advice to limit salt consumption remains. Lets take a closer a look at some of the issues associated with these claims, as well as important research the authors missed.

Most of us could afford to cut down on salt

One teaspoon of salt weighs around 5 grams and contains 2 grams of sodium.

Americans consume about 3.6 grams of sodium per day, equivalent to 9.2 grams (about 2 teaspoons) of table salt.

This is higher than the suggested dietary target of 2 grams of sodium (5 grams of salt) per day and the adequate intake range of 460-920 milligrams (1.3-2.6 grams of salt) a day.((Nutrient Reference Values for Australia and New Zealand: Sodium
Antmann E M et.al. Stakeholder discussion to reduce population-wide sodium intake and decrease sodium in the food supply: a conference report from the American Heart Association Sodium Conference 2013 Planning Group. DOI: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000051))

Sodium intakes in the US are similar to the rest of the world. Data from 66 countries, accounting for three-quarters of the world’s adult population, reported the average sodium consumption is 3.95 grams per day and ranges from 2.2 to 5.5 grams per day.((Mozaffarian D, et. al. Global Burden of Diseases Nutrition and Chronic Diseases Expert Group. Global sodium consumption and death from cardiovascular causes. N Engl J Med. 2014 Aug 14;371(7):624-34. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1304127.))

Yes, it’s possible to cut down on salt

Changing individual behaviour long term is challenging. But it’s possible.

A 2017 systematic review of dietary salt-reduction interventions found individual dietary counselling could reduce a person’s salt consumption by about 2 grams a day (equivalent to 780mg of sodium), over time periods up to five years.((Hyseni L et. al. Systematic review of dietary salt reduction policies: Evidence for an effectiveness hierarchy? PLoS One. 2017 May 18;12(5):e0177535. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0177535.))

Population-wide strategies that include reformulating manufactured food with lower levels of salt, improved labelling and mass media education were even more effective in some regions, reducing average salt intakes by around 4 grams a day in Finland and Japan.((Hyseni L, Elliot-Green A, Lloyd-Williams F, Kypridemos C, O’Flaherty M, McGill R, Orton L, Bromley H, Cappuccio FP, Capewell S. Systematic review of dietary salt reduction policies: Evidence for an effectiveness hierarchy? PLoS One. 2017 May 18;12(5):e0177535. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0177535.))

The authors of the above mentioned paper highlight a lack of studies in the population showing they’ve achieved dietary sodium intakes of less that 2.3 grams per day. But this fails to acknowledge the challenges in conducting such a study to test that, or the importance of reducing your sodium intake relative to what you usually consume.

Cutting salt lowers your risk of heart disease

A recently published randomised trial across 600 villages in rural China shows cutting salt intakes can reduce a person’s risk of cardiovascular disease, heart attack and stroke.((Neal B, et. al. Effect of Salt Substitution on Cardiovascular Events and Death. N Engl J Med. 2021 Sep 16;385(12):1067-1077. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2105675.))

The study included more than 20,000 people with high blood pressure who either had a history of stroke or were aged over 60 years. One group was randomly assigned to use a salt substitute to reduce their sodium intake. The second group continued to use regular salt. Both groups were followed up over five years.

The intervention led to a reduction in sodium excreted in the urine (indicating complicance) and a reduction in blood pressure.

The rate of any major cardiovascular event, including heart attack, was 13% lower among those in the salt-substitute group compared to the regular salt group. The rate of strokes was 14% lower.

This trial demonstrates the benefit of reducing dietary sodium intakes, irrespective of a specific daily target.

Is it risky to have too little salt?

Humans need sodium to maintain essential bodily processes such as fluid volume and cell stability. Sodium levels are balanced though a sensitive system of hormones, chemical processes and nerves to ensure that sodium in excess of needs is excreted in the urine.

There is conflicting evidence about heart health when you have very low sodium intakes. Some researchers have suggested there is a J-shaped relationship, where both low and very high intakes increase the risk of poor outcomes (the end of a “J” shape), while the lowest risk is across a broad mid-point of salt intake (the curve in the “J”).

Comparison of TOHP and PURE study, two examples of conflicting evidence about healthy sodium levels. — Association of sodium excretion with cardiovascular disease in the Trials of Hypertension Prevention (top) and PURE study (bottom)

The J-shaped curve in some studies on salt and blood pressure can be explained by issues such as measurement error, random variation, other differences (in age, sex, smoking status or socioeconomic status), existing dietary patterns or other health problems, interactions between a major sodium reduction, and the body’s physiological pathways that regulate blood pressure.((Cook NR, He FJ, MacGregor GA, Graudal N. Sodium and health-concordance and controversy. BMJ. 2020 Jun 26;369:m2440. doi: 10.1136/bmj.m2440.))

Or it could be explained by reverse causation, where the people recruited into the study report low sodium intakes because they have already been advised to follow a low salt diet before enrolling in the trial.

While we wait for more research to explaining discrepancies related to a J-shape curve, the evidence overwhelmingly finds lower sodium intakes, compared to higher intakes, lead to important reductions in blood pressure.((Graudal NA, Hubeck-Graudal T, Jurgens G. Effects of low sodium diet versus high sodium diet on blood pressure, renin, aldosterone, catecholamines, cholesterol, and triglyceride. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Dec 12;12(12):CD004022. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004022.pub5. ))

Stay Always Up to Date

Sign up to our newsletter and stay always informed with news and tips around your health.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

How Sunlight Can Change Your Mood

July 3, 2022 by Dr. Cesar Vasconcellos de Souza - [rt_reading_time label="Reading Time:" postfix="minutes" postfix_singular="minute"]

Do I need to sunbathe? Vitamin D prevents which diseases? Does sunlight have a good effect on our mood? What are the signs that you may be deficient in Vitamin D?

We know that sunlight is critical to our health linked to vitamin D. But what about our mood? There is vitamin D2 which is called ergocalciferol, and D3 called cholecalciferol. Vitamin D2 is found in a limited number of foods, while D3 is absorbed by the body when the skin is exposed to sunlight. Both are converted into the active form which is used by the body and stored in the liver and kidneys.

When calcium levels in the body are reduced, the parathyroid glands, located in the neck, release a hormone that stimulates the kidneys to convert vitamin D into its most active form, aiding in the absorption of calcium and phosphorus. Our vitamin D requirement is 5 micrograms per day, this in adults weighing less than 200 lbs (90 kg).

A lack of vitamin D causes osteoporosis, which is a progressive decrease in bone density, with an increased chance of fractures, as bones become more porous and less resistant. Osteoporosis is more common in the elderly. A tip: if you are diagnosed with osteoporosis and have been prescribed to take calcium orally, know that this alone is not enough to resolve it. It is necessary to practice some exercise as well. Taking a lot of calcium and not doing any kind of physical activity is a message that bones interpret as we don’t need to be strong.

And the opposite is true. As you engage in regular physical activity, this will signal your bone cells to absorb calcium, because your message to them through exercise will be this: we need strong bones. So take calcium, but engage in some form of physical activity, at least three times a week.

Lack of vitamin D, in addition to osteoporosis, also produces rickets, which is characterized by insufficient mineralization of the bones, affecting children and adolescents. Symptoms are stunted growth, bowed legs, weakness and pain in the spine, pelvis and legs. Studies show that the absence of vitamin D, can facilitate the emergence of certain types of cancer, cardiovascular disease, hypertension or high blood pressure, multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis, type 1 diabetes among others.

About 90% of the vitamin D in our body is obtained from exposure to sunlight, which is converted from cholesterol in the skin. Normal doses of vitamin D can be obtained with direct exposure to the sun for 10 or 15 minutes daily, through the action of ultraviolet rays, which are also bactericidal. So, if you have a wound on your skin, expose that wound to sunlight as this will help it fight off infections and heal.

Have you ever heard people say, or maybe it happens to you that the cloudy weather with overcast makes you so sad, down and discouraged? There is a type of depression, which is a seasonal depression, whose scientific name is seasonal affective disorder. There are people who have depressive symptoms in autumn or early winter, and there are some who also have summer depression, starting in late spring or early summer. Summer depression is very rare, while winter depression is far more common.

Seasonal depression happens every year, always around the same time. The one that starts in winter is more frequent in countries with less sunlight throughout the year, with darker days and more rigorous winter. It seems that the farther a person lives from the equator, the greater number of people experience this type of suffering. That’s why it’s more common for people in Canada, Norway or Russia to have this type of depression than in tropical countries.

A seasonal depressive person on a rainy window

One theory says this is because sunlight activates brain hormones, which help maintain a happy mood. In a place called Fairbanks, Alaska, on winter days, the time span between sunrise and sunset is a little less than 4 hours. Imagine living a day with only 4 hours of natural light! With this great lack of sunlight, it would be logical to think that a good part of the population would have to have the winter depression. But it turns out that it is actually not that much. One study found that about 9% of Fairbanks residents had seasonal affective disorder, while this type of depression occurs in 1% in tropical countries.

The most common symptoms of seasonal winter depression are: more sleep, that is, the person sleeps more hours a day without feeling rested; increased appetite, desire to eat more carbohydrates, chocolate and fatty foods, difficulty getting out of bed in the morning, loss of energy, feeling of fatigue, impaired concentration, social isolation, irritability, constant sadness, among other symptoms. It affects more women with a share of 60 to 90%, especially between 20 and 40 years of age. In some ways, the behavioral symptoms of summer depression tend to be the opposite of those of winter depression. Summer depressed people can sleep less and lose weight.

A researcher at the National Institute of Mental Health, Tom Wehr, has suggested that seasonal depression may be related to melatonin, which is a hormone produced during the night. When the day gets dark, melatonin increases in the body, and if you can sleep in a dark environment, the peak of melatonin production happens between two and three in the morning. Scientist Tom Wehr commented that during winter animals produce melatonin for more hours, but in less quantity compared to other times of the year. He found that the people who increase production of this substance in the winter are the ones who suffer from these types of depression.

For the treatment of seasonal depression or seasonal affective disorder, medication and psychotherapy are used. Exposure to sunlight, called phototherapy, also helps. However, this does not work equally for everyone. If the problem was only linked to melatonin, perhaps light treatment will solve it in many cases. But there are still other factors that science is studying to understand why some people exhibit this sensitivity to light in a different way than others, to the point of suffering this winter depression.

So take care of your health and get some sun every day!

Stay Always Up to Date

Sign up to our newsletter and stay always informed with news and tips around your health.

The Intestinal Flora – The Unknown Organ

June 26, 2022 by Esther Neumann - [rt_reading_time label="Reading Time:" postfix="minutes" postfix_singular="minute"]

Did you know that our body accommodates about 10 times as many bacteria as body cells? A large part is in the colon and forms the intestinal flora, which handles a wide range of tasks for our body. They help with food absorption, strengthen the immune system and promote peristalsis.

The Intestinal Flora – The Unknown Organ

Cows and humans have one thing in common: they are home to countless other inhabitants, microorganisms and bacteria. Just the time at which these microorganisms do their work is very different in cows and humans.

In the cow, the breakdown of cellulose and other polysaccharides takes place in the forestomach. Short-chain fatty acids are formed in the process. In humans, the bacteria mainly really work in the colon. Again short-chain fatty acids are formed. The work of these microorganisms is extremely important for the health of cows and humans alike.

The 10¹³ cells of the human body are opposed to 10¹⁴ bacteria in the human ecosystem, that means 10 times more bacteria than body cells. There are far more of them living in the large intestine than in the small intestine. Around 1,000 different species and strains make up the intestinal flora, that can vary greatly from person to person. It is still unknown how, once destroyed briefly by antibiotics or during colonoscopy, they manage to rebuild so quickly into a new colony.

Actually, the term “flora” is not quite correct. Flora means plant kingdom. The phrase was coined in the time when bacteria were still considered plants. Today they are divided into a separate group. The bacteria in the gut are not a lifeless mass. They’re doing metabolism. And this huge number is capable to form substances that have an effect on the entire organism. The performance of the intestinal flora can be compared to that of the liver, which is the most versatile metabolic organ. Intestinal bacteria perform many important tasks on our behalf. Not everything has been explored yet.

Diet and Intestinal Flora

The composition of the intestinal flora changes with the food supply. Deviations in eating habits and dietary changes can affect the balance of the intestinal flora, damage it or conversely promote health. The administration of antibiotics also upsets the balance. If several negative factors are combined, pathogenic microorganisms such as enterococci or clostridia multiply. Health-promoting bacteria such as lactobacilli and bifidobacteria are suppressed. Many diseases are closely related to the intestinal microflora.

Lactobacilli at the intestine — Lactobacilli

Meat eaters have a completely different composition of the intestinal flora than people who only eat plant-based food. A study has shown that the metabolites of the microorganisms found in the stool of meat eaters lead to DNA damage. The result is cancer, especially in the colon. Many substances that are produced during the preparation of meat, especially when grilling over an open fire, also damage the DNA. Damage to the genetic material contributes significantly to the formation of cancer.

Functions of the Intestinal Flora

The intestine, with its huge surface area, represents the largest exchange surface with the environment. Foreign substances, including germs, are constantly passing through. Immune cells are located in the intestinal wall. A significant part of the antibodies is produced by lymphoid tissues in the intestine. They are passed on through the bloodstream and thus reach the mouth, nose and lungs. In this way, other parts of the body are also supplied with protective antibodies.

Healthy intestinal flora plays an important role in the development of the immune system. The harmless germs activate and train the immune cells. The function of the immune system cannot be maintained without a healthy intestinal flora. Of course, our defenses are not infallible and often become weakened, leaving us vulnerable to disease.

The intestinal flora participates in the digestion of dietary fibers. In the past it was believed that these were indigestible because there are no enzymes in the body that can break down fiber. They are therefore passed undigested to the large intestine. But gut bacteria can. They even break down wood. This results in short-chain fatty acids: acetic acid, propionic acid, butyric acid and lactic acid. These degradation products are very rich in energy. They nourish the intestinal mucosa cells and the intestinal flora itself.

It has been found that deficiencies in these fatty acids are common in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Irritable bowel syndrome, diarrhea or constipation can also be a consequence of disturbances in the intestinal flora. Short-chain fatty acids also stimulate intestinal movements. This promotes the mixing of the chyme for nutrient absorption and further transport.

In addition, the intestinal flora produces substances that the body cannot produce itself. This includes, for example, vitamin K, which is so important for blood clotting. It also produces vitamin B₁₂. Unfortunately, this vitamin is no longer absorbed in the lowest section of the intestine. However, the possibility is being discussed that in the healthy intestines of pure plant eaters such vitamin B₁₂-producing microorganisms continue to rise into the small intestine, where absorption is possible. They can also produce vitamin B₁ and B₂.

If the barrier function of the intestinal wall is impaired, it becomes permeable. This can lead to inflammatory reactions that can contribute to the development of other diseases. These include inflammatory bowel disease, type 2 diabetes, atherosclerosis, heart failure and certain liver diseases.

In order to improve health and quality of life, it makes sense to pay more attention to the intestinal flora. We can take care of them by eating more fiber. We find them in fruits, vegetables, whole grains, seeds and nuts. If we eat little or – even better – no meat at all, we improve the intestinal flora towards a positive colonization. This makes such a difference in our health.

Stay Always Up to Date

Sign up to our newsletter and stay always informed with news and tips around your health.

Stressors in the Midlife Crisis

June 19, 2022 by Martin Neumann - [rt_reading_time label="Reading Time:" postfix="minutes" postfix_singular="minute"]

Adults are expected to have it all together. They look back on years of experience that hopefully taught them some important lessons for life. They are dealing with growing responsibilities. This period in one’s life can come with a ton of challenges, both tangible and abstract. These are the years that are typically branded as the midlife crisis years, and for good reason.

At this point, many people realize that the first half of their life is over, and to some extent, they really can’t get back any of their childhood or young adult experiences. Unless they are pretty content with the lives they’ve lived thus far, it is pretty easy for somebody to slitter into that existential crisis of the midlife years.

One of the most dreadful causes of stress that people experience at this age is more philosophical than it is tangible. They start to see things in the bigger picture rather than just small portions of their life.

At this point, many people will start to wonder a lot about what they’ve done for the world. Thoughts such as, “What did I accomplish in my younger years?” and, “What was I put here to do?” are common, because it’s hard to imagine that you’ve already lived roughly half of your life without feeling like you did much. They really just want to have left some kind of reliable legacy, because there’s something scary about the prospect of one day being forgotten.

In a much more physical sense, this is when health problems can become really apparent. Joints at this age don’t work quite as well as they used to, leading to things like early stages of arthritis, general joint pain, and more. It might become harder for people this age to do things that they once enjoyed – especially when it comes to things like sports or hiking. By making basic enjoyable tasks painful, these health problems can take away much of their happiness and add on a lot of stress.

One major problem around this age that can cause stress is the sheer amount of responsibilities they have when it comes to family. Around this age, your parents are starting to get much older, and bluntly put, might pass away soon. They’ll have a ton of health problems of their own, so you’ll likely have to make sure they’re taken care of or become a caretaker yourself.

At the same time, your own kids will be a bit older, so you’ll also have to give them a certain amount of care and concern as you ready them to go out in the world as young adults soon.

Trying to balance that alone is bad enough, but you also still have to work and earn money, start thinking about retirement, and you might be experiencing issues with your relationship by this point.

All kinds of problems can arise around this time, making it one of the most stressful times of one’s life. The classic sign of stress around this time is the midlife crisis. A midlife crisis occurs when someone has been going through the same motions for decades now, and is so sick and tired of the monotony, that they do something very out of character in order for them to feel refreshed and reinvigorated.

A midlife crisis can manifest itself in a number of things, varying from person to person. With men, it could be something like buying a new sports car or a motorcycle – something exciting and interesting that they can enjoy.

In some more extreme cases, a midlife crisis might culminate in leaving your significant other, especially if you’re not fully happy with the relationship. It doesn’t have to be something specific, either.

Many people experience this crisis just by realizing they’re now older than they want to be. They start taking note of little things like how much the world has changed, how much they’ve changed, and how everything they used to do is now old-fashioned.

This can be really hard on some people, and they’ll show it. One prevalent sign of stress around this age is changes to the body. Many men experience a receding hairline as a result of both age and stress, and by worrying about it, they only make it worse.

Men can also experience a severe drop in testosterone around this time. No matter who you are, you’ll also start to get some gray hairs coming in, which can be stressful if you’re worried about your looks. Both men and women alike will dye their hair in an attempt to keep looking youthful.

There are many, many solutions for stress around this time. The first solution you might try is coming to terms with and accepting your age. Growing older isn’t a bad thing, but it feels bad at the time. In reality, you’re experiencing more and more each day than many other people got to, so you should enjoy the time you have rather than sit there stressing and having regrets.

It’s also important that you deal with your stress in a proper way. Going out to drop tons of money on an expensive car is not healthy, nor is leaving your family or taking up unhealthy habits. Instead, find joy in things that are either productive or make you feel whole. Sure, life is stressful, but if you can escape it for an hour to engage in some kind of hobby, you’ll feel so much better by the end of the day.

One practice that has helped many people become more positive in their lives is to embrace positive thoughts as much as you do negative thoughts, if not more. Each time you think about something negatively, think of a positive aspect to it as well.

For example, if you’re unhappy with your job, it’s fine to think about that, but just also think about the fact that you’re lucky to be employed and to have a stable source of income. Taking time to appreciate all of the little things can really make such a difference in your life. Gratitude can change your outlook to life quite drastically. Be sure you find the best in your years you are living right now, and let the stressful thoughts pass you by.

Do you need a guide to help you understand how to cope with Stress in an all inclusive approach? Learn how to combat stress, mentally, physically, emotionally and strategically in your life.

Get Me the Guide

« Previous Page