Chris Masterjohn PhD on Herd Immunity, Viruses & Immune Function


Baby: Welcome to my mom’s podcast.

This episode is brought to you by Jovov Red Light Therapy. Red light therapy, also called photobomodulation, has been a part of my life for many years. I discovered this years ago when I did some research and found specific benefits for hair, skin, thyroid, energy levels, and many other things. And that’s because our bodies need light. We think of food as fuel for our bodies, and so is light, but light is an important fuel for our bodies and for ourselves. And many of us find certain types of light, such as the artificial blue indoor spectrum of light, and not enough for other types of light, such as all the spectrum emanating from the sun, and including red light. Yeah Al that sounds pretty crap to me, Looks like Al that sounds pretty crap to me, Looks like Al that sounds pretty crap to me, Looks like Al that sounds pretty crap to me, Looks like Al that sounds pretty crap to me. It works wonders for my well-being routine, and that’s why I make it such a priority. When I use it regularly, I notice a difference in my energy level and my skin. And I wanted to talk to you today specifically about Joff because he has long been at the forefront of red light therapy. But they have just come up with a new generation that has upgrades that are really interesting. Their devices are sleek, lightweight and equal to the power of all their original equipment. But they’ve stepped up their coverage area so you can stand three times as far away and still get the recommended dose. I find that it allows me to work or do other activities that are close to the light to reap the benefits. They’ve also upgraded their setup, so it’s very fast and easy to build and can fit in almost any space, depending on your size requirements. A couple of really cool features about these new devices. They have something called recovery pulse mode, which uses pulse technology to give themselves an extra boost after a hard day of workout or stress. And I know that sleep is one of the most important aspects of health. And I’ve used red light therapy at night to help me walk more often during the day. But their new devices have something called ambient mode, which is low-intensity light, which is especially beneficial at night, of course, and more so than the bright blue light of many of our screens. According to the natural circadian locks. For a limited time, Joff is offering listeners to this podcast with a special discount on the first order. And you can get all the details by going to joovv.com/wellnessmama and using my code valenessmama on a qualifying order.

This podcast is brought to you by your new personal care company, Valencia, based on homemade recipes in your kitchen for decades. A lot of “clean” products just don’t work and that’s why I’ve spent the last decade researching and perfecting recipes for products that not only eliminate toxic chemicals but also contain ingredients that Works better than traditional alternatives to and they nourish your body from the outside. I. Finally excited to share these products with you and want to tell you about our new dry shampoo! It can be used in different ways. You can spray it on clean hair to increase the volume and increase the time between fumes. Spray on hair that has not been given in a day or two so that oil or sweat is absorbed and you will be colored to maintain the color. Can work in hair as often as not washed with hair. These include oil-absorbing kaolin mud and volume-increasing tapioca, which work together to refresh hair at the roots. Lavender oil and cactus flower help balance the natural pH of the scalp and palms. Even for healthy hair growth we have added Hibiscus. You can check it out and try it out at wellnesse.com and my suggestion is to grab a bundle to save or subscribe as well as save it!

Katie: Hello, and welcome to the “Valence Mama Podcast.” I’m from KatieWellensmama.com and Wellensy.com. At the same time it is healthy, my new line of personal care products, such as hair care, toothpaste and hand cleaner.

It’s been a long time coming, but I wanted to make sure that there was reliable data before this interview. I’m back with Dr. Chris Master John, one of the researchers I’ve been to for a long time. And he’s been closely following research on coyotes, and not just what the immune system might be doing, but what the actual studies are saying right now. We have some studies that show some really interesting things, especially about vitamin D, on which we go deeper, but also on things like long-term immunity, herd immunity, and the possibility of another wave. Also He is a staunch supporter of data support and research, and has interviewed many experts who are doing mathematical research on matter and mortality, and we will face this in the future. So I think it’s a very timely point to go with them and get really deep into these issues. I learned a lot. He offers some really practical suggestions based on current research to help the immune system and reduce the severity of possible infections. He also makes some great points about social trends when it comes to exceptions. So as I said, I learned a lot. I know you will too. And without further ado, go with Chris. Chris, welcome back.

Chris: Katie, thank you very much for coming back to me. Nice to meet you here.

Katie: I’m so excited to chat with you today. And I think it’s going to be a very relevant and timely event and a record I’ve been waiting for a while. And I refrained from talking too much about COVID on this podcast until I felt like more data was available and was just not guessing. And I know you’ve followed the statistics very closely, especially on specific aspects of it, such as some vitamins, and nutrients, and whether or not what we can do can be helpful. ۔ And so, you were the first person that came to mind when I wanted to talk about it, and I’m so grateful to have you here today.

Chris: Thank you so much for keeping me. Can’t wait

Katie: So, I think to begin with, there are definitely general recommendations around certain vitamins that are supposed to have a positive effect on helping the immune system, which of course. , Is helpful in matters such as respiratory disease. And I want to make sure that obviously we are not making any medical claims. I know that you are always very careful to avoid it, and that there is no medical advice. But you have mastered the nutritional side of it. And I think it’s really important to go deeper from here because it’s a solid thing that we all have a lot of control over. And we have the ability to choose what we eat on a daily basis. So to get started with some of the things that are recommended to the general public, I’ve also seen in the mainstream media in recent days the things that are recommended for junk and vitamin C, vitamin D. Take a look through the line and see what the research is really showing, now that we’re starting to have some real data. So, since it’s still a bit sunny in some places, let’s start with Vitamin D, what is the actual research and data on Vitamin D and Covid right now?

Chris: Yeah Al that sounds pretty crap to me, Looks like BT aint for me either. And it has the strongest evidence of any nutrient for COVID-19, whether for or against efficacy. And there is evidence that lies very strongly in favor of vitamin D effectiveness. Probably not as effective against getting CoVID. But the evidence suggests that it is somewhat protective against COVID. But the evidence is stronger for controlling the severity and mortality of COVID. And so, in this case, we have moved away from having a very strong foundation of a large number of observational studies that were all saying the same thing, to maintain the status of vitamin D, at least 30 nan grams per ML is associated with very low COVID severity and mortality. We’ve now moved on to a randomized controlled trial, where, yes, it was small and yes, we need to see it over and over again through other people. But the first case that was published shows that vitamin D supplementation has reduced ICU admissions by 98%. And so, this is a very strong search. And it’s not really about death. Now, it just so happens that in this study, there were two people who died in the placebo group and there were zero people who died in the vitamin D group. But the death toll is not enough to run these figures. So it seems that he strongly defended against death, but the death rate in this study is not enough. But, in this case, almost eliminating the need for ICU admission, you know, has a very strong effect on its severity.

Now, it is also the case that there are more than two dozen cases listed in the government database which are usually the last I did not see more than the recruitment stage but all these are designed to test the effects of vitamin D treatment and Maybe, in three or four months, we will have a huge amount of research on the therapeutic effects of vitamin D, but about a dozen observational studies roughly all the same thing and now for the first time Emergence and confirmation of sequential control trials The studies were saying that vitamin D is very strongly in favor, especially in the context of reducing the severity of COVID. And based on my skepticism; and I must say and fully acknowledge that when this first thing became a cause for concern, I was actually against vitamin D supplementation because there were legitimate concerns. And to be honest, I was wrong, but I think I was right to worry about that. We know that the virus enters the cell using a protein called ACE2. And there have been many studies suggesting that vitamin D increases this protein. And it has a positive effect on health because ACE2 helps lower blood pressure and maintain a healthy cardiovascular system and a healthy respiratory system. However, stating that the protein has been hijacked by the virus to get into the cells has been given a huge body of research, which shows that it is basically a limiting factor as to whether The virus can infect you, and which cells it can infect, and how large. The infection will increase, I realized I was worried about it.

But it seems that vitamin D, due to its effects on the immune system, in addition to this protein, you know, is completely separated from it, because it seems to limit And of course, Vitamin D also makes antiviral peptides. But since the evidence is stronger than the risk of infection and stronger than the risk of death, I think what is more operative is the effect of vitamin D on regulating the immune system. And vitamin D is able to, for example, inhibit the production of antiloxin 6, also called IL6, which is probably the most central molecule responsible for triggering cytokine storms that COVID can be very bad, and is a very strong predictor of respiratory pressure and winding on the ventilator. And similarly, my suspicion is that what Vitamin D is doing more or less strictly, is that it usually has a vitamin D status and is not sub-maximal, or insufficient, or deficient. , Basically puts you in a situation where you can be found. Sick, but you will not feel the inflammation, or you are less likely to have the inflammation completely gone. Because the severity of COVID and the risk of death are very low in terms of direct viral damage, not to say that this is not really the case, but that there is very little about it and much more about it. Parts of your immune system are responsible for freezing, and respiratory pressure, and tissue damage. Are they completely out of the spiral? And maybe Vitamin D is working to control it, and maybe that’s what he’s doing. But I think the message to take home is that if you have the foresight to take care of your vitamin D status before you get sick, you have to keep your vitamin D status within the normal range according to the laboratory. , Which means to maintain it. At least 30s per milliliter in the middle of the 30s.

So the reference limit is usually 30 or 32 or something like that. It seems that just because it is above this level, almost all of the effects found in these studies are accounted for. And so, you know, you mentioned resignation, and yes, you know, I’m going to give up completely. I am not a doctor. I’m not a doctor. I am not an epidemiologist either. You know, my vitamin D is fine, but we can’t tell people what effect their treatment will have on them, what they should do when they get sick. But also that we are not talking about any danger here. We are talking about what you should do anyway. Okay fine? And so, I think it’s surprisingly powerful to say that, according to the laboratory, it’s just a matter of maintaining your vitamin D status within the normal range, which is huge for bone health anyway. There are reasons for which it is well known. It seems that most of the issues observed in the study will be taken care of. And, you know, during observational studies and previous randomized controlled trials, it seems like maybe, you know, the chances of a serious or fatal case are extremely low and possibly close to 0, Maybe not 0, but, you know, probably less than 90%. And similarly, we are not talking about going out and using experimental medicine. We’re just talking about what you should do with vitamin D anyway. And so, I don’t want to tell anyone what to do to cure the disease, but I don’t feel any controversy about saying, you know, it’s okay to do what we know, they say Here’s what you should do for the last 10 years on vitamin D and get your level up to at least 30 nanograms per milliliter. And so I look forward to seeing the next test. But for now, everything looks very positive for vitamin D.

Katie: Yeah, and that’s a good point. This is something that the body naturally builds up from sun exposure, and that we have, as you said, on the threshold of the annual statistic that it should be at least. And it’s easy to test. Your doctor should be able to help you diagnose this or there are even places where I can get tested myself without a doctor. I think knowing this is really a valuable metric, not just going into a cold and flu season, not just now, but our family always checks in the fall and winter anyway. For those who are wondering if they are trying out and trying to raise this level, or maybe someone is below that threshold, have you made special consideration to let them know? What kind of vitamin D supplement is going on if you are not? To raise your level in a sunny area ??

Chris: I will use vitamin D3 instead of vitamin D2. But I won’t be more worried, I mean, especially if you’re just trying to get your level at 30 nanograms per milliliter. If you are mega-dosing, there are concerns about balancing with other nutrients and things like that. But, you know, in terms of trying to reach just 30 nanograms per milliliter or a little more, you know, any vitamin D3 should be acceptable.

Katie: Gota I think this study is just as important because I know there’s a need to flatten the curve initially so that hospitals and ICUs aren’t overwhelmed. And so if the data now shows that something like vitamin D can reduce the chances of ending up in the ICU by 98%, that’s a tough thing to do, and it seems that medical care and It makes a big difference in fighting it. . Other things that are commonly recommended, of course, for any respiratory disease and now for covid, vitamin C of course. Always on this list. Do we still have any data directly with Vitamin C and Covid?

Chris: Not what I’ve seen. Therefore, there are reports of treatment for its use. And to be honest, I haven’t taken a full dive into all the literature, but I haven’t seen any statistics that can really tell you how much vitamin C is used when used as an emergency medicine. Is effective So, I think getting proper vitamin C is a very, very, very smart thing. And based on other respiratory distress issues, statistics show that high-vitamin C can reduce mortality by half when one has severe respiratory distress. And it is possible that I have lost the recent studies that have come to light because it is very difficult to keep up with everything that comes up because it often has dozens or more titles in a day. But I haven’t seen anything that has vitamin D in it, in terms of achieving a good feeling, you know, that definitely has an effect. لہذا میری ذاتی رائے ہے ، اور یہ میرے اندازے کی سطح پر بھی زیادہ ہے ، اس بارے میں میری اس غیر یقینی صورتحال سے بچنے کے لئے کہ آیا زیادہ مقدار میں وٹامن سی بہت جلد استعمال ہونے پر نقصان دہ اثرات مرتب کرسکتے ہیں ، جو بڑی حد تک میکانکی قیاس آرائیوں پر مبنی ہے۔ لیکن اس مقام پر ، میں اس بارے میں کافی فکر مند ہوں کہ میں یہ کہوں گا ، آپ جانتے ہو ، ایک دن میں 100 ، 200 ، 300 ملیگرام وٹامن سی حاصل کریں ، لیکن میں نہیں لوں گا ، آپ جانتے ہو ، 5 ، 10 ، 15 ایک دن میں صرف وٹامن سی کے گرام گرنے سے بچاؤ ہوتا ہے۔ اگرچہ میں سمجھتا ہوں کہ طبی نگرانی میں زیادہ مقدار میں وٹامن سی یا نس نس وٹامن سی کے ساتھ طبی استعمال ، شدید سانس کی تکلیف کے دوران بہت معنی خیز ہے۔ اور میں اس کی افادیت پر مطالعات کو سامنے آنا دیکھنا پسند کروں گا۔

کیٹی: گوٹا ٹھیک ہے. یہ سمجھ میں آتا ہے۔ اور ایک اور جس کے بارے میں ابھی بات کی جارہی ہے وہ زنک ہے۔ میں جانتا ہوں کہ بہت ساری چیزیں ہیں ، ایسا لگتا ہے کہ اس میں بہت سارے اعداد و شمار موجود ہیں اور زنک کی بھی مختلف شکلیں ہیں۔ کیا ابھی مدافعتی نظام کے لئے زنک کی بات آتی ہے یا اس سے آگاہ کرنے کے لئے کچھ ہے؟

کرس: جی ہاں ، لہذا ، زنک انٹرمیڈیٹ مرحلے میں ، وٹامن سی اور وٹامن ڈی کے مابین ، ثبوت کی سطح کے لحاظ سے ایک قسم ہے۔ ایک چیز جس کا ہم ابھی انتظار کر رہے ہیں وہ زنک کے ساتھ کلینیکل ٹرائل ہوگی۔ لیکن ہم نے یہ جاننا شروع کیا کہ زِنک کلیدی خامروں کا ایک بہت ہی طاقتور روک تھام ہے جسے وائرس نقل کرنے کے لئے استعمال کرتا ہے اور اس سے زنک بہت زیادہ روکتا ہے… آپ جانتے ہو ، زنک وائرس کے ساتھ جو کچھ کرتا ہے وہی ایک ہی عین چیز ہے جس کی محققین کوشش کر رہے ہیں کرنے کے لئے منشیات تیار کرنے کے لئے. لہذا زنک جانے سے بہت مثبت نظر آیا۔ اور پھر لوگوں نے اس کا استعمال شروع کردیا۔ اور اسی طرح ایک مطالعہ ہوا جو نیویارک شہر کے ایک اسپتال NYU لانگون ہیلتھ کے ذریعہ کیا گیا تھا ، جو وبائی امراض کی بلندی کے دوران ہے۔ اور یہ مطالعہ اس لحاظ سے زیادہ مضبوط نہیں تھا کہ اسے کس طرح ڈیزائن کیا گیا تھا۔ بنیادی طور پر ، وہ جو کر رہے تھے وہ یہ تھا کہ وہ اپنے معیاری پروٹوکول کے حص earlyے کے طور پر ہیڈروکسائکلروکائن اور ایزیٹرومائسن استعمال کررہے تھے۔ اور ظاہر ہے ، اب یہ دوائیں اپنے بارے میں شواہد کی وجہ سے حق سے باہر ہوگئیں۔ لیکن یہ واپس آ گیا جب لوگوں کے ساتھ سلوک کرنا معمول کی بات تھی۔ اور پھر ایک تاریخ کو ، انہوں نے اپنے پروٹوکول میں زنک شامل کرنا شروع کیا۔ اور انھوں نے بنیادی طور پر اس طرف دیکھا کہ انھوں نے زنک شامل کرنا شروع کرنے سے پہلے زنک بنانا شروع کیا تھا اس کے بعد کیا ہوا تھا۔ اور اس نے تجویز کیا کہ زنک کا اضافہ مطالعہ کی مدت کے قلیل مدت کے اندر جاری ہونے کے 50٪ زیادہ امکان سے ہے۔ میرے خیال میں یہ ایک یا دو ہفتوں کا تھا۔ اور یہ خاص نگہداشت رکھنے والے لوگوں کے لئے تھا۔ تو یہ اس امکان میں 50٪ اضافہ تھا کہ انہیں قلیل مدتی بنیاد پر رہا کیا جائے گا ، جو کہ بہت مثبت ہے ، اور پھر انھوں نے آدھے امکان کو کم کردیا تھا کہ کسی کو اسپتال میں بھیج دیا جائے گا یا اس کی موت ہوگی۔ اور اسلئے کسی کو اسپتال کی دیکھ بھال کے لئے بھیجا گیا ہے اگر ان کے مرنے کی توقع کی جا رہی ہو۔

لہذا ، آپ جانتے ہو ، سطح پر ، ایسا لگتا ہے جیسے ، آپ جانتے ہو ، زنک کی شدت اور اموات میں کمی کرنے کی صلاحیت کے لئے بہت ہی مثبت ہے۔ لیکن حقیقت یہ ہے کہ انہوں نے لوگوں کو زنک وصول کرنے کے لئے بے ترتیب نہیں کیا تھا یا نہیں ، اور محض اس سے پہلے اور بعد کی طرف دیکھا ، جیسے سوالات اٹھتے ہیں ، جیسے آپ جانتے ہو ، اگر انھوں نے یہ زنک متعارف نہ کیا ہوتا تو ، چیزیں بہرحال کسی اور کی وجہ سے بہتر ہوتی۔ چیزیں ، آپ جانتے ہو ، یہاں تک کہ وائرل پھیلاؤ یا دیگر علاجات یا سورج کی نمائش کے آس پاس بھی۔ اور میرا مطلب ہے ، وٹامن ڈی ایک مثال ہوگا ، ٹھیک ہے؟ کیونکہ یہ چیز سردیوں میں شروع ہوئی تھی۔ اور اس طرح جیسے جیسے وقت آگے بڑھتا ہے ، ہر ایک کی وٹامن ڈی کی حیثیت زیادہ ہوتی ہے ، ایسی چیزیں۔ لہذا ، میں سمجھتا ہوں کہ اعداد و شمار زنک کے ل good اچھے لگتے ہیں ، لیکن جست پر اتنا ہی یقینی بننے کے لئے کہ وٹامن ڈی پر ہیں ، ہمیں بے ترتیب کنٹرول ٹرائلز کو دیکھنے کی ضرورت ہے ، اور ہم ابھی تک یہ کام نہیں کر سکے ہیں۔ لیکن چیزیں زنک کے ل good اچھی لگتی ہیں۔ اور ، آپ جانتے ہو ، یہ ایک بار پھر… زنک کی اضافی تعلیم کے زمرے میں آتے ہیں… آپ جانتے ہو ، مجھے لگتا ہے کہ ایک اچھی مثال ایسی ہوگی ، جیسے ، کوویڈ میں کون زیادہ خطرہ ہے؟ بڑے آدمی ، ٹھیک ہے؟ اور اس طرح ہمارے پاس آزمائشیں ، دیرپا سال ہیں ، اس زمرے کے لوگوں کو زنک کی تکمیل کی زیادہ مقدار دیتے ہیں ، تاکہ عمر سے متعلقہ میکولر انحطاط اور اس طرح کی چیزوں کو روکنے کی کوشش کریں۔ اور اس طرح ، آپ جانتے ہیں ، ہم جانتے ہیں کہ جمع 65 ، جمع 75 ، یا اس سے زیادہ 80 عمر گروپ میں رہنے والے لوگوں کے لئے ایک دن میں 85 ملیگرام زنک روزانہ دو سال تک بڑھانا محفوظ ہے۔ اور اسی طرح ، جب ہم زنک کی تکمیل کے بارے میں بات کر رہے ہیں ، خاص طور پر ایک مختصر سے درمیانی مدتی بنیاد پر ، ہم کسی ایسی چیز کے بارے میں بات نہیں کر رہے ہیں جو پرخطر ہے۔ اور اسی طرح ، میں سمجھتا ہوں کہ اگر آپ کو اعلی خطرہ کی صورتحال میں زنک کی تکمیل کے بارے میں سرگرم عمل ہونا پڑے تو اس سے صرف یہ معنی حاصل ہوگا کہ اس میں بہت کم نقصان ہے۔ اور ، آپ جانتے ہو ، علاج کے اثر پر ڈیٹا مکمل طور پر ٹھوس نہیں ہوسکتا ہے ، لیکن یہ اچھا لگتا ہے۔

اور اسی طرح ، میرے خیال میں ، آپ جانتے ہو ، زنک کی تکمیل کے لحاظ سے ، شاید… اور ، یقینا ، یہ ایک بہت ہی پیچیدہ موضوع ہے۔ لیکن اگر میں نے ایک سادہ اصول کے ساتھ چلنے کی کوشش کی تو ، میں یہ کہوں گا ، اگر آپ کو ایسی صورتحال ہے جہاں آپ کوویڈ کے ساتھ رابطے میں آنے کے بارے میں واقعی پریشان ہیں ، اور میں اس کی وضاحت کروں گا کیونکہ وہاں ایک سرگرم اور بڑھتے ہوئے معاملے کا بوجھ ہے۔ آپ کے علاقے میں یا شاید معاملات اتنے خراب نہیں ہوئے ہیں ، لیکن اسکول ابھی کھل گئے ہیں ، اور آپ کو معلوم نہیں ہے کہ اگلے دو ہفتوں میں کیا ہونے والا ہے ، یا معاملات واقعتا high زیادہ ہوچکے ہیں ، اور وہ نیچے نہیں جارہے ہیں ، یا آپ سفر کر رہے ہو ، یا آپ کسی ایسے اندرونی ماحول میں کام کریں جہاں لوگ ، آپ جانتے ہو… میرا اندازہ ہے ، اگر آپ کسی ریستوراں یا کافی شاپ میں گھر کے اندر کام کرتے ہیں ، یہاں تک کہ اگر COVID آپ کے علاقے میں برا نہیں ہے تو ، آپ شاید ایک اعلی رسک کیٹیگری ، جو بھی ہو۔ اور آپ اس کی وضاحت کرسکتے ہیں کہ آپ کس طرح چاہتے ہیں۔ لیکن اگر آپ اپنے آپ کو اعتدال پسند اور اعلی رسک کی صورتحال پر غور کرتے ہیں تو ، کوویڈ کے ساتھ رابطے میں آنے کے معاملے میں ، میں ذاتی طور پر دن میں تین بار 15 ملی گرام زنک لینے کے حکم پر زنک کی تکمیل کو بڑھانا عقلمند سمجھوں گا۔ یہ خالی پیٹ پر بہترین ہے۔ لیکن اگر یہ آپ کو متلی کرتا ہے تو ، آپ اسے کھانے کے ساتھ لینا چاہ but ، لیکن آپ ہمیشہ اسے کھانے کے ساتھ لینے کی کوشش کریں جس میں سارا اناج ، گری دار میوے ، بیج یا پھل نہ ہو۔ اور اس لئے بہتر ہے کہ اسے باہر رکھیں۔ لیکن ، آپ جانتے ہو ، آپ کو اس بات پر بھی غور کرنا ہوگا کہ آپ کے لئے عملی اور پائیدار کیا ہے۔ لہذا ، مثالی چیز 15 ملیگرام زنک ہوگی۔ فارم کے لحاظ سے ، میرے خیال میں زنک کی بہت سی قسمیں قابل قبول ہیں۔ مجھے صرف زنک پکنیلیٹ یا زنک آکسائڈ پسند نہیں ہے۔ لیکن زنک کی زیادہ تر دوسری شکلیں ، میرے خیال میں اچھ .ی ہیں۔ اور اس طرح ایک دن میں 15 ملی گرام زنک ، دن میں تین بار ، یا تو خالی پیٹ پر یا کچھ ایسی خوراک کے ساتھ جس میں پورا اناج ، گری دار میوے ، بیج اور پھل نہیں ہوتا ہے۔

اور پھر میں یہ بھی سوچتا ہوں کہ زنک ایسیٹیٹ لزینجز کا اسٹور رکھنا بہت مفید ہے۔ میرے پسند کردہ افراد لائف ایکسٹینشن اینانسیسڈ زنک ایسیٹیٹ لزینجز ہیں۔ اور اس کی وجہ یہ ہے کہ ، یہ صرف زنک کی شکل کے بارے میں نہیں ہے ، بلکہ لوزینج کی باقی چیزوں کے بارے میں بھی ڈیزائن کیا گیا ہے تاکہ آپ کے منہ میں زنک کو زیادہ سے زیادہ آئنائز ہونے دیں۔ اور اس کی وجہ سے زنک منہ ، ناک اور گلے میں گھس سکتا ہے۔ اور یہ دیکھتے ہوئے کہ شاید ناک ، منہ یا گلے میں وائرل انفیکشن شروع ہوجائے گا ، ان اعصاب تک زنک پہنچانے میں یہ لوزینج بہت اچھے ثابت ہوسکتے ہیں۔ اور اسی طرح ، آپ جانتے ہو ، میں نیویارک شہر میں رہتا ہوں ، اور میں ابھی نیویارک سٹی کو کم خطرہ سمجھتا ہوں۔ لیکن جب میں نیو یارک سٹی کو اعلی خطرہ سمجھتا ہوں اور ، یقینا، ، یہ اپریل میں ایک انتہائی خطرہ تھا۔ جس طرح سے میں یہ کروں گا ، میں اس پر عملدرآمد کروں گا ، آپ جانتے ہو ، دن میں 15 ملیگرام زنک کچھ دن۔ میں اس کے ساتھ متحرک رہوں گا ، اور پھر روزانہ کی بنیاد پر۔ اور پھر ، آپ جانتے ہو ، اگر میں گروسری اسٹور پر جاتا ہوں تو ، میں اس پر غور کروں گا کہ انتہائی خطرناک صورتحال ہے۔ لہذا میں جانے سے پہلے اور اس کے بعد زنک ایکسیٹ لیزینگ لوں گا ، یا اگر میں چلا گیا تھا… میرا اندازہ ہے کہ معاملات قدرے بہتر ہوجاتے ہیں اور ریاستی پارکس کھل جاتے ہیں ، میں پیدل سفر میں جاؤں گا۔ میں پیدل سفر پر گیا۔ تم جانتے ہو ، میں اس سے پہلے اور بعد میں زنک ایسیٹیٹ لزینجز لوں گا۔ اس ل then ، آپ جانتے ہو ، پھیلاؤ کا بیرونی خطرہ کم ہے اور اس کے باوجود میں کسی مختلف علاقے کا سفر کر رہا ہوں اور ایسی جگہ جا رہا ہوں جہاں مجھے معلوم ہے کہ جگہ جگہ سے لوگ سفر کر رہے ہیں۔ اور اس لئے میں سوچتا ہوں کہ جب بھی آپ مسافروں کے ساتھ اختلاط کرتے ہیں تو یہ ایک اعلی خطرہ کی صورتحال ہوتی ہے۔ لہذا صرف اضافی زنک زنک لوزینج کے ذریعے یا اس سے پہلے اور بعد میں ، زیادہ خطرہ ، ممکنہ نمائش ، میں سمجھتا ہوں کہ یہ ایک اچھا خیال ہے۔ اور ان زنک ایسیٹیٹ لوزینجز کا واحد منفی پہلو یہ ہے کہ ان میں چینی کی ایک گرام مقدار موجود ہے۔

اور شوگر گلوکوز ہے ، جس کی وجہ سے میں فریکٹوز یا سوکروز کے مقابلے میں وائرل نشوونما کے بارے میں زیادہ فکر مند نہیں ہوں۔ تو یہ مجھے زیادہ پریشان نہیں کرتا ہے۔ لیکن مجھے معلوم ہے کہ کچھ لوگوں کو شوگر کی مقدار کو مکمل طور پر دیکھنے کی ضرورت ہے۔ اور بدقسمتی سے ، کوئی زنک لوزنج نہیں ہے جس کی طرح ان لوگوں کو بھی ڈیزائن کیا گیا ہے جس میں اس میں شوگر نہیں ہے ، لیکن میرے خیال میں اگلی بہترین چیز یا تو آپ کے منہ میں کچھ آئنک زنک چھڑکنے یا کسی ایک کو استعمال کرنے کی طرح ہوگی ، جیسے ، کولڈیز یا کوئی ایسی چیز جس میں زنک گلوکویٹ ہو۔ ان کے پاس شوگر سے پاک ورژن ہیں۔ لہذا ، میں نہیں سوچتا کہ وہ آئونک زنک کی درست راہ میں فراہمی کے لحاظ سے اتنے اچھے ہیں جتنا زندگی کی توسیع طویل ہوتی ہے ، لیکن مجھے لگتا ہے کہ اگر آپ اس عمر میں توسیع کے طویل حصے میں شوگر کا بوجھ نہیں اٹھا سکتے ہیں تو ، کچھ چینی۔ زنک گلوکوونیٹ ، یا زنک ایکسیٹیٹ ، یا آئنک زنک سپرے کا مفت ورژن متبادل ہوسکتا ہے۔

کیٹی: گوٹا اور یہ ایک بہت بڑا نکتہ ہے کہ یہ ہمارے پاس ابھی تک واضح طبی اعداد و شمار نہیں ہے لیکن ایسا لگتا ہے کہ یہ ایک بہت ہی کم رسک والی چیز ہے جس سے ہم یہ کرسکتے ہیں کہ اس سے فائدہ ہوسکتا ہے۔ اور اس طرح جب اس کیخلاف وزن بڑھایا جائے تو یہ سمجھ میں آجاتا ہے۔ آپ نے انٹرویو میں پہلے سائٹوکائن طوفان کا ذکر کیا تھا۔ کیا ہمیں سائٹوکائن طوفان پیدا کرنے سے بچنے یا کسی اور چیزوں سے بچنے کے لئے ایسی کوئی اور چیزوں سے آگاہ کرنے کی ضرورت ہے جس کے خطرے میں اضافہ کیے بغیر ہم قوت مدافعت کے نظام کو بڑھاوا سکتے ہیں؟

کرس: ٹھیک ہے ، میں یہاں بھی سوچتا ہوں ، ہم کسی بھی طبی اعداد و شمار کے مطابق نہیں ہیں اور قیاس آرائی کرنے کی کوشش کر رہے ہیں۔ اور اس طرح ، ایک چیز جو ہم جانتے ہیں وہ یہ ہے کہ ہم جانتے ہیں کہ IL-6 سائٹوکائن طوفان کا ایک اہم ڈرائیور ہے۔ اور ہم جانتے ہیں کہ نہ صرف آپ سے… آپ جانتے ہو ، اس سے پہلے بھی ہمیں سختی سے شبہ ہوا تھا ، آپ جانتے ہو ، بہت مستقل اعداد و شمار سامنے آرہے ہیں ، جو اس کے خراب نتائج سے وابستہ ہیں۔ لیکن اب ہم یہ بھی جانتے ہیں کیونکہ IL-6 کو روکنے کے ل a کسی دوائی کے ساتھ پہلا بے ترتیب کنٹرول ٹرائل ہائپوکسیا یا کم بلڈ آکسیجن کی سطح کو کم کرنے میں کامیاب رہا تھا۔ اور اس طرح ، اس دوا کے استعمال سے متعلق اعداد و شمار اچھ .ا طور پر آنا شروع ہو رہے ہیں۔ اور یہ کہ میرے خیال میں غذائی اجزاء یا جڑی بوٹیوں کو دیکھنے کے لئے مدد فراہم کرتے ہیں ، یا آپ جو کچھ بھی کہنا چاہتے ہو ، آپ کو معلوم ہے ، اگر یہ چیز IL-6 اٹھاتی ہے تو ، آپ کو شاید اس سے تھوڑا سا محتاط رہنا چاہئے۔ اگر یہ چیز IL-6 کو کم کرتی ہے تو ، یہ زیادہ مددگار ثابت ہوسکتا ہے۔ اور آپ کو یقینی طور پر یہ بات ذہن میں رکھنی ہوگی کہ آپ یہاں احتمال کا کھیل کھیل رہے ہیں کیونکہ ان میں سے بیشتر چیزوں پر کوئی طبی مطالعہ نہیں ہوتا ہے۔ کچھ لوگ شواہد پر مبنی دوائی کہتے ہیں ، “ٹھیک ہے ، پھر ہمیں اس کے بارے میں بالکل بھی بات نہیں کرنی چاہئے۔” لیکن میں اس سے اتفاق نہیں کرتا کیونکہ مجھے لگتا ہے کہ ہم ہمیشہ ان چیزوں کے بارے میں فیصلہ دیتے رہتے ہیں جن کے بارے میں ہم ہر وقت غیر یقینی رہتے ہیں۔ اور اسی طرح میں سوچتا ہوں کہ جب ہمیں سائٹوکائن طوفان کو جلانے والی قسم کی چیزوں کا بہت اچھا اندازہ ہے اور ہم اس کے بارے میں بات کر رہے ہیں ، ٹھیک ہے ، آپ جانتے ہیں ، مجھے نہیں معلوم کہ یہ کام کرنے والا ہے ، یا کام نہیں ، یا نقصان دہ ، یا مددگار ثابت ہوں۔ لیکن میں ایک اچھا اندازہ لگانا چاہتا ہوں کیونکہ میں ایسا کچھ کرنے جا رہا ہوں جس کے بارے میں مجھے لگتا ہے کہ اس پر غور کرنا سمجھ میں آتا ہے۔ لہذا ، اگر میں نے نقصان کے ممکنہ امکانات کو دیکھنے کے لئے ایک میٹرک استعمال کرنا ہے تو ، میں خاص طور پر اس کی طرف دیکھ رہا ہوں گا کہ آیا چیزیں IL-6 میں اضافہ کرتی ہیں یا کم ہوتی ہیں۔ اور ایک چیز جو IL-6 کے لئے مثبت نظر آتی ہے وہ ہے لییکٹوفرین۔

اور لییکٹوفرین آئرن لے جانے والا پروٹین ہے جو کولسٹرم اور دودھ میں موجود ہے۔ اور ، دلچسپ بات یہ ہے کہ ، حاملہ خواتین میں سوزش کی متعدد مختلف وجوہات کے ساتھ پہلے لییکٹوفرین استعمال کیا جاتا ہے ، جہاں IL-6 کو دبانے سے ان خواتین میں لوہے کے تحول کو معمول میں لانے میں مدد ملتی ہے۔ اور IL-6 کو دبانے کی اس کی قابلیت کو اسی تناظر میں دکھایا گیا ہے کہ یہ کافی مختلف اشتعال انگیز حالتوں میں ہے۔ لہذا یہ لییکٹوفرین کا ایک عمومی اصول معلوم ہوتا ہے۔ اور کچھ ان وٹرو ڈیٹا بھی ہے ، جس کا معنی ٹیسٹ ٹیوب میں ہوتا ہے ، جس سے یہ پتہ چلتا ہے کہ عام طور پر نہ صرف لییکٹوفرین ، بلکہ چھینے والے پروٹین۔ اور لیکٹوفیرن وہی پروٹین ہیں جن میں اینٹی ویرل اثر ہوتا ہے۔ اور اس طرح ، مجھے اتنا یقین نہیں ہے کہ ، آپ جانتے ہیں… یہ ہمیشہ ایسا نہیں ہوتا ہے کہ کسی پیٹری ڈش میں سیل پر کچھ پھینک دیا جائے اور یہ دیکھنے کی کوشش کی جا. کہ اس سے وائرس روکا جاتا ہے یا نہیں۔ یہ ہمیشہ ایسا نہیں ہوتا ہے کہ اس چیز کو کھا نا وہی کام کرتا ہے۔ لیکن چونکہ IL-6 کو کم کرنے کے ل la لیفٹفرین کو اضافی آزمائشوں میں دکھایا گیا ہے ، اور کیونکہ عام طور پر وہیل پروٹین اینٹی وائرل ہونے کا ایک ممکنہ اثر ہے ، اور کیونکہ لییکٹوفرین کو حاصل کرنے کا آسان ترین طریقہ در حقیقت 20 سے 40 گرام چھینے والی پروٹین لینا ہے ، پھر میں سوچتا ہوں کہ 20 سے 40 گرام وہی پروٹین حاصل کرنا ، آپ جانتے ہو ، ایسی کوئی چیز جس کے مثبت اثر ہونے کا زیادہ امکان ہوتا ہے۔ اور پھر ، آپ جانتے ہو ، میں جڑی بوٹیوں سے متعلق پروٹین ، کاربز ، چربی ، وٹامنز ، اور معدنیات ، اور ضروری فیٹی ایسڈ کے بارے میں بہت کچھ جانتا ہوں ، لیکن یہ بہتر ہوگا کہ ہزاروں جڑی بوٹیوں کے جڑی بوٹیوں کے ماہر سے بات کی جائے اور کون سا IL-6 میں اضافہ یا کمی کرتا ہے۔ لیکن میں نے بڑے بیری کے بارے میں ایک جامع جائزہ لیا اور میں نے کچھ ماہ قبل… پر بہت سے لوگوں کو سائڈوکائن طوفان کے سبب بزرگ بیری کے بارے میں تشویش لاحق تھی۔ اور میں نے بزرگ بیری اور سائٹوکائنز پر تمام ادب کا جامع جائزہ لیا۔ اور صرف ثبوت ، مجھے نہیں لگتا کہ وہ بڈ بیری کے بارے میں فکر مند ہے۔

ایلڈر بیری کو کچھ سیل مطالعات میں دکھایا گیا ہے تاکہ کچھ سائٹوکائنز کو بڑھایا جاسکے۔ لیکن بزرگ بیری کی تکمیل کے مقدمات میں ، بزرگ بیری سائٹوکینس کو متاثر کیے بغیر اینٹی وائرل ہے۔ And if you look at the specific cytokines and the specific cell types, every time you look at the type of cells or the types of cytokines that would be concerned about in COVID-19, elderberry is generally having a positive effect in reducing those. And when you look at the studies showing elderberry can raise cytokine production in certain cells, generally, the cytokines are the cells that we’re not concerned about in COVID-19. For anybody that wants the details of that, if you just go to chrismasterjohnphd.com and search for elderberry or if you Google my name with, “can elderberry cause a cytokine storm?” you’ll get my complete review with, you know, reference and with all those details. In terms of… I think there are a large number of other herbs that may have an increase or decreasing effect on IL-6. But because herbs are not my main thing, I can’t really venture into that area beyond elderberry to talk much about it.

Katie: Gotcha. That makes sense. I know you’ve written on a lot of these topics, I’ll make sure I link to those in the show notes so people can find them and keep reading. And I didn’t know that about whey protein powder, that’s really helpful. On a personal level, I’ve been trying to figure out how to increase my protein anyway. So, kill two birds with one stone with that one. You mentioned earlier on that, like, middle-aged or elderly men seem to be at higher risk. And early on there was… We didn’t really know who seemed to necessarily be most at risk. And it seems like we have more clear data on that right now. I know from what I’ve seen, as a mom, I’m very not worried about any of my kids, since none of them have any pre-existing conditions and they’re all pretty young. But what are you seeing in the data right now of who might still be at risk versus who’s likely to have less of your case, even if they contract it?

Chris: Well, I haven’t looked at the latest data but as I’ve been following it over time, the last data that I was familiar with was all pointing towards greater age being a risk factor, male sex being a risk factor, black or South Asian ancestry being a risk factor, obesity, diabetes, blood pressure, cardiovascular disease being risk factors, and anything that can be associated with immunosuppression being a risk factor, anything being associated with respiratory distress being a risk factor. And so that’s the general picture.

Katie: Gotcha. Okay. Another thing that is somewhat controversial from what I’ve read is, if there is long-term immunity conferred once someone has actually had COVID, it seems like there are kind of varying opinions on this. And I’m curious if you’ve seen anything really compelling in the data about if actually getting infected does lead to long-term immunity or not.

Chris: Yeah. So, one of the problems with trying to understand this is that the only way you could really know for sure is if you did a randomized control trial that involved exposing people to the virus to actually test their immunity. And so we’re not gonna do that. We’re never gonna do that. And so what we’re doing instead is trying to understand the correlates of immunity and then trying to reason from that, based on surrogate markers. And so, that puts us in a position where we’re saying, “Okay, we know one thing that should be a protective correlate of immunity should be neutralizing antibodies.” And so, you develop an antibody response. To be neutralizing antibodies means that if you took those antibodies out of someone’s blood and you mix them with a cell that you are trying to infect the virus in a test tube, that those antibodies will block the virus from infecting the cell. And so not all antibodies that are provoked to the virus will necessarily be neutralizing because an antibody can bind to the virus but not do anything to its ability or, you know, bind the virus or bind to a protein that the virus is supposed to bind to, but not necessarily do anything to actually prevent infection. And there are also sometimes enhancing antibodies that can actually make a viral infection worse. So just because the antibodies are raised to the virus does not mean that they’re protective and does not mean that they’re a correlate of immunity. But neutralizing antibodies are one of the correlates of immunity. And so, you know, if you see neutralizing antibodies rise in response to treatment or in response to infection, then that is, you know, you could say bullish for lasting immunity. But then if you see the neutralizing antibodies fall off, you could say that’s bearish for lasting immunity.

And so one of the concerning things that we’ve seen is that the neutralizing antibodies do seem to drop off even when the total antibodies remain elevated after 2 3, 4 months. On the other hand, another apparent correlative immunity is T-cell immunity. And that’s when you can take a T-cell out of someone’s blood and you can show that not only does it respond to the virus or not only does it match the virus, but It will grow its population and expand the colony in response to the virus and it will attack the virus, etc. And in that case, the data seemed to suggest that the T-cell immunity will last for decades. Now, obviously, no one’s had COVID for decades, so we don’t know for sure, but what we know is that as long as people have had a recovery from COVID, the T-cells remain very robust, even after the neutral neutralizing antibodies drop off. And then we also know that people who had T-cell immunity to the first SARS virus, which was well more than a decade ago, almost two, they still have T-cell immunity to the first SARS virus. And so given how similar these two viruses are, with the first one being called SARS coronavirus, and this one being called SARS coronavirus 2, that’s very bullish for lasting T-cell immunity. Now, the question is, how much immunity from which mix of these things do you need to not get sick? And we just don’t know and we’ll never know the answer to that. All we could do is estimated or model it. And, you know, just because you have an immune response to something doesn’t mean you didn’t get sick, right? However, even in the cases where let’s say you got sick, neutralizing antibodies disappeared, but you have a very active T-cell immunity, even if you can get sick, you’re probably not gonna get anywhere near as sick as you got the first time around when you have no T-cell immunity, right?

So it’s very, very, very unlikely that after being infected, someone’s resistance ever drops to baseline. It might drop low enough to get infected again, but it probably is not gonna drop in almost anyone low enough to allow, I mean, a second infection that was as bad as the first infection. And then also just because the neutralizing antibodies drop off, doesn’t mean that they’re not gonna rise back up if you were to get a second infection. And so there are circulating B-cells that have the potential to produce those antibodies that will stay there, even when the neutralizing antibodies die off. So we don’t know the answer. But we have some reasons to say, you know, maybe the immunity might start dropping off in a few months. But we also have other reasons to say, there’s a strong chance that even if it drops off somewhat, it’s not gonna drop off completely, possibly for decades to come. Now, the other kind of piece of the puzzle looking at that is what happens in the real-world data. And so one thing that’s interesting to me, as someone who lives in New York City, and someone who was exposed to all of the tangible ways this virus permeated everyone’s life, I mean, obviously, you know, it hurt some people much worse than others. But everyone who lived in New York experienced the sights and sounds of ambulances driving by all the time and so on. What’s interesting to me is that if you look at the data for cases hospitalizations and deaths in New York City, they have been declining since April 7th, if I remember, right? And for the past three months, they’ve basically been bottomed out. And so it seems like, you know, with four-and-a-half months of straight decline, and with three months of being very much bottomed out, it seems like if some people can get reinfected after three months, they’re not large enough in number to dominate a trend.

You know, so reinfection may be possible but it just seems to me like if immunity only meaningfully lasted three months, that New York would be in a complete state of disaster right now, with a second wave as big as the first one. And it’s not. And you can’t blame… You can’t attribute that to behavior change, or to the careful and phased reopening, or to the testing. I mean, you can give that some role, but the fact is that in March, when we started to lock down in New York City, we went in a matter of days from having, like, 100 cases to 1,000 more cases. And we are, you know, about as open duck as we were in the sort of the middle of closing down back then. And so, if the immunity only last three months, and if everyone who got sick in March and April is able to get reinfected now, they should all be getting reinfected. And we should have a devastating second wave, and that’s not happening. And so, you know, I suppose you could say, “Well, the neutralizing antibodies drop off after a few months, maybe the T-cells drop off after nine months, we don’t know that they don’t, maybe it’s after nine months, you’re gonna get these massive wave of infections.” But I mean, I would think if that was the dynamic thing happening, that we were moving towards, there would be some sign of it. And there’s just no sign of that happening. So, I don’t doubt that reinfection can happen. I just don’t think that it’s going to be a force that can make a trend.

Katie: Yeah, that makes sense. And that’s a really important distinction, I think. It feels like the conversation is still kind of just concentrated on general cases and the assumption that there will be a second wave or there is no long-term immunity, which makes kind of the future look very uncertain as far as what the end of this is gonna eventually look like. And I think the other piece of that that is starting to be talked about more and more is the herd immunity factor. And certainly, there’s a lot of debate going on right now about what the number looks like for herd immunity and if certain places have hit it or not. And you, I feel like having a very unique perspective on this having lived in New York City and seeing the worst of the first wave, and then now seeing both the data and the day-to-day of what life looks like right now. So I’d love to hear your opinion on what you think about herd immunity and what that would look like and what kind of timeline we might be on for that.

Chris: Yeah. So I mean, my interpretation of what happens around me is driven by the science. So before I… So, okay, background is… What most people are saying about herd immunity is based on… Most people are saying we need 60% to 80% of people to get infected in order to reach herd immunity. And maybe a few months ago, we had 10% of the country infected, maybe now we have 16% of the country infected. We are nowhere near that. And we don’t wanna… You know, if it was the total disaster of the last of the spring and summer, that got the first 10% down, we don’t wanna see what happens to get the next 50% down. Now that 60% to 80% figure is based on a mathematical formula that is used to calculate the herd immunity threshold for randomly distributed vaccines. And what some scientists have pointed out in several papers that have been published by different groups. And these papers are generally coming out from mathematicians, but they’re not all, like, disconnected from epidemiology. So, I did a two-hour interview with the corresponding author of one of the papers that came out of Europe. And this was with Gabriela Gomez. And her entire career, basically, even though she’s a mathematician, her whole career has been modeling infectious disease epidemiology, and that’s what she was doing way before COVID. And so, you know, it’s not like these are people who were in the math field. And just because everyone wants to do COVID research now, they thought, “Oh, I’ll do it too.” These are people in mathematical epidemiology. And what they’ve pointed out is that when you have a natural pandemic, the herd immunity threshold will usually be much lower than it would be for randomly distributed vaccines.

And that’s for this reason. When you randomly distribute vaccines, you have no idea who will get infected and you have no idea who will be most likely to spread the virus. So you vaccinate everyone. And that means that while you are by random chance, immunizing some of the people who are most likely to spread the disease, you are also immunizing all the people who would never get sick in the first place, who would get sick but not spread, or who would spread the disease very little. And the reason is obvious. And that’s that you have no idea who would spread the disease and who wouldn’t. By contrast, that is not at all what happens when a virus spreads naturally. What happens when a virus spreads naturally, is that it infects the most vulnerable first. In general, the people who are most vulnerable are also the people most likely to spread it. And that’s not a one to one, hard and fast universality. It’s just the general correlation. So, there’s a couple of reasons for that. Number one, if, from a biological perspective, you are more vulnerable, because you have lower immunity, the virus, you’ll be more likely to get infected. If you get infected, you’re more likely to spread it. And then on a social level, if by your behavior, you are more likely to engage in behaviors that get you infected, those are the same behaviors that will get other people infected. So, from both a biological and a social perspective, the things that get you infected are the things that make you spread it. Therefore, the people who would spread it the most will always get the most infected first. And so the virus doesn’t have the inefficiency in… And of course, when I’m speaking from the perspective of the virus, this sounds morbid but, you know, imagine the virus is trying to take people out, right?

The virus is not gonna have the inefficiency in immunizing people or simply removing them from the population because the virus, obviously, when we vaccinate people, we want to prevent people from dying. But the virus doesn’t care about that. If the virus kills off the most vulnerable people, it also stops them from spreading the disease. And so we don’t want that to happen but it does, right? Everyone was trying to prevent death from the get-go with this, and still, in New York City, we had over, you know, 400 or 500 people per day dying at the peak of this pandemic. And so, you know, the virus did that, whether we wanted it to happen or not. And so as an unfortunate fact of the people who were most vulnerable, dying, before anyone was anywhere near able to develop a vaccine or an effective treatment, the most vulnerable people and the people most likely to spread the disease had been removed from the population already. And among those who live, the people who are most likely to… You know, even when you’re talking about 30-year-olds who could get infected, probably won’t have serious consequences, although they might, but probably won’t, they can still spread it. And the ones who have the lowest immunity and are most likely to get infected are the ones who do get infected. They’re also the ones who are most likely to spread it. So if they get infected first, and they become immune first, then they also are removed from the population of people who can spread it. So because the virus when it spreads naturally, removes transmitters from the population selectively, it hits all those potential transmitters at the beginning of the pandemic. And because of that, it doesn’t need to hit 60% to 80%. So, if you vaccinate people, and you need 60% to 80% of people to be vaccinated, that’s because you’re vaccinating, you know, all the large bulk of people that wouldn’t be transmitters in order to get to the transmitters.

The virus just comes and selectively picks off the transmitters, and so only needs to get 10% or 20% of those people. Now, before I read these papers and before I did my two-hour interview with Gabriela Gomez, and before I really grappled with this interpretation, I was still aware that the virus had largely disappeared from New York City life, at least as a medical force. So if you look at the data, in April, at the peak of the pandemic, the mortality rate from COVID was four times greater than the usual total mortality rate per day. And now, yes, COVID still exists, but it’s 2% to 3% of the usual total mortality rate. And so, you know, people are afraid of the second wave, people make policy around the second wave. And so the shock effects of fear of COVID still are present. But in terms of, you know, are the hospitals filled up with COVID cases? No. Is COVID a dominant force in daily mortality? No, it’s there but, you know, 97% of the people dying every day in New York City are dying from completely different things. And so, before I looked at this herd immunity research, I would basically argue the opposite of what I’m saying now. You know, people would show… I remember someone on Twitter showed a graph comparing New York and Texas. And he was saying, “Yeah, Texas might be in a peak, but look at the peak of Texas per capita, compared to New York.” Yes, New York’s is over and yes, Texas is rising now, but the per capita number of cases or hospitalizations or deaths or whatever metric you wanna use, never got anywhere near what the peak of New York was. So, I would respond to that and I would say, “Hey, look, that’s because New York, jumped on the lockdown very early on, acted very swiftly, and we’ve been very careful about reopening. We’ve been very good about testing.”

But now that I’ve read the research arguing in favor of New York City having hit herd immunity, I cannot help but see that we’ve had our cases and our mortality being in steady decline since the early to middle of April, more than four-and-a-half months ago, and for about three months, we’ve had completely flat bottomed out stats for this. And that’s despite the fact that we are in phase 4 of a reopening that started in June. And so, how can reopening, and reopening, and reopening, and reopening in these phases, how can that not have any perceptible increase in the caseload? And I think, now granted just in the last week, they are talking about the cases increasing but I think this is because they’re testing people so systematically. And so they are seeing the percent positivity rate increase in their systematic testing of people. But if you look at the cases, the data for cases, you know, you can barely tell whether there’s any signal rising above the noise. It’s not clear that there’s an uptick yet. But more importantly, there’s definitely no uptick in hospitalizations or deaths. So whoever’s getting infected right now, it’s just not that serious. And, you know, this also would be predicted from the same exact principle, right? Because just as the virus would pluck off the people most likely to be a transmitter early on, it’s also plucking off the people most vulnerable. So, you know, if the virus first hits the people with the least immunity, then six months in, even when it’s infecting people enough to make them positive, it should be infecting the ones who had good enough immunity that they didn’t get infected back in March. So, because of that better immunity, when they do get infected in September or October or November, it’s not as likely to be serious.

And so I think that’s probably what we’re seeing. And the general trend that there’s just been this completely flatline, that has basically not changed for all these months, I just think that it’s far more likely that what happened is, we got hit so hard, and despite our best efforts to stop it, that we can never get hit that hard again. And, you know, I think it’s important to note that herd immunity doesn’t mean the end of caution. It just means that that enough of the transmitters had been infected, that you’re not gonna have exponential growth. You are instead going to have all things being equal, a decline in caseloads, whether it’s fast or slow. And it also doesn’t mean if you make some dramatic change to policy, where you open back up, that you’re not gonna see some temporary, small uptick. It just means that that uptick is not going to create a second wave that looked anything, even 10% like the first one. And so, no, I don’t think the end of caution has come. But I think, you know, for New York City, I think we clearly got hit so hard, that we have overshot herd immunity. Caution shouldn’t be, you know, thrown away, but we do need to balance that in perspective. And I think there’s a lot of other areas where, you know, if you see them spiking… And I think this is a great test to do. Like, if you hear someone talking about a spike in cases in a particular area, then what you should do is you should go to Google, and you should google the case number in that area, then you should open a new tab, Google the population in that area, divide one by the other, and see whether it’s gotten up to the level of New York City or not. You know, so when Spain was having its second wave, or Spain is having its second wave, even with the second wave peak, even now Spain has, you know, 70% fewer cases per capita than New York City had in total.

And so, when you look at that, you have to keep that in perspective that the places that are really getting hit the hardest, now are generally the places that didn’t get hit hard before. And there’s not really anywhere that got hit as hard as New York City did, that is having a second wave that looks like the first one. You know, Spain’s second wave in caseload looks as bad as its first one. In hospitalizations and deaths, it does not look as bad as its first one. But in cases, it does. But you know, you take the first wave and the second wave, add them together, and it still doesn’t get anywhere near New York City’s first wave. And so that’s why the second wave is that bad. And I think that that’s a… Look, I’m not an epidemiologist. I do not have the final say on this stuff. But I think we really need to open up the conversation around this because there are very good mathematical epidemiologists who are coming up with these models. And I think they need a voice in policy decisions at the local, state, national, and global level. Because, like in the case of New York City, you know, it made complete sense when we had four times more COVID death cases in a day than any other death. It made sense to ignore every other cause of death and focus on COVID. But excuse me, when COVID mortality is 2% or 3% of total mortality, we can’t… You know, yes, if the prospect of a second wave is bad as the first one is right around the corner, then yes, we should only be thinking about COVID. But if there’s a very strong case to be made, that that second wave, as bad as the first one, is not right around the corner, then, you know, it behooves us morally, ethically, and rationally to not ignore the 97% of mortality that isn’t COVID.

So I think it’s a discussion that has to be had because there’s an opportunity cost to everything that we do, and we can’t ignore COVID. But if there’s a strong case to be made, that not everything else has stopped to matter, then we can invest so much…then we have to question whether when we invest in preventing COVID at the expense of taking care of all the other things that need to be taken care of, whether we’re making the wrong decision not to reapportion some of that mental energy, and some of that monetary investment, and some of that analytical investment and understanding, a little bit away from COVID, to not forsake all the other things that are important.

Katie: Yeah, I think you put that so well. And this is one of the reasons I love your work and the research you do and how intellectually honest you are. And even the number of times in this conversation that you said, you know, early data looked like this, and then I changed my mind, in light of new information. I think we need more voices like you and, like, these epidemiologists and researchers that you’re talking about to have an honest conversation about this going forward. Because, like you said, we’re at a place where we need to look at cases versus the mortality and hospitalization. And I feel like those just keep getting lumped into the same conversation. And I think you put it so well, it’s not the time for the end of caution, but it is time to consider other potential consequences and look at total harm minimization, not just number of cases of COVID when we’re seeing businesses shut down, and the economy decline, and kids not being able to go to school.

And my opinion is at this point, we all need to be responsible for doing our own research and looking at the data. And I love Charlie Munger’s idea of, you know, earn the right to have an opinion by knowing the other side of that opinion, as well as your opponent, might actually look at the conflicting data and challenge yourself, make sure that your conclusions are backed by research and data, and not just, you know, alarmist post on social media. And so I will make sure I put links in the show notes for people to follow you and to keep up with the nutritional side of this. And you’ve been doing, like you mentioned, some great interviews that I think really bring some important points to light. And this is why I felt like it was finally time to open this conversation on here and to share this data with my listeners because like you said, I think this is a really timely and important topic right now, as we look forward to what will policy be for the rest of the year, for early next year? And will there be as dangerous of a second wave as we keep hearing there might?

This podcast is brought to you by Wellnesse, my new personal care company that is based on the recipes I’ve been making at home in my kitchen for decades. Many “clean” products simply don’t work and this is why I have spent the last decade researching and perfecting recipes for products that not only eliminate toxic chemicals but contain ingredients that work better than their conventional alternatives and that nourish your body from the outside in. I’m so excited to finally share these products with you and wanted to tell you about our brand new dry shampoo! It can be used various ways. You can sprinkle it in clean hair to add volume and to extend time between washes, sprinkle it in hair that has not been washed in a day or two to absorb oil or sweat and you can work in to color treated hair to maintain color-treated hair by not having to wash as often. It contains oil-absorbing kaolin clay and volume-boosting tapioca which work together to refresh hair at the roots. Lavender oil and cactus flower help to balance scalp and strands’ natural pH. We even added hibiscus for healthy hair growth. You can check it out and try it at wellnesse.com and my tip is to grab a bundle to save or subscribe and save as well!

This episode is brought to you by Joovv Red Light Therapy. Red light therapy, also called photobiomodulation, has been a part of my life for a lot of years. I discovered this years ago when doing some research and specifically found the benefits for hair, skin, thyroid, energy levels, many other things as well. And the reason for this is that our bodies need light. We think about food as the fuel for our bodies, and it is, but light is also a very important type of fuel for our bodies and for ourselves. And many of us get too much of certain types of light, like blue artificial indoor spectrums of light, and not enough of other types of light, like outdoor light, all the spectrum that come from the sun, and including red light, which is why I love having an option in my house where I can make sure I’m getting enough red light daily. It’s done wonders for my wellness routine, and that’s why I’ve made it such a priority. I’ve noticed a difference in my energy levels and in my skin when I use it regularly. And I wanted to talk to you about Joovv today specifically because they have long been the leader in red light therapy. But they’ve also just now come out with a new generation of devices that have upgrades that are really exciting. Their devices are sleeker, lighter, and with all of the same power of their original devices. But they’ve intensified their coverage area so you can stand as much as three times further away and still get the recommended dosage. I find this lets me work out or do other activities still close enough to the light to get the benefits. They’ve also upgraded their setup, so it’s very quick and easy to build and can fit in almost any space, depending on your size requirements. A couple really cool features about these new devices. They have something called Recovery Plus Mode, which uses pulsing technology to give yourselves an extra boost after a tough workout or a stressful day. And I find that sleep is one of the most important aspects of health. And I have used red light therapy at night to help wind down for the day quite often. But their new devices have something called Ambient Mode, which is calmer lower intensity lights, especially beneficial at night, certainly more healthy than the bright blue light from many of our screens and in line with our natural circadian rhythms. For a limited time, Joovv is hooking up listeners of this podcast with an exclusive discount on a first order. And you can find out all the details by going to joovv.com/wellnessmama and using my code Wellnessmama on any qualifying order.

Just on a personal level, what does your day-to-day look like? What does your personal risk assessment of the virus or how has your life changed in New York now versus a few months ago?

Chris: So a few months ago, I would say I… You know, what I was just saying I think it was actually very well reflected in what I’ve done personally. So, when we were in lockdown, a lot of my energy was invested in buffering the psychological stress. So I deliberately made some choices with my diet, for example, to allow more comfort foods, you know, still trying to select from the healthiest of comfort foods, but still… You know, like, pre-COVID, my diet was very much built around most of the time, the functionality of getting my nutrients in. And, you know, yes, I enjoyed home-cooked pleasurable meals, went out to eat and whatnot. But during the height of the COVID lockdown, you know, I very much acknowledged that many of the things that were fun and interesting to me, that existed outside of my apartment, were no longer available to me. And knowing that… And, of course, this is a very financially stressful time as well because, you know, especially in March and April but, you know, small businesses are having a difficult time this year. And so, you know, I made the choice to say, like, “Okay, I’m gonna allow myself to gain some weight. I’m gonna allow myself a glass of wine every night, instead of two nights a week. I’m gonna, you know, eat some more comfort foods. I’m gonna put cream in my coffee.” I usually avoid dairy because it causes a slight inflammation for me, and I also tend to gain a few pounds if I put cream in my coffee because it’s just added calories that don’t make me eat any less. But I just sort of, like, shifted the allocation and mental energy towards just increasing the comforts available to me, inside my lockdown apartment, and just trying to buffer some of that psychological stress.

And then my supplement regime was largely built around preventing COVID. So, like I said before, with the zinc, also with elderberry, and garlic, and a couple of other things, I would have my daily COVID prevention supplements. And of course, you know, as we said, early on, there wasn’t that much data. So this was all built on what I think is the most probable outcome if I take elderberry or garlic, or whatever. And I’d have certain things that I’d do before and after high-risk exposures. And so the zinc lozenges were one. Eventually, a nasal rinse with povidone-iodine at 0.5% concentration became another thing that I added to that. And then as we’ve opened up, the opening up has been very gradual. So, probably the first thing that I started doing was once the state parks opened up, my girlfriend and I would go hiking on a regular basis. And, you know, that was one of the… Like, we couldn’t go to a play or go… You know, at first, we couldn’t go to restaurants either. Couldn’t go to most entertainment, right, but we could go hiking. And that’s number one gonna get us physical activity when all the gyms were still closed. Number two, gonna get us outside, where we get the benefits of sunshine, including the vitamin D, as well as many other things. Number three, just, you know, the whole forest bathing concept, just very much needed stress relief. And as that started, I said to myself, “Okay, I’m gonna sort of, like, gradually shift. Let’s say we’re 10% back to normal compared to lockdown, okay, I’m gonna start taking a 10% allocation shift from my psychological stress and COVID prevention bucket,” and shift it back into, you know, what was I doing before to keep optimal body composition, to, you know, sort of have a stoic, non-inflammatory vitamin and mineral positive diet, and just gradually shift things back there.

So, I’ve just gradually decreased my… So, as an example, now I put cream in my coffee on weekends and I do black coffee during the week. Started to gradually decrease my alcohol consumption back to what it was before not quite, but, you know, gradually. I’ve started to eliminate the most of the comfort foods and eat a more, you know, vitamin and mineral, non-inflammatory sort of oriented diet similar to what I had before. And then I guess my supplementation regime is very much not focused on COVID prevention and much more focused on what do I think are the things that I’m not hitting with my diet, where I get the most benefit out of adding a supplement in. And so now my supplements look very and a lot, like, what they did pre-COVID and sort of nothing like what they did during COVID. But I still do have elderberry, garlic, povidone, iodine, zinc, vitamin D. And I have those kind of in line for if I do something out of the ordinary where I’m expecting that I’m mixing with travelers or I spend a lot of time, you know, now that indoor dining is around, say I participate in indoor dining, you know, things that are theoretically a higher risk, I’ll still add some of that sort of before and after high-risk potential exposure prevention protocol. You know, take zinc lozenges, take some garlic elderberry, do a nasal rinse with the 0.5% povidone-iodine, but that’s become a very intermittent thing that is no longer the dominant force in my life.

Katie: Got it. I think that’s a super balanced approach. And I feel like this episode has been packed with so much practical information. I know that you have written so much and done interviews on a lot of these topics. So I’ll make sure all of those are linked in the show notes at wellnessmama.fm. For any of you guys listening, I highly recommend following Chris on social media and keeping up with all of his research. He’s incredible. Chris, thank you so much. I know I always say this, we’re gonna have to do another round sometime soon…

Chris: Happy to do it.

Katie: …because you’re such a wealth of knowledge. I’m very appreciative of your time. Thank you for all the research that you are doing in this and for sharing such a well-informed and balanced approach to this. So thank you for your time today.

Chris: You’re welcome. Thank you so much for having me on. It was great.

Katie: And thank you as always for listening and sharing your most valuable resource, your time, with both of us today. We’re so grateful that you did. And I hope that you will join me again on the next episode of “The Wellness Mama.”

If you’re enjoying these interviews, would you please take two minutes to leave a rating or review on iTunes for me? Doing this helps more people to find the podcast, which means even more moms and families could benefit from the information. I really appreciate your time, and thanks as always for listening.



Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back To Top