Someone put this up on Facebook, and this was my response.  

The medical world is sick.  Sick and twisted. It is a deranged profession, as they practice their pseudo-scientific religion. And the reality of that is nakedly clear, especially when you look at the eruption over Omicron.  

Are you aware that this whole thing, this whole worldwide clamor and obsession with Omicron started with one female doctor in South Africa? This is what she said, and it is frightening to think that this is what jarred the whole world into a frenzy:

"In 8-10 weeks, we had not seen any new COVID-19 cases. We were out of our third wave. So when around November 18, a patient came to me complaining of a viral infection, it didn't make sense. I tested him and found him and his whole family positive. All had the same type of symptoms, related to COVID like fatigue, body aches, scratchy throat, cough. No one really complained of a fever. This was not typical of the Delta variant, which we have seen a lot of cases of. I raised an alarm to the advisory committee. Our scientists looked at this and realized it's a new variant," said Dr. Angelique Coetzee. 

So, because a guy showed up with flu-like symptoms that did not include fever, she concluded it must be a new Covid variant. Then her “scientists” quickly agreed.

She was quick to point out though that, so far, all cases have been mild, with no severe symptoms or hospitalizations and with normal oxygen levels. And she said that recovery time was 2 to 3 days.

2 to 3 days? So, all this fuss over something with the severity of a very mild cold? 

Note that they already decided it was a new Covid-19 variant before doing any lab testing. Did they forget that people have been getting sick this way forever? With fatigue and malaise and scratchy throat and body aches?  It wasn’t new. Why couldn’t it have been a mild case of flu? Why did it have to be a new Covid variant?

Now, let’s look at the timeline. It was on Thursday, November 27 that Dr. Coetzee and her South African scientists announced their discovery, all starting with this one guy with a scratchy throat that cleared up in a couple days. The very next day, Europe announced its first case of Omicron in Belgium. Before the weekend was out, Australia, Britain, Canada, Denmark, Germany, Israel, Italy and other countries had all found cases.

How is that possible? This is insane. It’s like a sci-fi movie.

What it comes down to is: genome sequencing. You know that nucleic acids are comprised of long strands of nucleotides, and those units, the nucleotides, are considered the genetic alphabet. There are reportedly 30,000 nucleotides in the Covid-19 virus. A variant presumably has undergone changes in the sequence of nucleotides.

So apparently, very quickly, mad scientists came up with a new test to identify the newly mutated viral genome.  It was already decided and settled on that that’s what it was.

Now remember that in all forms of life, genes have to be replicated, and a mutation is a mistake in the replication. Supposedly, the whole process of “Evolution” is driven by mutations, which although they are mistakes, sometimes deliver good things, good adaptations, and all by accident. And then they get "naturally selected," and this is responsible for all the genetic diversity and evolution of the species on the planet. I don’t buy it, and neither do these guys:

But usually, the idea goes that the mutations occur over very long periods of time. This idea of viruses mutating in very short periods of time, like weeks or months, is unique. There is no other form of life that supposedly mutates that fast and that often.

It is very arcane, but basically, the way the PCR test works is that they take exudate from a person, which is a complex mixture of things; they apply reverse transciptase to it to convert the RNA to DNA. Then, they heat the DNA to separate the strands. Then, they cool it and apply the polymerase enzyme which causes duplication. But first, they have to decide what they’re going to duplicate. They’re not trying to duplicate the whole virus. So, they apply "primers," which are very short strands of DNA that basically tell the polymerase what part to duplicate. They assume that the whole virus is in there, but when it comes to duplication, they just try to duplicate chosen pieces; what they consider to be the signature pieces of the virus. So, for instance, if the whole virus is presumed to be 30,000 nucleotides long, they may try to duplicate a 100 nucleotide piece of it. But not just one 100 nucleotide piece; usually 2 or 3.

So, the primers cause dupliation of specific very short strands that they consider to be the hallmarks of Covid 19. Then, other DNA fragments called “probes” are added, which are flourescent. These flourescent probes then combine with the duplicated material until there is enough flourescence to trigger the registering of a positive test result. So, the flourescence is like the bell going off. It’s the thing that says “Bingo.”

You know how dipstick urine tests involve a color change, say from orange to purple? Well, in this case, what they look for is not a color change but a change from non-flouresence to flouresence.

So, that’s the overview of the PCR test for Covid. When the South African scientists, drooling with excitement, started testing samples hoping to identify the new variant, they noticed that one of the probes wasn’t working at all. Apparently, that strand wasn’t being duplicated by the PCR test. So, that became the first hallmark of the new strain, that it didn’t contain the “S” gene that corresponded to that probe.  

I don’t think there is any point in trying to delve further into this technically. The fact is that they have never once isolated or identified a whole, intact, complete Covid-19 virus anywhere in the world. This whole time it’s been the presumption that the pieces they duplicate stand-in for the whole virus. And now because a certain piece isn’t getting duplicated, they’ve decided that that’s the hallmark of this new strain of the virus.

So, what is really going on? What’s going on is that a guy in South Africa had malaise and a scratchy throat for a couple days, and they are blowing it up into a global crisis. Super-fast, they have adjusted all their testing so that it’s Omicron, Omicron, Omicron wherever they look. The whole thing is nothing but an illusion.

There is no new strain. There is just a new paranoia. It’s just another feeding frenzy among the deluded “scientists” who are the Stepford Wives of the Covid industry.

I’ll be perfectly honest with you. I’ve done quite well. I haven’t had a fever in decades. The last time I got the flu was around the mellennium, and I was down for about a week. But, that’s the last time I got it, and this is nearly 2022. Since Covid began, I have not gotten it nor any colds or flus. Over the years, I've had some minor colds, but not severe enough to want to stay in bed. I have never had pneumonia in my life, that I know of.  I did have inguinal hernia surgery in 2020, and that worked out well. The maverick surgeon I went to in Florida really fixed me up, and I mean that I’m as good as new. And I healed fast too.

The point I’m trying to make is that, based on my experience, if I did get malaise and a scratchy throat, I would not be the least bit interested in finding out if I had “Omicron.” I would handle it as I have before. I would just let my body work through it, without suppressing symptoms. I would rest and conserve. I would sleep as much as possible. And if there was loss of appetite, I would respect that and not eat. I would allow myself to recover naturally and spontaneously. I would not take Ivermectin or antibody cocktails or anything else. And I would stay the hell away from doctors.   

What's going on today is not science. It is religion; a pseudo-scientific religion that is based on dogma, ritual, and phony tests that are designed to find exactly what they are looking for.   




Stock markets around the world tumbled in response to the news. Is it anything we should take seriously and act upon? No, it is not. And I would like to remind you that what they claim is that whole live Covid viruses are transferred from one person to another just from talking or even just breathing in proximity. So, it should be very easy to obtain whole Covid viruses, all 30,000 base pairs. If they travel through the air from one person to another, then you should be able to intercept them en route. So, why can’t they do it? Why do they have to settle for tiny fragments of RNA that they assume came from the Covid virus and duplicate that? To this day, they have never come up with a single complete Covid virus.

And the same applies to the variants. They are not finding a whole virus variant. Again, it comes down to pieces of RNA. You see, they let a computer program tell them what the hodge-podge of genetic fragments in a person’s sputum should look like and how it should be proportioned. And if what they find deviates from what the algorithm says, then, wahlah, it’s a new variant. If I said the process was arcane, it would be a gross understatement.

And remember that when they say they have “isolated the virus” what they mean is that they have done things to induce a certain pathological effect on a group of cells in a petri dish, using a very complex mixture, and if they see the pathological effect, they say that, in so doing, they isolated the virus. It isn’t isolation at all. I am reminded of the Prego tomato sauce commercials, where the Italian chef is stirring the sauce, and when someone asks him, does it have this, does it have that, he keeps repeating, “it’s in there.”. And that’s what they’re telling us that the Covid virus is in there, even though they can’t separate it from everything else.

Of course, most people know nothing about this and have no ability to grasp it. All they know is that “scientists” determined it, and since “science” is the bedrock of modernty, it must be true what the scientists say. But, scientists are human beings, and like all human beings, they are subject to being programmed, to being indoctrinated, and the whole of medical education is an indoctrination.

What science has become is a dogma in which beliefs are held firmly, and all data that comes in are then interpreted according to those beliefs.

Science is NOT supposed to be biased, but medical science is the most biased thing in the world.

For example, there is the belief that the Covid vaccines are effective. So, when a surge breaks out in a community that’s heavily vaccinated, or perhaps almost completely vaccinated, they will scramble to come with something, anything to explain it and avoid concluding that the vaccines don’t work. For instance, they’ll say that the problem is that though the vaccines protect, the reason cases are soaring among the vaccinated is because they need a booster, that the protection they previously had wore off.

Even if one were willing to accept that, what good is a vaccine whose benefit wears off in months? Is this going to be a new way of life now, for people to get vaccinated for Covid every six months? Do you want to live like that? Why would anyone want to live like that?

But, it’s just an assumption- the most attractive assumption they could think of. Seriously, how can they speak of the protection wearing off when they never established there was any protection in the first place? They assumed people were protected, and now they’re assuming that the protection is wearing off.

Or, they’ll suggest that in a heavily vaccinated state like Vermont where Covid is surging, it must be the small percentage of unvaccinated who are driving it. But, for that to be true, then the occurrence rate in the small group of unvaccinated must be a multiple of what it was before in order to shift the total into record territory. But, there is no basis to believe that.

Ireland is 90% fully vaccinated, and it just had its greatest Covid surge.

What, are they going to blame the 10% who are unvaccinated? Are they completely out of their minds?

In Los Angeles, the most vaccinated areas now have the highest Covid rates.

What is happening right now is frightening. And I’m not talking about what the theoretical virus and its theoretical variants are doing. I’m talking about the well-oiled religion of Covidism spreading its hallowed dogma and bogus science everywhere- into all the halls of force and authority and power, as well as into the fearful minds of people.

And whether you agree with me or not, I hope you’re smart enough to realize that there is no reason to think that the discovery of new variants is finished. As long as they keep looking for them, they’ll find them. And as long as they keep doing the PCR test, people will continue to test positive for Covid. As long as they keep doing what they’re doing, this “pandemic” will go on forever.



I notice that many of the low-carb and no-carb advocates, including doctors who advocate those diets, like to talk about glycation reactions in which the reaction of glucose with proteins causes damage. It’s also associated with aging. It makes sense to them that the way to avoid this is to avoid carbohydrate as much as possible, even completely. However, it is not sound thinking, in my opinion, and I’ll tell you why.

You know that your body has two states of being: wakefulness and sleep. You know that it switches back and forth between these two states on a circadian basis. When you’re healthy, the “switch” that controls the daily transitions is very efficient, and you don’t spend much time in a transitory state. You go quickly into sleep from wakefullness, and you quickly reach full awakeness and mobility when you come out of sleep. It’s nice when the whole process is very efficient, isn’t it?

Well, there’s a similar thing the occurs metabolicailly in which the body has two states: eating and fasting. When the body is in an eating state, it is burning sugar, glucose for energy; not exclusively, but primarily. But, when the body is in a fasting state, it burns primarily ketones from fat, and it burns much less sugar.

The body stores very little carbohydrate. There is glycogen, which is “animal starch” stored in the muscles and in the liver, but it gets used up very quickly once a person starts fasting. From that point on, if the body were to continue burning sugar, the body would have to break down proteins to make it, and when fasting, your body does all it can to limit protein loss. It has to break down proteins some in order to provide amino acids for vital functions, both structural and enzymatic. However, it doesn’t want to break down proteins for fuel, just to burn. That would be like burning the furniture to stay warm. So, since the body stores caloric energy mostly in the form of fat, that’s what it seeks to burn during a fast in order to spare bodily proteins.

So, in the normal operation of the human body, it goes into ketosis when it’s fasting, and it also happen in various states of sickness. But, it’s not supposed to happen under normal eating conditions. In other words, you’re not supposed to go through life in a perpetual state of ketosis. In ketosis, you have bad breath; you have a bad taste in your mouth; you get dehydrated. You’re not supposed to go through life like that.

And the body is determined not to go through life like that. As I have emphasized before, human break milk is the sweetest milk of any mammal. So, what happens within the body of a nursing mother who is eating a carnivore diet? Her body undergoes massive gluconeogenesis, and the result is that her milk is just as sweet as that of a carb-eating mother. Milk composition is a highly regulated thing. As long as her diet has enough calories, and is sufficient otherwise, she will churn out that sugar for the baby. The difference in milk composition is quite small despite massive differences in macronutrient consumption, and it’s quite amazing.

So basically, the body cannot be talked into or forced into the low-carb mantra. It wants what it wants, and it will move heaven and earth to get it. So, the body of the nursing mother will churn out sugar, through its own metabolic conversions, so that the baby gets what it needs.  But, what about the baby? What if the mother weans the baby to a no-carb diet, where it goes from sweet milk to non-sweet meat, fish, and eggs and nothing else?  Then, the body of the baby will do the same thing and start churning out sugar via gluconeogenesis.

So, very low carb and no carb diets turn the body into a sugar making machine. And the sugar that it makes from glucogenic amino acids and from the glycerol portion of fats is just as likely to undergo glycation reactions with proteins as the sugar from plants. But, the unrefined plants at least contain antioxidants and polyphenols and other things that help limit the damage.

Being in a state of carbohydrate deprivation and ketosis while eating is quite stressful for the body, and it results in a raising of the cortisol level, which is a stress hormone. And one of the effects of cortisol is to increase blood sugar. Now, people vary a lot in this regard, but in some people, the blood sugar can shoot up very high as a result of this mechanism.

When it comes to blood sugar, what you want is normality. You don’t want your blood sugar to be abnormally high or abnormally low. When you eat a very low or no carb diet, you are teaching your body to be carbohydrate intolerant. So, let’s say that you are eating that way, but then you stop eating that way, and resume eating a normal amount of carbyhydrate- which you consider a binge. You won’t tolerate it well. You’ll incur a greater spike in blood sugar than the person who is used to eating carbohydrates on a regular basis.  

No one is going to avoid glycaton reactions completely. For instance, they test the blood for glycated hemoglobin, and normally, it’s a little over 5%. So, that means that 5% of the hemoglobin in the blood is damaged. But, it never goes to zero. And it would be alarming if it did. You would probably be dead if it did. If hemoglobin A1C gets too low (below 4.5) it is associated with increased all-cause mortality and cancer.,early%20stages%20of%20cancer%20%28%203%2C%2010%20%29.

So, does that mean that there is something beneficial about having 5% of the hemoglobin in the blood damaged from glycation? I rather doubt it. It’s the conditions that led to the A1C getting that low that are harmful.

The right way to proceed, in my opinion, is not to adopt the extreme measure of avoiding dietary carbohydrates but rather to keep your carbohydrates unrefined, since whole foods affect the body very differently than refined foods. And that includes something as simple as eating a whole apple rather than drinking apple juice. It’s far better to eat the whole apple.

Then, the second thing is to control for calories. It’s one thing to limit carb consumption by radically skewing the balance of protein, fats, and carbs, but it’s another thing to limit carbs by limiting calories overall. We know beyond a shadow of a doubt that caloric reduction is the most proven life extension technique. It’s been proven in animals large and small. Of course, it’s never been tested similarly on people because it would mean controlling their calories for their whole lives, and it isn’t practical to do that for 80 or more years, and it would be inhumane. But, they have done experiments in which they controlled for calories in people for short periods and compared markers for aging, such as telomere length, and saw impressive results.

So, I say eat whole unrefined foods and be attentive to calories. I don’t say to live life with a calculator every time you put something in your mouth because that is no fun. What you need is a general plan to limit calories. When you make fresh fruits and vegetables a big part of your diet, it is going to automatically reduce calories because these foods are so high in water and fiber which have no calories.  Eating a lot of fresh fruits and vegetables is the most painless way to eat low-cal because you still get to eat. You get to eat a lot.

But, as far as the balance between proteins, fats, and carbohydrates, rather than trying to limit carbs within the group, or limit fats within the group, the one you should really want to limit is protein. Remember that most of the calories you eat are for fuel. It’s stuff you burn. And you don’t want to burn protein. You want to get enough protein to meet your structural, enzymatic, and functional needs (to make things like neurotransmitters) but you don’t want to start burning the furniture. Hydrocarbons are for burning, and that means carbs and fats.

And keep in mind that I do NOT advocate ultra-low-fat diets, such as Pritikin, McDougall or Esselstyn. There is absolutely nothing wrong with eating healthy fats.  But, you have to remember that fats are more calorically dense, and since the most proven thing is to control for calories, you have to factor that in when you’re eating high-fat foods, such as nuts.

I suppose in the end it comes down to one thing: balance. But, avoiding carbohydrates completely as a dietary tactic is extreme. It is extremely extreme.  


Despite having the highest vaccination rates in the country, with over 70% fully vaccinated, with over 80% having at least one dose, and vaccination rates among the elderly at 99%, Vermont is experiencing its worst Covid surge ever, with over 300 new cases a day.

So, how do they account for it? How do they spin it? They said that because of the high vaccination rate, people got complacent about wearing masks (even though masks have never been proven effective). But, recall that at the start of the vaccination campaign, we were told that vaccination was the way to end the pandemic, so that we didn’t have to wear masks any more. Then, they’re blaming the change of seasons, saying that the cold weather is pushing people indoors. Of course, they're also blaming Delta. Then, they point out that since Vermont got started vaccinating so early that the protection is wearing off, so all those people need boosters.

In just about any other area of life, these results would generate the simple conclusion that the vaccines have failed, that they are ineffective, that they don’t work. And keep in mind that they have already admitted that the vaccines do not prevent infection. They admit that the vaccinated get infected and spread infection easily. VIRAL LOADS ARE THE SAME WHETHER YOU’RE VACCINATED OR NOT.

So, what benefit is there to the vaccines? All they have left to cling to is the claim that the vaccines prevent SERIOUS illness, the kind that requires hospitalization.

However, that is NOT what the vaccine trials showed. What they showed, reportedly, was that rates of mild infection among the vaccinated were less than the unvaccinated. But, that’s all forgotten now. Now, it turns out, according to them, that the true benefit of the vaccines is in preventing serious illness- and that’s despite the fact that Covid deaths among the vaccinated are far from rare.

I mean: if after being vaccinated, you can still get Covid bad enough that it kills you, isn’t that as serious as it gets? It doesn’t get any worse than that, right? If that’s possible, and if it’s happening at a rate that is being reported regularly, then what is there left to cling to to hold onto the belief that the vaccine is protecting you at all?  Virtually nothing.

And for the life of me, I can’t understand why people who think they have Covid want to go to the hospital. Virtually 100% of the people who are dying of Covid are dying IN THE HOSPITAL. Being in the hospital is not saving them. Medical treatment is not saving them. Maybe it’s killing them.

Remember, it was the medical profession that was putting Covid patients on ventilators even though the death rate from being on the ventilator was 97%. It was the medical profession that was talking people into going on ventilators, including people who were NOT visibly struggling to breathe, not complaining of air hunger. Still, they told them, “Let us knock you out, paralyze your breathing muscles, and have a machine force air into your lungs, because, you see, you need the rest.” And people said, “OK.” Doctors were doing this even though there was nothing mechanically wrong or lacking in their patients’ chest movements- their excursion was fine. Still, they were knocking them out and putting them on ventilators.  How much of it was spurred by the fact that the government was paying $39,000 every time they ventilated someone?

It’s a very twisted game they are playing. If you are in the hosptal for anything, they are going to test you for Covid. And remember that anybody can test positive for Covid. In other words, a person who seems to be in perfect health can test positive for Covid. It happens all the time. Also, there is a correlation between the frequency of testing and the generating of a positive test result. In other words, if you keep testing, no matter who you are, eventually, you are going to get a positive test result.

I’m not going to use the example of a coin flip because that’s a 50/50 chance. But, let’s say you had a spinning wheel, and it had numbers from 1 to 10. So, every time you spin the wheel, you’re going to get one of those numbers. And let’s say it’s decided that the number 7 is bad. Well, if you keep spinning that wheel, sooner or later it’s going to land on 7. You’re going to get that positive test result if you just keep testing.  It’s the same way with the Covid test, but it may be more like 1 in 20 than 1 in 10.

Again, the only thing they have left to claim ANY benefit from the vaccine at all is to claim that the vaccine lowers the risk of hospitalization and death. But remember, no matter what you are in the hospital for, if they do a Covid test, and it’s positive, then you’ve got Covid, and Covid is what’s ailing you. Not your longstanding heart condition but Covid. So, wanting to prove the effectiveness of the vaccines, all they have to do is test, test, test, particularly among the unvaccinated. And every time they get a positive test, it’s Bingo.

What I’m saying is that in a rational world, this vaccine program would have been declared a failure long ago. But, we don’t live in a rational world. We live in a world of dogmatism and stupidity, and at the highest level, including among the supposedly learned, who just repeat the brainwashed mantra, ad infinitum.  










Next comes the bioavailability of nutrients in plant vs. animal foods, where animal foods are better. The term “bioavailability” can encompass many things, but it starts with how absorbable the nutrients are.  It’s undeniable that the fiber in plant foods blocks nutrient absoprtion to some extent. But, it’s part of the natural order. One of my colleages, Dr. Alan Goldhamer, did a determination once of the nutrient content of his recommended vegan diet. And it had something like 39 milligrams of iron. Well, you certainly would not want to absorb 39 milligrams of iron every day. That would cause iron poisoining, for sure. So, thank God the fiber blocks the absorption of much of that iron.  The fact is that we are only supposed to absorb a small percentage of the minerals in plants. You end up sending more minerals to the toilet than to your cells. But again, that’s normal because there is a surplus there.

I’m not saying that vegans can’t get into trouble, say with iron. But, so can meat-eaters. However, something is only a problem if it is one. And the fact is that most vegans who avoid vegan junk foods, usually have no trouble maintaing their iron status.  

You realize that iron is a double-edged sword. It is an oxidizer that rusts you from the inside. It causes free radical damage. You definitely want to get enough iron, but you also don’t want to get too much. And it’s easier to avoid getting too much on a plant diet.

Unless I’m missing something, unless a person is anemic, they do not have a problem with iron. You do a CBC. You run the iron tests like serum iron and ferritin etc. And if everything is within normal limits, then there is nothing to be concerned about. And most vegans are not iron-deficient. However, a small percentage are, and it’s more likely to occur among vegan junk eaters and the aged. And that’s true for non-vegans as well. You can be a meat-eater and be iron-deficient. It happens. And if it happens to a vegan, who likes being a vegan, I would say: just take an iron supplement. Especially today because there are excellent chelated forms of iron that are very effective and gentle on the stomach. Ours is very good, and I have seen it produce great results.

Then, there is zinc, and it is known that the zinc in plants is not as easily absorbed as the zinc in meat.  And it has been shown that vegans and vegetarians have lower serum zinc levels than meateaters. But, are they showing signs of zinc deficiency, such as increased infections, poor immunity, poor wound healing, etc. I don’t think those problems are common among vegans.  But, age, again, is a factor because when people get older, they don’t absorb zinc as well, no matter what they eat.  

But, I’ll admit that zinc is a potential weak spot in the vegan diet. And, it’s one of the reasons I take our Core Multi every day which has 15 mgs of highly absorbable chelated zinc.

I have never had a zinc blood test, and I have never had any signs of zinc deficiency.  But, I’d rather be safe than sorry, so I take our Core Multi with its 15 mgs of chelated zinc, and I feel protected. I look at it as a form of insurance. I’d rather be safe than sorry. And I’d rather do that than eat meat.

Then, he addresses protein with graphs showing digestibility, with animal foods doing better. Well, no matter what the graphs say, I am 70 years old, 5’6”, 140 pounds, and I can still pull that 140 pounds up a pull-up bar 10x in a row. So, why should I doubt whether I am getting enough protein?

I have pointed out before that human breast milk has the lowest protein content of any mammalian milk at 1 per cent. However, analyses in some nursing mothers has come in below 1 percent, like .9  and even .8 percent protein.  And eating Dr. Saladino’s way is not going to alter that much.  A woman eating the Carnivore diet would still produce milk with 1 percent protein. It might go up to 1.1 percent, but that’s about it. It would not go to 2 percent, or even 1.5 percent.  Forget it. The plain truth is that the human body does what it wants to do, and it wants to make a low-protein milk- even if the mother gorges herself on meat at every meal.

Then he gets to Vitamin K2, and it’s true that you can’t get it from plants. It’s made by bacteria, and bacteria may be making it in your gut from K1. Some fermanted plant foods also have K2, such as natto from soybeans. But, I just take a Vitamin K2 supplement. Again, we have a good one, and I regard it as insurance.

Repeatedly, Dr. Saladino said that there are no polyphenols in human biochemistry, that the human body does not make them. Therefore, he claims we don’t need them. But, the human body doesn’t make Vitamin C either, and that’s why we need to get it from food. If it made it then we wouldn’t need it. So, he’s got it ass-backwards.

Then, he gave a list of essential nutrients that can only be found in animal foods: He failed to point out that most of them can be synthsized by the body, including creatine, carnitine, and carnosine. He included choline, but that is produced by plants; in fact, it’s widely distributed. He included Vitamin B12, and that is something that vegans need to supplement with, without a doubt. And it’s not just vegans because with aging, even meateaters can lose the ability to absorb Vitamin B12 from food. Supplementing with one of the sublingual forms of Vitamin B12 is a good idea for all older folks. Even if they include meat in their diet, it’s still a good idea because they could still get in trouble with Vitamin B12,  and it pays to take it for insurance. I do, and it’s this one.

I’ve known for a long time that a vegan diet has to be supplemented. You need to take B12, which everyone agrees. And I think it’s very prudent to take EPA/DHA since the conversion of plant Omega 3 (alpha linolenic acid) into the longer chain polyunsaturated fatty acids is very iffy. Then, taking some supplemental zinc and taurine makes sense to me too- from what we know. Taking Vitamin D3 is also very beneficial. All the vegans that I know or know of do take supplemental B12, but some take just that and nothing else. Some of them are even vegan doctors, and I am not going to tell you that they aren’t doing well, healthwise, because I have no basis to say it or think it. But, I take some supplements, and again, for me, it is a matter of insurance. Some people can sleep at night with little or no insurance. Others need to be insured to the hilt in order to feel safe. I would rather err on the side of caution by taking supplements for nutritional assurance, and I don’t worry about it philosophically.  My goal is not to prove the adequacy of a vegan diet.  I am much more selfish than that. My goal is to live long and to thrive and to avoid the decrepitude of old age.

The idea that a whole, natural fruit or vegetable contributes to the development of atherosclerosis is an impossibility. In other words, it’s crazy to think that fruits and vegetables cause heart disease. There is overwhelming evidence that fresh fruits and vegetables, as well as beans and raw nuts, protect against heart disease. And if you can avoid heart disease, that will probably prevent half or more of the things that can go wrong in old age.

Likewise, fruits and vegetables are protective against cancer. You realize that cancer starts with one abnormal cell. That cell divides into 2, then 4, then 8, then 16, then 32, etc. Early on in this process, the body may get on top of it. It may swoop in and destroy the cancer before it reaches the point of no return. Do you realize that you may have already had cancer and recovered from it without realizing it?  

Well, those “phytochemicals” that Dr. Saladino is so afraid of, that he considers to be toxins, they are like Nature’s chemotherapy but without any untoward side efects. They cause aberrant and senescent cells to commit suicide, a phenomenon called apoptosis, which means programmed cell death. The capacity for apoptosis is rather built-in, but there are phytochemicals that tell the abberent cells to self-destruct.

So, there is very strong epidemiological and experimental evidence that whole natural fruits, vegetables, and other plant foods oppose the development of heart diease (which is, by far, the biggest killer) and cancer (which is second). That is reason enough in itself to make fruits and vegetables a big part of your diet.

No one has the Peter Pan complex more than I do. To say that I detest the idea of growing old is the biggest understatment ever. I know I am going to die, and I also know that before I die, I am going to decline. But, it’s a matter of degree. My goal is forestall, as long as possible, the feeling that I am not myself any more. I don’t have that feeling now. I joke about it sometimes with people. But really, I don’t have that feeling. I feel like I’m still me. I don’t feel less spry than I did 20 or 30 years ago. And I want to keep feeling spry- for as long as possible. And I am thoroughly convinced that plant foods, which have served me well, will continue to serve me well, so that I can experience a higher quality of life than most older people do. I don’t want to wind up like them. Thank you for reading this.  


Before continuing, I want to remind my readers that it is now pomegranate season, and I hope you are going to get your share. The good news about the benefits of pomegranates continues to grow. The latest is that pomegranates contain a substance called punicalagin that bacteria in your gut convert into a substance called utolithin A, which improves and repairs mitochondrial function. It makes your body repair mitorchondria and make new mitochondria, which means more energy for you. I know pomegranates are rather pricey, but try to include some in your diet. It’s worth it.

Now, moving on, next Dr. Saladino referred to a study which denied that there were any measurable antioxidant and immunological benefits in subjects eating a high amount of vegetables.  But, right below it on PubMed, there was another article entitled:

Fruit and vegetable consumption and its relation to markers of inflammation and oxidative stress in adolescents

Background: Fruits and vegetables, foods rich in flavonoids and antioxidants, have been associated with lower risk of stroke, coronary heart disease, and markers of inflammation and oxidative stress in adults. Markers of inflammation and oxidative stress are predictors of coronary heart disease risk; however, it is unknown whether these markers are related to dietary flavonoid and antioxidant intake in youth.

Objective: To determine whether greater intakes of fruit and vegetables, antioxidants, folate, and total flavonoids were inversely associated with markers of inflammation and oxidative stress in 285 adolescent boys and girls aged 13 to 17 years.

Design: In this cross-sectional study conducted between February 1996 and January 2000, diet was assessed by a 127-item food frequency questionnaire. Height and weight measurements were obtained and a fasting blood sample drawn. Spearman partial correlation analyses evaluated the relation of intakes of fruit and vegetables, antioxidants, folate, and flavonoids with markers of inflammation (C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, tumor necrosis factor-alpha, and 15-keto-dihydro-PGF(2alpha) metabolite and oxidative stress (urinary 8-iso prostaglandin F(2alpha), an F(2)-isoprostane), adjusting for age, sex, race, Tanner stage, energy intake, and body mass index.

Results: Urinary F(2)-isoprostane was inversely correlated with intakes of total fruit and vegetables, vitamin C, beta carotene, and flavonoids. Serum C-reactive protein was significantly inversely associated with intakes of fruit (r=-0.19; P=0.004), vitamin C (r=-0.13, P=0.03), and folate (r=-0.18; P=0.004). Serum interleukin-6 was inversely associated with intakes of legumes, vegetables, beta carotene, and vitamin C. Serum tumor necrosis factor-alpha was inversely associated with beta carotene (r=-0.14, P=0.02) and luteolin (r=-0.15, P=0.02).

Conclusion: Study results show that the beneficial effects of fruit and vegetable intake on markers of inflammation and oxidative stress are already present by early adolescence and provide support for the Dietary Guidelines for Americans "to consume five or more servings per day" of fruits and vegetables to promote beneficial cardiovascular health.

RC: I’ll point out that the study he cited did observe that the high vegetable eaters had lower white cell counts than the low vegetable eaters, and that’s consistent with my own observations, as well as those of Dr. Roy Walford, the famous UCLA gerontologist who wrote Maximum Longevity.

At this link, you can read the abstract from the study he cited, and below it, where it says “Similar articles” you’ll see the above study plus several more that all support the benefits of eating vegetables.

Then, it gets weird. Dr. Saladino cites a Danish study out to test the antioxidant effect of green tea extract. They wanted to isolate that, so they depleted other dietary sources of antioxidants and flavinoids, hence it was presumably low in vegetables and fruits. Maybe none at all because they described it as fruit and vegetable depletion diet. But get this: the intervention diet consisted of meat patties with the GTE mixed into them. The GTE did increase plama antioxidant status from 1.35 to 1.56. But, the effect wore off, so that once the person was in a fasting state, medically speaking, say by the next morning before eating, that it went back to baseline. But, who would consider a diet of meat patties with some GTE mixed-in optimal? That’s more like what Dr. Saladino eats, except sans the GTE. Everything about this study was goofy, and it didn’t prove anything. Just because a diet of meat paddies and green tea extract didn't change oxidative status much does not disparage fruits and vegetables. 

Next, Dr. Saladino gets to hormesis, which refers to the adaptive response to stressors that results in improved performance. The classic example is exercise, which can be stressful, but your body’s adaptations to it result in you becoming stronger, faster, etc.  Dr. Saladino believes in the benefits of exercise that way, and so do I, to a point, but it’s a fine line. Running marathons no doubt has a hormeitic effect (positive adapations) but let’s not kid ourselves: it also has negative effects. It’s an extreme thing to do, and the bottom line is that it's stressful- both in a good way and a bad way. 

I think that the concept of hormeisis is itself dangerous. At the very least, it is a double-edged sword. Dr. Saladino is gung-ho about hormesis from exercise, and also from extremes of heat and cold, such as swimming in ice water, presumably. Do I approve of that? Actually, I don’t. I wouldn’t do it. So, if I wouldn’t do it, why would I recommend it? But, it’s part of Dr. Saladino’s “radical living” program. But get this: he’s willing to subject his body to that kind of stress, swimming in super-cold water, but he’s unwilling to subject his body to the “stress” of eating an apple. It was I who picked that example, but I could have said any fruit or vegetable since he doesn’t eat any of them.

He also likes extreme heat, so I guess that means a hike in Death Valley on a summer afternoon is good. So, he’d do the hike in 120 degree temperature, but if if he was offered some cold watermelon at the end of it, that he would turn down because it’s too stressful. That is some weird thinking. 

He pointed out that smoking has been shown to raise glutathione levels as do the polycyclic hydrocarbons from meat, but surely he is not advocating smoking on that basis, is he? Holy Mother of God.

I really think he’s got it exactly wrong. Yes, extremes of exercise can have positive adaptations, but it can also have “collatarlly damaging side effects.” Dr. Saladino needs to read The Exercise Myth by Dr. Henry Solomon, and everyone should because it's a good read.

I think you should be kind to your body- all the time. Yes, you should exercise, but not to the point of harming yourself. Dr. Solomon isn’t opposed to exercise either- just to the extremes of it. And I think he’s right.

Dr. Saladino wants the stress of extreme exercise, but he’s scared shitless of eating a peach. That is some weird, wacky, wild stuff. 






Next, Dr. Saladino said that domesticated fruits and vegetables don’t exist in Nature, that in most places, the woods or the brush have no edble plants, and he showed a picture. So, the fact that supermarkets are teeming with fruits and vegetables is a bad thing, in his view. He also claimed that modern fruits and vegetables are less toxic than their wild counterparts. But, the fact is that plant foods do occur in the wild. Where I live in Central Texas, there are wild mustang grapes, and they are prolific. They are not very sweet, and people rarely eat them out of hand. Typically, they make jam out of them- or wine. There are the wild native pecans, and they too are prolific. There are wild blackberries; there is a wild Texas persimmon, and they grow wild in my neighborhood. I have two trees of them, myself, although mine are both males, so they don’t bear fruit. They were here when I brought the property. But, I have gotten to taste the wild Texas persimmon. There are wild onions and garlic, hence the names Onion Creek and Garlic Creek that are close to me. I think it was Mark Twain who said that a squirrel, starting in Maine, could jump from chestnut tree to chestnut tree, never touching another tree, and make it to the Mississippi River without ever touching the ground. I suspect that was an exaggeration, but you get the idea. Every single food that we have started with some wild derivative. Right? So, let’s move on

Then, he said that the greatest mistake in human history was agriculture. He speculated reasons why Man resorted to growing plants, but think about it: Why would you grow something that you weren’t used to eating? You wouldn’t. Among the earliest human crops were lentils and chickpeas- still in use today, and both favorites of mine. Humans must have been eating them, to some extent, before agriculture. They grew them because they liked them. And that’s true of everything.

He claimed that coinciding with the shift to agriculture came a decline in height and osseous signs of malnutrition. Hmmm. But remember that the domestication of animals for food took place at the same time as plant horticulture. Many of the earliest crops were grown for domesticated animals. Dr. Saladino and others make it seem like it went from a canivore diet (except in a pinch)  to near veganism, due to agriculture. It is a gross exaggeration, to say the least. 



Next, he did a big section on plant toxins in which he said that because plants can’t run away, they fought back against being eaten by evolving toxins to poison their predactors.

But wait: there is a large element of symbiosis that he is overlooking. When you harvest and eat fruit, you are helping to spread the seeds. Even the very eating of it and pooping it out can populate the plants. I was told once that sewage processing plants can have luxuriant tomato plants growing resulting from seeds in the feces germinating. But, even without that, plant consumption can be good for the plants and just what they want us to do. Where I live here in Central Texas, there are two edible plants spread by squirrels. One is pecan and the other hackberry. All over my property, pecan trees and hackberry trees pop up all the time, and it’s from squirrels. And it’s a nuisance too because, endlessly,  I have to pull them out, since I can’t have them growing everywhere. I do have a big hackberry tree that’s wild, and I’m sure it started just that way. And I have a pecan tree too, although I planted it.  So, the fruit tree wants you to eat its bounty and disseminate its seeds, and the same goes for the nut tree.

But, let’s talk about the plant toxins that worry Dr. Saladino so much. He starts with phytoalexins, oxalates, and lectins. 

Phytoalexins are anti-microbial toxins that a plant produces when it’s under attack by fungus, bacteria or other microbes. They are not detetable in uninfected plant tissues. But, it’s been suggested that in humans, phytoalexins can have an anti-cancer effect. There are compounds called stilbenoids that are phytoalexins, and there is one stilbenoid that I’m sure you’ve heard of: resveratrol. People pay good money to take resveratrol. And it’s a phytoalexin.

And I’ve got news for Dr. Saladino about oxalates: as a carnivore, he’s in greater danger of getting kidney stones than I am. A lot of oxalic acid is generated in the body, for instance, from the breakdown of Vitamin C, but also from the breakdown of amino acids. And he is breaking down a lot more amino acids than I am because he consumes a lot more amino acids than I do. But, there’s another factor at work: calcium. To form a calcium oxalate kidney stone, you need two things: oxalic acid and calcium. If there is a lot of oxalic acid, but little or no calcium, you’re not going to have a problem. So, it’s when you have hypercalciuria- high amounts of calcium in the urine that you’re in danger of forming stones. And we know that high protein diets cause hypercalciuria. That’s because those diets are acid-forming, while the body needs to maintain its alkalinity. The ph of the blood is 7.4, which is alkaline. Calcium is a base that can be used to neutralize acids. High meat diets lead to a heavy loss of calcium in the urine.

You can tell if you’re losing a lot of calcium in your urine by mixing a sample of it with Sulkowitch reagent and seeing if it turns cloudy. If clear urine turns cloudy to where you can’t read newsprint through it, you know there is a lot of calcium there. They’ve been doing that test for decades. I learned to do it in Chiropractic college in 1973.

Almost all fruits and vegetables have some oxalic acid; it’s ubiquidous. A few of them have a lot; most notably spinach and swiss chard. And I grow swiss chard here in Central Texas every winter. I’m growing it right now. It’s easy to grow, and it's beautiful. I’ve been doing this for decades, growing and eating swiss chard in the winter, and it’s never bothered me, nor anyone I’ve known. I feed it to my retreat guests. 

I’m not urging people to cast aside all caution. I heard of a case of a woman who went on a spinach juice fast which she supplemented with megadoses of Vitamin C. So, there was a lot of oxalic acid coming in from the spinach juice and forming from the Vitamin C, and she did develop kidney stones that put her in critical condition. So, definitely be reasonable about this. For instance, don’t make a whole salad out of spinach. Make it mostly out of lettuce and other low-oxalate veggies, and just add a few leaves of spinach- if you wish. And don’t juice spinach at all.

So, don’t go hog-wild on high-oxalate vegetables, but eaten in moderation, they’re fine.

Lectins are proteins in plants that can bind with sugars, but like the phytoalexins, some lectins have been found to fight cancer. Lectins are destroyed by cooking. The most dangerous raw bean is the red kidney bean. It could actually kill you. Even undercooked, it could make you very sick. But frankly, I don’t cook them from scratch. I do buy some organic canned soups that contain kidney beans, and I like them. And when they are commercially canned, they are cooked thoroughly to where there is no danger at all. I’ve eaten kidney beans my whole life. Growing up, we loved to make 3 bean salad, with green beans, garbonzos, kidney beans, red peppers and onions.  Season it with some extra virgin olive oil and vinegar. It’s delicious. I’m not giving that up.

Like the phytoalexins, the lectins can have good effects, for instance in cell adhesion, such as when the sperm cells and egg cells bond. That depends on  glycoproteins which are sugar-protein combinations.

Lectins are involved in immune regulation, and they may have direct anti-microbial effects.  And like phytoalexins, lectins have been shown to have an anti-cancer effect.

I mentioned that for oxalic acid, I do avoid eating spinach like lettuce- since I don’t have to. But, for lectins, the only thing I do is make sure I don’t eat raw or undercooked legumes, and I don’t eat raw grains either. Otherwise, I enjoy my tomatoes and potatoes and other plant foods, and I don’t worry about it.

Consider the leading diseases that kill people. On top of the list is heart disease, and if you include cerebrovascular disease (and you might as well since it’s the same disease in a different location) it is overwhelmingly the top killer. Whole natural plant foods have been proven to fight heart disease in all its forms. Following heart disease comes cancer, and again, whole natural plant foods have been shown to have a preventative effect. Then comes COPD, which is due mostly to smoking and air pollution. After that comes diabetes, and you might think that the carnivore diet is best for that, but it isn’t. What do you think happens to the blood sugar of people like Dr. Saladino? It doesn’t drop to zero, and they would be dead if it did. It stays within the normal range, and that means that their diet is turning them into gluconeogenetic machines.  So, what happens if they faifufully do carnivore, but then they come off it for a weekend? That can’t hurt, right? Oh yes it can because their carnivore diet made them more sensitive to sugar. Internally, they are sugar hoarders, whether they like it or not. So, in their avoidance of carbohydrate, they’ve become overly sensitive to sugar. It’s better to let your body adapt to whole natural carbohydrates rather than become a gluconeogensis machine.

There are plenty of things that are terribly wrong that are worth worrying about, but being harmed by a tomato, an apple, a pepper, etc. isn’t one of them.   

So, don’t buy into what these paranoia peddlers are selling because the woes they’re selling, you don’t need to worry about. Fruits and vegetables and other natural plant foods are good for you. Some small observances, like soaking beans and discarding the soak water, also not going gangbusters on high oxalate foods, makes sense. So use common sense, but don’t throw out the most disease-preventing foods on the planet, which are whole, natural plant foods.  


More Articles...