Petition update

ICUs giving vitamin C report fewer deaths

C4UK

Aug 30, 2020 — 

Dear C4UK supporter

You may have noticed in the UK, but also in many European countries, cases of apparent infection as classified by a positive PCR swab test, seem to be going up but deaths aren’t. Why is this? You might wonder why national newspapers and governments fail to address ways to support your own immune system. I thought you’d appreciate an update.

Firstly, in many countries including the UK the number of PCR tests has increased and there’s a very high level of ‘false positives’ creating the impression of more risk. Also, many ‘at risk’ groups are protected by social distancing, a proportion of which have either had the virus and are now immune or, unfortunately, have died. Also, you can test PCR positive but be apparently asymptomatic, or have very minor symptoms because your immune system deals with the viral exposure so effectively. So, the actual number of people getting infected and checking in to hospitals and Intensive Care Units (ICU) and dying remains extremely low. Hence, your actual risk if you are not in a high risk group and have healthy immunity is very low, whether or not you wear a mask, and would be even lower with appropriate intake if vitamin C, as well as sufficient vitamin D and zinc. This state of affairs will probably change from October as we enter the flu season but is unlikely to be a big ‘second wave’.

The reason for this is that there is almost certainly much more immunity in the general population than is being given credit for. This is because we don’t yet know how to prove immunity. The first wave of antibody testing (IgG) established that many people exposed to the virus tested negative but were immune. This is a bit like a  ‘false negative’ but not because the test is faulty but that it’s not necessarily measuring the right thing. Although not yet commercially available one can have t-cell memory and be immune without being IgG antibody positive. Then there’s all the people who have been exposed to the virus, and developed immunity, whether they suffered badly or barely. Even of those that do test antibody positive a small proportion remained asymptomatic. The science hasn’t really caught up with the actualities yet so it’s still really hard to predict but certainly a degree of immunity now exists in the population at large. There’s a good article on this, headed ‘ why everyone was wrong - The immune response to the virus is stronger than everyone thought’.

When rates of flu infection in the winter months do pick up, coinciding with both drops in vitamin D levels, temperature and humidity (viruses survive better in cold,wet climates like the UK in winter months) the death rates will be less because ICUs have got better at treating it – and that’s without vitamin C. To give you a measure on this the Intensive Care National Audit and Research Centre (ICNARC) reported 48% mortality in ICUs at the end of March and 41% at the end of July.

However, the best results are being reported in ICUs using intravenous vitamin C with both steroids and anticoagulants. In the US two such ICU’s have reported 6.5% and 3.5% mortality using 12 grams of vitamin C, plus steroids and anticoagulants. In the UK only one ICU that I know of has used vitamin C (2 grams) with anticoagulants but not steroids has reported 32.7% mortality – the lowest of all ICUs in the UK – compared to the national average of 41%. That equates to saving one in five lives. There’s a very good blog on this by Jerome Burne headed ‘there is a case for treating virus victims with vitamin C, say ICU experts’.

The Daily Mail have accepted, and edited a similar article on vitamin C in ICUs and say it’s in the pile for publication. I’ll let you know when/if this happens. Other papers have refused to publish on vitamin C despite being given copious evidence.

So, why is vitamin C being almost totally ignored by the media and the medical journals? There’s a very good article that shows, as an example, just how much funding is going into influencing the mainstream media, from the BBC to the Guardian, by the Bill Gates Foundation, headed ‘Journalism’s Gate Keepers’ . Gates, of course, is pushing the vaccine agenda and has also funded many key decision makers including the ‘independent’ government agency who decides what can and can’t be used, and said, about treatments from vitamins to vaccines.

The same kind of political influence is happening on the medical journal front. This is no surprise. Most of the main medical journals are part-owned and largely funded by pharmaceutical companies. That is why it is extraordinarily difficult to get vitamin studies published and very easy to get ‘anti’ vitamin studies published. Another example is the randomized-controlled trial on intravenous vitamin C by Professor Zhiyong Peng at Wuhan’s Zhongnan University who, I am told, has struggled to get his results showing a third less deaths in those given vitamin C versus placebo published despite finishing the trial back in May.
We, that is Professor Iain Whitaker and colleagues in NHS Wales and I managed to get a systematic review entitled ‘Could Vitamins Help in the Fight Against COVID-19?’ published in the international journal Nutrients last month but even so the ‘meaty’ bits on vitamin C got edited out. It’s still a step in the right direction.

The Government are apparently advised by Public Health England (PHE) who are apparently advised by the Scientific Advisory Panel of Nutrition (SACN). PHE are not aware of any robust evidence that vitamin C can ‘boost’ immunity or prevent or treat infection.’ PHE’s dismissal is based on a review of the evidence for benefit by SACN (Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition) which relied on just three papers – the only ones, the committee reported, it could find. I did a search on Pubmed using the same criteria and found over 40 papers.

What’s more, SACN misrepresented the studies it did find. Rather than containing no evidence, all three papers showed positive results and recommended vitamin C supplementation to support immune response against viruses.

One search result, for instance, said that being deficient meant you were more likely to develop ‘severe respiratory infections’. A second that deficiency would result in a poorer immune response and increase the risk of infection.  The committee also ignored studies of intravenous vitamin C given to seriously infected ICU patients. One meta-analysis, for instance, has found it significantly reduced time on a ventilator. 

I was working on a proper review of the evidence to submit to PHE/SACN but, as you’ve heard, Matt Hancock wants to disband PHE and set up the ‘Institute for Health Protection’. Until we know who is in charge of such issues as how we support our own immunity, if any, and whether SACN is even relevant, this could be a wasted effort. Also, I ran out of time (I’m running my retreats until 15th September then a week off, then back on this.) If there’s anyone out there good at writing review papers I could certainly do with some help. I’ve got all the studies. It would be good to provide a review of all relevant papers so those responsible can’t pretend they haven’t come across any evidence, as has often been done in the past by SACN and continues to be done by the UK government and health officials from SACN to the NHS chiefs. As winter approaches this all becomes very pertinent.

Wishing you the best of health,

Patrick Holford

 


Keep fighting for people power!

Politicians and rich CEOs shouldn't make all the decisions. Today we ask you to help keep Change.org free and independent. Our job as a public benefit company is to help petitions like this one fight back and get heard. If everyone who saw this chipped in monthly we'd secure Change.org's future today. Help us hold the powerful to account. Can you spare a minute to become a member today?

I'll power Change with $5 monthlyPayment method

Discussion

Please enter a comment.

We were unable to post your comment. Please try again.