How the Wrong Dietary Fat Can Wreck Your Health

Download Interview Transcript | Download my FREE Podcast

  • Omega-6 linoleic acid (LA) is the most common fat in the American diet. Most people get 25 times more LA than they need. At most, you need about 2 grams a day, but the average American gets about 50 grams a day, thanks to the fact that most processed foods and condiments are loaded with omega-6 seed oils

  • LA gets incorporated into your cell membranes where it causes inflammation. Its half-life is nearly two years, so ridding your body of stored LA completely can take up to seven years

  • Eliminating LA is a marathon, not a sprint. Ineffective and potentially harmful ways of eliminating LA include extended fasting and overtaxing your body with strenuous endurance exercise

  • To stop the accumulation of LA in your cells, eliminate seed oils from your diet. Cook with beef tallow, butter, ghee or coconut oil, and avoid all processed foods, restaurant foods, condiments, and animals raised on grains, such as chicken and pork

  • Vitamin E, in a dose of about 2 IU – 3 IU for every gram of PUFA (not just linoleate) consumed daily may also be able to provide some protection against the inflammatory and endocrine (estrogenic, pro-cortisol) effects of linoleate and PUFA in general

  • To safely encourage the elimination of LA from your body, focus on building muscle and maximizing lean muscle mass with concentric exercise, and eat a balanced diet with a ratio of 2-to-1 healthy carbs to protein

Visit Mercola Market


In this interview, Georgi Dinkov, an expert on linoleic acid (LA), details some of the health hazards of this exceedingly common fat in the modern diet, and how to safely rid your body of it.

Both Georgi and I are convinced excessive LA intake is one of the most important variables that can make or break your health, especially in the long term. It’s a far greater contributor to chronic and degenerative disease and mortality than sugar, and it’s the primary culprit that makes processed foods so harmful.

The historical (last 50 to 75 years) incidence curves of cancer, cardiovascular disease (CVD), diabetes and neurological disease in the general population overlap remarkably well the ever-increasing PUFA consumption rates in developed countries, suggesting PUFA is a major factor in those diseases.1 2

Despite having a degree in computer science, Georgi has made a name for himself as an expert biohacker. After graduating from college in 2002, he got a job as a programmer at the National Biomedical Research Foundation (NBRF).

There, he helped develop, a database of all known protein sequences — Protein Information Resource (PIR — and UniProt (

Surrounded by up to 60 of the brightest doctors and biochemists in the world, Georgi developed an interest in biochemistry, and started studying on the side so he could more effectively collaborate with his coworkers. He provides an amazing example of what one can learn without any formal training if they merely apply themselves.

“Between 2002 and 2005, I was part of this group as a programmer, but I basically started attending all of their lectures and classes,” he says. “Some of them were teaching at nearby universities, so I kept going.

I was a young, single person, didn’t have anything better to do, and I tried to utilize my time the best I could. Over a period of about three years, it started to click, so I started to understand what these people were talking about.

In 2005, I left, got myself a full-time job in the IT sector, and then kept reading. The reason I got into this bioenergetic area, which linoleic acid is a big part of, is because around 2009, I … became a low-carber.

Being an athlete in college, I basically happened to combine very low carb diet with very exhaustive exercise, and I got myself into a really big predicament. I started getting these very weird neurological symptoms, tingling of the extremities, headaches, sensitivity to light.”

In the interview, we clear up some of the pervasive confusion surrounding low-carb diets, and why long-term chronic low-carb is not ideal. It’s a great short-term intervention for most people, especially those with insulin resistance.

This is because lowering carbs can help reset your metabolism and recover your metabolic flexibility. However, in the long term you can run into trouble — especially if you’re also doing a lot of endurance training. The main reasons for the issues caused by chronic low-carb diets (and/or stress, which mimics the effects of low-carb diets) are:

  1. The elevated lipolysis in a low carb-state, which results in chronically elevated circulating levels of PUFA, with the resulting inflammatory and endocrine effects (e.g. PUFA is pro-cortisol, estrogenic and also synergizes with endogenous/exogenous estrogens, and promotes their effects even in low doses).

  2. The downregulation of the resting metabolic rate (RMR) by lowered synthesis of T3 when eating a low-carb diet and/or fasting and/or strenuous exercise.

For more details on this, be sure to listen to the interview at normal speed. Believe me, this is an interview that nearly everyone should listen to a few times to capture the incredible clinical pearls that Georgi shared. I personally learned more during this discussion than I have from most interviews.

If you listen to the interview, you will learn that once your sugar stores are expended, you start tapping into your fat stores through a process called lipolysis. This liberated fat is then circulated around your body and supplied to the cells as fuel to compensate for the low glucose availability.

However, certain types of fat block the effects of insulin in your body, so a long-distance endurance athlete can actually end up with a blood profile similar to that of a person with Type 2 diabetes. In Georgi’s case, as an endurance athlete, his blood sugar climbed higher the less sugar he ate. This competition/antagonism between glucose and fats (mostly PUFA) as fuel for the cells was first discovered in the 1970s and named the Randle Cycle.

Why does it occur? The process in your liver that controls blood sugar is gluconeogenesis. If you stop supplying carbs to your body, the organs that need them will activate glucose creation in your body by elevating the stress hormone cortisol, which ends up being very destructive to your tissues, including skeletal muscle, liver, brain and kidneys.

In Type 2 diabetes, a state with hyperglycemia, only about 10% of the circulating glucose is of dietary origin. The rest is due to chronically elevated gluconeogenesis — which suggests that cortisol is the driver of hyperglycemia in Type 2 diabetes — and elevating cortisol chronically by doing low-carb or exhaustive exercise is likely detrimental to insulin sensitivity.

People with elevated cortisol (Cushing phenotype) have the same central obesity and loss of muscle mass (sarcopenia) as the ones seen in diabetes 2. Conversely, blocking cortisol’s effects with the drug RU486 has been demonstrated to lead to sustained fat loss WITHOUT dieting, and improved insulin sensitivity.3 4 5

Cortisol goes up during exercise, and if there’s no glucose around, cortisol rises even higher. Shakes, problem sleeping, jitteriness and neurological abnormalities are some of the symptoms of high cortisol and low glycogen stores. In Georgi’s case, his symptoms slowly vanished once he started eating a more balanced diet, with a macronutrient ratio of about one-third carbs, one-third fat and one-third protein.

In his search for answers to the symptoms he experienced on a low-carb diet, he came across Dr. Peat’s website,6 aka, Dr. T.A. Peterson, an American biologist who’s been studying the role of energy in the cell, and the effects of LA. Georgi started reading Peat’s work in 2009, and eventually started doing his own experiments.

As noted by Georgi, published research has long demonstrated that LA is far from a benign macronutrient. It’s actually a highly proinflammatory mediator and has endocrine effects that mimic estrogen. Contrary to popular belief, LA is also a major culprit in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), more so than fructose and other sugars.7 8

Georgi cites research9 10 11 showing people with alcoholic cirrhosis (liver disease) who ate their normal diet, which was high in omega-6 fats, experienced classic progression of cirrhosis resulting in liver failure. The group whose diet was altered to eliminate all forms of fat aside from coconut oil, a saturated fat, was able to reverse their cirrhosis, even in the presence of continued alcohol abuse. Additional animal experiments12 confirmed these results. As explained by Georgi:

“The livers of people who are eating predominantly omega-6 fatty acids very quickly get fattened up. Also, there’s cell damage of the Kupffer cells due to the many oxidation byproducts (OxLAMs) of these omega-6 fatty acids … [Meanwhile], the livers of the animals that were still alcoholic but were given the saturated fatty acids had very little oxidative damage to the cells, and they weren’t fat.

What could explain this? Well, it turns out that when you’re consuming a meal with fat, it’s composed of many different fatty acids, but we can separate them into saturated fatty acids, monounsaturated and polyunsaturated [PUFAs].

It turns out that the liver and most of the organs preferentially oxidize (burn) the saturated fatty acids, and then the monounsaturated fatty acids, while the polyunsaturated acids are predominantly stored.

The polyunsaturated fatty acids, aside from being very susceptible to spontaneous auto oxidation … combustion … are precursors to inflammatory mediators such as prostaglandins and leukotrienes. Those inflammatory mediators are basically derived from … linoleic acid. So, if you eat a lot of polyunsaturated fats, and specifically linoleic acid, you’ll have more … systemic inflammation.

Now NAFLD is already known to be an inflammatory state. You cannot get an inflammatory state from saturated fat. It does not produce those same mediators. Saturated fat will either get stored or will get oxidized properly through the process of beta oxidation to carbon dioxide, ATP and water.

But the polyunsaturated fats, they’re unstable. They can get combusted and create a lot of toxic byproducts, and the liver being the site of the primary organ of detoxification of whatever you are eating through the diet — guess what? They’re going to go mostly there.

Also, because they’re precursors to a number of different mediators, enzymes in the body will take these fatty acids, specifically linoleic acid, and then through a chain of reactions convert it to prostaglandins, leukotrienes and thromboxane.”

An important take-home here is that PUFAs such as LA are not digested. Instead they’re stored.13 Most of the body fat in obese individuals is composed of PUFAs, not saturated fat. Saturated dietary fat is mostly burned (oxidized) and used up.

So, obese individuals are typically not eating very much saturated fat; rather, they’re exponentially overdosing on LA. Animal studies in the early 20th century demonstrated conclusively that pigs fed saturated fats (mostly coconut oil) could not get fat but became lean and muscular, while the ones fed PUFA gained mostly fat.

This led to the adoption/promotion of PUFA as animal feed since the goal there is to maximize “caloric efficiency” — i.e., get the animals as heavy as possible with a little food as possible. In other words, the pro-obesity effects of PUFA and anti-obesity effects of saturated fats are well-known in the livestock industry and are not disputed.

Considering the similarity of our metabolism/structure/tissues/organs with those of pigs, it should not be at all surprising that we keep getting fatter while consuming ever-larger amounts of PUFA.

The half-life of PUFAs such as LA, which get embedded and integrated into your cell membranes, is about 680 days. This means that to rid your body of LA will take approximately seven years, provided you don’t load more in. And you really do want to get rid of this fat, as it’s highly inflammatory and prevents your mitochondria and cellular machinery from operating properly.

Research has shown that given enough PUFAs, your cells will go into apoptosis, they basically commit suicide. “It can actually work like a radiation or chemotherapy. It is a type of chemotherapy,” Georgi says. The implications14 15 of this insight are quite profound and I look forward to exploring that with Georgi on his next interview.

A key way to eventually lower your body burden of LA is to keep your total LA intake below 2%, maybe even close to 1%. You need to stop putting more in. Exercise and fasting will help drive the LA out, but you need to be really careful if you have a lot of LA storage.

“A recent study16 found that even lean people who are running marathons, a good portion (82%!) of them are actually in acute kidney failure by the time they reach the finish line,” Georgi says. “The question is, how is this possible? It looks like these circulating fatty acids, which are mostly PUFAs coming out of storage, circulate and cause energetic problems.

Also, because of the quick peroxidation and conversion into inflammatory mediators, they’re damaging many of the organs, predominantly the kidneys.17 Why the kidneys? Anything that is not oxidized for fuel basically gets sent to the liver through the blood stream, the Phase 2 detoxification mechanism. The liver attaches glucuronic acids to these fatty acids to make them more water soluble.

It can also sulfate them. When they’re more water soluble, you pee them out. But they have to go through the kidneys, and it looks like if a sufficiently big supply of these glucoronidated sulfated PUFAs, or let’s say linoleic acid just for the sake of the argument, is flooding the kidneys, it is causing local damage there.

So, what should we do? Well, it looks like we should be taking measures to not get into excessive lipolysis. What is excessive lipolysis? It’s any situation where you’ve run out of glycogen and now the body says, ‘I don’t have the fuel,’ because you’re not eating and you’ve run out of glycogen.

Then fat is your only other fuel, plus the amino acids that are coming from cortisol. So basically, you should not be getting to a state where you’re chronically starving. Acute, let’s say like eight to 12 hours of fasting, calorie restriction, has been shown to have benefits, but anything longer than that, then you’re starting to increase baseline lipolysis.”

Georgi pointed out the dangers of an excessive time-restricted eating (TRE) window.18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 An extreme example of TRE is the one meal a day (OMAD) protocol, where you’re fasting 20 hours or more each day. Georgi believes this is too extreme for most people, as most have large stores of LA that need to be purged safely.

I have been personally practicing and advocating a six– to eight-hour time restricted eating window. What I learned from our conversation is that this, or even longer eating restrictions and fasts, are perfectly appropriate for 95% of the population as they are insulin resistant and metabolically inflexible.

The major problem comes once you lose your insulin resistance and become metabolically flexible. At that point, this strategy becomes counterproductive as you will increase your cortisol levels, which causes chronic inflammation that can lead to tissue damage. Usually, it takes about three to six months for you to recover your metabolic flexibility.

Prior to my interview with Georgi I would have a six- to eight-hour eating window and I did this for a few years. Now I am going to shift to one day a week of 12 hours, three days of 10 hours and three days of eight hours. If you are metabolically healthy, I would encourage you to avoid very short eating windows under eight hours.

This is because chronic fasting also elevates your cortisol, just like chronic endurance exercise does. Cortisol, in turn, is involved in insulin resistance and the synthesis of fat, and promotes the storage of fat. Also, as just mentioned above, high amounts of LA can kill your cells.

“So, you don’t want to be doing this to your normal tissues, and you’re doing it to your tissues every single time you over-exert yourself to the point of either glycogen running low or you’re so stressed that your adrenaline has gotten to the point where it’s increasing lipolysis and you’re starting to shed fat.”

This is a massive piece of the puzzle that I never fully appreciated. Molecular biology and pH physiology are based on a pre-1860s scenario where you didn’t have these high levels of LA, which totally distorts the strategies. If they weren’t there, you could fast to activate autophagy and get all these benefits.

You could have a much longer TRE window. But LA is a game changer. It radically modifies the concept of what you need to do to optimize your health. Essentially, if you’ve filled up your fat stores with LA — and in most people, over 20% of their fats are LA stored in their cell membranes and the optimum is 1% to 2% — then you need to integrate that knowledge into your strategy.

How can you safely reduce these stores of LA without self-sabotaging? As explained by Georgi, extensive fasting will, in this instance, backfire, as will overtaxing yourself with heavy exercise. You’ll need to accept that this is a marathon, not a sprint, and that it’s going to take years to purge your LA stores. The best strategy, Georgi says, is to build muscle and maximize lean muscle mass.

“What does that mean? Concentric exercise, stimulating the muscles to grow. We already mentioned that cortisol is a very catabolic steroid for the muscles, so [you don’t want that] chronically. Acute spikes of cortisol are unavoidable. But things such as chronic fasting or eating inflammatory foods should be avoided as much as possible, which means cutting out vegetable oils.

If you’re cooking your own food, you have the tools at your disposal to eliminate almost completely the consumption of polyunsaturated fats. If you have to fry things or cook on high temperature, use butter, ghee or beef tallow. Even coconut oil [is good], but it has a lower smoke point. All of these are very good substitutes.”

Also avoid all processed foods, restaurant foods, condiments and animal foods raised on grains, such as chicken and pork. Aside from switching the types of dietary fats you eat, Georgi recommends a diet with a 2-to-1 ratio of carbs to protein, the carbs being in the form of fruits and vegetables, not processed sugary snacks.

“Protein is thermogenic. It’s going to raise your metabolic rate. It’s important to consume it with enough carbs because one of the quickest ways to damage your kidneys is consuming a very high protein diet without sufficient amount of carbs.

Even a competitive bodybuilder can only fully utilize about 120 grams of protein a day. Everything else that a person consumes is going to get oxidized as fuel and in the process gets deaminated, which means it produces ammonia, which is very toxic. It destroys the kidneys, liver and brain.

So, eat your protein, don’t cut down on the protein, but don’t overdo it. Make sure the ratio of carbs to protein is at least two to one, and completely cut out PUFAs as much as possible, especially if you’re cooking your own food.”

Hopefully you didn’t skim this and miss the pearl at the end, to take twice as many carbs as protein. What Georgi didn’t state here, though, is that is for people who are metabolically flexible and not insulin resistant.

So, the key is not to be afraid of healthy carbs: They are your friend. If you are eating enough protein to build muscle, please make sure you also have enough carbs because, if you fail to do this, you can hurt your kidneys, liver and brain.

He also shared another pearl about resistance exercises that I wasn’t aware of.  Eccentric exercise, in which you are resisting gravity on the way down, builds muscles, BUT it also damages your muscles and destroys the mitochondria. It is far better to focus on the concentric phase of exercise, as it builds more and stronger mitochondria. Concentric exercise increase mitochondrial biogenesis, and steroidogenesis in muscle.26

Saturated fats improve the structure of cells, specifically the lipid bilayer, while PUFAs like LA impair it. The reason your cholesterol and LDL levels may go up when switching to saturated fats is because you’re giving the cells the structural material needed, from which the cells can synthesize their own cholesterol as needed. Hence, extra cholesterol gets dumped into the bloodstream because it isn’t needed.

Cholesterol is carried around by LDL. So, when you’re eating saturated fat, your LDL rises, but it’s rising because the cholesterol already in the cell is not as needed anymore. It’s actually a good sign.

Conversely, when you’re eating PUFAs, your cells need more cholesterol to strengthen their structure, so your body dumps cholesterol into the cells to protect them from the onslaught of the PUFAs. Hence, it appears your cholesterol level is going down, but it’s actually having a strongly negative effect.

Additionally, the LA becomes oxidized and the LDL carrying it is now oxidized LDL, which is strongly associated with plaque. Plaque, associated with heart attacks also contains white blood cells, calcium, 7-ketocholesterol and PUFA peroxidation byproducts. Saturated fat does not contribute to plaque.

“The plaque is basically a reaction to an inflammation caused by these toxic PUFA byproducts, and PUFA itself is inflammatory. When it gets lodged into the blood vessel walls, it causes a localized inflammatory reaction. The first response of the body is to send white blood cells to protect the blood vessel wall from damage and rupture. That’s really the purpose of the plaque.

So, the body’s not trying to kill you. It’s simply trying to repair in the best possible manner, to isolate the issue. And the issue that it’s trying to isolate is the PUFA peroxidation byproducts27 and 7-ketocholesterol.28 How can you get around this? Don’t eat PUFA, or at least drastically reduce it. Go back to whatever your grandmother was eating.”

Like me, Georgi is convinced LA is a primary culprit in chronic diseases. And, since LA is found in most whole foods, there’s really never any need to take an omega-6 supplement. It’s virtually impossible to get too little from your diet.

I believe omega-6 supplements really ought to be removed from the market altogether, as people are getting 25 times more omega-6 than they could possibly need from their diet. At most, you need about 2 grams a day, but the average American gets about 50 grams a day, thanks to the fact that most processed foods and condiments are loaded with omega-6 seed oils.

If our diet were to be shifted away from seed oils to saturated fats, the way it was 150 years ago, we’d likely see a massive decline in chronic diseases, including cancer and heart disease.

To learn more, be sure to listen to the entire interview, as we dive into far greater detail than what I’ve summarized here. Georgi is an absolute fire hydrant when it comes to biochemical details. Also check out Georgi’s blog at You can also obtain a major sampling of Ray Peat’s work for free by going to these two sites: and

Subscribe to Mercola Newsletter

Disclaimer: The entire contents of this website are based upon the opinions of Dr. Mercola, unless otherwise noted. Individual articles are based upon the opinions of the respective author, who retains copyright as marked.

The information on this website is not intended to replace a one-on-one relationship with a qualified health care professional and is not intended as medical advice. It is intended as a sharing of knowledge and information from the research and experience of Dr. Mercola and his community. Dr. Mercola encourages you to make your own health care decisions based upon your research and in partnership with a qualified health care professional. The subscription fee being requested is for access to the articles and information posted on this site, and is not being paid for any individual medical advice.

If you are pregnant, nursing, taking medication, or have a medical condition, consult your health care professional before using products based on this content.

Sulfur Consumption Reduces Risk of Death

Download Interview Transcript | Download my FREE Podcast

  • A large epidemiological study found people who took glucosamine supplements daily had a reduced overall mortality to the degree that is conferred by regular exercise

  • One contributing factor may be the sulfate in the supplement. Stephanie Seneff, senior research scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, calls sulfur an “unappreciated deficiency” and proposes it may be central to heart disease, muscle wasting and altered glucose metabolism

  • Bone broth and Epsom salt baths are simple and effective strategies to naturally boost your sulfur levels; each also has other health benefits

  • Methylsulfonylmethane (MSM) is a sulfur donor widely used in the treatment of arthritic pain and known to reduce inflammation, balance reactive oxygen species and modulate your immune response

Visit Mercola Market


Sulfur is in the top three abundant minerals found in the human body1 and the topic of the interview with Stephanie Seneff, senior research scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, in the video above. An epidemiological study from West Virginia University found glucosamine sulfate supplements may lower overall mortality as much as regular exercise.2 The underlying mechanism may be related to sulfur.

If you’ve ever smelled sulfur gas when it comes up from well water, you won’t forget the smell of rotten eggs. In fact, the natural gas industry adds mercaptan, a component of sulfur, to natural gas — which has no odor — to make it smell like rotten eggs so you can detect a natural gas leak.3

While stinky in gas form, sulfur is an important mineral in the optimal function of your body. Interestingly, you’ll get most of your sulfur from specific amino acids, including methionine, cysteine, cystine, homocysteine, homocysteine and taurine.4 Of these, the two most important are methionine and cysteine. Methionine is an essential amino acid, which means your body can’t synthesize it so it must be supplied through your diet.

Your body can make cysteine from methionine but not from inorganic forms of sulfur. Some individuals are allergic to sulfa drugs and may have concerns about eating sulfur-containing foods. However, since sulfur is an essential element to life, no one is allergic to sulfur. When a sulfonamide molecule from sulfa drugs is metabolized it can bind to a protein that serves as an allergen.5

The sulfonamide molecule in sulfa drugs does have sulfur, but it is embedded in a compound with the unique property of being able to form proteins that cause an allergic reaction in some people. Glucosamine, the subject of the featured publication, is an amino acid that is often combined with sulfate and not known to trigger allergic reactions from the sulfate.6

However, most glucosamine supplements are derived from shellfish and there is some concern of an allergic reaction in people who have an allergy to shellfish.7 There are several forms of glucosamine supplements that are not interchangeable.

They include glucosamine sulfate, glucosamine hydrochloride and n-acetyl glucosamine. Glucosamine sulfate is what is used to help painful arthritis and was the focus of this study.

In an epidemiological study released from West Virginia University, researchers found that individuals using glucosamine supplements had reduced overall mortality to the degree conferred by regular exercise.8 The first author, Dana King, is chair of the department of family medicine at West Virginia University.9

He and his partner, a data analyst, evaluated information from 16,686 adults who had participated in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. The results were from 1999 to 2010 and the data was merged with 2015 mortality figures.

The researchers controlled for a variety of confounding factors, such as age, activity level and smoking status, and found those taking a glucosamine/chondroitin supplement each day for at least a year or longer had a 39% reduced potential of all-cause mortality and a 65% reduction in mortality from cardiovascular-related events.10

King shared that his interest in glucosamine and chondroitin began when he learned many of the cyclists he rode with on weekends used the supplement. King points out that the data are from an epidemiological study and not a clinical trial so it can’t conclusively demonstrate that death is less likely, but goes on to comment:11

“Does this mean that if you get off work at five o’clock one day, you should just skip the gym, take a glucosamine pill and go home instead? That’s not what we suggest. Keep exercising, but the thought that taking a pill would also be beneficial is intriguing.

Once we took everything into account, the impact was pretty significant. In my view, it’s important that people know about this, so they can discuss the findings with their doctor and make an informed choice. Glucosamine is over the counter, so it is readily available.”

The results of this study support previous research published in the BMJ in which researchers engaged 466,039 participants without cardiovascular disease to determine if there was an association between glucosamine use and a reduction in the risk of cardiovascular disease.12

After adjusting for confounding factors, such as age, body mass index, dietary intake, sex and drug use, researchers found there was a “significantly lower risk” of 9% to 22% of all outcome measures.

The outcome measures included cardiovascular disease events, coronary heart disease and stroke in people who used glucosamine supplements daily. The researchers found that their findings supported past studies that had demonstrated an inverse relationship between glucosamine supplementation and cardiovascular disease risk and mortality.

Interestingly, they also found those taking glucosamine and who were current smokers experienced reductions in cardiovascular disease greater than in those who were past smokers or never smokers. They theorized this was because smokers have a higher level of inflammation and glucosamine is associated with a reduction in C-reactive protein, a marker for systemic inflammation.

An opinion piece that ran in the same publication points out that the sulfate in glucosamine sulfate supplements, which make up “most glucosamine products available on the market,”13 may have been a contributing factor as it satisfies a potential sulfur deficiency.14

One study analyzing how much sulfur is available in the diet concluded “a significant portion of the population that included disproportionately the aged, may not be receiving sufficient sulfur.”15 Scientists are aware that nutrient deficiencies can produce significant health problems.

In one paper in the Journal of the American Heart Association the writers said: “Micronutrients are necessary cofactors for normal cardiac metabolism, and deficiencies have been implicated in the development and progression of HF [heart failure].”16

Seneff and her team proposed the hypothesis that atherosclerosis is the result of a cholesterol sulfate deficiency.17 They proposed that atherosclerosis can be explained by the body using plaque to replenish cholesterol and sulfate to the microvasculature. They argue that insufficient sulfate may increase the risk of high blood pressure and blood clot formation.

Seneff calls sulfur an “unappreciated deficiency” since it is found in several foods and most assume that your diet meets your minimum daily requirements.18 Excellent food sources include eggs, garlic, onions and green leafy vegetables. Nuts, grass fed meat and seafood also contain sulfur.

However, a depletion in the soil creates a deficiency in your fruits and vegetables and may contribute, in part, to sulfur deficiency. She theorizes that a sulfur deficiency is related to rising obesity rates and is connected to glucose metabolism and cardiovascular disease.

In her research, she found people who experience muscle wasting from diseases such as cancer, HIV, sepsis, irritable bowel disease and athletic overtraining may be the result of a deficiency in cysteine and glutathione, two amino acids with sulfur molecules.

Sulfur can be found in your muscles, skin and bones. It helps with fat digestion, is needed to make bile acid and required to form collagen.19 The element plays important roles in hundreds of physiological processes. For example, sulfur bonds are needed for proteins to maintain their shape and they determine the biological activity of the protein.

Hair and nails are made of a tough protein called keratin, which is high in sulfur, whereas connective tissue and cartilage have protein with flexible sulfur bonds.20 In addition to proteins, sulfur is also required for the proper structure and biological activity of enzymes.

Methylsulfonylmethane (MSM) is a sulfur donor and contains 34% elemental sulfur by weight.21 Many of the benefits of supplementing with msm are related to the compound’s ability to reduce inflammation, regulate the balance of reactive oxygen species and antioxidant enzymes,22 and modulate your immune response.23 It is widely used in the treatment of pain, especially pain associated with arthritis.

In one clinical trial, researchers found people with osteoarthritis of the knee who took three grams of MSM twice a day for 12 weeks experienced a significant reduction in pain and improvement in physical function, as compared to those who took the placebo.24

In another randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study,25 data showed participants with mild-to-moderate osteoarthritis experienced an analgesic and anti-inflammatory effect when given oral glucosamine and MSM, both individually and in combination.

In this study, the treatment groups received 500 milligrams (mg) of glucosamine and/or 500 mg of MSM three times a day for 12 weeks. According to the authors:

“Combination therapy showed better efficacy in reducing pain and swelling and in improving the functional ability of joints than the individual agents.

All the treatments were well tolerated. The onset of analgesic and anti-inflammatory activity was found to be more rapid with the combination than with glucosamine. It can be concluded that the combination of MSM with glucosamine provides better and more rapid improvement in patients with osteoarthritis.”

In addition to food and MSM supplementation, you may also absorb sulfur from homemade bone broth or a relaxing soak in a warm Epsom salt bath. As I’ve written in the past, bone broth contains other valuable minerals that your body can easily absorb in use, including magnesium, phosphorus, calcium, silicon, sulfur chondroitin and glucosamine.26

Bone broth also helps attract and hold liquids in the digestive system and supports proper digestion. In one study, researchers found that chicken soup has medicinal qualities and significantly mitigated inflammation and infection.27 28 The amino acids in bone broth helps to fight inflammation and courtesy of chondroitin sulfate and glucosamine, it helps to reduce joint pain and inflammation.29

Bone broth is made from animal bones. It’s important to use homemade bone broth since the store-bought variety is produced by adding chemical-laden bouillon cubes, whereas traditional soups are made by cooking bones and meat for several hours. In its simplest form, it’s made by using bones, vinegar and spices, and simmering in a pot or slow cooker for as long as 24 to 72 hours.

Bone broth made over longer periods of time increases the release of gelatin, minerals and other nutrients from the bones, which are key to many of the benefits and restorative properties.

Epsom salt baths are a simple way of absorbing both magnesium and sulfate. Epsom salt is magnesium sulfate, which is easily absorbed through your skin. It is also a preferable way of absorbing magnesium and sulfate since it’s readily available to your body without having to be converted as it is when taken orally.

As a general recommendation, use 1 to 2 cups of Epsom salt in a tub of water. The warmer the water, the more the salt will dissolve and the more your body will be able to absorb it.

Some people may experience a negative reaction, such as irritability or hyperactivity. In this case, decrease the amount you use and incrementally raise it based on your tolerance. Alternatively, make a foot bath of one part Epsom salt to two parts water and soak your feet for about 30 minutes.

Subscribe to Mercola Newsletter

Disclaimer: The entire contents of this website are based upon the opinions of Dr. Mercola, unless otherwise noted. Individual articles are based upon the opinions of the respective author, who retains copyright as marked.

The information on this website is not intended to replace a one-on-one relationship with a qualified health care professional and is not intended as medical advice. It is intended as a sharing of knowledge and information from the research and experience of Dr. Mercola and his community. Dr. Mercola encourages you to make your own health care decisions based upon your research and in partnership with a qualified health care professional. The subscription fee being requested is for access to the articles and information posted on this site, and is not being paid for any individual medical advice.

If you are pregnant, nursing, taking medication, or have a medical condition, consult your health care professional before using products based on this content.

An open letter to CDC Director Walensky: Can we talk about it?

Dear Dr. Walensky,

Hi. My name is Steve Kirsch. There are some people who believe that my friends and I are responsible for generating most of the world’s misinformation in regards to COVID mitigation policies.

I am reaching out to you because both of us have a common interest: we both strongly agree that misinformation is a problem that costs lives and should be reduced.

Where we differ, however, is in who we believe is responsible for spreading misinformation.

There are two basic ways to resolve this conflict and achieve consensus:

  1. Censorship: You can censor, deplatform, threaten, demonetize, gaslight, and intimidate the other party.

  2. Dialog: You can seek to persuade the other party through civil dialog.

For reasons we have never understood, those supporting the government narrative have only tried method #1. Today, three years later, the results are now very clear: it hasn’t worked at all. In fact, it has done the opposite: it has made things much worse. Today, fewer people than ever are believing government authorities and the number of “misinformation spreaders” has grown dramatically. Every single day, there are many more people moving to our side of the narrative than to your side. Every time you release a new booster, few and fewer people are taking it. Today, just 1.3% of eligible children under 5 have been vaccinated with the COVID vaccine, a fact you readily concede. The low acceptance rate for your narrative isn’t because parents haven’t heard your arguments; it is because the credibility of the CDC is now at an all time low. As time goes on, fewer and fewer people are believing the CDC and more and more are siding with our side of the narrative. Even though you are outspending us by at least 10,000:1 on marketing, you are losing badly. Thus, method #1 is a losing strategy by any objective measure.

May I suggest that you give approach #2 a try and see if that might work better? This approach was suggested by UCSF Professor Vinay Prasad in an op-ed published nearly 3 years ago in STAT entitled “Scientists who express different views on Covid-19 should be heard, not demonized.”

If you are open to hosting a forum where a group of scientists from the CDC, FDA, and NIH can engage with us in a public forum to resolve our differences, please have Carol Crawford give me a call and we can work through all the details for hosting such an event.

Thank you for your attention to this urgent matter. I look forward to hearing from you soon.

Professor Byram Bridle did NOT get arrested for spreading misinformation

He asked me to broadcast to everyone that he’s alive and well and the police are not arresting him. He said, “Rumors of my arrest have been greatly exaggerated.”

He isn’t in any trouble with the law whatsoever. Not even close. Just the opposite.

I will have more details on this story soon. And you are going to LOVE it I promise you.

But he swore me to secrecy in the meantime.

But you will LOVE it when I break the news about what is really happening

He said he’d call me as soon as I can say something.

Hint: It involves someone who I have written about in my Substack.

You’ll find out soon, probably in the next few days.

It will be worth the wait, I promise you.

FDA acknowledges that pulmonary embolism generated a safety signal

What is Pulmonary Embolism? | American Venous Forum

Pulmonary embolism (blood clot in the lungs) is life threatening. But the CDC is told to ignore looking at safety signals and focus on driving a “needle in every arm.”

The FDA spotted a safety signal using the CMS database that the vaccine might cause pulmonary embolism (PE). But they aren’t sure if it is the COVID vaccine or not. After all, it could be something else like some new virus that nobody knows about yet!

But the signal is crystal clear in the VAERS database. It generated a safety signal at least a year ago, but unfortunately, the CDC isn’t monitoring VAERS for safety; they just maintain it to be compliant with the law.

The PE signal is over 6,500 times normal for ONLY the COVID vaccines. The counts are normal for all the other vaccines. If it isn’t the vaccine that is causing this, what is? And why is it ONLY affecting people who get the COVID vaccine? Nobody at the FDA is able to explain this.

Bottom line: The CDC isn’t looking at any of the safety signals, so they won’t find any. The FDA is equally clueless and it will take decades before they can tie the pulmonary embolism to the vaccine.

Congresswoman Anna Eshoo ignores all attempts to contact her regarding this.

Here’s the Epoch Times article entitled Pfizer’s COVID-19 Vaccine Linked to Blood Clotting: FDA. The FDA used the CMS database (Medicare) for the research.

Here’s my tweet about it:

The Epoch Times article said,

The FDA said it was not taking any action on the results because they do not prove the vaccines cause any of the four outcomes, and because the findings “are still under investigation and require more robust study.”

OK, but here is a VAERS query I did just now over the entire 32 years of data. It took me all of 30 seconds to do the query. This is something that seems beyond the technical skills of anyone working at the CDC or FDA. In 30 seconds, you get a search result that is impossible to explain if the vaccines are safe and effective:

Do you see a safety signal?? There are 13,608 reports for the COVID vaccines and a “normal” vaccine might have 1 PE event in 32 years. Do you think the COVID vaccine causes PE? Of course it does! If it doesn’t, the FDA needs to tell us the more likely cause of the association.

But they will simply study the problem, trying to narrow down the possible causes from this list of possible causes:

  1. COVID vaccine

Tough problem right??? Maybe they should ask for help from some experts to help them narrow down the list of possibilities.

The FLU3 vaccine has about 1 case of PE per year. Say 2X as many people got the COVID vax. This suggests that the 13,608 should be divided by 2.

So we are looking at an elevation of over 6,500X normal.

Here’s the proof I knew about this signal over a year ago. Three different places (using different methods for calculating the X factor):

  1. All you need to know about COVID vaccine safety (October 22, 2021). See slide 73 and look at the TOP item on the list. Pulmonary embolism was elevated by 473X normal.

  2. Also, see page 28 in my Estimating the number of deaths in America article.

  3. See Why can’t anyone explain how these 14 kids died after getting vaccinated? Of 14 kids who died after being vaccinated, 2 died from pulmonary embolism. Kids never die of pulmonary embolism. This article is from a year ago. To have 2 of 14 kids die of PE is a HUGE red flag. Instead, the CDC ignored it. “Nothing to see here; move along.”

  4. Also, see The VAERS X-factor analysis that I published over a year ago on my Substack. Feast your eyes on line item 24 showing a 954X increase over normal at the time. And I didn’t do this analysis. It was done by Albert Benavides at my request.

Pulmonary embolism, a life-threatening side effect caused by the COVID vaccine, has been in plain sight for more than a year as one of the top safety signals that is impossible to miss.

The CDC still hasn’t spotted it. They never will because they aren’t looking and there isn’t anyone in Congress who is willing and able to hold them accountable. That will change next month when the House shifts to Republican control.

The FDA found it in the CMS data only because the signal is so huge and hard to ignore. But they can’t figure out if it is caused by the vaccine.

Congresswoman Anna Eshoo who is Chair of the Health Subcommittee is actually in a position to ask about this but she flatly refuses to talk to me and denies all meeting requests from me and any of her other constituents who tries to point out something is wrong. When I try to ask a question in her town hall meetings, I’m first in the queue, but I’m never called upon. This is how members of Congress avoid being held accountable to their constituents.

Adverse events in Pfizer trial may have been underreported by 10X or more

We have yet another piece of evidence suggesting Pfizer understated certain life-threatening serious adverse events by a factor of 10X or more

I’ve written about the COVID vax clinical trial fraud before. These things never get investigated by anyone and the medical community ignores all of them without investigation. That’s the way science works I guess.

But Brook Jackson just noted this:

Brook was involved in the Pfizer trial. She informed the FDA about what was going on and then she was fired just 6.5 hours after she called the FDA.

How does that happen?!?! You confidentially tell the FDA there is a problem and the FDA releases your identity to the drug company and you get fired on the same day?!? How is that supposed to encourage people to be whistleblowers!??! Meanwhile, the medical community doesn’t say a word about this. Did you see any outrage at all from anyone in the medical community about this? I didn’t hear a peep. I guess this is how science works.

Brook personally knows of at least 10 cases of anaphylaxis post-shot.

But Pfizer told the FDA that there were 0 cases of anaphylaxis in Summary Basis for Regulatory Action dated Nov 8, 2021 (see page 25):

Let’s look at the numbers.

First, anaphylaxis is easy to spot since it happens right after vaccination.

The rate of anaphylaxis post COVID vaccination is well documented in the peer reviewed scientific literature (the Blumenthal MGH study published in JAMA): 2.47 per 10,000.

Let’s be clear: this is 50X higher than for other vaccines per Pfizer’s own admission (300/M per Blumenthal study cf. 6/M expected!

In other words, just on this one life-threatening event alone, the COVID vaccines are 50X more dangerous than the typical vaccine.

Since there were 22,000 people who got the shot in the Pfizer trial, we expect to see around 5 cases of anaphylaxis.

Pfizer says 0. Brook says 10.

Statistics will tell you expecting 5 and getting 10 is NOT statistically significant (p=.3). This means it’s highly probable Brook is telling the truth.

But expecting 5 and getting 0 is rare (p=.0625).

This means it’s much more likely that Pfizer is lying.

Furthermore, if you believe Brook based on other factors (see the next section), her observation validates the JAMA paper numbers. These numbers are important, since they were used to derive the minimum underreporting factor of 41 in VAERS that I’ve written about many times. In fact, if you think Brook’s observations are more accurate than the JAMA paper, then the minimum VAERS underreporting factor should be closer to 82 which is devastating for the “safe and effective” narrative.

She puts herself at a huge financial risk of being sued by Pfizer. She is now out of a job and lives on donations sent to her GiveSendGo (which has only raised $6K to date). Not only that, she took out a $50K loan to fund medical treatments for the vaccine injured. That is extraordinary.

You can learn more about this incredible woman here. She is an unsung hero in the fight for truth. You can follow her on Twitter here.

I wrote previously about Pfizer Phase 3 clinical trial fraud allegations that should be immediately investigated by the FDA.

Pfizer isn’t interested in talking about it to lift any clouds of suspicion.

The FDA said they would investigate but did NOTHING, even when it is clear cut as in the Maddie de Garay case.

Now we have yet another data point to add to the article which indicates that at least one adverse event was underreported by 10X or more. I wonder how many more adverse events there are like this? Unfortunately, nobody wants to know the answer to that, not the FDA, not Congress, not the CDC. Because it isn’t about your safety. It’s about not making people look bad.