GET WOKE GO BROKE: Home-goods giant Bed Bath & Beyond considers filing for bankruptcy

Image: GET WOKE GO BROKE: Home-goods giant Bed Bath & Beyond considers filing for bankruptcy

(Natural News) Home-goods giant Bed Bath & Beyond announced Thursday, Jan. 5, it may need to file for bankruptcy. The domestic merchandise company released a statement saying it has “substantial doubt” about its ability to continue.

“For the third quarter of fiscal 2022, the Company expects to report net sales of approximately $1.259 billion compared to $1.878 billion in the year-ago period, reflecting lower customer traffic and reduced levels of inventory availability, among other factors,” the statement included.

Sue Gove, president and CEO of Bed Bath & Beyond, said the firm is considering all “strategic alternatives,” including restructuring and refinancing its debt, seeking additional debt or equity capital, reducing or delaying the company’s business activities and strategic initiatives, selling assets and filing for bankruptcy.

“We have a clear vision for the future of the company. Today’s announcement underscores the importance of having initiated a turnaround at the start of the third quarter and why we strengthened our leadership team to execute each step with precision,” Gove said in the statement.

But despite more productive merchandise plans and improved execution, she said the financial performance was negatively impacted by inventory constraints as they partnered with suppliers to navigate both micro- and macro-economic challenges.

“We continue to manage our financial position amidst a changing landscape and work with expert advisors as we consider all paths and strategic alternatives to accomplish our short- and long-term goals. We look forward to providing an update on these fronts on our formal third quarter earnings call next week,” Gove said.


The retail giant already shut down 37 stores in New York, California, Florida, Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Idaho, Missouri, Mississippi, Montana, Michigan, New Jersey and Minnesota. Bed Bath & Beyond already has a plan in place to close 200 stores over two years, remodel 450 locations and focus more on e-commerce.

Bed Bath & Beyond stock swinging wildly since start of pandemic

The Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has driven much of consumers into online shopping due to public health mandates.

Bed Bath & Beyond struggled to build a strong digital presence and become one of the worst-hit physical stores during the pandemic. But its shares began surging when retail traders plowed into heavily shorted stocks. The frenzy cooled off when stores reopened following the lifting of COVID-19 restrictions.

Activist investor Ryan Cohen of Chewy and GameStop fame sparked another rally when he bought around 10 percent stake in the company in March last year. This prompted Cohen’s followers on Reddit and YouTube to pump up Bed Bath and Beyond’s stock.

But he suddenly sold his entire stake in August, and the stock fell 52 percent in a two-day wipeout. (Related: SHOP Bed Bath & Beyond bet on China and lost: After kicking Mike Lindell’s MyPillow to the curb, chain losing money and closing stores.)

“Sometimes when things seem too easy, and you see a 100 percent rally for no apparent reason, that’s not a sign to get in. That’s a sign to get out,” said Greg Taylor, chief investment officer at Purpose Investments. “That’s what the lesson should be to anyone to get out of this.”

In September, the company fired a fifth of its corporate and logistics staff. Suppliers began hesitating about sending more stuff to Bed Bath, worried they won’t get paid. In late summer, the company had secured financing that propelled it through the holiday shopping season. Now the retailer is trying to refinance its debts, facing waning enthusiasm from creditors.

Browse through for updates on companies filing for insolvency due to the failing U.S. economy.

Watch the video below that talks about Bed Bath & Beyond CFO jumping to death after stock fraud allegations.

This video is from the NewsClips channel on

More related stories:

Shipping rates drop 75% amid plummeting US retail demand.

Walmart, major US retailers are canceling orders as consumer demand plunges.

US retailers CANCELING orders worth billions of dollars before the holidays as consumer demand plummets.

Energy prices in Germany soar 1,000% as companies go bankrupt.

Sources include:

Only 20% of rail services are running normally in the UK as rail strikes cause widespread disruptions

Image: Only 20% of rail services are running normally in the UK as rail strikes cause widespread disruptions

(Natural News) Rail workers in the United Kingdom started the new year with a weeklong strike that began on Tuesday, Jan. 3, with union bosses warning of more industrial actions to come if negotiations don’t bear any fruits.

These rail strikes have been ongoing for months across the U.K. as soaring inflation and stagnant wage growth have made the paychecks of rail workers shrink drastically.

As a result, around half of all railway lines in the U.K. are currently closed, and only a fifth of rail services are running on time. Train services like those going into London operated by Thameslink, Southern and Southeastern, have come to a complete halt. Other rail operations like Great Western Rail are running heavily reduced services.

Train drivers represented by the Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen (ASLEF) and other rail workers represented by the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers (RMT) have walked out of the job and set up picket lines following unresolved disputes with rail companies and the British government over pay, benefits and working conditions. (Related: Biden preparing to pay off unions using tens of billions of taxpayer dollars with massive pension bailouts.)

“The longer this goes on, the likelihood of escalations goes up,” warned ASLEF General Secretary Mick Whelan, who recently received a renewed mandate from union members to keep conducting strike actions up until June. “We don’t want to go on strike, but the companies have pushed us into this place.”

“We will continue our industrial action campaign while we work towards a negotiated resolution,” said RMT General Secretary Mick Lynch in a statement.


Whelan and other union leaders are expected to meet with government ministers on Monday, Jan. 9, where the elected officials will be urged to play a bigger part in negotiations to help the workers reach an agreeable settlement with railway companies.

The government has urged union leaders to come to the negotiating table with government officials, who say they have offered them a “very fair pay offer.” Government officials have rejected the possibility of providing any more intervention, saying if the rail workers want a better deal it will ultimately be down to the rail companies to make that offer.

Stranded commuters sympathetic but frustrated

Passengers interviewed by Euronews noted that while they were sympathetic to the demands of workers, they still feel frustrated by the strike actions.

“Well, it’s really inconvenient for us, but this is about their livelihoods and it’s about safety,” said one passenger in London. “So we are impacted as people who travel on trains and it’s uncomfortable and difficult, but it already is difficult because of the way that the management have treated them. I think they should at least speak to them and respect them as workers who deserve a living wage.”

Others have pointed out that the strike’s leaders, such as Lynch and Whelan, are themselves very wealthy and have not been affected by the strikes the way regular people have been.

“I’ve got no support for them whatsoever. No sympathy. NHS [National Health Service] absolutely, the RMT and obviously that Mick Lynch is on 120,000 [pounds] ($142,345) a year. He won’t lose any pay today,” said another commuter.

Visit for more stories about railroad strikes.

Watch this episode of “Truth Matters” on Amazing Discoveries discussing the history of labor unions and how today’s unions may have been co-opted by the New World Order.

This video is from the channel PatchSDA on

More related stories:

Bank customers FURIOUS after HSBC announces closure of 114 UK branches.

Discretionary income evaporates as UK food inflation hits record high ahead of dark winter.

JD Rucker warns of CATASTROPHIC things to break the US supply chain starting right now.

British government “war gaming” emergency plans to deal with week-long blackouts.

Refinery strikes and gas rationing: France’s energy supply chain collapsing.

Sources include:

IMF trying to bribe Egypt away from BRICS with new loans

Image: IMF trying to bribe Egypt away from BRICS with new loans

(Natural News) The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has approved a more than $3 billion loan allegedly to support Egypt’s ailing economy. But many experts note that the timing of this massive bailout is suspect because of Egypt’s recent moves to join the China- and Russia-aligned BRICS economic union.

In the past year, Egypt has been hit exceptionally hard by soaring oil and commodity prices resulting from global economic turmoil. Foreign portfolio investors have already pulled out around $22 billion from Egyptian debt markets. (Related: Egypt joins BRICS-owned New Development Bank, expresses interest in becoming full-fledged member of BRICS.)

In response to the economic turmoil, Egypt devalued its currency in March and then again by around 18 percent in late October, causing the $400 billion economy to face the worst foreign-exchange crunch in over half a decade.

Egypt has asked the IMF to provide it with more support – on top of a previous $12 billion IMF loan the country is still paying back.

The executive board of the IMF noted that it will send the approximately $3.1 billion bailout in tranches, and the first disbursement of about $347 million will be provided immediately.

As part of the loan agreement, Egypt has acquiesced to several loan conditions. This includes committing to “a permanent shift to a flexible exchange rate regime to increase resilience against external shocks and to rebuild external buffers.”

The Central Bank of Egypt has also promised several changes, including more efforts to control inflation and stabilize commodity prices, improve efficiency of the nation’s monetary policy and remove a requirement for importers to acquire letters of credit to buy goods from abroad.


Furthermore, the government of Egypt has introduced structural reforms to reduce government spending, level the playing field across all economic agents, facilitate more private sector-led growth and strengthen governance and transparency in the public sector.

IMF bribing Egypt to stop de-dollarization efforts

Holly Seeliger of “Zoon Politikon” noted that BRICS enticing other developing economies like Egypt to join their economic union is part of a global de-dollarization effort to topple the American dollar’s position as the world reserve currency.

“Egypt stepping up as de-dollarization efforts seem to have sent shockwaves to the West,” said Seeliger. “So, now the IMF has arrived to rescue the petrodollar by bribing Egypt to stop its de-dollarization efforts.”

Michael Mahanta, writing for TFIGlobal News, agreed with Seeliger. He wrote: “It is well known how IMF often secures or advances U.S. interests by using its economic clout. It has done it again, the case of Egypt, in the name of economic assistance.”

Official statements from the IMF and Egypt claim that the $3.1 billion loan will catalyze about $14 billion in additional financing from the country’s international and regional partners. This includes new financing from allies in the Gulf states “through the ongoing divestment of state-owned assets as well as traditional forms of financing from multilateral and bilateral creditors,” claimed the IMF.

Learn more about BRICS and international finance at

Watch this episode of “Zoon Politikon” as host Holly Seeliger discusses the IMF’s attempt to bribe Egypt into staying in the West’s sphere of influence.

This video is from the Zoon Politikon channel on

More related stories:

BRICS nations moving rapidly to circumvent the US dollar as the World Reserve Currency.

End of petrodollar edges closer as Saudi Arabia looks set to join new China-dominated ‘BRICS’ economic alliance.

Economists warn: IMF, World Bank may have little space to maneuver as they lend record amounts to poorest countries.

BRICS member nations are creating new reserve currency to challenge the dollar, Andy Schectman tells Mike Adams.

Argentina, Iran apply to join BRICS group of emerging economies.

Sources include:

Peter Hotez Vies for Power as Fauci Steps Down

peter hotez vies for power as fauci steps down

  • Dr. Peter Hotez, dean for the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, is enamored with dangerous virus tinkering, censorship and state-directed cyberattacks on civilians. He decries the benefits of whole food and nutrition and is a leading advocate for biomedical tyranny and the murder of independent thinkers

  • In a professionally produced PR video for the World Health Organization, Hotez refers to vaccine safety advocates as “anti-science aggressors” and claims “anti-vaccine activism” has become “a major killing force globally”

  • Hotez ignores data showing the jab does more harm than good. For example, a recent Cleveland Clinic study concluded that the risk of COVID-19 infection “increased with the number of vaccine doses previously received”

  • Cleveland Clinic also found the bivalent COVID-19 booster was only 30% effective in preventing infection “during the time when the virus strains dominant in the community were represented in the vaccine”

  • In the fall of 2021, about 3 in 10 adults who died from COVID-19 were jabbed or boosted. By April 2022, 6 in 10 adults who died from COVID-19 were jabbed or boosted, and that remained true through August 2022, which is the latest data available

Visit Mercola Market


As Dr. Anthony Fauci steps down from his position as director of the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and top chief of the American bioweapons program, the scene is open for another word-wrangling science bungler to step into the limelight.

Seemingly vying for the position of lead propagandist for Big Pharma and the global Deep State is Dr. Peter Hotez, dean for the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine, Houston — a scientist enamored with dangerous virus tinkering, censorship and state-directed cyberattacks on civilians, who decries the benefits of whole food and nutrition and is a leading advocate for biomedical tyranny and the murder of independent thinkers.

An M.D. who writes articles on Substack under the moniker A Midwestern Doctor recently addressed the hateful rhetoric being thrown about by Hotez.1 “Although I am used to seeing inflammatory approaches … being used to silence debates, I was nonetheless quite taken aback by the WHO’s recent tweet,” he writes.

The WHO tweeted out a video2 (above) featuring Hotez, in which he refers to vaccine safety advocates as “anti-science aggressors” — a term he coined in a 2021 article3 — and claims “anti-vaccine activism” has become “a major killing force globally.”4 According to Hotez, 200,000 Americans lost their lives to COVID-19 because they refused the experimental COVID jab.

Hotez goes on to claim that “anti-science now kills more people than gun violence, global terrorism, nuclear proliferation or cyber attacks” — a statement that makes anti-science sound threatening but actually absolves it, seeing how nuclear proliferation and cyber attacks have killed no one (at least not to my knowledge), and the death toll from terrorism is infinitesimal compared to things like preventable medical errors.

Pouring additional fuel to the fire, he makes the absolute statement that the anti-vaccine movement is a “far-right” political movement. “This is the new face of anti-science aggression,” he says, “so we need political solutions to address this.” In other words, he wants government to pull out the big guns and enforce a one-sided “consensus.”

As explained by A Midwestern Doctor, the central claim in that video appears to be based on an October 2021 study5 that estimated 163,000 COVID-19 deaths “could have been prevented by vaccination since June 2021, when safe and effective COVID-19 vaccines were widely available to all adults in the U.S.” However, as A Midwestern Doctor points out, there are several problems with this argument:6

  • “Since so many deaths not caused by COVID-19 have been classified as COVID-19 deaths, we don’t actually know how many people died from the illness (this study just assumed the official but inflated figure as accurate).

  • In Pfizer’s trial, the survival benefit from the vaccine worsened with time (this has also been observed outside the trials), and at 6 months follow-up (where the trial was abruptly terminated).

  • More people who were vaccinated died than those who were unvaccinated (which means that it is impossible that there could have been a net gain of life through vaccinating). Since this is the longest clinical trial that was performed on the vaccines, its conclusion must stand until a longer trial is conducted.

  • The vaccines we are using have caused SARS-CoV-2 to rapidly evolve into variants for which it no longer offers protection. For this reason, the alleged benefits of the vaccine have had to be continually modified because it failed to meet each of its previously promised metrics (e.g., it does not prevent transmission of COVID-197).

  • The study fails to account for the fact that national death rates consistently increased or stayed the same (but never decrease) following COVID vaccination campaigns …

    jabs and deaths by country

  • The estimate also fails to account for the fact that life insurance data has shown that there has been an unprecedented spike in deaths for age groups rarely expected to otherwise die, following the mass vaccination campaigns.”

Hotez, the WHO and the PR firm that made that video also ignore data showing that the COVID jab increases your risk of contracting COVID-19 over time. For example, a Cleveland Clinic preprint8 posted December 19, 2022, concluded that the risk of COVID-19 infection “increased … with the number of vaccine doses previously received.”

As of April 2022, about 6 in 10 adults who died from COVID-19 were vaccinated or boosted.

Moreover, the bivalent COVID-19 booster was only 30% effective in preventing infection “during the time when the virus strains dominant in the community were represented in the vaccine.”

bivalent covid-19 booster

So much for “safe and effective.” The boosters provide minimal protection when well-matched to the circulating strain, and as its protection wanes, it leaves you at higher risk of infection than before. Deceiving people into taking this product? Now THAT’S anti-scientific aggression.

We also have U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data that confirm Cleveland Clinic’s findings. As reported by the Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF):9

“The share of COVID-19 deaths among those who are vaccinated has risen. In fall 2021, about 3 in 10 adults dying of COVID-19 were vaccinated or boosted. But by January 2022, as we showed in an analysis10 posted on the Peterson-KFF Health System Tracker, about 4 in 10 deaths were vaccinated or boosted.

By April 2022, the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data11 show that about 6 in 10 adults dying of COVID-19 were vaccinated or boosted, and that’s remained true through at least August 2022 (the most recent month of data).

covid-19 deaths by vaccination status

The data from this chart come from the CDC, which collects data on the number of deaths by vaccination status from 30 health departments (including states and cities) across the country.

In order to be counted as vaccinated, a person must be at least two weeks out from completing their primary series … Similarly, to be counted as having a booster, a person must be at least two weeks out from their booster or additional dose before testing positive. People who were partially vaccinated are not included in this data.”

The irony here is that the data Hotez cites in the video match an earlier KFF Health System report, but when he was presented with the updated dataset from the same source, now showing that 170,000 vaxxed Americans have died from COVID, he simply blocked the person who shared it.12

Of course, maintaining a propaganda narrative demands that you ignore everything that might poke holes in it, and Hotez is no stranger to propaganda tactics. He’s been a relentless vaccine pusher and denier of vaccine-induced autism, even though (or perhaps because) his own child is autistic. As noted by A Midwestern Doctor:13

“Prior to this recent push to criminalize those questioning vaccine safety (which is evil), I viewed him as a comical individual who I genuinely felt bad for, and someone — who like many that do immense harm to the world — is simply controlled by habitual fixations they are never able to move beyond.

I have not done a deep dive into his background. However, everything I’ve seen is consistent with an unhappy, frustrated individual who frequently gets scammed by life and is both physically and emotionally unhealthy.”

Case in point: Hotez’s Joe Rogan interview (clip of which is featured in the video above), where he admitted being a junk food-aholic and intends to stay that way. Rogan, who is neither a doctor nor a nutritionist, actually ended up lecturing Hotez about the merits of a healthy diet. As noted by Dr. Pierre Kory:14

“In just a few minutes, Peter Hotez inadvertently shows the world exactly what has gone wrong with our medical system and why his endless push for more vaccines will never create health.”

Indeed, as Ryan Cristiàn, editor-in-chief of The Last American Vagabond, points out in the video above, Hotez nonchalantly discusses his unhealthy choices (and on the largest podcast on the planet) as if it’s perfectly OK to cast the foundations for health aside — because we have vaccines.

“I think he genuinely, to some degree, doesn’t understand why that’s so stupid,” Cristiàn says. “But on the other side of it, there’s obviously a push to make it about, ‘that’s not real health [i.e., food and lifestyle], vaccines are real health.’ It’s just this alarming undertone.”

In that Rogan interview,15 Hotez also makes the ridiculously unscientific claim that vaccines contain just antigens in saline, basically mimicking an advertisement by the Colorado department of health (below). Anyone who knows anything about vaccines — especially the COVID shot — can see how utterly and shamefully deceptive this is.

covid vaccine ingredients

Another gross piece of propaganda was recently put out by the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) (video16 below). The ad chastises the West for withholding COVID shots from Africa, resulting in it having one of the lowest jab rates in the world.

Set three years into the future, it claims the virus kept mutating into ever more dangerous variants, which is the complete opposite of what’s been happening in the real world. It portrays Africa as a continent ravaged by COVID-19 due to lack of COVID shots, yet in the real world, Africa has fared far better in terms of cases and deaths than highly-jabbed nations. Frankly, it’s so distorted and contrary to facts, it’s hard to watch.

Since the beginning of the COVID outbreak, Hotez has repeatedly accused those who disagree with him of committing a hate crime, which is a rather infantile defense mechanism. It’s quite typical for people who know they have no grounds for their argument to resort to name-calling and threats instead.

Not only has he called on government to use its military and intelligence forces to quash public discussion about COVID jab dangers, he’s also been a vocal defender of the natural origin theory, dismissing evidence of a lab leak as pure fiction and conspiracy theory.

This too is an example of that same defense mechanism. It was recently revealed that Hotez funded risky gain-of-function research on coronaviruses in Wuhan, China, so no wonder he wanted people to shut up about the possibility of the virus being a lab creation. His own work might be implicated in its creation. As reported by U.S. Right to Know (USRTK):17

“While casting concerns about Wuhan’s labs as ‘fringe,’ Hotez has not mentioned his own connection to a project involving a laboratory-generated chimeric SARS-related coronavirus that has come under Congress’ microscope. The project was helmed by Zhengli Shi, a senior scientist and ‘virus hunter’ at the Wuhan Institute of Virology nicknamed the ‘Bat Lady.’

As part of his NIH grant, Hotez subcontracted funding for research on combined or ‘chimeric’ coronaviruses, a scientific paper18 shows. Hotez’s grant19 underwrote two of Shi’s collaborators on the project.

In the 2017 paper20 co-funded by Hotez, Shi and her colleagues generated a recombinant virus from two SARS-related coronaviruses: ‘rWIV1-SHC014S.’ It’s not clear whether the paper co-funded by Hotez should have been stopped under a temporary ‘pause’ on gain-of-function work before 2017.

However, some independent biosecurity experts have said research on this chimeric virus in some ways epitomizes lapses in NIH oversight of risky research in the years before the COVID-19 pandemic.

A prior study21 of one of the coronaviruses that comprised the chimera, WIV1, found it to be ‘poised for human emergence.’ Another prior paper22 on the other coronavirus, SHC014, stated that its future study in lab-generated viruses may be ‘too risky to pursue.’

‘The work here should have been at the very least, heavily scrutinized,’ said David Relman, a Stanford microbiologist and biosecurity expert. ‘This work should have been heavily reviewed for [gain-of-function], and probably should have been subject to the pause prior to December 2017.'”

Hotez has made headlines a number of times through the years, typically delivering some kind of hateful rhetoric. He’s publicly stated he wants to “snuff out” vaccine skeptics,23 for example, and in May 2021 called for cyberwarfare measures to be deployed against people who share vaccine safety information.24

Hotez has repeatedly spewed vitriol at parents of vaccine-injured children and called for physical harm and imprisonment of people who don’t agree with the one-size-fits-all vaccine agenda, so it was rather funny when he whined and complained about getting bombarded with “anti-vaxx hate speech” in response to his cyberwarfare call.25

Hotez is not above casting an evil eye on other scientists either. As reported by journalist Paul Thacker in an August 9, 2022, Substack article titled, “Peter Hotez Sees Aggression Everywhere But in the Mirror”:26

“Patrolling scientific discourse, Hotez has a knack for discovering ‘antiscience’ in anyone who disagrees with him. Jeffrey Sachs, economics professor at Columbia University and chair of an international commission on COVID-19, charged in a wide-ranging interview27 last week that the National Institutes of Health and allied scientists were impeding an investigation into how the COVID-19 pandemic started …

Hotez went on the assault, tweeting that Sachs, as leader of the Lancet Commission, did not represent the views of science. Much like a Pentagon general wrapping himself in freedom and the flag to demand more federal monies for another foreign war … Hotez has been shrouding himself in the mantle of science to denigrate anyone who questions taxpayer funding for dangerous virus research by the National Institutes of Health.”

In his article,28 Thacker goes on to review several other bizarre incidences involving Hotez. For example, he referred to the scientific experts invited to testify before Congress as “fringe elements” testifying and promoting “outlandish conspiracies.” So much for Ph.D.s and med school. He also accused Sen. Rand Paul of promoting conspiracies.

Here’s the take-home: The reason Hotez rails against “anti-science” is because he can sense the danger the research community and vaccine industry are in.

If SARS-CoV-2 is conclusively proven to be a lab creation, it would put a massive spotlight on scientists involved in dual purpose viral research. Gain-of-function research may be banned altogether (as it should), which would sink many a career, including his own.

Similarly, public acknowledgement that the COVID jabs are a public health disaster would permanently and perhaps lethally injure the vaccine industry. So, all that hateful rhetoric? It really comes down to protecting self-serving interests.

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.

Are the Unvaxxed Deadly Drivers?

  • A Canadian study concluded that people who are not vaccinated have a relative risk of more car accidents. According to the design and data, you don’t even have to be in the car to be a greater risk

  • The researchers concluded that doctors should counsel patients to be better drivers and insurance companies should raise rates of the unvaccinated. Dr. Vinay Prasad calls the study misguided, profoundly unethical and deeply disrespectful

  • Prasad also notes the researchers did not account for at least two important confounding factors and made a “flippant recommendation” to raise insurance rates without evidence to back it up

  • While the published conclusions could not be made on the data, the study did inadvertently create a falsification test, demonstrating that observational studies published since the vaccine was released have a fatal flaw

Visit Mercola Market


In this 12-minute video, oncologist, author and speaker Dr. Vinay Prasad identifies several flaws in the design and conclusions of a December 2022 research study. Researchers from Sunnybrook Research Institute1 in Canada published the study in the American Journal of Medicine,2 concluding that people who are not vaccinated get into more car accidents than those who choose to take the experimental genetic jab.

There were many problems with the study, which Prasad believes is nothing more than clickbait for the mainstream media as the headlines from Yahoo! News,3 Fortune,4 and the Times of India5 have demonstrated.

The results of this study add to the poor “science” that mainstream media and some public health experts are using to stigmatize and dehumanize those who have chosen to protect their health without taking the jab. This is even more irrational as you consider the shot does not prevent infection and does not prevent the spread of the virus.

People who have received one, two, three or more doses are still getting infected, and at ever-increasing rates. They are spreading the infection to those who are vaxxed and unvaxxed and, based on data collected by the FDA and CDC,6 the jab may be just as dangerous and likely to kill as the virus. More than 80 studies7 have shown that natural immunity to SARS-CoV-2 is equal or superior to the immunity you get from the jab.

Whatever protection may be ascribed to the jab, studies have also shown that the effectiveness rapidly wanes.

One Swedish 2022 study,8 found the Pfizer jab declined from 92% effectiveness at Day 15 through Day 30; to 47% effectiveness by Day 121 through 180; and 23% by Day 211 and onward. The effectiveness of the AstraZeneca shot was not detectable from Day 121 onward.

Yet, for the first time in modern medical history, people with natural immunity are labeled as dangerous, and are shunned and even fired from their jobs for refusing to take the shot.9

With the accident study, researchers made a considerable leap in their theory that vaccine hesitancy could contribute to traffic safety.10 To test their suspicion, they evaluated a cohort of 11,270,763 Canadians, 16% of whom were unvaccinated and 84% of whom had received a vaccine.

They counted 6,682 traffic crashes in Ontario11 during the study period, including pedestrians, which meant that if you were not in a car and not vaccinated in this study, you were more likely to be involved in a car accident. They found those who were unvaccinated accounted for 1,682 crashes or 25% of the accidents, which they adjusted to a 72% increase in relative risk as compared to those who were vaccinated.

Conversely, 75% of the accidents occurred in vaccinated individuals. The researchers used the relative risk score to draw their conclusions. They also adjusted for some confounding factors such as age, socioeconomic status, medical diagnosis, sex and home location.

The researchers concluded that “These data suggest that COVID vaccine hesitancy is associated with significant increased risks of a traffic crash. An awareness of these risks might help to encourage more COVID vaccination.”12

In a press release, the principal investigator and senior scientist acknowledged the study did not show causality, but “Instead, it suggests that adults who do not follow public health advice may also neglect the rules of the road.”13 In other words, the researchers used relative risk to create an association between the jab and car accidents, even if you aren’t in a car.

In the video above, Prasad describes14 design flaws which significantly taint any recommendations that could be made from the data. He acknowledges that the researchers adjusted for many confounding factors, but then points out that they did not adjust for two factors that may have significantly impacted the data.

The first is the number of miles driven, since many believe the risk of an accident is proportional to the number of miles you routinely drive. This is a commonly held belief that doesn’t account for the type of driving — city or highway — and the age of the driver.15 However, the researchers should have factored in the type of driving or number of miles driven before concluding that people who are not vaccinated are just “reckless drivers.”

Secondly, the researchers should have entertained the possibility that the car being driven had an impact on the risk of a car accident. Prasad admits that 20 years ago this may not have been a salient factor, but today’s vehicles are equipped with computer and safety systems that can stop the car automatically when it detects an obstacle rapidly approaching from the front and can keep the car in the lane. Prasad said:16

“Researchers should at least adjust for the type of car. These researchers, of course, they don’t discuss it, as if they’re not aware, and they don’t do it. And that’s another failure of their analysis.”

Based on the data, the researchers also recommended that people who are unvaccinated should be counseled by their physicians to drive carefully. “This is a pretty stupid thing to say because they have no data to support that claim,” Prasad said.

He notes that to support the recommendation of counseling the unvaccinated to drive more carefully, the researchers need to prove that counseling unvaccinated people lowers the risk of a car accident. Then, to further prove causality, scientists must demonstrate that counseling vaccinated people does not lower their risk of a car accident. This would identify that the group who benefits from counseling are the unvaccinated.17

“They’ve done none of that. They haven’t even tried to do that. They’re just talking. They’re just saying things you could do that sound bioplausible. They’re just making things up. It’s rather disgraceful as a researcher to say things without having any basis for those claims. This is an extremely problematic recommendation; level of evidence — garbage.”

The researchers also included the recommendation of raising insurance premiums for people who do not take the shot. This is yet another way of stigmatizing and punishing individuals with the intent of pushing an agenda by attacking people’s pocketbooks. Prasad notes that actuarial rates and insurance premiums are not always based on causal factors. However, using a vaccine as a factor would have spillover effects and is a “dangerous business.”

He called this a “flippant recommendation” that was made without the appropriate studies to understand unanticipated consequences. Such a recommendation should not have been published until they had the evidence to back it up. Prasad questions whether this is arguably a discriminatory action if it’s found that people who are not vaccinated are more likely to be part of a specific racial group or socioeconomic status.

In other words, raising insurance rates because you aren’t vaccinated becomes a code word for racial and socioeconomic disparities, which allows companies the ability to discriminate using a proxy. In a real-life example, in August 2021,18 Delta Airlines announced that any unvaccinated employees would incur a $200 monthly surcharge on their health insurance.

This is one coercive method used to drive people to take the genetic jab. For Delta Airlines, 20% more employees took the injection, raising the injection rate from 74% to 78% of the company. Yet, if reducing health care costs for the company were the real goal, Delta would offer access to inexpensive, early prevention and treatment to ensure lower costs.

On the surface, this was an illegal move since the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA)19 and Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA)20 prohibit group health plans and insurers from discriminating against individuals based on health factors.

But, by making the injections a requirement of the wellness program, Delta was “rewarding” members who participated by letting them avoid the premium surcharge they saddled on the unvaccinated. The featured study may generate further industry interest to raise rates and therefore pad their financial bottom line.

With the accident study, it isn’t health insurance, but car insurance that would come under scrutiny, which leads to wonder how much longer it will be before the insurance industry finds a reason to charge you more for life insurance or homeowners’ insurance because you have not accepted an experimental shot?

While Prasad notes that the writers could not make these conclusions based on the data, the study did inadvertently show that observational studies published since the vaccine was released, which compared children or young adults who were vaccinated to those who were unvaccinated, have a fatal flaw.21

The result of the featured study shows that the people in past observational studies are likely not from the same groups. In other words, the reasons people choose to be vaccinated or unvaccinated may have more to do with the case rate or death rate than the shot.

“They are basically running what we in medicine call a falsification test, an endpoint that you don’t think is causally linked to the vaccines to prove that the two cohorts are actually dissimilar. That’s what they’re running and they’ve inadvertently done this, which undermines the entire genre of observational data that supports vaccination.”

He went on to say that the irony of the paper is that they also inadvertently created a falsification test that shows observational data for COVID-19 vaccines are likely unreliable. However, they misinterpreted the results:22

“… as an impetus to provide specific driving counseling to unvaccinated people, a recommendation they’ve pulled directly from their ass because they have no data for that.

And, a request to raise insurance premiums, a recommendation they’ve also pulled from their ass with unintended spillover effects on society, and on anger, and on how the public acts reacts to public health in the future that they’ve not considered in any way shape or form.”

Prasad begins his analysis of the study saying, “Let’s get to the bottom of this claim. I find it deeply problematic on both face value and what it reveals about us as an intolerant profession.”23 He continues that, in the broader culture of medicine, “this paper is loathsome, it’s despicable.”

The concern is that the study promotes the idea of stigmatizing people based on their decisions, whereas progressive medical thinking is founded on the idea that patients are treated no matter their situation. He notes that doctors must treat patients equally — those who have done the worst things imaginable and those who have done some of the best things imaginable.

His point is that physicians should not discriminate based on decisions their patients have made. But this study shows that science has now identified a group of individuals that society has given carte blanche to stigmatize. Prasad questions whether that is a realistic assessment of the situation since decisions are a product of an individual’s socioeconomic, racial and cultural factors.

Instead, the paper feeds a narrative that it’s OK to stigmatize a group of individuals, and Prasad notes that whether or not an individual or large groups of individuals are vaccinated or unvaccinated, “it won’t affect the spread of the virus across society: It’s like spitting in the ocean:”

“Their research is misguided, it is profoundly unethical, it’s deeply disrespectful of causality and disrespectful … to make medicine and medical research be used as a force of good rather than a force for clickbait headlines. I think they’ve confused the two.

On my Substack I wrote a paper and said using the same methods you could probably show that unvaccinated people are more likely to lose fingers. Why? Because maybe they work more in factories, and they have more finger accidents and so therefore we should counsel them to keep their fingers attached.”

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.

How Sugar Harms Your Brain and Drives Alzheimer’s Epidemic

sugar brain function

  • One in 3 seniors in the U.S. dies with Alzheimer’s, and the disease kills more than breast and prostate cancers combined

  • A growing body of research suggests there’s a powerful connection between your diet and your risk of developing Alzheimer’s disease, via similar pathways that cause Type 2 diabetes

  • Some research shows that sugar and other carbohydrates can disrupt your brain function even if you’re not diabetic or have any signs of dementia

  • Long-term, sugar can contribute to the shrinking of your hippocampus, which is a hallmark symptom of Alzheimer’s disease

  • The researchers propose that lowering glucose levels, even if they’re within the “normal” range, may have a positive influence on cognition in older people

Visit Mercola Market


Alzheimer’s disease, a severe form of dementia, affects more than 6 million Americans, according to 2022 statistics.1 One in 9 seniors over the age of 65 has Alzheimer’s; and the disease kills more than breast and prostate cancers combined.

A growing body of research suggests there’s a powerful connection between your diet and your risk of developing Alzheimer’s disease, via similar pathways that cause type 2 diabetes. Seventy-three percent of people with Alzheimer’s are over age 75; two-thirds of Americans with Alzheimer’s are women.

Contrary to popular belief, your brain does not require glucose, and actually functions better burning alternative fuels, especially ketones, which your body makes in response to digesting healthy fats.

According to experts at Emory School of Medicine, Alzheimer’s and other brain disorders are associated with proteins that regulate glucose metabolism. Previously, they had determined that abnormalities in the process by which the brain breaks down glucose were associated with amyloid plaques in the brain and the onset of memory loss.

Interestingly, Alzheimer’s disease was tentatively dubbed “Type 3 diabetes” in early 20052 when researchers discovered that in addition to your pancreas, your brain also produces insulin, and this brain insulin is necessary for the survival of brain cells.

“What we found is that insulin is not just produced in the pancreas, but also in the brain,” researchers said in a press release at the time. “And we discovered that insulin and its growth factors, which are necessary for the survival of brain cells, contribute to the progression of Alzheimer’s.”

In your brain, insulin helps with neuron glucose-uptake and the regulation of neurotransmitters, such as acetylcholine, which are crucial for memory and learning. This is why reducing the level of insulin in your brain impairs your cognition.

Research3 has also shown that Type 2 diabetics lose more brain volume with age than expected — particularly gray matter. This kind of brain atrophy is yet another contributing factor for dementia.

Studies have found that people with lower levels of insulin and insulin receptors in their brain often have Alzheimer’s disease. But according to research published in the journal Neurology,4 sugar and other carbohydrates can disrupt your brain function even if you’re not diabetic or have any signs of dementia.

To test their theory, they evaluated short- and long-term glucose markers in 141 healthy, non-diabetic, non-demented seniors. Memory tests and brain imaging were administered to assess their brain function and the actual structure of their hippocampus. As reported by Scientific American:5

“Higher levels on both glucose measures were associated with worse memory, as well as a smaller hippocampus and compromised hippocampal structure.

The researchers also found that the structural changes partially accounted for the statistical link between glucose and memory. According to study co-author Agnes Flöel, a neurologist at Charité, the results ‘provide further evidence that glucose might directly contribute to hippocampal atrophy.'”

The findings suggest that even if you’re not diabetic or insulin resistant, of which about 80% of Americans are, sugar consumption can still disrupt your memory. Long-term, it can contribute to the shrinking of your hippocampus, which is a hallmark symptom of Alzheimer’s disease. (Your hippocampus is involved with the formation, organization and storage of memories.)

The authors of the study suggest that “strategies aimed at lowering glucose levels even in the normal range may beneficially influence cognition in the older population.”

Normally, a fasting blood sugar level between 100 and125 mg/dl is diagnosed as a prediabetic state.6 A fasting blood sugar level of 90 to 100 is considered “normal.” But in addition to the featured research, other studies have also found that brain atrophy occurs even in this “normal” blood sugar range.

Neurologist Dr. David Perlmutter insists that being very strict in limiting your consumption of sugar and non-vegetable carbs, and consuming healthy fats,7 are some of the most important steps you can take to prevent Alzheimer’s disease for this very reason.

He cites research from the Mayo Clinic,8 which found that diets rich in carbohydrates are associated with an 89% increased risk for dementia. Meanwhile, high-fat diets are associated with a 44% reduced risk.9

Compelling research shows that your brain has great plasticity, which you control through your diet and lifestyle choices. Unfortunately, the American public has been grossly brainwashed by the sugar and processed food industries into believing that sugar is a perfectly reasonable “nutrient” that belongs in a healthy diet.

Without accurate information, it’s certainly more difficult to make health-affirming choices. Newsweek10 recently ran an article revealing just how far the sugar industry will go to defend its market share:

“According to a new report11 from the Center for Science and Democracy … industry groups representing companies that sell sweeteners, like the Sugar Association and the Corn Refiners Association … have poured millions of dollars into countering science that indicates negative health consequences of eating their products.

For example, when a University of Southern California study from 2013 found that the actual high fructose corn syrup content in sodas ‘varied significantly’ from the sugar content disclosed on soda labels, the Corn Refiners Association considered paying for its own counter research.

A consultant suggested that the counter research should only be published if the results aligned with their goal of disputing the USC study: ‘If for any reason the results confirm [the University of Southern California study], we can just bury the data,’ the consultant wrote, according to the report.”

According to the Center for Science report, the Sugar Association even threatened the director general of the World Health Organization (WHO). WHO had published a paper on sugar, recommending a 10% limit on added sugars, stating that added sugars “threaten the nutritional quality of diets.”

The Sugar Association shot off a letter to the director general, warning him that, unless WHO withdrew the study, the Sugar Association would persuade the US Congress to withdraw the WHO’s federal funding. The following year, when WHO published its global health strategy on diet and health, there was no mention of the offending sugar study.

Indeed, despite overwhelming evidence showing that sugar, and processed fructose in particular, is at the heart of our burgeoning obesity and chronic disease epidemics, the sugar lobby spent decades trying to dissuade regulatory agencies from looking at the “factual” dangers of sugar.

As a result, today, according to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data,12 3 in 5 Americans aged 2 years and older exceed the CDC’s recommendation to consume less than 10% of total calories in a day. On average adult men in the U.S. eat 19 teaspoons of added sugars a day; adult women eat an added 15. This adds up to about 14.1% of the average American’s food consumption.13

In the U.K., a report14 by the Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN) recommends limiting added sugar intake to just 5%, in order to avoid obesity and Type 2 diabetes. They calculate this to be the equivalent of 25 grams of sugar (5 to 6 teaspoons) per day for women, and 35 grams (7 to 8 teaspoons) for men.

This matches my own recommendations for healthy, noninsulin-resistant individuals — with one key difference. I recommend restricting sugar/fructose consumption to 25 grams from ALL sources, not just added sugar. This includes limiting your non-vegetable carbohydrates as well.

Crazy enough, the Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition still recommends you get 50% of your daily energy intake in the form of starchy carbohydrates, which will undoubtedly and significantly raise your risk of insulin resistance.

If you’re insulin/leptin-resistant, diabetic, overweight or have high blood pressure, heart disease or cancer, I recommend restricting your sugar/fructose consumption to a maximum of 15 grams per day from all sources, until your insulin/leptin resistance has been resolved.

It’s becoming increasingly clear that the same pathological process that leads to insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes may also hold true for your brain. As you over-indulge on sugar and grains, your brain becomes overwhelmed by the consistently high levels of glucose and insulin that blunts its insulin signaling, leading to impairments in your thinking and memory abilities, eventually causing permanent brain damage.

Additionally, when your liver is busy processing fructose (which your liver turns into fat), it severely hampers its ability to make cholesterol, an essential building block of your brain that is crucial for optimal brain function. Indeed, mounting evidence supports the notion that significantly reducing fructose consumption is a very important step for preventing Alzheimer’s disease.

Because of the very limited treatments, and no available cure as of yet, you’re really left with just one solid solution, and that is to prevent Alzheimer’s from happening to you in the first place. As explained by neurologist Perlmutter, Alzheimer’s is a disease predicated primarily on lifestyle choices, the two main culprits being excessive sugar and gluten consumption.

Another major factor is the development and increased consumption of genetically engineered (GE) grains which are now pervasive in most processed foods sold in the US. The beauty of following my optimized nutrition plan is that it helps prevent and treat virtually ALL chronic degenerative diseases, including Alzheimer’s.

Dr. Perlmutter’s book, “Grain Brain: The Surprising Truth about Wheat, Carbs, and Sugar — Your Brain’s Silent Killers,” also provides powerful arguments for eliminating grains from your diet, particularly if you want to protect the health of your brain. In terms of your diet, the following suggestions may be among the most important for Alzheimer’s prevention:

  • Avoid sugar and refined fructose — Ideally, you’ll want to keep your total sugar and fructose below 25 grams per day, or as low as 15 grams per day if you have insulin resistance or any related disorders. In one recent animal study, a junk food diet high in sugar resulted in impaired memory after just one week!15 Place recognition, specifically, was adversely affected.

    As a general rule, you’ll want to keep your fasting insulin levels below 3, and this is indirectly related to fructose, as it will clearly lead to insulin resistance. However, other sugars (sucrose is 50% fructose by weight), grains, and lack of exercise are also important factors. Lowering insulin will also help lower leptin levels, which is another factor for Alzheimer’s.

  • Avoid gluten and casein (primarily wheat and pasteurized dairy, but not dairy fat, such as butter) — Research shows that your blood-brain barrier, the barrier that keeps things out of your brain where they don’t belong, is negatively affected by gluten.

    Gluten also makes your gut more permeable, which allows proteins to get into your bloodstream, where they don’t belong. That then sensitizes your immune system and promotes inflammation and autoimmunity, both of which play a role in the development of Alzheimer’s.

  • Eat a nutritious diet, rich in folate, such as the one described in my nutrition plan. Vegetables, without question, are your best form of folate, and we should all eat plenty of fresh raw veggies every day. Avoid supplements like folic acid, which is the inferior synthetic version of folate.

  • Increase consumption of all healthful fats, including animal-based omega-3 — Beneficial health-promoting fats that your brain needs for optimal function include organic butter from raw milk, clarified butter called ghee, organic grass fed raw butter, olives, organic virgin olive oil and coconut oil, nuts like pecans and macadamia, free-range eggs, wild Alaskan salmon, and avocado.

    Contrary to popular belief, the ideal fuel for your brain is not glucose but ketones. Ketones are what your body produces when it converts fat (as opposed to glucose) into energy. The medium-chain triglycerides (MCTs) found in coconut oil are a great source of ketone bodies, because coconut oil is about 66% MCTs.

    Also make sure you’re getting enough animal-based omega-3 fats, such as krill oil. (I recommend avoiding most fish because, although fish is naturally high in omega-3, most fish are now severely contaminated with mercury.) High intake of the omega-3 fats EPA and DHA help by preventing cell damage caused by Alzheimer’s disease, thereby slowing down its progression, and lowering your risk of developing the disorder.

  • Optimize your gut flora by regularly eating fermented foods or taking a high-potency and high-quality probiotic supplement.

  • Eat blueberries — Wild blueberries, which have high anthocyanin and antioxidant content, are known to guard against Alzheimer’s and other neurological diseases.

Another helpful tip is to reduce your overall calorie consumption, and/or intermittently fast. As mentioned above, ketones are mobilized when you replace carbs with coconut oil and other sources of healthy fats. A one-day fast can help your body to “reset” itself, and start to burn fat instead of sugar.

As part of a healthy lifestyle, I prefer an intermittent fasting schedule that simply calls for limiting your eating to a narrower window of time each day. By restricting your eating to a six- to eight-hour window, you effectively fast 16 to 18 hours each day.

Also be aware that when it comes to cholesterol levels and Alzheimer’s, lower is NOT better. Quite the contrary. Research shows that elderly individuals with the lowest cholesterol levels have the highest risk for Alzheimer’s.16 They also have the highest risk for dying. As he says, the war on cholesterol is fundamentally inappropriate and harmful.

Finally, there’s a short list of supplement recommendations worth noting for their specific benefits in preventing and treating dementia. So, although your fundamental strategy for preventing dementia should involve a comprehensive lifestyle approach, you may want to take special note of the following natural dietary agents. These four natural foods/supplements have good science behind them, in terms of preventing age-related cognitive changes:

  1. Ginkgo biloba — Many scientific studies have found that Ginkgo biloba has positive effects for dementia. A 1997 study from JAMA showed clear evidence that Ginkgo improves cognitive performance and social functioning for those suffering from dementia.

    Another 2006 study found Ginkgo as effective as the dementia drug Aricept (donepezil) for treating mild to moderate Alzheimer’s type dementia. A 2010 meta-analysis also found Ginkgo biloba to be effective for a variety of types of dementia.

  2. Alpha lipoic acid (ALA) — ALA has been shown to help stabilize cognitive functions among Alzheimer’s patients and may slow the progression of the disease.

  3. Vitamin B12 — A small Finnish study published in the journal Neurology17 found that people who consume foods rich in B12 may reduce their risk of Alzheimer’s in their later years. For each unit increase in the marker of vitamin B12 the risk of developing Alzheimer’s was reduced by 2%. Remember sublingual methylcobalamin may be your best bet here.

Lifestyle choices such as getting regular sun exposure and exercise, along with avoiding toxins, are also important factors when it comes to maintaining optimal brain health. Here are several of my lifestyle suggestions:

  • Optimize your vitamin D levels with safe sun exposure — Strong links between low levels of vitamin D in Alzheimer’s patients and poor outcomes on cognitive tests have been revealed.18 Researchers believe that optimal vitamin D levels may enhance the amount of important chemicals in your brain and protect brain cells by increasing the effectiveness of the glial cells in nursing damaged neurons back to health.

    Vitamin D may also exert some of its beneficial effects on Alzheimer’s through its anti-inflammatory and immune-boosting properties. Sufficient vitamin D is imperative for proper functioning of your immune system to combat inflammation that is also associated with Alzheimer’s.

  • Exercise regularly — It’s been suggested that exercise can trigger a change in the way the amyloid precursor protein is metabolized,19 thus, slowing down the onset and progression of Alzheimer’s.

    Exercise also increases levels of the protein PGC-1alpha. Research has also shown that people with Alzheimer’s have less PGC-1alpha in their brains20 and cells that contain more of the protein produce less of the toxic amyloid protein associated with Alzheimer’s. I would strongly recommend reviewing the Peak Fitness Technique for my specific recommendations.

  • Avoid and eliminate mercury from your body — Dental amalgam fillings, which are 50% mercury by weight, are one of the major sources of heavy metal toxicity. However, you should be healthy prior to having them removed. Once you have adjusted to following the diet described in my optimized nutrition plan, you can follow the mercury detox protocol and then find a biological dentist to have your amalgams removed.

  • Avoid aluminum, such as antiperspirants, non-stick cookware, vaccine adjuvants, etc.

  • Avoid flu vaccinations as most contain both mercury and aluminum, well-known neurotoxic and immunotoxic agents.

  • Avoid anticholinergics and statin drugs — Drugs that block acetylcholine, a nervous system neurotransmitter, have been shown to increase your risk of dementia. These drugs include certain nighttime pain relievers, antihistamines, sleep aids, certain antidepressants, medications to control incontinence, and certain narcotic pain relievers.

    Statin drugs are particularly problematic because they suppress the synthesis of cholesterol, deplete your brain of coenzyme Q10 and neurotransmitter precursors, and prevent adequate delivery of essential fatty acids and fat-soluble antioxidants to your brain by inhibiting the production of the indispensable carrier biomolecule known as low-density lipoprotein.

  • Challenge your mind daily — Mental stimulation, especially learning something new, such as learning to play an instrument or a new language, is associated with a decreased risk of Alzheimer’s. Researchers suspect that mental challenge helps to build up your brain, making it less susceptible to the lesions associated with Alzheimer’s disease.

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.