Zum Seitenende Übersicht Artikel Home & Impressum
First the link to this week’s complete list as HTML and as PDF.
Evaluating Dror et al. it has to be stressed that their result only pertains to seriously deficient levels of vitamin D. Among those reaching the accepted minimum value, higher levels don’t seem to confer additional protection.
As an exception I do not add any comment but just repeat Herby et al.’s conclusion verbatim:
“While this meta-analysis concludes that lockdowns have had little to no public health effects, they have imposed enormous economic and social costs where they have been adopted. In consequence, lockdown policies are ill-founded and should be rejected as a pandemic policy instrument.”
There is one question Piller fails to ask. The now discredited 2013 paper made strong allegations against popular and wide spread products. It became well publicised and caused commercial damage. Yet not one of the prosperous companies chose to sue and offer proof of their products’ contents. Did Newmaster know where to hit?
Contrary to what Barr et al. claim, their findings are not in opposition but exactly in line with the proposed explanation for brain growth. In contrast to muscle and bone, brain size can not be enhanced during life by training. The adult brain size is already fixed at birth, or more precisely at conception. It is also a very costly organ, not only in term of energy but also nutrients like phosphorus. So whatever the means and reason, nutrition, i.e. meat had to come first, brain growth later. This is probably best explained by Reichholf, list of 2011-12-01.
Zum Anfang Übersicht Artikel Home & Impressum