Pinned Tweet
Did you ever read the documents making the rounds? I did, because they don’t say what Rand Paul thinks. Whether that is his ignorance or him trying to bring Fauci back to make a point. Making Sense of the Gain-of-Function Madness open.substack.com/pub/tsimpson/p…
38
32
130
14,646
Dr Terry Simpson retweeted
Fat Burning is NOT the same thing as losing body fat
You've been led to believe they are the same by influencers in order to sell you:
-Low Carb Diets
-Fat Burners
-Fasted Cardio
And a variety of other things
Fat burning is PART of losing body fat, but it doesn't tell the full story
You've been led to believe they are the same by influencers in order to sell you:
-Low Carb Diets
-Fat Burners
-Fasted Cardio
And a variety of other things
Fat burning is PART of losing body fat, but it doesn't tell the full story
18
7
198
35,119
Dr Terry Simpson retweeted
Vaccine-sceptic doctors sued the CDC over the childhood schedule.
A judge threw it out on Friday for lack of standing.
The court never even got as far as the evidence.
Lucky for them.
Would've been embarrassing for them
👇
A judge threw it out on Friday for lack of standing.
The court never even got as far as the evidence.
Lucky for them.
Would've been embarrassing for them
👇
7
89
272
4,832
You've confused three entirely different things: dying of COVID in a nursing home, acquiring COVID because of an unsafe hospital transfer, and deliberately causing deaths to inflate pandemic statistics.
Those are not interchangeable.
We routinely transfer patients from hospitals to skilled nursing facilities, including patients with infections. The question is whether the receiving facility can safely isolate and care for them.
Yes, some state policies were badly handled. New York's attorney general documented infection-control failures and underreported deaths. Those deserve scrutiny.
But nursing homes were devastated because COVID was particularly lethal to their elderly, medically vulnerable residents. Staff and community transmission also drove outbreaks.
Your claim that governors deliberately inflated deaths to justify mandates is an accusation of mass murder.
Where is your evidence?
A statistic about where people died isn't evidence of how they became infected, much less proof of a conspiracy.
Those are not interchangeable.
We routinely transfer patients from hospitals to skilled nursing facilities, including patients with infections. The question is whether the receiving facility can safely isolate and care for them.
Yes, some state policies were badly handled. New York's attorney general documented infection-control failures and underreported deaths. Those deserve scrutiny.
But nursing homes were devastated because COVID was particularly lethal to their elderly, medically vulnerable residents. Staff and community transmission also drove outbreaks.
Your claim that governors deliberately inflated deaths to justify mandates is an accusation of mass murder.
Where is your evidence?
A statistic about where people died isn't evidence of how they became infected, much less proof of a conspiracy.
@Truth_in_Numberk@receiptsreqd @drterrysimpsons declared as you say. However, ACM spiked again after vaxx rollout, as did covid deaths, with the highest rises in the US in states with the strictest protocols. Considerable evidence exists that the pandemic spike was caused by use of ventilators, remdesivir, and the decision to house covid sufferers in seniors' homes -- a decision that only makes sense if the death numbers needed to be juiced to justify the pandemic mandates.
x.com/_aussie17/stat…
x.com/drsimonegold/s…
0
9
42
798
Scott ( @ScottM2018 ), you've confused evidence with allegiance.
We don't attribute benefits to vaccines simply because we like them, nor dismiss adverse effects because they're inconvenient.
We use controlled studies, surveillance, biological plausibility, and epidemiology to investigate BOTH.
Myocarditis after mRNA vaccination was identified, quantified, and publicly reported. So were other rare vaccine complications. It wasn't identified by a group of anti-vaxers, it was physicians.
The reduction in severe COVID and hospitalization was also measured, not imagined. And some of us were on the front lines.
If you have evidence that vaccination caused an increase in cancer or heart disease, present it.
The standard of evidence hasn't changed. You just seem unhappy that it applies to your claims, too. Sorry -
We don't attribute benefits to vaccines simply because we like them, nor dismiss adverse effects because they're inconvenient.
We use controlled studies, surveillance, biological plausibility, and epidemiology to investigate BOTH.
Myocarditis after mRNA vaccination was identified, quantified, and publicly reported. So were other rare vaccine complications. It wasn't identified by a group of anti-vaxers, it was physicians.
The reduction in severe COVID and hospitalization was also measured, not imagined. And some of us were on the front lines.
If you have evidence that vaccination caused an increase in cancer or heart disease, present it.
The standard of evidence hasn't changed. You just seem unhappy that it applies to your claims, too. Sorry -
@drterrysimpson Let me guess this straight, we can attribute late term positive effects to the vaccine but not negative effects?
2
8
40
660
Dr Terry Simpson retweeted
FINALLY - THE CASE IS CLOSED - embarrassment that this faulty study was ever published but now is buried where it belongs, in the dust bin of medical nonsense @nationallipid @foundationofnla @society_eas @ASPCardio @escardio @atherosociety @TheEndoSociety @FamilyHeartFdn esterol
41
66
357
87,162
Dr Terry Simpson retweeted
In 2000 the US eliminated measles.
In 2026 : 4,588 cases so far
The virus didn't get any smarter.
We got dumber
In 2026 : 4,588 cases so far
The virus didn't get any smarter.
We got dumber
30
241
809
11,288
Yes so when we have less deaths from acute heart disease, decreasing cancer mortality, and emptied the patients in the ICU from a vaccine that works - you don't trust us. Got it. Find a witch doctor and get off social media. Or get an education
@drterrysimpson Establishment Doctor syndrome is where Doctors now realize they are no longer trusted due to a dismal 6 year track record of the treatment of COVID and ignoring the profound increase in diseases, especially heart defects and cancer.
7
22
110
1,388
You're confusing finding something with discovering something new, and then confusing both with proving causation.
White, rubbery, fibrin-rich postmortem clots were described long before COVID vaccines existed. They are neither a new discovery nor proof of vaccine injury.
Yes, some specimens have undergone laboratory analysis. But identifying proteins doesn't establish a new disease, its cause, or whether it killed anyone. Your own embalmer survey acknowledges it cannot establish causation.
And let's be clear: morticians are not pathologists. Embalmer observations aren't controlled autopsy studies, and postmortem findings don't automatically establish the cause of death.
Interestingly, a 2025 Journal of Virology study found less COVID-associated pulmonary fibrin deposition in vaccinated patients, although that examined a different phenomenon.
I've spent a career as a surgeon dealing with thrombosis and pathology. I don't establish diagnoses by watching interviews on X.
Show us controlled pathology, appropriate comparison groups, and evidence linking these findings to vaccination.
Calling something “Calamari Clot Syndrome” doesn't make it new, doesn't make it vaccine-induced, and certainly doesn't make it science.
White, rubbery, fibrin-rich postmortem clots were described long before COVID vaccines existed. They are neither a new discovery nor proof of vaccine injury.
Yes, some specimens have undergone laboratory analysis. But identifying proteins doesn't establish a new disease, its cause, or whether it killed anyone. Your own embalmer survey acknowledges it cannot establish causation.
And let's be clear: morticians are not pathologists. Embalmer observations aren't controlled autopsy studies, and postmortem findings don't automatically establish the cause of death.
Interestingly, a 2025 Journal of Virology study found less COVID-associated pulmonary fibrin deposition in vaccinated patients, although that examined a different phenomenon.
I've spent a career as a surgeon dealing with thrombosis and pathology. I don't establish diagnoses by watching interviews on X.
Show us controlled pathology, appropriate comparison groups, and evidence linking these findings to vaccination.
Calling something “Calamari Clot Syndrome” doesn't make it new, doesn't make it vaccine-induced, and certainly doesn't make it science.
Thanks for reading my research Doc! 😘
Unfortunately you have taken an emerging injury you know little about, and dismissed it because you are years behind the science.
You are part of the antiquated scientific hegemony unwilling to open your mind and put in the time and effort to understand the data.
These are reproduced lab results and peer-reviewed papers on the science of the C0VID #VaxxInducedWhiteClotSyndrome
#WhiteClotSyndrome #CalamariClots
And whether you approve of us speaking about it or not, it’s real.
Many people are 💀 from it.
As a career researcher my advice to you and everyone else is to do an “Advanced Search” on X of Dr. Phillip McMillan’s page @vejon_health and “clots"
Begin your homework by watching dozens of interviews with the scientists who are studying and describing the phenomenon.
Philip has repeatedly interviewed almost every one studying this problem from the people taking the surveys of the embalmers, to the doctors seeing patients, and the scientists analyzing the specimens.
#WhiteClotSyndrome #CalamariClots
#Censorship #CensorshipKILLS #GeezerScience
4
10
44
1,315
Apparently, once you’ve had a COVID shot, every subsequent stroke becomes a vaccine injury—even years later. Remarkable diagnostic method: no medical records, no comparison group, just a calendar and a conclusion.
One wonders what caused all those strokes before 2020.
One wonders what caused all those strokes before 2020.
19
20
150
2,433
RFK Jr said at two years he would have measurable changes to health - not quite two years but what have we done:
Measles - oh, sorry not a good story there, lets ignore that and RFK Jr constant anti MMR career statistics
• 10 million more uninsured by 2034, projected.
• Medicaid enrollment projected down 13.1 million.
• SNAP spending projected down $211 billion.
• NIH grants down from pre-2025 levels.
• Glyphosate still registered.
Those are measurable policy changes. Now show us the measurable improvements in chronic disease.
But we asked industry to change the colors in Skittles, and well that is something.
We did get one person to put tallow in fries - and that has changed - nothing.
We made a new food pyramid that only influencers enjoy and no one follows.
So we have less people with insurance, more infectious diseases, less ability for poor to get the whole foods he wants and we cut basic research.
Measles - oh, sorry not a good story there, lets ignore that and RFK Jr constant anti MMR career statistics
• 10 million more uninsured by 2034, projected.
• Medicaid enrollment projected down 13.1 million.
• SNAP spending projected down $211 billion.
• NIH grants down from pre-2025 levels.
• Glyphosate still registered.
Those are measurable policy changes. Now show us the measurable improvements in chronic disease.
But we asked industry to change the colors in Skittles, and well that is something.
We did get one person to put tallow in fries - and that has changed - nothing.
We made a new food pyramid that only influencers enjoy and no one follows.
So we have less people with insurance, more infectious diseases, less ability for poor to get the whole foods he wants and we cut basic research.
18
89
274
5,891
oh @reallyoptimized I have no problem with ezetimibe. I take rosuvastatin (Crestor) and ezetimibe (Zetia) myself, with no issues.
But this UAMS paper does not show what you’re claiming.
It is a mechanistic study plus a retrospective database analysis showing an association between ezetimibe use and lower dementia incidence. Interesting? Absolutely. Proof that ezetimibe prevents dementia? No. And it did not randomize ezetimibe against statins or establish that ezetimibe is “safer across the board.”
The current lipid guidelines still regard statins, ezetimibe and PCSK9 inhibitors as generally safe. Statins remain foundational because we have decades of randomized cardiovascular outcome data for them. Ezetimibe and PCSK9 inhibitors are excellent tools, particularly as add-on therapy or when statins aren’t tolerated.
And there is an important point buried in the paper you just cited: lowering peripheral cholesterol does not inherently damage cognition. Ezetimibe lowers LDL while having very limited CNS penetration, and these investigators are actually exploring whether it might be neuroprotective through a different mechanism.
So my objection is not to alternatives.
My objection is taking a cognitive warning based largely on post-marketing reports, ignoring randomized and large observational data showing no dementia signal from statins, and then presenting a retrospective ezetimibe association as though it settles the question in the opposite direction.
That is applying different evidentiary standards to drugs you like and drugs you don’t. We call this cognitive bias and you don't have to have too much blood flow to have this issue
But this UAMS paper does not show what you’re claiming.
It is a mechanistic study plus a retrospective database analysis showing an association between ezetimibe use and lower dementia incidence. Interesting? Absolutely. Proof that ezetimibe prevents dementia? No. And it did not randomize ezetimibe against statins or establish that ezetimibe is “safer across the board.”
The current lipid guidelines still regard statins, ezetimibe and PCSK9 inhibitors as generally safe. Statins remain foundational because we have decades of randomized cardiovascular outcome data for them. Ezetimibe and PCSK9 inhibitors are excellent tools, particularly as add-on therapy or when statins aren’t tolerated.
And there is an important point buried in the paper you just cited: lowering peripheral cholesterol does not inherently damage cognition. Ezetimibe lowers LDL while having very limited CNS penetration, and these investigators are actually exploring whether it might be neuroprotective through a different mechanism.
So my objection is not to alternatives.
My objection is taking a cognitive warning based largely on post-marketing reports, ignoring randomized and large observational data showing no dementia signal from statins, and then presenting a retrospective ezetimibe association as though it settles the question in the opposite direction.
That is applying different evidentiary standards to drugs you like and drugs you don’t. We call this cognitive bias and you don't have to have too much blood flow to have this issue
@drterrysimpson By the way, ezetimibe not only has no cognitive warnings like statins, but emerging data is directionally protective for dementia...
And that's just the dementia angle... It's safer across the board.
2
2
13
862
And once again, morticians have apparently discovered pathology. Those clots - never seen before COVID - oh wait a second, perhaps this "doctor" forgot his pathology class in medical school. In fact, we discuss clotting in the first year.
White, fibrin-rich postmortem clots are not new. Pathologists described “chicken-fat” clots and long fibrin coagula decades before COVID and decades before mRNA vaccines. Now I went to med school in the 1980's so I am sure that was before COVID>
The 2021 paper being invoked here studied microscopic amyloid-like fibrin deposits in the PLASMA of living patients with acute and long COVID. It did not study these large structures removed during embalming, and it certainly did not prove they are the same thing.
Even the recent embalmer survey admits that nobody yet knows exactly what these structures are and that proper histology, immunohistochemistry and proteomics are required.
That is what pathologists do. An embalmer can tell you, “I pulled this out.” And why do they pull out clots? Minor problem with this story: embalmers don’t perform thrombectomies.
They inject embalming fluid into the arterial system while blood drains from the venous system. They may encounter material obstructing a vessel during that process, but they are not dissecting the vascular tree and “pulling clots out” for diagnosis.
And looking at a white string of material on an embalming table does not tell you whether it is an antemortem thrombus, postmortem fibrin clot, vascular cast, or embalming artifact.
Pathologists have been examining thrombi and postmortem clots for generations. If someone thinks they have discovered a brand-new human pathology, hand it to a pathologist, stain it, characterize it, and publish the findings.
Until then, “an embalmer pulled something strange out” is an observation — not a diagnosis.
That requires histology. A pathologist can tell you what it is. Those are not interchangeable credentials.
and an anti-vax mortician ... well they get more business
White, fibrin-rich postmortem clots are not new. Pathologists described “chicken-fat” clots and long fibrin coagula decades before COVID and decades before mRNA vaccines. Now I went to med school in the 1980's so I am sure that was before COVID>
The 2021 paper being invoked here studied microscopic amyloid-like fibrin deposits in the PLASMA of living patients with acute and long COVID. It did not study these large structures removed during embalming, and it certainly did not prove they are the same thing.
Even the recent embalmer survey admits that nobody yet knows exactly what these structures are and that proper histology, immunohistochemistry and proteomics are required.
That is what pathologists do. An embalmer can tell you, “I pulled this out.” And why do they pull out clots? Minor problem with this story: embalmers don’t perform thrombectomies.
They inject embalming fluid into the arterial system while blood drains from the venous system. They may encounter material obstructing a vessel during that process, but they are not dissecting the vascular tree and “pulling clots out” for diagnosis.
And looking at a white string of material on an embalming table does not tell you whether it is an antemortem thrombus, postmortem fibrin clot, vascular cast, or embalming artifact.
Pathologists have been examining thrombi and postmortem clots for generations. If someone thinks they have discovered a brand-new human pathology, hand it to a pathologist, stain it, characterize it, and publish the findings.
Until then, “an embalmer pulled something strange out” is an observation — not a diagnosis.
That requires histology. A pathologist can tell you what it is. Those are not interchangeable credentials.
and an anti-vax mortician ... well they get more business
Embalmers have started pulling something out of bodies that many had never seen in their careers: large, white, fibrous clots.
Funeral directors admit they're seeing them, but most are afraid to speak out. And these aren't ordinary clots. Instead, they appear to be made out of eins, which may be why the body's own enzymes can't break them down.
A study from August 2021 may explain how they form, and why so many anticoagulants don't touch them. 🧵
17
57
291
8,913
well @evipedia_ai @evipedia_ai You've cited a trial in which both treatment groups received statins as grounds for questioning whether statins extend life.
RACING demonstrated that moderate-dose rosuvastatin plus ezetimibe was noninferior to higher-dose rosuvastatin for cardiovascular outcomes, with better tolerability. Excellent evidence for combination therapy.
But the question of mortality was answered long before RACING.
The Cholesterol Treatment Trialists analyzed 170,000 participants in 26 randomized trials. All-cause mortality fell 10% per 39 mg/dL LDL reduction. Coronary mortality fell 20%. PMID: 21067804.
These were deaths, not laboratory values or surrogate endpoints.
We can certainly debate the optimal combination of medications. We can even debate absolute benefit in low-risk populations. I take dual therapy myself.
But suggesting that statins may not prolong life while citing a trial in which everyone receives a statin is a curious way to practice evidence review.
The evidence deserves better than that.
RACING demonstrated that moderate-dose rosuvastatin plus ezetimibe was noninferior to higher-dose rosuvastatin for cardiovascular outcomes, with better tolerability. Excellent evidence for combination therapy.
But the question of mortality was answered long before RACING.
The Cholesterol Treatment Trialists analyzed 170,000 participants in 26 randomized trials. All-cause mortality fell 10% per 39 mg/dL LDL reduction. Coronary mortality fell 20%. PMID: 21067804.
These were deaths, not laboratory values or surrogate endpoints.
We can certainly debate the optimal combination of medications. We can even debate absolute benefit in low-risk populations. I take dual therapy myself.
But suggesting that statins may not prolong life while citing a trial in which everyone receives a statin is a curious way to practice evidence review.
The evidence deserves better than that.
@drterrysimpson @reallyoptimized On safer alternatives: in artery disease, moderate statin plus ezetimibe matched maximal-statin protection with fewer dropouts, though whether either extends life is disputed. evipedia.ai/statins_ezetim…
1
3
21
748
Well @Soulgirl1RN You’ve changed my argument. Or as we like to say - you moved the goal posts.
I didn’t say surgeons wear masks primarily to prevent themselves from catching respiratory infections. Surgical masks are part of infection control: among other things, they reduce contamination of the operative field from material coming from the surgical team’s mouth and nose.
A KN95/N95 is different. It is a respirator, specifically designed to reduce the wearer’s inhalation of airborne particles.
So yes, I wear a surgical mask while operating, and I wear a KN95 in healthcare facilities to reduce my exposure to respiratory viruses. Neither is controversial.
As for this supposedly established 1.5–1.6% annual transmission rate “regardless of masks,” please cite the actual UK and US surveillance studies. A percentage without a denominator, case definition, pathogens studied or methodology is not epidemiology. It’s a number. I asked you to cite it, and again you say "quality surveillance .." so cite the study so I can see it. but since you won't let me help you and since you keep quoting 1.5–1.6% as though hospital respiratory transmission is some immutable constant “regardless of masking.”
Here is actual published hospital data.
Munigala et al., Open Forum Infectious Diseases, 2024: after universal masking was implemented, healthcare-associated respiratory viral infections fell 34.9%, from 0.71 to 0.19 infections per 1,000 patient-days during universal masking, with the analysis accounting for changes in community respiratory-virus activity.
So no, the literature does not show that transmission simply stays the same regardless of masking. It helps if you cite the studies, read the studies because I will. If you believe what people tell you the studies say you will be misled a lot. In this case, you tried to mislead - either intentionally or I suspect because you didn't read the study, you just used some secondary source
I didn’t say surgeons wear masks primarily to prevent themselves from catching respiratory infections. Surgical masks are part of infection control: among other things, they reduce contamination of the operative field from material coming from the surgical team’s mouth and nose.
A KN95/N95 is different. It is a respirator, specifically designed to reduce the wearer’s inhalation of airborne particles.
So yes, I wear a surgical mask while operating, and I wear a KN95 in healthcare facilities to reduce my exposure to respiratory viruses. Neither is controversial.
As for this supposedly established 1.5–1.6% annual transmission rate “regardless of masks,” please cite the actual UK and US surveillance studies. A percentage without a denominator, case definition, pathogens studied or methodology is not epidemiology. It’s a number. I asked you to cite it, and again you say "quality surveillance .." so cite the study so I can see it. but since you won't let me help you and since you keep quoting 1.5–1.6% as though hospital respiratory transmission is some immutable constant “regardless of masking.”
Here is actual published hospital data.
Munigala et al., Open Forum Infectious Diseases, 2024: after universal masking was implemented, healthcare-associated respiratory viral infections fell 34.9%, from 0.71 to 0.19 infections per 1,000 patient-days during universal masking, with the analysis accounting for changes in community respiratory-virus activity.
So no, the literature does not show that transmission simply stays the same regardless of masking. It helps if you cite the studies, read the studies because I will. If you believe what people tell you the studies say you will be misled a lot. In this case, you tried to mislead - either intentionally or I suspect because you didn't read the study, you just used some secondary source
@drterrysimpson You dont wear a mask as a surgeon to prevent respiratory infections so please dont insult my intelligence. Quality surveillance across several years both in uk and us showed similar transmission rates of around 1.5% and 1.6% every year.
8
40
228
4,446
Well @reallyoptimized Ryan, what exactly are these safer alternatives, and where are the randomized trials showing equivalent reductions in heart attacks, strokes, and mortality with superior safety?
Ezetimibe? PCSK9 inhibitors? Bempedoic acid? Excellent medications, and all further support the benefits of lowering atherogenic lipoproteins. But each has its own evidence, limitations, and indications.
You dismiss randomized trials as too short, yet apparently find the observational negative signals sufficiently persuasive to recommend abandoning one of the most extensively studied classes of medications in cardiovascular medicine.
Curiously, observational studies involving more than seven million people associate statin use with LOWER dementia risk (PMID: 39822593).
I agree that dementia may take decades to develop. I also agree that statins have adverse effects. Medicine requires weighing their frequency and severity against demonstrated benefits.
So please identify the safer alternative, the comparative outcomes, and the evidence supporting your recommendation.
A vague reference to negative signals is a rather slender foundation on which to advise people to abandon proven treatment.
Ezetimibe? PCSK9 inhibitors? Bempedoic acid? Excellent medications, and all further support the benefits of lowering atherogenic lipoproteins. But each has its own evidence, limitations, and indications.
You dismiss randomized trials as too short, yet apparently find the observational negative signals sufficiently persuasive to recommend abandoning one of the most extensively studied classes of medications in cardiovascular medicine.
Curiously, observational studies involving more than seven million people associate statin use with LOWER dementia risk (PMID: 39822593).
I agree that dementia may take decades to develop. I also agree that statins have adverse effects. Medicine requires weighing their frequency and severity against demonstrated benefits.
So please identify the safer alternative, the comparative outcomes, and the evidence supporting your recommendation.
A vague reference to negative signals is a rather slender foundation on which to advise people to abandon proven treatment.
@drterrysimpson RCT signals are mostly irrelevant, as they are far too short.
But I agree that this paper is pretty weak, too.
That said - we have safer alternatives and there are enough negative signals with statins to justify going a different direction.
4
6
28
1,113
Dr Terry Simpson retweeted
I used to buy into the cherry-picked science pushed by lifestyle influencers. Then reality hit.
When carnivore advocates selectively weaponize observational studies to demonize statins, they aren't trying to protect your brain—they are trying to protect their brand. 1/2
When carnivore advocates selectively weaponize observational studies to demonize statins, they aren't trying to protect your brain—they are trying to protect their brand. 1/2
Brand new study just dropped (published Oct 29, 2026 in Frontiers in Pharmacology).
A massive new analysis from two of the world’s largest biomedical databases just linked statin use to roughly double the risk of dementia.
Researchers looked at the All of Us Research Program ng over 31,000 statin users, followed through 2023) and the UK Biobank (173,282 adults, including nearly 44,000 statin users). After balancing groups for age, BMI, APOE status, comorbidities, and other factors using inverse probability of treatment weighting, statin users showed adjusted hazard ratios of 2.22 (All of Us) and 2.54 (UK Biobank) for incident dementia.
The association held across Alzheimer’s disease, vascular dementia, and other subtypes. High-intensity statins carried an additional ~14% higher risk compared with moderate-to-low intensity therapy. Incidence rates were higher in the discovery cohort (64.9 vs 30.7 per 10,000 person-years) than in the replication cohort, but the relative increase was consistent.
In an exploratory mediation analysis, a modest portion (8.2%) of the association appeared to run through lower levels of coenzyme Q7—a protein involved in CoQ10 biosynthesis. Lower COQ7 was itself linked to higher dementia odds. The pathway through LDL-C was not statistically significant. The authors note this is hypothesis-generating and that direct CoQ10 was not measured.
This is observational data, not a randomized trial, so it cannot prove causation. Residual confounding (including why people were prescribed statins) remains possible, and the literature on statins and cognition has been mixed. Still, the scale, the replication across two independent cohorts, the intensity-dependent pattern, and the COQ7 signal make it hard to ignore.
This is the kind of result that makes people who have been skeptical of long-term statin use for primary prevention sit up and take notice—especially given the CoQ10 connection many clinicians have quietly acknowledged for years.
The full paper is open access: frontiersin.org/journals/pharm…
4
4
11
832
Well @Soulgirl1RN I think you should cite your paper, because as a surgeon, I wear masks all the time and I always wear one entering any healthcare facility. You say: “Approximately 1–2% every year regardless of mask mandates” but this is not a documented universal finding in epidemiology. If you have the paper, cite it.
Published hospital studies actually show significant reductions in hospital-acquired respiratory viral infections after infection-control measures that included masking — roughly 35% in one study and 44–53% for influenza/RSV in another.
I wear a KN95 in healthcare facilities because respiratory viruses are transmitted in healthcare facilities and source control plus personal respiratory protection reduces exposure.
I’m a surgeon. I’ve spent much of my career wearing a mask around patients. This is hardly a radical concept.
Published hospital studies actually show significant reductions in hospital-acquired respiratory viral infections after infection-control measures that included masking — roughly 35% in one study and 44–53% for influenza/RSV in another.
I wear a KN95 in healthcare facilities because respiratory viruses are transmitted in healthcare facilities and source control plus personal respiratory protection reduces exposure.
I’m a surgeon. I’ve spent much of my career wearing a mask around patients. This is hardly a radical concept.
@Corbie25 @drterrysimpson Wrong. Respiratory transmission rates are approximately 1 to 2% across adult hospitals every single year regardless of mask mandates or not. A documented finding in epidemiology
6
21
96
1,920
As my 16.5 year dog gets more picky about food, I find I am happily being a short order cook and making him more chicken. Then I went to a local pet store and discovered that woo has entered the vet world as much as the medical world. But I did get a lot of interesting dog food - he eats is fine with me. Even if I am making it for him
2
4
45
830