NAC’s Crucial Role in Preventing and Treating COVID-19

Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola

Source: https://media.mercola.com/ImageServer/Public/2021/November/PDF/coronavirus-n-acetylcysteine-pdf.pdf

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

• N-acetylcysteine (NAC) is a precursor to reduced glutathione, which appears to play a crucial role in COVID-19. There’s evidence glutathione deficiency may worsen COVID-19 severity
• Patients with glucose 6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) deficiency are more prone to COVID-19 as it depletes glutathione. Some of these patients are also at increased risk of hemolytic anemia when given the COVID-19 drug hydroxychloroquine
• High-dose intravenous NAC may address the chain of events leading to red blood cell hemolysis in these patients, allowing them to recover from severe COVID-19
• NAC also inhibits expression of proinflammatory cytokines, improves T cell response, benefits a variety of lung problems, and inhibits the hypercoagulation that can result in stroke and/or blood clots that impair the ability to exchange oxygen in the lungs
• As the benefits of NAC against COVID-19 are starting to become known, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration is suddenly cracking down on NAC, claiming it is excluded from the definition of a dietary supplement

The best way to end the pandemic? Early treatment!

99.76% risk reduction from hospitalization; 100% risk reduction from death. Plus they don’t cause death or disability (like the COVID vaccines do). This is why they are being suppressed by the NIH.

Source: https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/the-best-way-to-end-the-pandemic?

Early treatment is the true win-win: for you and for society

It’s the patriotic thing to do to end the pandemic.

We need to educate everyone on early treatment protocols. Look at the benefits:

1. Treatments are super safe never kill or disable you
2. You will avoid getting long-haul COVID
3. Higher relative risk reduction than any vaccine or big-company pharma proprietary drug. For the Fareed-Tyson protocol, we have 99.76% reduction in hospitalization, and 100% reduction in death rate. There is nothing better that. Nothing.
4. After you recover, if you catch COVID again, you won’t get sick or infect anyone else. None of these are true if you get vaccinated.
5. After you recover, you can’t pass on the virus to anyone else (like you can if you just get vaccinated). This is important. This keeps others safe. It is the right thing to do for society. It is the patriotic thing to do.

What’s the catch? They only work if you take the drugs and are treated early (as soon as you have symptoms).

For more information on effective early treatments, see my article on early treatments.

The big problem was never the virus; it is our response to the virus

Meanwhile, the effectiveness of early treatments will continue to be suppressed by the CDC, FDA, NIH, AMA, and WHO among others.

Study – Previous COVID-19 may cut risk of reinfection 84%

Source: https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2021/04/previous-covid-19-may-cut-risk-reinfection-84

People who had COVID-19 had an 84% lower risk of becoming reinfected and a 93% lower risk of symptomatic infection during 7 months of follow-up, according to findings from a large, multicenter study published late last week in The Lancet.

The prospective cohort SARS-CoV-2 Immunity and Reinfection Evaluation (SIREN) study, by Public Health England Colindale researchers, involved 25,661 workers at public hospitals throughout England who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 every 2 to 4 weeks and antibodies at enrollment and every 4 weeks. Volunteers also completed questionnaires on symptoms and exposures every 2 weeks.

Of the 25,661 participants, 32.3% were assigned to the baseline positive (possibly or probably previously infected) group, and 67.7% were assigned to the negative group. Of the 8,278 positive participants, 91.2% had SARS-CoV-2 antibodies at study enrollment, while 7.0% were negative for antibodies but had a previously positive antibody and/or coronavirus test, and 1.8% had tested positive for COVID-19 but didn’t have linked antibody data.

Natural immunity vs vaccine protection

In a commentary in the same journal, Florian Krammer, PhD, of the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York City, said that although natural infection tends to induce lower and more variable antibody concentrations than COVID-19 vaccines, “the findings of the authors suggest that infection and the development of an antibody response provides protection similar to or even better than currently used SARS-CoV-2 vaccines.

He added, “The SIREN study adds to a growing number of studies, which demonstrate that infection does protect against reinfection, and probably in an antibody-dependent manner.”

Krammer pointed out that the researchers didn’t link quantitative antibody measurements to protection against infection afforded by natural infection versus vaccines, a topic that should be a priority for future studies.

“Establishment of antibody titres as a correlate of protection and defining a protective titre would be extremely important for public health considerations and for patient management,” he wrote. “A correlate of protection and a protective threshold would also allow for the development of additional SARS-CoV-2 vaccines based on small immunogenicity-based phase 3 trials rather than large and costly field efficacy trials, which are becoming exceedingly difficult to perform.”

Brownstone Institute – 21 Essential Studies that Raise Grave Doubts about COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates

BY PAUL ELIAS ALEXANDER

Source: https://brownstone.org/articles/20-essential-studies-that-raise-grave-doubts-about-covid-19-vaccine-mandates/

The following research papers and studies raise doubts that Covid vaccine mandates are backed by science and good public-health practice. Anyone seeking to challenge these mandates should consult these carefully. They demonstrate that these mandates provide no overall health benefit to the community and can even be harmful. Instead, the decision to accept the vaccine should be made by individuals according to their own assessment of risks in consultation with informed medical professionals. 

The model of Marek’s disease (‘leaky’ non-sterilizing, non-neutralizing vaccines that reduce symptoms but do not stop infection or transmission) and the concept of the Original antigenic sin (the initial priming of the immune system prejudices the immune response to the pathogen or similar pathogen life-long) may explain what we are potentially facing now with these mass mandates of COVID vaccines (immune escape, increased transmission, faster transmission, and potentially more ‘hotter’ variants).

In addition, such mandates result in the forced separation and segregation of society. They create hazards for people in their professional lives. For example, why would governments impose punitive career altering vaccine mandates on an unvaccinated nurse who is most likely already immune due to natural exposure? Mandates also represent an encroachment on freedom and liberties, and call into question the motives behind these mandates when the science shows no public benefit compared with the costs. 

COVID-19 early treatment: real-time analysis of 1,141 studies

Source: https://c19early.com/

Analysis of 30 COVID-19 early treatments, and database of 225 other potential treatments. 66 countries have approved early treatments. Treatments do not replace vaccines and other measures. All practical, effective, and safe means should be used. Elimination is a race against viral evolution. No treatment, vaccine, or intervention is 100% available and effective for all variants. Denying efficacy increases the risk of COVID-19 becoming endemic; and increases mortality, morbidity, and collateral damage.