How they blantantly lie! Vitamin C now said to harm sepsis patients.

Ask questions, seek advice, or share your experience with vitamin C

Moderators: ofonorow, popnowlin

ofonorow
Ascorbate Wizard
Ascorbate Wizard
Posts: 15822
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2005 3:16 pm
Location: Lisle, IL
Contact:

How they blantantly lie! Vitamin C now said to harm sepsis patients.

Post Number:#1  Post by ofonorow » Thu Jun 16, 2022 7:53 am

https://www.medpagetoday.com/criticalcare/sepsis/99248

Headline is that vitamin C now harms sepsis patients! (Notice that you can't easily read this paper)
Owen R. Fonorow
HeartCURE.Info
American Scientist's Invention Could Prevent 350,000 Heart Bypass Operations a year

ofonorow
Ascorbate Wizard
Ascorbate Wizard
Posts: 15822
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2005 3:16 pm
Location: Lisle, IL
Contact:

Re: How they blantantly lie! Vitamin C now said to harm sepsis patients.

Post Number:#2  Post by ofonorow » Wed Jun 29, 2022 7:45 am

Overall, the trial demonstrated that for patients with sepsis admitted to the ICU who were on vasopressor therapy, intravenous vitamin C was associated with a higher risk of death or persistent organ dysfunction.


lies, more lies? in the periodicals physicians read.... Are doctors really this gullible?

So what is wrong with this study? Sounds impressive...


Intravenous vitamin C increases mortality and organ dysfunction in sepsis patients
https://www.physiciansweekly.com/intrav ... -patients/


Evidence rating is "excellent?"


So what is vasotherapy? Apparently drugs that raise blood pressure. Did they all get the same vasotherapy drug? Unsaid and unknown. Maybe we should trust them...

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10 ... 00317/full
Conclusions
Neurological dysfunction is frequent during sepsis. Both sepsis and high dose vasopressor therapy may negatively impact cerebral perfusion and/or oxygenation. The best way to monitor and to manage patients suffering from sepsis-induced neurological dysfunction remains to be elucidated.



Results

A total of 872 patients underwent randomization (435 to the vitamin C group and 437 to the control group). The primary outcome occurred in 191 of 429 patients (44.5%) in the vitamin C group and in 167 of 434 patients (38.5%) in the control group (risk ratio, 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04 to 1.40; P=0.01). At 28 days, death had occurred in 152 of 429 patients (35.4%) in the vitamin C group and in 137 of 434 patients (31.6%) in the placebo group (risk ratio, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.98 to 1.40) and persistent organ dysfunction in 39 of 429 patients (9.1%) and 30 of 434 patients (6.9%), respectively (risk ratio, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.83 to 2.05). Findings were similar in the two groups regarding organ-dysfunction scores, biomarkers, 6-month survival, health-related quality of life, stage 3 acute kidney injury, and hypoglycemic episodes. In the vitamin C group, one patient had a severe hypoglycemic episode and another had a serious anaphylaxis event.
Owen R. Fonorow
HeartCURE.Info
American Scientist's Invention Could Prevent 350,000 Heart Bypass Operations a year

Blargus
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 192
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2021 12:03 am
Contact:

Re: How they blantantly lie! Vitamin C now said to harm sepsis patients.

Post Number:#3  Post by Blargus » Thu Jun 30, 2022 12:33 am

Can't see full text without paying...50 mg/kg given every 6 hours "for up to 96 hours." Hmmm.....does that mean some patients did not get this dose for 96 hours? Also that's 4 days and their conclusions seem to be based on a measure of mortality and persistent organ disfunction after 28 days. Why couldn't they just dose them continually for that 28 day measure? They dose for 15% of the duration of the study (or maybe less i.e "up to 96 hours") at the beginning then everyone's on the same playing field for 85% of the time...wonder if data on measures during that "up to 96 hours" shows an improvement and then the reverse as it is discontinued, I have read somewhere maybe Dr. Cathcart that you should continue at least a lower dose of Vitamin C after high dose and not suddenly discontinue as it could make infections flare up. Not sure I'll try to find it maybe that's what's going on here because why would it make things worse and why is the dose duration so murky and mismatched to the outcome measure? Just my inexpert opinion.

ofonorow
Ascorbate Wizard
Ascorbate Wizard
Posts: 15822
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2005 3:16 pm
Location: Lisle, IL
Contact:

Re: How they blantantly lie! Vitamin C now said to harm sepsis patients.

Post Number:#4  Post by ofonorow » Thu Jun 30, 2022 9:27 am

Very good analysis blargus! Keen eye. Thank you. It was Pauling who discussed the "rebound effect" because that was exactly the technique the Mayo Clinic used to debunk vitamin C for cancer. Like you say, a true and competent trial would have the patients take high dose vitamin C orally, not to mention both hydrocortizone and vitamin B1, after the short introductory IV period.

Lets review and remember these professor Marik videos
:


youtube direct link
https://youtu.be/yfXVce34A78

The youtube A-holes removed the second compelling video of the Intensive Care nurses reporting on what they have seen in sepsis patients on Mariks protocol.
:twisted:
Owen R. Fonorow
HeartCURE.Info
American Scientist's Invention Could Prevent 350,000 Heart Bypass Operations a year

ofonorow
Ascorbate Wizard
Ascorbate Wizard
Posts: 15822
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2005 3:16 pm
Location: Lisle, IL
Contact:

Re: How they blantantly lie! Vitamin C now said to harm sepsis patients.

Post Number:#5  Post by ofonorow » Fri Jul 08, 2022 12:21 pm

Here is the infamous study that all news reports are relying on.
Intravenous Vitamin C in Adults with Sepsis in the Intensive Care Unit
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35704292/#:~:text=Conclusions%3A%20In%20adults%20with%20sepsis,than%20those%20who%20received%20placebo.

First rule of "phony science" to watch out for: Lots and lots of authors!


François Lamontagne 1 , Marie-Hélène Masse 1 , Julie Menard 1 , Sheila Sprague 1 , Ruxandra Pinto 1 , Daren K Heyland 1 , Deborah J Cook 1 , Marie-Claude Battista 1 , Andrew G Day 1 , Gordon H Guyatt 1 , Salmaan Kanji 1 , Rachael Parke 1 , Shay P McGuinness 1 , Bharath-Kumar Tirupakuzhi Vijayaraghavan 1 , Djillali Annane 1 , Dian Cohen 1 , Yaseen M Arabi 1 , Brigitte Bolduc 1 , Nicole Marinoff 1 , Bram Rochwerg 1 , Tina Millen 1 , Maureen O Meade 1 , Lori Hand 1 , Irene Watpool 1 , Rebecca Porteous 1 , Paul J Young 1 , Frederick D'Aragon 1 , Emilie P Belley-Cote 1 , Elaine Carbonneau 1 , France Clarke 1 , David M Maslove 1 , Miranda Hunt 1 , Michaël Chassé 1 , Martine Lebrasseur 1 , François Lauzier 1 , Sangeeta Mehta 1 , Hector Quiroz-Martinez 1 , Oleksa G Rewa 1 , Emmanuel Charbonney 1 , Andrew J E Seely 1 , Demetrios J Kutsogiannis 1 , Remi LeBlanc 1 , Armand Mekontso-Dessap 1 , Tina S Mele 1 , Alexis F Turgeon 1 , Gordon Wood 1 , Sandeep S Kohli 1 , Jason Shahin 1 , Pawel Twardowski 1 , Neill K J Adhikari 1 , LOVIT Investigators and the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group



No one wants to take responsibility for bad science, so every possible contributor is named.


Also the large number of authors has a psychological reassuring effect.

Bravo to Blasarus for noting the discontinuation of vitamin C after 96 hours! The fatal error.


In this randomized, placebo-controlled trial, we assigned adults who had been in the ICU for no longer than 24 hours, who had proven or suspected infection as the main diagnosis, and who were receiving a vasopressor to receive an infusion of either vitamin C (at a dose of 50 mg per kilogram of body weight) or matched placebo administered every 6 hours for up to 96 hours.
Owen R. Fonorow
HeartCURE.Info
American Scientist's Invention Could Prevent 350,000 Heart Bypass Operations a year

Blargus
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 192
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2021 12:03 am
Contact:

Re: How they blantantly lie! Vitamin C now said to harm sepsis patients.

Post Number:#6  Post by Blargus » Mon Jul 18, 2022 5:19 pm

Authors of the study might think that there were "mixed results" of the therapy in a meta analysis, so apparently medical professionals generally go with this meta analysis that concludes it doesn't work. But just like ivermectin, look in the tables of this unfavorable meta analysis and you find this summary of the studies which seems to show a clear "favors Vitamin C" general result. So suppose worst case that it is a moderate good effect, why not use it since it is harmless? I wonder if you looked at studies that were just high dose with close adherence to Dr. Marik's protocol that you could redo that list and get a much stronger result. But medical professionals seem to be convinced it doesn't work even when that list in the meta analysis saying it doesn't work even seems to show it does to some extent even with variances in does and deviations from Dr. Marik's protocol. :?:

Image

https://evidence.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/EVIDoa2200105


Return to “General Discussion Topics and Issues”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 46 guests