Logical Analysis of Response of Health Officials’ Worldwide, to Cost-Effective Early Remedies for COVID19

Abstract

With the advent of COVID19, the attitude of health authorities around the world, led mainly by the West, demanded a level of proof as evidence for cheap, non-patented remedies while promoting expensive, patented, and untested remedies by using emergency use authorization and special provisions afforded to the status of a pandemic emergency. Western science has neither a tested nor a valid historical basis of a logical system that informs to authenticate scientific practices. Here we use a logical heuristic derived from ancient Buddhist logic, which is consistent with the conduct of modern science. We applied the heuristic to show that enough evidence was available for using cost-effective early therapies such as vitamin D supplementation as a public health measure during the first half of 2020. Strong supporting evidence has since accumulated. Apart from political and financial decisions incompatible with science and other conflicts of interest, a critical barrier to evaluating and approving early therapies appears to be the fallacy that the randomized controlled trial (RCT) is the superior proof method in medical hypotheses, including those for nutrients. Logically, no reason exists why properly designed retrospective, ecological, and naturalistic studies with adequate sample sizes and applied appropriate statistical methods would not be as valid as RCTs, especially when elucidating a causative factor instead of treatment. That assertion is particularly true for nutrient deficiencies, interventions, and other cost-effective therapies. Leading health authorities’ failure or refusal to consider other study types (because of either poor logic or vested interest) probably contributed to the spread of misinformation, symptomatic disease, complications, and deaths from COVID19. Partial immunity derived from vaccines and the later development of more contagious variants—and thus a sense of acceptance that SARS-CoV-2 had progressed from a pandemic to an endemic—shows the hollowness of the initial promotions and mandates of vaccines as a cure. Adequate knowledge was available in 2020 to advise that SARS-CoV-2 will continue to mutate, with variants emerging a few times per year, making the vaccine less effective. Emerging evidence confirms that natural immunity better protects against new variants than vaccination against the spike protein. Had vitamin D been adopted as part of the public health measure through a broader supplementation program in 2020 or even today (through sun exposure or as a prophylactic or adjunct therapy early on), the viral spread and symptomatic disease may have been suppressed, with minimal lockdowns and quarantine, and economic harm. The pandemic could have been halted with a significantly reduced need for hospitalization, complications, and deaths, potentially saving millions of lives.

Physiology of Vitamin D—Focusing on Disease Prevention

“…In a person with vitamin D deficiency, the body-weight-based doses mentioned in Section 4.5 could take from weeks to months to raise serum 25(OH)D concentrations to the desired therapeutic levels [ 6 ]. In these situations, as described below, it is helpful to give an upfront loading dose (a bolus dose) to increase serum 25(OH)D concentrations within a few days instead of months [ 49 , 265 ].…”