DWQA Questions › Tag: human disempowerment
Filter:AllOpenResolvedClosedUnanswered
A review article shows little or no benefit of supplementing patients with vitamin D3 for bone fractures (T. Gatt, A. Grech, and H. Arshad. The effect of Vitamin D supplementation for bone healing in fracture patients: a systematic review. Adv. Orthopedics Volume 2023, Article ID 6236045). However, the supplement doses of vitamin D3 were either low, 800-2000 IU daily, or quite high loading doses orally or systemically of 100,000 to 300,000 IU. Was their negative assessment justified or were the studies flawed? Would taking a 5000 to 10,000 IU dose of vitamin D3 daily, give significant benefit for healing bone fractures?
ClosedNicola asked 4 days ago • 
35 views0 answers0 votes
Are the Red Light Therapy devices from UltraLux Health safe and effective, and of high enough quality to be a good value considering their cost?
ClosedNicola asked 4 days ago • 
19 views0 answers0 votes
Many Red Light Therapy devices only deliver visible red and near-infrared wavelengths. How significant for healing is exposure to far-infrared wavelengths?
ClosedNicola asked 4 days ago • 
20 views0 answers0 votes
A systematic review of 416 medical journal articles affirmed a strong association between higher serum vitamin D levels and a lower risk of bladder, breast, colon, endometrial, esophageal, gallbladder, kidney, ovarian, pancreatic, rectal, stomach, and vulvar cancers, as well as Hodgkin’s and non-Hodgkin’s lymphomas. The review also uncovered lower risks of metastasis and mortality from cancer in patients with higher levels of vitamin D. While vitamin D levels of 20 ng/ml (50 nmol/L) were adequate for bone and muscle health, reduction of cancer risk and mortality required levels greater than 40 ng/ml (100 nmol/L) and fell further with levels above 50 ng/ml (125 nmol/L). The review cautioned that studies showing no benefit for those taking less than 5,000 IU per day might be misleading. [Wimalawansa SJ. Vitamin D’s impact on cancer incidence and mortality: a systematic review. Nutrients. 2025 Jul 16;17(14):2333. Doi: 10.3390/nu17142333.] Is this a fair summary of vitamin D benefits for limiting incidence and severity of cancer?
ClosedNicola asked 4 days ago • 
16 views0 answers0 votes
You have told us that 5000 IU of vitamin D3 taken twice a day would be safe and helpful for many, many people. Is that enough to get serum levels in a useful range for cancer prevention?
ClosedNicola asked 4 days ago • 
13 views0 answers0 votes
Studies have shown that vitamin D levels have an inverted U-shaped curve, where low levels (<29.7 nmol/L) result in shortened telomeres on DNA, a sign of aging, but so do high levels of vitamin D (>95.9 nmol/L). Population-based studies and randomized clinical trials have shown a U- or J-shaped curve and suggested an increased risk of adverse outcomes in those with the highest serum Vitamin D levels, including falls, fractures, and frailty. Most studies have reported a higher risk in those participants with serum levels above 100 nmol/L. Are the deleterious effects noted in these studies caused by elevated vitamin D? If so, your support for taking 5,000 to 10,000 IU of vitamin D3 daily seems risky. What is most important for us to know?
ClosedNicola asked 4 days ago • 
11 views0 answers0 votes
A viewer asks: “Recently a friend of mine explained she was diagnosed with MTHFR gene mutation. After which I realized this may be the gene mutation my doctors told me I had years ago. The gene mutation appears to be responsible for all kinds of chronic physical ailments. Everything from heart problems to digestive disorders and nerve issues. My question is: Are chronic viruses somehow related to the gene mutation? Or is there another reason for this mutation to occur through the environment or are there more sinister reasons for this mutation? Like interloper involvement? What can you tell me?”
ClosedNicola asked 2 weeks ago • 
48 views0 answers0 votes
Humans do not produce Vitamin C due to a mutation in the GULO (gulonolactone oxidase) gene, which results in the inability to synthesize the protein. Normal GULO is an enzyme that catalyzes the reaction of D-glucuronolactone with oxygen to L-xylo-hex-3-gulonolactone. This then spontaneously forms Ascorbic Acid (Vitamin C). However, without the GULO enzyme, no vitamin C is produced. Other mammals like guinea pigs, bats, and dry-nosed primates have gained the same defect. It seems odd that a deleterious random mutation would become dominant in the human lineage. Is that what happened, or was there a sinister manipulation of the human genome?
ClosedNicola asked 2 weeks ago • 
47 views0 answers0 votes
If human DNA was corrupted deliberately, what caused the problem in other mammalian species?
ClosedNicola asked 2 weeks ago • 
49 views0 answers0 votes
A viewer asks about selling versus holding onto gold in a downturn: “What timing options can people consider beyond simply holding for the long term? I gather the word is that the drop will be sudden and you could just be too late, but would it be a good idea to sell right after the massive US power blackouts hit? I know there would be gaps in internet and stock market services for a time.” What can we tell him?
ClosedNicola asked 2 weeks ago • 
50 views0 answers0 votes
Given the recent paper showing a good anticancer effect of both grape seed extract and vitamin C in a mouse model of solid Ehrlich carcinoma, would either or both be a safe and effective addition to our Antiviral Regimen?
ClosedNicola asked 2 weeks ago • 
34 views0 answers0 votes
A viewer asks: “What can you tell us about the benefits versus risk factors in taking the bone medication Evenity? Cost is high, but insurance can help. Can you tell us if it is highest and best to take this or if it would be better to continue LHP-DSMR healing requests without outside chemical interventions? Side effects with this drug are concerning.”
ClosedNicola asked 2 weeks ago • 
31 views0 answers0 votes
In the book, The AI Con: How to Fight Big Tech’s Hype and Create the Future We Want, co-authors Emily Bender and Alex Hanna argue that the term AI (acronym for Artificial Intelligence) is marketing hype. Google defines the word hype as “promote or publicize (a product or idea) intensively, often exaggerating its importance or benefits.” The implication is that without the exaggerated claim of benefit, and if people knew what they were REALLY getting with widespread adoption of these technologies bundled under the AI moniker, they quite likely would reject the product or idea altogether. The other pertinent question is, benefit to WHOM? Does the average consumer really benefit more than the cost imposed and the harm potentially incurred? The authors argue NO, the use of the term AI is really a bait and switch for increased AUTOMATION across the board. Automation that will decrease the demand for labor and remove human judgment from decision-making and categorizing. It will end up benefiting the ownership and finance classes at the expense of everyone else. What is Creator’s perspective?
ClosedNicola asked 2 months ago • 
122 views0 answers0 votes
The term AI and Artificial Intelligence suddenly became relevant in the 2010s with the fortuitous adoption of chip technology designed to solve an entirely different problem, namely presenting complex and fast-changing graphics on computer screens, used mostly to make video games more realistic and lifelike. A little more than a decade ago, a small company named Nvidia made a graphics processor for making computer video a LOT faster. Today, it’s a trillion-dollar company because that processor was successfully adapted for AI processing with little modification. Once this discovery was made, untold TRILLIONS of dollars have been poured into making billions of these chips. Massive data centers are being built to utilize them, requiring vast amounts of resources and electricity. AI was less a software innovation than it was a hardware innovation. At the end of the day, these chips are overwhelmingly “number crunchers,” not much different in base functionality than an electronic calculator, only vastly miniaturized for speed and scaled up for volume. Is it fair to say that AI is really just a vast “calculator” when one tries to grasp how it REALLY works? What is Creator’s perspective?
ClosedNicola asked 2 months ago • 
209 views0 answers0 votes
When people think of AI, most think about chatbots like ChatGPT and Grok. These technologies are based on a software architecture called neural networks. Another name for the way these chatbots are put together is called LLMs or large language models. A large language model is really just a very sophisticated pattern matcher, and the shortcut used to match patterns is statistical probability. At its very foundation it makes large amounts (hundreds, thousands, millions or more) of microscopic decisions based on what statistically is more or less probable in terms of what comes before or after a word. Is it more probable the word “and” follows the word “this,” or more probable it follows the word “that?” So any response from a question to ChatGPT or Grok is the result of deep statistical analysis and pattern matching with no actual intelligence involved. What is Creator’s perspective?
ClosedNicola asked 2 months ago • 
152 views0 answers0 votes
123…34Next »
Ask Question