(0:00) Hi, this is Dr. Daniels, and you are listening to Healing with Dr. Daniels. This is the May 16th Sunday edition 2020. Today's topic is "Can Antibodies Save Your Life? Don't Bet on It." So today, I'm going to review recent information that exposes antibody truths that may make you wonder.

(0:29) But first, we're going to talk about Vitality Capsules. Yay! Vitality Capsules are back in stock, and you can get them at vitalitycapsules.com. We have regular and extra strength. The extra strength has a shipping delay—they'll show up in 10 days, but we are shipping all regular strength Vitality Capsules right now. Yay! I'm so excited. Yes, and those of you who've missed Vitality Capsules, you are excited too.

(1:10) So, Vitality Capsules are an everyday cleanser that helps your body detox comfortably and on a steady daily basis. You can experience benefits every day. The nice thing about them is they enhance circulation with the garlic and ginger, which are two ingredients in the Vitality Capsules, both regular and extra strength. They also increase bile flow with K-PLO and cascara sagrada.

(1:46) This is very important because a lot of times people can get discomfort when toxins are released into the circulation but not removed from the body. The effect on the bile ducts means the bile flows into the intestines, and then the Vitality Capsules stimulate the intestines so that the toxins are moved out of the body. This is a really amazing combination that works great.

(2:16) The difference between regular and extra strength Vitality Capsules is explained on the website. However, I can tell you right now that the extra strength has cayenne, and the regular does not. I personally take regular because it's more gentle, and I am a wimp. There we go, confessions. Where's my glass of water? So that's Vitality Capsules. Support our sponsor. Yay!

(2:54) Then, of course, we have to take our turpentine. Yes, turpentine is an amazing healing substance that actually was the main material used by doctors to heal absolutely everything prior to 1900. We have our turpentine container, yay, with a little label on it and a little pipette. We just boom, suck it up to the neck. I personally take a half a teaspoon every day. I'm trying to get every day, but some days I miss. And it just makes all the difference in the world.

(3:42) I'm 63 years old, and this helps me stay flexible, limber, pain-free, and just more durable. Okay, so here we go. All right, we're going to squeeze the last little bit out of here. As Mary Poppins would say, a spoonful of sugar—this is white sugar, and this is cane sugar. Beet sugar, which is also white, is often genetically modified, so that's why I use cane sugar. There we go. Very good.

(4:50) If you want to find out more about turpentine, you can go to vitalitycapsules.com, enter your email address, and get your free report, "Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About the Healing Powers of Turpentine." This report used to sell for $800 a copy, but you are getting it free. So, check it out. A lot of people send me all kinds of emails. It's in the report. Get the report. Read the report. There you go.

(5:22) Next, we have Shilajit. This is Shilajit’s amazing black tar from the mountains of Russia. Yay! It goes by many names—Shilajit is one, Mumio, Destroyer of Weakness. It has a lot of really impressive names, and it's really impressive material. This is totally natural. They dig it right out of the ground, just put it in a bottle like this—no processing at all.

(5:47) And this is trace minerals. It has a very broad spectrum of trace minerals, broader than the fulvic minerals from the United States or from India. So, it's Shilajit in India, in the Himalayas, but the Russian Shilajit is the best. We just take this goo, put it here. As you can see, it does not dissolve very well. Yeah, there we go. Right there in the bottom, it does not dissolve. So, we are going to do our show today, and then we're going to drink that. Yay! Yum, yum, yum.

(6:29) This brings us back to "Can Antibodies Save Your Life?" As always, our sources are the Medical Industrial Complex. I count on them to reveal all the information we need to know. They've done a lot of research. So, we're going to check it out. This is Medscape Family Medicine. You should go to Medscape.com and get your own Medscape account. It's just amazing. They put a lot of medical information on Medscape that is sent only to doctors and that is not broadcast to the public. But you can kind of eavesdrop on the medical conversation. You should certainly, at least if you have a condition for which you have chosen to take medication, be reading everything Medscape has to say about your condition.

(7:25) This headline caught my eye: "Hold on, Antibody Testing." "Hold on" means like, whoa, stop. The FDA has done us a disservice. Ah, so what service is the FDA supposed to do for us? Well, they're supposed to tell us that things are safe and effective. And so, if the FDA has done a disservice, that means there must be something that's either not safe or not effective, and they failed to alert doctors to that case.

(8:01) So, this is two doctors chit-chatting about the situation. Let's start at the very beginning. I'm going to share this information with you, and then I'm going to do commentary on the information as it's presented to help you really get a grip and understand this. And then, I'm going to make a recommendation at the end. How's that? Yeah, like what you can do instead. I'm pretty upbeat about this. I think that, in general, the world is really going in a very positive direction for people who want to improve their lives. There has never been a better time to do it.

(8:53) So, these are the questions—oh, oh, these are statements, bullet points:

(11:16) The way an antibody works is an antibody is a key that goes into the lock of the virus, gloms onto it, and takes it out of the body and saves the person's life. That’s the theory. But wait, if these other coronaviruses interact with the test, shouldn’t the antibodies detected from those other C-viruses also react with the present C-virus? In other words, if you’re measuring antibodies using a protein—so let’s just say it’s a magnet—you have a magnet, and you’re picking up metal slivers. All right. That magnet can pick up a metal sliver. Maybe it can pick up a paperclip. Maybe it can pick up different things made by metal, but whatever it picks up must be metal.

(12:16) So basically, what you have is a test that acts like a magnet, and it’s detecting several viruses, including the one of interest. So, it’s looking for antibodies to the one virus of interest. If the antibody to that one virus of interest is a valid antibody pick, and we’re going to say it is, then—and it reacts with all the others—that must mean that the human-manufactured antibody is effective against all of those viruses that are detected.

(13:01) In other words, if you have an accurate antibody detector, and it attaches to the virus of interest, the C-19 virus of interest, but it also attaches to five other viruses, that’s like having a key antibody to any of the five other locks, then it’s also going to open that lock. This is great news. And to put it more precisely, a human being with antibodies against any of the prior C-viruses—like SARS and MERS, to name a couple, and the common cold—they would also have antibodies that would be effective against the present virus of interest, which is C-19.

(14:24) For antibody testing to work in a disease that affects 3% of the population, we need a test with at least 99.7% specificity. What does that mean? That means when the test says you don’t have a disease, it has to be accurate 99.7% of the time. What if it’s less than that? They’re going to tell us.

(15:15) So, what we’ve now found is the antibody testing that’s now being used detects many C-viruses. Let’s just say it’s accurate. What it’s really detecting is antibodies against the C19 virus, which are also effective against the other C-viruses. That means if someone’s been infected, if you’ve had the common cold, then you would be immune or have antibodies against C19. But let’s go on with the discussion. It gets even better.

(16:17) The C-virus can be scary. There’s a lot we don’t know. Should you get tested? What’s the role? This is what they don’t know. They don’t know if you should get tested. They don’t know the role of antibodies. They don’t know what treatments actually work. They don’t know when a vaccine will show up. And they don’t know how long people need to stay in place. This was published May 6, a little more than a week ago. This is what the doctors don’t know. They don’t know. And none of these questions, by the way, have been answered since then, just by the way.

(18:25) Despite all this uncertainty, there are some things we do know. Really? Do tell. That’s what’s missing from much of the discussions—a common-sense approach to dealing with the virus. That’s why I think you’ll want to listen to my next guest, Dr. So-and-so, from the University of Alabama at Birmingham. He offers the common-sense insight that we need to make good decisions. Stop right there. I went to medical school, so I have a little bit of understanding about this. At medical school, half of everything they teach is false—they just don’t know which half. So, we’re going to listen to this doctor from the Medical Industrial Complex, knowing that his database is at least 50% inaccurate. But we’re going to accept everything he says as true, look for internal contradictions, and see if we can maybe get a little closer to what might be true.

(19:19) Let’s start off with who should get antibody testing. Well, he says, ideally, the prime people are those who feel they’ve been exposed to the virus and did not have symptoms, and they’re suspicious that they may have been infected but have no symptoms. Whoa. So, the criteria for this particular test is a feeling. If you have a feeling, can you feel it yet? Yeah, yeah, a feeling. So, we’re basing testing on a feeling.

(20:06) Now, I went to medical school. In medical school, we’re basing tests on physically examining the person and what symptoms the person tells us they have. If they have a certain set of symptoms, and we find certain things when we examine them, that lets us know which test to order. But for this particular virus, our criteria for ordering the test is a feeling. So, are we talking about antidepressants? I don’t know. This is very interesting. If the test is working well, and that’s a big if—okay, so what he’s saying is this test is not working very well—then what would tell them that they had the infection and may be protected by immunity.

(21:01) So, if the test is working well, then the presence of antibodies—a positive test—would indicate that a person had the infection and may be protected by immunity. But then again, they might not. Here’s where the whole antibody situation comes in. Antibodies are not reliable protection against infection.

(21:28) The interviewer asks, do you think the presence of antibodies grants immunity? There’s been a lot of debate about whether or not that’s the case. What do you think? Well, I hope it does. All right. So here we have a scientist relying on hope. We have a feeling and we have hope. Okay, so science has not yet entered the room, just saying.

(22:08) The doctor says, I’ve had the virus, and my antibodies are through the roof. In fact, tomorrow I’m donating plasmapheresis so that it can be used in research. But the takeaway point is we don’t know if antibodies create immunity for sure. Stop right there. Vaccines create antibodies based on the scientific pronouncement that antibodies and antibodies alone create immunity. So, what they’re saying here is we don’t know if antibodies to this virus will create immunity. If antibodies to this virus do not create immunity, then no vaccine will work because vaccines work by creating antibodies. Let’s see what else he says.

(24:01) But then we look at the other extreme—dengue fever. Dengue fever is transmitted by a mosquito, which means mosquitoes, the stinger, which is basically analogous to a hypodermic needle, injects the dengue into the unfortunate person. There is no person-to-person spread of dengue fever. Dengue fever spreads by mosquitoes biting people. In other words, it spreads only by injection. What else do we know about dengue fever? The symptoms of dengue fever are identical, and the testing, by the way, test results are identical to that of malaria. Yeah, you guessed it. Malaria was renamed dengue fever so that the tourist industry could be protected.

(25:20) Dengue fever, also known as malaria, antibodies do not protect from reinfection. The treatment for malaria is hydrochloroquine, quinine, which happens to be the same drug that works for the present C-virus. What else do we know? The symptoms of the present C-virus are identical to dengue. It says you get antibodies to dengue, but you get reinfected, and your disease can be worse on reinfection. So, the present virus will fall somewhere on that spectrum. But we already know that with dengue, not only do you get antibodies, but the antibodies are not effective in preventing reinfection.

(26:01) So, I checked this out. We now know that a dengue vaccine cannot possibly work because antibodies to dengue do not prevent infection. In fact, if you have antibodies to dengue, aka malaria, which looks like aka C-virus, then there’s a problem here. So, I looked this up—the vaccine to dengue—and yes, indeed, there is a vaccine for dengue. Now, I happen to live in an area where there’s a lot of dengue, so they say, and they’re not offering any vaccine to dengue. Why? Because it doesn’t work.

(27:12) Since the present situation is that the symptoms are identical to dengue, the cure is identical to dengue cure, aka the malaria cure. So, we’re getting a picture here. Again, this is from Medscape. I can’t make this stuff up. It’s my personal stance. So now he’s getting personal. What does that mean? Personal means he and only he has this particular position, and there’s no science to back it.

(27:48) Is that we are not seeing any cases to speak of where somebody had it and then got sick again. I think that as more time goes on, we’ll answer the question. But right now, we don’t know for sure. Since they don’t know, but since I’m totally familiar with dengue and have studied it, I can tell you that if dengue antibodies are not going to create health and immunity, then the present situation, which is looking a lot like dengue, the antibodies/vaccine are not going to be helpful.

(29:05) The interviewer asks, do you think there’s more evidence than not that antibodies might give immunity to even one person? The doctor says, well, leaning that way. I had to look up the word "some," and in order to find the meaning of the word "some," I had to actually go to a legal website to look up the meaning of the word "some," and this will really shock you. There are a few quantitative vague words like "some," "couple," "few," "many," and "several." "Some" means at least one. "Couple" means two. "Few" means two or more. "Many" means a large number. You can decide what a large number is. "Several" means three or more.

(30:07) So, what he has said here is, he’s asked, do you think there’s more evidence than not that antibodies might give immunity to even one person? And he’s saying, leaning that way. That’s a face-palm moment right there. That is sad.

(30:38) The interviewer asks about the reinfections that have been reported. Most people are saying that those are issues of testing and not of reinfection. The doctor says it’s a simple RNA virus. It’s not like zoster. Zoster is herpes. What are your thoughts on that? The expert says, well, if we dig into the weeds a little bit on those stories, they were mostly people who tested positive for the virus, then tested negative, and then tested positive again. So, the test is an antibody test. There are a few questions.

(31:00) The interviewer asks if they had symptoms when they tested positive. The expert says, no, they didn’t have symptoms. So, the presence of antibodies does not indicate symptoms or illness, right? Because we know that people are getting positive testing, negative testing, positive testing without symptoms. They had been sick. The expert says they had the virus. They got better. They tested negative. Then they tested positive again later. That’s my understanding.

(31:32) The interviewer asks, well, why were they retested? The expert says, I think they were looking to see if there is persistence between you, me, and the lampposts. They were testing to see how long they should extend quarantine. But if the test is not an indicator of disease, because we’re testing, right? The test is positive, and the person’s healthy. So, it’s not a test of disease. The issue is, was it truly a reinfection or just persistent RNA that they picked up a second time later on?

(33:00) Again, with the virus, the RNA is felt to be infectious. I don’t know the answer, but my feeling is—okay, so now we have feelings—it probably wasn’t reinfection. The way to really know for sure is to do molecular virology, which they haven’t done. Where do you do sequencing and see if it’s related? So here we have a whole country shut down, and a little molecular virology with sequencing of DNA or RNA could open it up for us. And they haven’t done a test yet. What?

(33:52) But right now, I think common sense is telling me that people are probably not getting reinfected and that any residual testing that’s positive—and some I’ve seen going out to almost five weeks—is due to residual RNA. What they’re finding now is people get the virus, recover, and their viral test is positive going out even five weeks. So, the question is, is that an infectious virus that’s being picked up or just a remnant?

(35:09) The interviewer asks how concerned the expert is about the accuracy of the tests and how a patient would know if they’re getting a good test. The expert says, you are not going to know if you’re getting a good test. And then he casually says, that’s a huge problem. He understands why the FDA relaxed and went to early authorization use, but he thinks in retrospect, it was a disservice to us.

(36:37) The expert says, we have all been infected with a C-virus in our lifetime, like aka common cold. That means that we have antibodies to the C-virus in our bloodstreams that are just hanging around. If the test for SARS C-virus 2, C-virus 19 virus antibodies is not really specific for that particular virus, there will be cross-reaction from these other C-virus antibodies onto that test. So, if your body is making antibodies against the C-virus and it’s ever seen a C-virus, and antibodies make you immune, then you’re already immune to SARS C-virus 2 and C-19.

(37:07) This is a bombshell. They insist on rigor before they approve things. And by relaxing those standards for this, though I understand why they did it, I think they’ve done us a little bit of a disservice from a common-sense perspective.

(38:01) The interviewer asks if it matters whether the blood is drawn via a pinprick or a needle in the vein. Which is better? The expert says it is better to put the vein in your arm because you’re going to get plasma. With a pinprick, you’re getting just a drop or two of blood, and it’s less likely to be accurate. The expert thinks we need standardized tests with published false positive rates. He’s going to explain this further.

(39:05) The expert says, let’s say we have a test that’s got a 3% false positive rate, which is 97% specificity. If we apply that to a population that has less than 5% prevalence, so the majority of people have not had it, that test in terms of positive predictive value could be wrong 50% of the time, and that is not helpful. The present test they’ve calculated is wrong 80% of the time. Who wants to submit to a test that’s wrong 80% of the time? Not me, but maybe you do. I don’t know.

(40:00) For tests to really work well in a disease that’s only affecting 3% of the population at most, we need a test that’s at least 99.7% specific. The expert says, I’m not sure we have that proven yet. He’s absolutely sure it’s not proven because the CDC has published numbers indicating that it is not the case.

(41:11) The interviewer asks the expert about his experience with the virus. The expert says, my son, who lives in New York, was coming back to Birmingham, a long car ride. He was going to drive by—I was in Boston. So I took the train and met him. On the way, he started to not feel well. By the day we got to Birmingham, he was having a fever. We looked at each other, and we knew he almost certainly had COVID.

(41:39) We quarantined ourselves in the house. I got sick the next day—not bad, but by day six, it was pretty awful. As a physician, the worst thing was knowing what would happen if my breathing deteriorated. I would be in the hospital, maybe on a ventilator, and that was a nightmare scenario for me. Every night for eight nights in a row, I suffered through that anxiety of worry about it. Fortunately, by day 14, it went away.

(42:35) The expert says they were both positive. But there’s a reasoning breakdown here. They don’t have tests on them before they got sick or before they got in the car, so they’re assuming association is not equal to causality. The expert and his son volunteered for a research study, and the expert’s plasma is being used for test validation.

(45:08) The interviewer says, you mentioned common sense. The expert says, yes, this plasma seems—now we have feelings, beliefs, and now "seems"—on early reports is helpful in some patients. Some means one or more. That is not a lot. So it’s not shown to be helpful in several patients, that would be three or more, not a couple of patients, that would be two, not many patients—some.

(46:29) The interviewer asks what common sense advice the expert would give viewers. The expert says, common sense is that all this virus cares about is survival and replication, and it’s still here. The vast majority of citizens in our country are susceptible. We’ve been successful at putting a wall between the virus and these susceptible people with the stay-at-home orders. If you take the wall away, common sense tells you that these things will come back together, and we’re going to get another surge in cases.

(49:47) The interviewer asks if the vaccine will be here in six to 12 months. The expert says no, no. Even if we had one that we knew worked, we’re going to have to mass-produce it. If there are 300 million people who will need the vaccine in the U.S., and if you assume two doses, that’s 600 million doses, and this is a worldwide pandemic. Even if we had a vaccine, we aren’t going to be able to scale up to that degree of production for at least 20 months.

(50:42) The expert’s hope is that some of the drugs that are in development will be shown to work. That would be a game-changer because, even if someone got infected, we can catch them early, like we do with Tamiflu, and intervene to abort the symptoms, and then the person still develops immunity, but they won’t get as sick. That’s the hope.

(51:48) The expert says we should sit and fold our hands, and wait for 20 months, and shelter in place for 20 months. But sheltering in place did not prevent the spread from him and his son. And sheltering in place is not working as people who have diligently sheltered in place are turning up positive for COVID.

(53:13) So what we’ve managed to deduce from this expert is that antibodies do not create immunity. Antibodies are generally not protective. And in the case of dengue, antibodies do not prevent reinfection. Yet, if you look it up online, you’ll see there is a dengue vaccine. So, where does that leave us? Bottom line: Antibodies are not a good bet. Antibodies are not a good bet. And in the C-virus category, if an antibody is present for one C-virus, it should work for all C-viruses.

(55:49) So, having antibodies is actually irrelevant. What you really need is to keep your skin intact. One way to do it is to stop all needles. Don’t use needles. If you’re a diabetic, especially if you’re type 2, this is the time to control your situation without needles because needles pierce the skin and things enter through the skin. And you know, if you’re a diabetic, it’s not going well already.

(58:05) How do you maintain the barrier? One, obviously don’t stab yourself. But even better, you can simply put an oil on your skin from head to toe, and that oil acts as a barrier. So, any virus hitting it will get stuck and won’t penetrate. Yay. My favorite oil is castor oil. The best way to use that is waist down once a day for three days, and then head to toe.

(59:04) Next is removal. Good hydration. That means drink enough water. Enhance your circulation. Water does that. If you’re in a cool climate, keep warm. You definitely want to exercise. You don’t have to do a lot—just a walk around the block will do it. So, you definitely don’t want to shelter in place because that’s going to decrease your circulation and increase your susceptibility to these things.

(59:48) Next is nutrition. Nutrition is key. This is a really good time to cook at home. Many people are sheltering at home anyway, and many restaurants are closed. But if you’re serious about your immune system, cook at home and cook from scratch. I’m really encouraged by seeing all the videos online about how to make your own bread, how to make your own sourdough starter, how to start your own garden. So, these are things you should do to ensure you are not eating contaminated food and so you can eat food that has the highest nutritional value.

(1:01:08) We do not have much time for questions. I think I can take one question. Here’s a quickie. When I eat pine nuts, I have a violent reaction when it comes out both ends simultaneously. Can I still take turpentine as it is distilled? You can, and also turpentine does not come from the pine nuts. But I would just take a very small dose, like maybe one drop—one drop on maybe a quarter teaspoon of sugar. So, just take a test dose. And if you have any reaction to that, and if you do, it should be mild. But even a mild reaction to the one drop, then I would say turpentine is not for you. Maybe you want to just try Vitality Capsules to help keep your immune system supported and keep things cleaning up.

(1:01:46) All right, that is it for questions today. And as always, think happens.