MKD @ 127.0.0.1 2x💉 🍉

This is in very bad faith Yuvraj. You are a good cricketer, you are a strong human, a cancer survivor. But you are an absolute health and science illiterate. People like you and your business of bad science deeply damages science literacy and public health in our society. It is a pathetic. You can be powerful allies for cancer patients and oncology societies and use your voice to educate people on evidence-based preventative care and direct cancer patients towards science-based care for improved survival outcomes. But instead, you chose to team up with unethical businessmen - some with long degrees, lengthy certifications and in high positions without any functioning brain cell - and among them, one of the worst "health" influencers on the internet right now, the so-called cancer surgeon Arpit Bansal who is a pseudoscience sympathizer, an Ayurveda apologist and quite similar to Luke Coutinho, but with actual medical degrees wasted. Know this first: Cancer patients who use alternative medicine die sooner, study finds - nbcnews.com/health/health-ne… Now coming to your product - P32 Among the 32 listed ingredients with 35+ distinct compounds in them, 13 carry documented risks of organ toxicity, mineral toxicity, capable of causing/promoting atherosclerosis inducing toxin generation, and with high rates of toxic environmental contamination. Four ingredients - Ashwagandha, Bacopa, Curcumin and Boswellia are among the most frequently implicated botanicals in liver injury in LiverTox registries. When they come together, it is going to be disastrous. medpagetoday.com/gastroenter… - The person who designed this complex formulation is really a clown. Nearly all 30 active ingredients in this 32-ingredient supplement lack solid scientific proof for the health benefits promised on the label. First, the company's own chart admits that eight ingredients have no gold-standard human trials behind them - two are just inactive fillers, and six rely on weaker data or are added only for safety, yet are still marketed as multi-organ boosters. At least 11 ingredients are "fairy-dusted," meaning the sachet contains only a tiny fraction of the daily dose actually proven to work in human studies. High-level clinical and translational evidence demonstrates that several components in this sachet can actually increase cancer risk or accelerate tumor progression in healthy adults: Vitamin E (prostate cancer), combined folic acid+B12 (lung and colon cancer) and NAC, Vit E, Vit C, Astaxanthin (increase risk of cancer spread). See this paper: Supplement Use and Increased Risks of Cancer: Unveiling the Other Side of the Coin - pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/article… Finally, the product stretches basic science by assuming that because a nutrient deficiency harms certain organs, taking extra amounts will supercharge those same organs in healthy adults who already get enough nutrients. Your product is absolute BS just like the whole of herbal and dietary supplement industry is. Have some shame selling this nonsense to public and people with cancer. I hope nobody accepts your stupid invite.

HELLO! I HAVE AN ANNOUNCEMENT THAT BENEFITS YOU! WE NEED YOUR SUPPORT. We are back. And this time, we are taking on arguably the biggest wellness hack that people spend money on. The NEW Citizens Project will now look at a massive list of Probiotics for their quality claims. People consume probiotics for a host of things. Gut health, protection against alcohol use, brain improvement, improving digestive symptoms, exercise recovery and even sleep! Despite generating over $75 billion in annual sales (and heading toward $115 billion by 2030), most store-bought probiotics suffer from poor quality control because they are regulated as food supplements rather than medicines. Independent lab tests regularly reveal that what is on the label is not inside the bottle: products frequently contain dead bacteria, far lower doses than advertised, missing bacterial types, or unlisted contaminants. Even when the microbes are alive on the shelf, poorly made capsules often fail to protect them, meaning stomach acid destroys the bacteria before they ever reach your gut. These widespread failures show an urgent need for strict regulation and mandatory independent testing before products reach consumers. For a generally healthy person, over-the-counter probiotics rarely deliver real value for money or live up to their bold marketing promises. Good bacteria are not a one-size-fits-all cure; specific microbes only help specific illnesses, and in a healthy gut, supplement bacteria usually pass right through the body without sticking around. Unless a doctor recommends a clinically proven product for a specific medical issue, buying daily general probiotics is largely an expensive waste of money. Are you wasting money of the hyper rated probiotic supplements? Are you really getting what you spend money for? The Citizens Probiotics Project will look at standards and quality of probiotics sold to you across the medical and wellness pharma spectrum and in great depth that is the highest standards in medical science and industry. We have the list (>100 products) and the pricing is being finalized. But, it you would like to get onboard and help us with early logistics, such as purchases and travel then please think about supporting us here with the minimum of ₹500 pages.razorpay.com/meshPromo… ...or wait for the full project to go live for specific levels of funding for the public, in a few weeks. We hope we can provide you with the highest quality of citizens science you'll ever witness in this era. Thank you in advance! - for Mission for Ethics and Science in Healthcare (MESH) meshindia.org

My dear friends, something important. I am deeply honored to share that I am one of the eight finalists globally shortlisted for the 2026 John Maddox Prize. Established in 2012 in memory of Sir John Maddox (the legendary former editor of Nature and Fellow of the Royal Society), this global prize, spearheaded by Sense about Science and supported by the Royal Society. It was previously co-awarded by Nature. And honors individuals who stand up for sound science and evidence in the public interest, advancing critical discussions despite facing hostility, powerful vested interests, and severe obstacles. For me, an India-based science communicator and clinician, this recognition carries immense weight. This is the very first time a resident from the Indian Subcontinent has been shortlisted for the Maddox Prize. Speaking truth to power against pseudoscience, predatory health misinformation, and unscientific traditional remedies in a cultural and political ecosystem that heavily endorse them, comes at a steep personal, legal, and professional cost. To stand alongside seven extraordinary global finalists—from public health researchers working under fire in Gaza, to scientists defending rigorous evidence in the UK, France, Bolivia, Mexico, New Zealand, and the US—is deeply humbling for me. I may or may not win. But with this shortlist, India’s advocacy for evidence-based medicine has a place on this global stage. Our patients, our public conversations and our struggles to defend scientific integrity matter beyond our borders. I hope this encourages more doctors and researchers across India, the wider subcontinent and West Asia to speak openly, engage the public and stand by sound evidence. Whatever the result, the work continues. Jai Hind. Please read the official announcement and details of other candidates here: senseaboutscience.org/activi…

For physicians and gastroenterology/liver specialists, we are happy to share our new work, published in @PLOSONE on the value of interleukin-6 (IL-6) in hospitalized patients with cirrhosis. Turns out, this inflammatory marker could be a pretty good predictor of death in hospital for patients with alcohol-related cirrhosis and infection. Here is a simple summary: 1. Admission IL-6 is predominantly a short-term prognostic marker that predicts in-hospital death. 2. IL-6 complements, but does not replace, established disease severity scores. 3. The strongest prognostic value was in alcohol-associated liver disease. 4. Infection accounted for only part of the IL-6–related death in patients association Cut-offs: (a) IL-6 ≥41.6 pg/mL: The optimal cutoff for in-hospital mortality (alcohol etiology + infection) (b) IL-6 <10 pg/mL: best negative predictive value For those interested, please read more on it here: Admission interleukin-6 as a time-limited, etiology-dependent prognostic signal in hospitalized cirrhosis – A frequentist and Bayesian cohort study journals.plos.org/plosone/ar…

Good morning. Remember the celebrity Homeopath, the most influential academic Homeopath Mr. Rajan Sankaran and his study which claimed Homeopathy being better than standard of care for Covid-19? He came on Namita Thapar podcast and was endorsed by actress Anushka Sharma. Read on it here: timesnownews.com/health/expl… I spoke about it in June 2026 and the Homeopathy community mass reported my accounts, started an abusive trolling campaign, dogpiled harrassments, character assassinated me and my family and send me anonymous threats. Some anon accounts morphed nude images of me and posted it under my other posts (they were forced to be deleted after action was taken). Well, after correspondence with the journal which published his paper, the Editor-in-Chief has now updated the study page with An Expression of Concern citing major integrity issues including data fraud / fabrication and change from original methods. sciencedirect.com/science/ar… Ayush pseudoscience peddlers and promoters WILL be questioned, and made accountable. This is no more the time where you can go on fooling people and monetize the lies and fraud you subject public and patients to.

PLEASE READ. THIS IS IMPORTANT. SEE HOW YOUR TAX MONEY IS WASTED ON FRAUD PSEUDOSCIENCE STUDIES BY THE BJP GOVERNMENT. The study did not demonstrate added benefit, and its claim of prolonged safety is a lie. No demonstrated benefit Ashwagandha did not produce a statistically convincing improvement in antibody responses, COVID-19 prevention or quality of life. There were 27 infections among 598 Ashwagandha recipients and 20 among 602 placebo recipients. This does not demonstrate protection. Some numbers are mathematically impossible The same supplement reports a spread (standard deviation) of 13.8 for a questionnaire score that mathematically cannot have a spread larger than about 10.8–12 — like reporting that everyone in a room is between 5 and 6 feet tall, with an average variation of 2 feet. Elsewhere, the placebo group’s heights supposedly vary by 17–22 cm while every other group varies by 9–10 cm; the odds of that happening in a real randomized trial are about one in a trillion trillion trillion. The one “positive” result is an illusion created by math The abstract says the Ashwagandha group showed “persistently higher” antibody levels in one subgroup. The paper’s own Table 2 shows the opposite: that group’s actual antibody levels were lower at every single time point. The “20–40% higher” claim comes from measuring change from each group’s starting point — and the Ashwagandha group happened to start 25–34% lower, so its catch-up looks bigger as a percentage. It is like two runners: one starts 10 metres behind and both finish together; you then praise the trailing runner for “gaining more metres.” That is not a drug effect; it is an accounting artifact. The paper never tells readers this. The safety story is a lie and the bad bits were left out “Safe” in this paper means “no statistically proven difference in harms” - but the trial was not designed to detect rare or moderate harms, and every actual number tilts against the herb: more adverse events (337 vs 309), more serious adverse events (6 vs 2), more probably drug-related events (7 vs 2), and more dropouts (92 vs 76) in the Ashwagandha arm. Some numbers were simply misreported: serious reactions are listed as “0.08%” when the real figure is 0.67% - ten times higher. Significant differences in blood tests (including D-dimer, a clotting marker that matters after an adenovirus-based vaccine like Covishield) appear in the tables but are never mentioned in the text, which instead says all lab results stayed normal. And 168 people (14%) left the trial for “various reasons” that are never itemized, so the claim that “no one quit because of side effects” cannot be checked. Basic numbers and statistical tests do not agree. Nobody can say how many people were actually in the trial. The text reports 11 symptomatic COVID-19 infections, while the adverse-event table reports 22. Depending on which table you read, the same 1,200 participants split into subgroups four different, mutually contradictory ways (the totals come out as 1,200, 1,194, 1,019-labelled-as-919, and 1,025). One trial cannot have four different headcounts. Dropout rates also varied bizarrely between recruitment waves - 23.7% in one group versus 5.4% in another, with no explanation. Some statistical test results cannot be reproduced from the printed counts. Some laboratory data require urgent verification. Some of the data were literally copied and pasted. In the paper’s quality-of-life supplement, one column of numbers (baseline results for the Ashwagandha group) reappears — digit for digit, all eight values — as a completely different column (week-28 results for the placebo group). Two different groups of people, measured six months apart, do not produce identical results down to the second decimal place. This is a copy-paste job, and it means at least one of those columns is not real data. One table reports a very large difference in blood urea between groups, with small variation within each group, yet gives a statistical result suggesting little difference. The corresponding urea-nitrogen value also does not fit. In the quality-of-life supplement, four pairs of averages and measures of variation are repeated exactly across different groups and visits. Ashwagandha's quality documents do not consistently support their own claims. A raw-root test reports 0.048% total alkaloids against its stated minimum of 0.3%, while declaring compliance. Those statements cannot all be correct. The extract and finished-tablet measurements also do not reconcile on the obvious calculation. Chromatograms dated 2019 are supplied for a trial that began enrolling in late 2021, without showing their connection to the actual trial batches. This means the documentation is insufficient to verify what participants received. The goalposts were moved after the results came in When the trial was registered in 2021, its main question was whether Ashwagandha improves the immune response to the vaccine. The answer came back: no measurable effect. So the published paper re-centred itself on a secondary question — safety — and put “safe” in the title, while demoting the original main question to “exploratory.” That is called outcome switching, and trial registration exists precisely to prevent it. Along the way, the eligible age range quietly changed three times across documents (18–45, then 18–65, then 18–70), a planned interim analysis vanished, and the timeline described in the paper contradicts the registry. The paper hid the fact that the two groups were not comparable A fair trial needs the treated group and the placebo group to start out the same. At the start of this trial, 77.6% of the placebo group had signs of a past COVID infection, versus 70.9% of the Ashwagandha group — a real, statistically significant difference (the correct p-value is about 0.01). The paper’s own Table 1 says so. But the text of the paper claims the groups were “comparable” and quotes a p-value of 0.50 - wrong by a factor of fifty, and wrong in the direction that hides the problem. Why it matters: the group with fewer past infections (Ashwagandha) would be expected to look different on later antibody tests anyway, which muddies every comparison the paper makes about immunity and breakthrough infections. The published paper contains fabricated-looking data blocks, impossible statistics, a fifty-fold misreported p-value that hides an unfair comparison, a main result replaced by a secondary one after the fact, and a headline “benefit” that its own tables disprove. pib.gov.in/PressReleaseDetai… A letter to the journal's Science Integrity Department WILL BE MAILED TODAY with the following concerns about this paper @FrontiersIn

For information: Research-use only (RUO) retatrutide refers to experimental chemical peptide-powders sold strictly for laboratory testing, meaning they are completely illegal, unverified, and dangerous for human use. This is exactly where the dumbfck Bangalore Peptide party was eventually headed. Using currently approved, recommended and regulated peptides do not cause this.

Herbal supplements are not just trouble for Indian athletes, but humanity. They are the most commonly increasing causes for liver failure and organ transplants globally. They are untested, unregulated and blindly promoted. Athletes are...well, athletes, most of them have very poor understanding of medical and health and carry a non-existent scientific temper. T hat's why they go for bogus therapies like cupping, chiropractic, Ayurvedic mumbo-jumbo, garbage wellness and longevity hacks and stacks, acupuncture, cold plunges where they feel benefits - because of belief and routine and not science and research evidence. Herbal supplements are humankind's collective decision to promote one way of population control. Stupid people fight for Darwin Award with each other. India is well known for this.

This is a must read piece. In Germany, public health funds can no longer be used to finance Homeopathy. Patients remain free to seek them, but will generally have to pay from their pockets. As Prof. @EdzardErnst rightly mentions: a patient may purchase homeopathic products or consult a homeopathic practitioner, just as one may spend money on many other personally valued but useless services. edzardernst.com/2026/08/the-… Homeopathy is being rejected from its country of origin. In India, the Government is teaching it to younger generations as a career option, a bachelors degree across 5.5 years of training in public funded colleges. And India's Homeopathy Council's are gagging science communicators and public from calling it quackery and it's practitioners quacks. What a time to live in this country. Fake paneer. Fake milk. Fake ghee. Fake honey. Detergent instead of salt in public school meals. And fake degrees.

Detox. Flush out toxins. Cleanse. Support (insert organ) health... are all vague science sounding terms that the wellness industry use trying to hook you into buying their products. Be a smart consumer. Because they consider the average consumer stewpid. Don't be.

People seem to be very concerned (confused) about this post. Allow me to be very clear. Best (inert or beneficial) to worst (most damaging) options for [liver] metabolic health. Water > Black coffee > Fresh cut fruits > Diet soda > Fresh juice > Packaged juice = Sugar sweetened sodas = Energy drinks > Alcohol