Paused at 0:00.
Alright, well you're listening to WMRW LP Warren and it's 5 o'clock and time for Politics and Science and Politics and Science is live today for a change and I'm very honored that I have Dr. Raymond Peat back on the line here in the studio and let me bring him up here. I'm going to use the same bio I had for you years ago, right, which is that you have a PhD in biology from the University of Oregon and with a specialization in physiology and I also consider you a science historian and ombudsman, I've added that.
If you want to correct that, please feel free. Okay. Okay, no corrections then, huh? Alright. Well, I've wanted to get you on again because you're interesting to hear on any subject and we particularly have this weird emergency going on here that I think has got everybody spinning and that's the so-called Corona 19 or what's it called, COVID-19 pandemic and I just wanted to get your take on that and then maybe we could talk about the science behind pandemics and viruses and all of that and maybe cover vaccines at the end.
So feel free to just jump in and what do you think is going on right now? First of all, I'm not sure anything special is going on in the virus and infection world. It's definitely happening in the media and politics. Mexico isn't getting excited and they've had I think 16 mild cases but the CDC for years has been reporting the annual respiratory or flu-like death rate as being in the tens of thousands of deaths per year in the United States and so 100 or 200, the average number
of deaths from respiratory disease being say 30 or 40,000. If you look at the historic percentage of those respiratory diseases, about a tenth, 10% of roughly from 5 to 15% are historically coronavirus infections and the others are things as simple as rhinovirus or respiratory syncytial virus, things that range from mild sniffles up to serious pneumonia but historically about 10% are corona-type virus and so if 30 or 40,000 people are expected to die from a flu-like respiratory disease, we would expect to have 3,000 or 4,000 deaths per year from a coronavirus respiratory infection.
So I don't see any evidence at all that anything is happening on the real biological level. Are you there? The line seems to have... Sorry, Ray. Sorry, that was my fault. Do you hear me now? Yeah. I was just saying that the official line is that the crisis actually hasn't happened yet but you're saying in a given year, we should still see 3,000 to 4,000 deaths from coronavirus in an average year. That could still happen. We could get up to the average mortality associated with coronaviruses but we're not approaching
that by a long way so far. So a lower than average year as far as the actual figures that exist indicate. So just looking at the actual numbers, it looks like we're slightly deficient in cases and deaths of respiratory problems associated with that virus. And that's looking at the historical data? Yeah. Yeah. And if you look at... Have you checked out the Chinese or the Asian data at this point? Is the corona deaths up from their average? Yeah. They haven't talked about the average for corona.
They weren't gathering that data but they say this is just slightly more deadly than a typical influenza virus or the other things causing respiratory disease. So it is somewhat, according to their figures, just slightly more deadly. But the problem is Italy always has had about twice as many respiratory or flu-like deaths per year per capita as the United States. So it isn't unusual for them to be especially hard hit. But what makes the number go up is that they have been primarily testing sick people in hospitals. And it's the same with cancer diagnosis.
If you go all out to look for cancer in a population of middle age and old age in the cancer range, you'll find 100% cancers if you're really, really thorough in your diagnosis. And so the more you diagnose, the more you can find people die at the same rate unless you treat them. If you increase your treatment for cancer, as you increase the diagnosis, the treatment is going to kill more and more. But you can make your treatments look better by diagnosing more and more cases which are harmless. Same with the flu or the coronavirus.
If you test everyone in the population, you'll get all of these people with very mild reactions. And so it'll look like in South Korea, for example, 0.6% because they tested more people. I see. So the dying people become a smaller percentage when you test a more representative cross-section of the population. Yeah, I see. So that's a bit of, maybe it's just an accident that because they're looking for the diseases and the most vulnerable, that they test the sickest people first. Yeah.
And so that, if restricted to the people in the hospital on respirators, then you'll find that most of them have serious viruses, probably multiple respiratory viruses. I see. When you're very sick, various viruses that have been carried harmlessly will pop to the surface and get measured. I see, because your immune system is compromised. Yeah. Now, if we could back up a little bit, because I am confused and probably other people are too, exactly what's the difference between a virus and a bacteria? And also, what is particular, I can't talk particular about the coronavirus?
Most all bacteria are free living in a sense, they can generally live outside of cells if you feed them the right stuff and give them the right temperature and other conditions. They have the apparatus to reproduce their own genetic material and the virus depends on entering a cell, either a bacterium or a higher organism's cell and taking advantage of their machinery like ribosomes that can produce proteins from nucleic acids. And so these viruses put in their bit of nucleic acid once they can get into the cell and that
is processed on our ribosomes, the endoplasmic reticulum and proteins are added to the replicated nucleic acid and then it's excreted as a finished particle by our ordinary cell excretory system, secretory system. So in a healthy person, if you encounter a virus, even if it's a new virus that nobody's seen, do you think we're able to conquer that or at least isolate it so it doesn't do any harm? Yeah, for example, on the surface, the respiratory surface in our lungs and the tubes leading
into the air sacs, the air sacs are lined with epithelial cells that can secrete. There are cells around the air sac that secrete mucus that cover the epithelial cells and to reduce the surface tension so that the air sac will stay open, there's a protein called surfactant protein that has an oily, oil loving lipophilic fraction so it acts like a soap. The water loving part of the protein dissolves in this mucus layer on the cell lining the air sac and the oily surface reduces the surface tension so that the air sac can stay open
without extreme tension. And that surfactant protein contains groups that will collect the sugar like surfaces of the viral proteins or other, any pathogen possibility that hits that surfactant protein will get glued down by these binding particles. So it's our first layer of defense. And then in and around the epithelial layer, we have the reactive parts of the immune system. The angiotensin converting enzyme is one of the early parts of our immune system that sets up an inflammatory reaction that will set in action a whole chain of events.
If the pathogen gets through and is actually a threat, then you activate this proteolytic protein that creates angiotensin which is like a transmitter of a panic reaction to the organism. And it happens that this coronavirus is able to bind to one of these angiotensin converting enzymes. There is one which is only pro-inflammatory and another one that backs that up which undoes, inhibits the inflammatory damage done by the first angiotensin producing enzyme. This is called ACE2 and ACE2 happens to be attacked by this particular virus which binds to that enzyme and that's called the receptor.
It's a vulnerable point of the organism as far as this virus is concerned. And binding to that ACE2 means that it leaves the ACE, first the ACE1 which produces angiotensin, it leaves that free to act and ACE2 is capable of inactivating angiotensin, breaking it down to the first seven amino acids. They call it angiotensin 1 to 7 and this is a defensive anti-inflammatory peptide. So if your ACE2 is knocked out, angiotensin has a free range to cause damage. So the virus increases the inflammatory reaction by sticking to this defensive enzyme and that
enzyme combined with the virus then acts to enter the cell by way of the angiotensin receptor which is called the AT1. There are two known receptors by which angiotensin can do its damage. Angiotensin 1 is strictly an inflammation producing system. The angiotensin 2 produces some somewhat defensive reactions. It happens that the virus enzyme combination enters the cell by way of angiotensin receptor 1, AT1, and that turns on a whole range of destructive processes, nitric oxide and serotonin for example. And so just looking at the effects, it's obvious that you could defend by anything
that defends you against nitric oxide and serotonin. I see. Which are inflammatory mediators? Yeah. So anti-inflammatory things are the known treatment for this kind of virus. The Chinese for years have been using cinanserin which is a serotonin blocker for other treatments and they find that it's helpful for people with the established respiratory corona infection. And what was the name of that again, Ray? The Chinese? cinanserin, C-I-N-A-N-S-E-R-I-N. Okay. And losartan which is a high blood pressure drug is the most well-known blocker of angiotensin
receptor, candesartan and there are several others, but losartan is cheap and widely available. How do you spell that? L-O-S-A-R-T-A-N. Ah, just like it sounds. And what did you call that drug, Ray, is a certain type of? Angiotensin 1 receptor blocker. Okay. It's quite an action film you just painted for us there. I couldn't follow it all, but it seemed pretty interesting. Basically, the virus just activates an inflammatory process that many other things activate. So things that would primarily activate nitric oxide production or serotonin production or
histamine or prostaglandin production, any of these tend to end up in the same condition. So I think without knowing more about the nature of the infection, I think people who are taking aspirin, for example, it has a wide range of antiviral properties. It's already known to reduce infection from the standard influenza virus, hepatitis C virus, rhinovirus, half a dozen well-known viruses are blocked by common aspirin. There was a study of HIV, even, in which they saw beneficial effects from aspirin. Yeah, well, that's certainly available and very cheap, although much maligned.
And D happens to, one of its effects, like progesterone and aspirin, all of our known protective pro-immune but anti-inflammatory things lower the expression of antidensin receptor 1. So they predispose us to be less inflammable. So it sounded like when you say that the, see if I can get my words correctly here, when it enters your lungs, your cells put out a kind of a lipid of some kind? Well, naturally, just once we're born and start breathing, we depend on the production of this surfactant protein. So it's everywhere normally.
And our intestines have similar layers of defenses right at the very surface. Mucus will be a barrier against infection and then at the surface layers of cells and so on. And these viruses, the coronaviruses, don't just specialize on the lungs. They can infect the mucus membranes in the nose and the intestine. So the thing that some people have been saying that runny noses aren't connected as a precursor of the lung infection, but a Russian virologist says that looking at tens of thousands of
patients, he saw that a runny nose was a typical precursor to the rest of the lung infection symptoms and that the intestine is just as prone to infection as the lungs. So eating something could make you sick if you're feeling weak. Now I don't know if that's true, but it's possible to eat the virus and it could attack your intestines. Is that what you're saying? Yeah. If you get it in your mouth and swallow it, it could infect those as well. I see. So it's not your stomach acid you think would take care of it?
Not necessarily. The stomach acid doesn't break down the nucleic acid. I see. Now, if you're a healthy person, the mucus I understand is often a protective layer, correct? Like I think you just said that. And if your mucus is healthy and working correctly, would it be able to kill the virus or is this virus just too much for it? Yeah, the surface cells including the mucus have proteins analogous to the surfactant in the lung, proteins that collect the surface groups of a pathogen and bind them together.
So it's just like putting flypaper on them sort of. Oh yeah. Right. And I was thinking it sounded a little bit like soap. You said it was soap-like. Yeah, the hydrophobic surface itself tends to disorganize some of the invaders. For instance, they're telling us to wash our hands all the time. And how does soap kill a virus? Do you know? I'm taking the proteins, dissolving, making relatively insoluble things soluble because the soap has that hydrophobic fraction that sticks to hydrophobic insoluble parts of an organism and disassembles it. I see. Inside out. Right.
So that's a good thing. Now is the COVID-19, it sounds like it's a little better at breaking into our system, so to speak, than a normal cold, which is also, I've heard a cold is also a coronavirus. Is that true? No. A cold can be caused by any of these. If your immune system is good, like one study found that almost half of all of the respiratory infections, they couldn't identify a particular cause. But the rhinovirus was the biggest at about 30%.
That's the most common cold virus that is identified, but there are lots of unknown things that cause those symptoms. And then the coronavirus is in the range of somewhere between 5 and 15% of those respiratory infections. I see. So do you think the reaction of the government at this point is over the top considering? Unless it was their purpose to create international chaos, for example, to try to finish off Iran by cutting off their medical supplies while they're having a pandemic. That's right. The Trump administration is intensifying the sanctions at this point. Yeah.
You would suppose that it would fit into their plans. And if it's not really a threat, otherwise it becomes a threat when you do all of these insane things. For example, I just learned that all of my favorite brands of milk have been discontinued for the duration of the panic. Really? Why is that? I don't know. I don't think they know. Are they claiming milk as a carrier? No, no. But I have noticed that over the last several weeks, the Lucerne brand that I normally get,
they reduced it to one little row in the supermarket and weren't replenishing that. But then today they said they were discontinuing it. Wow. That's annoying. Well, worse than annoying because you don't have any milk. Yeah. Well, yeah, I'm sort of puzzled by the reaction. And everybody around here is, you know, trying to cope with it. Yeah, the media, including the big science media like Nature, the international science magazine, they are getting kind of excited in denying that it was an intentionally created virus which was leaked either accidentally or intentionally.
Just, I think, yesterday published a paper explaining technically why it would be impossible for them to have done it. But the fact that they're rushing so fast to deny that it could have been leaked accidentally out of a lab. But when you look at the fact that normally they say that it takes over a year to produce a vaccine to a new respiratory infection. But they're already now within weeks saying that they have a vaccine ready to test. The purpose of CDC patenting the coronavirus 17 years ago was deliberately to create pathogens
experimentally to enable them to anticipate a pathogen so that they could create, have a vaccine ready. So their intention was to have a vaccine ready by creating a pathogen. But now they're saying they couldn't possibly have created this, but they do happen to have a vaccine almost ready to use. So by their own declarations it sounds very suspicious. Yeah, I feel like there's a tremendous conflict of interest at the CDC. I know we're supposed to respect them. Yes, same as the World Health Organization. The head of that on January 29th said it's not a pandemic.
And then the next day said it is a pandemic. I think something happened to him politically. I see. Yeah, it's, I mean, they haven't, a pandemic was supposed to reach a much higher bar as my understanding than we've reached at this point. Well as I said, I don't see any evidence that it's anything different from last year or 10 years ago. Maybe you could explain the conflict of interest at the World Health Organization. I'm not familiar with that. People working there who have close connections to the vaccine industry.
I think Robert Kennedy Jr.'s website has information about the conflicts of interest. Yeah, he's spoken quite eloquently about that. And our own CDC, you mentioned that they have a patent on the coronavirus. Why would they patent that? Well, so that they can license a vaccine, I suppose. I see that gives them the right, sole right to licensing a vaccine that would treat that. Yeah, and now Trump's, I can't remember the name, I think his name is Foshee, Foshee, F-A-C. I've heard him speak. He actually seems like a fairly straightforward person.
And he was saying it would be at least a year and a half minimum to put out a vaccine. Do you think he's just out of the loop? No, no, that's what they've been saying. Virologists in general say it takes time to develop it and to do actual testing. I think that's a very optimistic idea because if they really had to test it, you know, it would take a generation. Because they tested on animals. Yeah, and the way they have tested the safety of it, for example, is to, in the control
group to use the same adjuvant, aluminum adjuvant, for example, which is the most dangerous component. So they're using fraudulent safety tests. You can't have a test without a control group. I see, you mean the control group is being fed the same adjuvant, which is actually an a... explain what an adjuvant is, Ray, you'll do it much better than I will. It creates a derangement of, in this case, the muscle is where they inject it. And anything that you inject into the muscle is going to damage it and start an immune corrective process.
But they found that just pathogens, particles, weren't enough to really tear up the tissue to produce a violent immune reaction. So they found that aluminum oxide particles created a terrific immunological storm that would sometimes create a little tumor or abscess at the site. It was such an intense damage. But that extreme inflammation at the point of injection activates a better, more systemic immune reaction. It turns your whole body into an inflammatory system. And so people very, very often have a fever for a couple of days after getting a shot.
So that's why some people, when they get a flu shot, they feel like they have a mild flu. Yeah, it's the same thing. It's a systemic inflammatory reaction, which is the whole purpose of the adjuvant. It wouldn't be an adjuvant if it didn't damage your whole inflammatory system. So you're saying when they do the testing, they don't have a controlled group that doesn't receive the adjuvant. Yeah, in many of the studies, that isn't a universal situation, but several of the very important studies were completely fraudulent by not having a control group.
Yeah, I think that's considered standard in double-blind testing, isn't it? Yeah. I have a number of questions here, but maybe talk a little bit more about vaccines. They keep harking back to the so-called Spanish flu, I think it was in 1918, that took a tremendous toll on lives over, I think, a year or two period. It was blamed on Spain, I think sort of like Trump is blaming it on China, but it turned out it actually came from a US Army base.
And I just read recently that that so-called flu that started on the Army base for these soldiers who had just been drafted and then were shipped over to Europe, that that might have been caused by a vaccine that the Rockefeller Center was testing on those soldiers who were basically draftees. Have you heard anything about that? And I was wondering if you could talk about that. I haven't heard any more than what you said, but do you know about the movie Vaxxed? Yes, I do.
There's information in that about the Gulf War syndrome and the anthrax vaccine. People were getting the Gulf War syndrome without leaving the US following their anthrax vaccination. That's right. I think there were a lot of complaints by veterans about those vaccines. And also the nurses who were giving them who felt terrible about administrating them. I'm just going to read a little thing here about this article I found at lewrockwell.com. It's looking at research that was done about the Spanish flu. And this scientist who looked into it, who looked back at the autopsies, they were all
the people who died of the flu supposedly tested positive for bacterial pneumonia. So for some reason, they all got bacterial pneumonia and that's what this person believes killed them. And that's different than the flu? Oh, definitely. But the CDC accounts pretty much that would fall into the unknown category of severe respiratory syndromes. So to get their annual 40 or 50,000 deaths, they can scare people saying that flu gets your flu shot. It obviously isn't the flu. It's pneumonia from partly unknown causes and partly a variety of viruses that have
nothing to do with the flu shot. Yeah, and of course, veterans in that situation are in the worst environment because they're either packed into barracks or into ships being shipped to Europe or in trenches where it's very... Yeah, the conditions during the First World War were not healthful in general. Much of the world was influenced by the war conditions. So stress itself is the cause of epidemics. A shortage of food will increase the incidence of infectious diseases. Yeah, that's a really good point.
So, I mean, right now, if it's true that this is a pandemic, it seems to mean that people all around the world are under a tremendous amount of stress if they're succumbing to it. Do you think that's possibly a cause if it actually is the case that we're succumbing? Yeah, if anything unusual is happening in the disease world, I think you can blame sanctions as one of the big causes that's dislocating the world economy. And if you cause unemployment, you're going to increase infectious diseases. I mean, poverty causes infectious diseases. Yeah. Yeah, causes ill health.
And somebody else was speculating that all the places where the hot points for this viral infection also coincide with sites of 5G deployment, the new telecommunications standard that involves a lot more millimeter waves basically being everywhere in the environment. So you can't escape these microwaves. Do you think that could contribute to the declining immune system? Yeah. I saw a good tape, an hour-long lecture by Deborah Davis. She did a good book on cancer, The Phony War on Cancer. But this is a very good analysis of the electromagnetic damage.
Basically they're claiming that it's safe on the basis of absolutely no research, but the animal research that exists shows that there is a real danger. That there is a degradation of the immune system from, like cell phones, for instance? Yeah. For example, some studies, just the mild field from sitting at an electric sewing machine, they found that people who had worked on an electric sewing machine for 20 years had a very high rate of dementia. And anything that affects your nervous system is affecting your immune system. Right.
So another reason to go back to a treadle sewing machine and a bicycle. Yeah. That's right. I'm going to switch and go to some questions here, Ray. Some people have nicely sent in questions for you tonight, I think mostly about this topic. Okay. So I'll proceed with that. Here's Caleb from Ontario, Canada. He would like to ask, Ray, how much of a role endotoxin plays in regards to a viral infection and if the effects of endotoxin are increased in the presence of a virus? And maybe you could quickly tell everybody what endotoxin is.
Endotoxin is a fatty acid with carbohydrate attached to it. It's called lipopolysaccharide, but it's just part of the coating of a bacterium. And so it's being produced in the living process of the bacteria. And normally our intestine filters out most of it, but when you're under stress, more of it reaches your liver and your liver is always doing a fairly good job of detoxifying it, but some of it's always circulating and activating the immune system a little bit. But when you're under stress, your liver gets overwhelmed with this bacterial material and
lets it produce inflammation and stress, interfering with oxidative metabolism everywhere in your body. And it's activating because it interferes with mitochondrial energy production. It's overlapping with what the angiotensin system is doing anyway, but it activates the angiotensin system. So the viral infection and anything stressing your intestine enough to make it permeable to bacterial materials will end up in the same place, making you have inflammatory symptoms, sometimes with bowel-centered symptoms, other times lung and head-centered symptoms. Yeah, it's always amazed me.
I didn't believe you when, you know, years ago when I first hear you talk about the intestine being so connected to your other organs. But I do believe you now. And if you look at a map of the nerve system, your intestines are connected to all those. Yeah, it's partly chemical leaking through and partly inflammatory substances like serotonin and histamine produced by the intestine itself getting into the bloodstream. A tremendous flood of serotonin shows up and circulates in the platelets. And the nerves directly can transmit signals such as secretion of mucus and production
of histamine and serotonin and nitric oxide right up in your nose membranes and throat membranes. And so you can treat the symptoms at the source by swallowing these things. So that's why I recommend raw carrot because carrot being indigestible will help to wash out some of the bacteria that are producing the endotoxin. But if you take anti-inflammatory things with it such as olive or coconut oil or aspirin or an antihistamine or antibiotic, the carrot will deliver that down all the way through your intestine offering protection and anti-inflammatory effect. So it's like... Oh, go ahead.
An early US 20th century gastroenterologist demonstrated that canine distemper which was thought of as a lung and respiratory disease, he found that before any bacteria or any virus occurred in any of these respiratory membranes, there was already a well-established infection in the intestine and they would start drooling and sniveling because of a nervous or chemical signal from an inflamed intestine. So no pathogen was present in these inflamed respiratory membranes. It was all coming from the intestine. I think that's very generally neglected in people treating respiratory sicknesses.
They let them go on eating things that are known to favor bacterial growth in the small intestine for example. Yeah, and if anybody's, I mean, interested in an everyday sort of phenomenon, notice when you eat something, a lot of times your nose will start to get moist on the inside. Maybe it's my age now, I'm almost 65, but when I eat something now, it doesn't always happen but I start to get a slightly runny nose. Yeah, that was something I noticed about 60 some years ago when I worked in the woods.
I would come in to eat supper in a restaurant and I noticed day after day, I would see someone eating paella mode or a milkshake and by the time they got to the cash register, they would be sniffling. Oh, just the thought of it. Was it just the thought of it that did that? No, I think it was loosening up mucus, producing sort of a therapeutic cleansing reaction when they got their blood sugar up. The first stage of inflammation increases circulation but it can dry up the membranes
and the mucus that they secrete becomes gummy and hardened and produces a dry cough but when you get your blood sugar up, the process can complete itself. It seems to need enough energy to produce a good flow of blood and mucus production so it can wash away the histamine. Okay, I'm going to move on to another question. Running out of time here amazingly. What about the theory that viruses are simply phages or somatids from bacteria and viral infections are really caused by occult intracellular bacteria?
Luke Montenger, if I'm saying that right, probably not, for instance, insists that there must be an occult bacteria associated with HIV. Those things do exist but I don't think he was right in that, blaming it all on occult bacteria. We are loaded with potential viruses. Several percent of our genome, some people have identified as potential viruses or retroviruses and these are DNA that has been built into our system by an exposure to the environment. There's a lab in Germany that shows that you can identify beef DNA after you eat beef in
a bloodstream and then you can find it integrated into our genome. Whatever we eat that has DNA in it is likely to be able to enter cells and be integrated as a potential resource but when we're put under stress, it's something that Barbara McClintock was very unpopular for in the 1940s and 50s when she talked about the jumping genes but she showed that stress causes genes to come out of the chromosomes and move around to a different place. Since we have these retroviruses, I think it's very almost certain that under stress
we will express retroviruses that have been in us for generations and if you look for them, it will look like you have caught a viral infection from the outside. That's what Peter Duesberg has been saying now for years. It's very interesting but it's really just something coming out of you when you're getting disorganized. Yeah, when the people with the tests for the HIV virus have looked at blood stored from army recruits in the 1960s and 70s, every year the stored blood showed roughly a one-half
percent HIV infection, every year the same and more recent tests have been in the same range of a general population. If you look at sick people, you'll find a higher percentage so it looks like an epidemic. You go to Africa where people are under stress and exposed to many infectious diseases, you'll find a very high infectious rate so-called of HIV virus but the standard healthy population historically has been one-half percent and if you stir up the organism and cause rearrangement of the genes as McClintock showed, the stress induces the expression of what we can call
viruses, retroviruses. I see, I never understood what that meant before. I'm going to move right along here because here's a pertinent question. This says, "I heard that immunity after an infection with a coronavirus is quite short-lived. Unfortunately, I do not remember where I heard this. Does Mr. Peat have any opinion on acquired immunity to coronaviruses?" No, not at all but one thing that is known is that after this kind of a severe respiratory infection, there is a great increase in the risk of pulmonary fibrosis just because inflammation leads to fibrosis and reduced lung function.
So apart from any future risk, I think the real thing to worry about is to stop the progression of that angiotensin-related inflammatory production of tissue fibrosis and stiffness. I see and anti-inflammatories will do that. Yeah. I see and what's the best way of delivering an anti-inflammatory to the lung? I think through the mouth. Okay. So just eating it like Losartan is currently and the Chinese are recommending a variety of things. They are including some virus-killing chemicals but I think their main recommendations are Losartan and cinanserin, the anti-serotonin things being very broad-spectrum protective anti-inflammatory.
So I think Ciproheptadine is a good, safe, broad anti-inflammatory. And a lot of people are recommending the old approach to viruses, the idea of killing the virus and in the 70s and 80s, antivirals based on the idea of nucleoside analogs to mutate the DNA of the virus, acyclovir and ribavirin for example. And at that time, a lot of people were saying if you mutate the DNA or RNA of a virus, aren't you likely to be mutating the human DNA? And the FDA approved studies that said absolutely no, they're absolutely not going to mutate
your gonadal DNA. But in recent years, 40 some years later, the studies are saying yes, definitely they injure the gonads and mutate human DNA. So people are now recommending widespread use protectively of nucleoside analog antivirals. But I think widespread use of that is going to create genetic damage to the reproducing population. Yeah, and we're already seeing a lot of sterility amongst the general population. But we really don't have any more time. So I apologize to everybody who sent in questions and we didn't get to them.
Maybe perhaps Dr. Peat, you'll come back sometime and we could cover some of these. Perhaps at this point, with only four minutes left to go, we should just sum up what's the best course of action for people to protect themselves? My first recommendation was to eat well and make sure your vitamin D level is up to around 50 to 60 nanograms per milliliter on a blood test, which often takes 5,000 units a day. And to use a very safe antiviral such as aspirin.
But if there's a sign of an infection, then I think Losartan and the antiserotonin things would be appropriate to limit the degree of inflammation and not to worry about killing the virus or becoming immune to some future variant because your immune system is a lot better than the vaccines, but still the immune system doesn't necessarily keep up with a mutating virus. Okay. And the Losartan and cyproheptadine are good things to go to if aspirin isn't working? I think so. The Chinese recommend cinanserin. Oh, that's right. I don't know if it might be better than cyproheptadine.
Okay. And you can also get vitamin D from sunlight, right? If you're in some place where it's sunny enough. That's the best thing. Yeah. All right. Well, thanks for being on the air tonight, Ray. I really appreciate it. And I think everybody else does too. And if you don't mind sometime coming back, we'll get to these other questions. Okay, any time. Okay, that's wonderful. So maybe we'll do it next week if you're up for it. Okay. Great. Well, thanks so much and I'm wishing you a good night and stay healthy. Okay, thanks. Bye.
Okay, thanks, Ray. Bye-bye. All right. Thanks, everybody, for listening tonight. You heard Dr. Raymond Peat. And if you want more of his information, he has many articles on his website, which is raypeat.com. There is no charge. You can just go there and read a lot of good information and very interesting stuff too. So I hope you can avail yourself of that. I've been your host for Politics and Science, John Barkhausen. And it looks like next week we'll be back again with Dr. Raymond Peat to talk more
about the coronavirus and get to some of the questions that we didn't get to tonight. And thanks to everybody who sent in questions. They were excellent and we'll get to more of them next week, five o'clock Eastern Standard Time at wmrw.org. And now it's time to say this is WMRW LP Warren. And we're going to Letters in Politics with Mitch Jeseritz. Thanks for listening. [BLANK_AUDIO]