Health
YIKES! Diet Soda Gets More Bad News
A major new study suggests that diet soda — often marketed as a healthier alternative to sugary sodas — may carry unexpected risks. The research shows that people who drink zero- or low-sugar artificial beverages face a higher chance of developing liver disease. Just a month ago, we wrote a news article about another study linking diet soda to faster aging — and now, this new research delivers yet another strike against them. These findings challenge what many consider to be a “safe swap.” (RELATED NEWS: Diet Soda Speeds Brain Aging, RFK Jr. Targets Additives) Study Design and Key Findings According to a press release, the study was presented at UEG Week 2025, a major European conference focused on digestive health. Researchers analyzed data from the UK Biobank, a large ongoing health study that tracks more than half a million adults in the United Kingdom. For this project, they focused on 123,788 participants who were followed for about ten years. At the beginning of the study, none of the participants had liver disease. Researchers collected detailed information on their beverage consumption, lifestyle habits, and medical history, then monitored them for signs of liver problems over the following decade. The results were striking. People who consumed sugar-sweetened beverages such as regular soda, sweetened teas, or energy drinks had about a 50 percent greater risk of developing metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), also known as nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Even more concerning, participants who regularly drank artificially sweetened beverages — marketed as “zero sugar” or “diet” options — had an even higher risk: roughly 60 percent greater than those who rarely or never drank them. In other words, switching from sugary drinks to diet soda did not lower the risk — it may have made it worse. The researchers also found that participants who replaced either sugary or diet soda with water reduced their risk of liver disease by as much as 15 percent. However, swapping between sugary and diet drinks offered no reduction in risk. The most alarming news is the study linked frequent consumption of artificially sweetened drinks to higher rates of liver-related deaths, suggesting that the potential harm extends beyond fatty liver disease alone. Possible Mechanisms Behind the Risk Why might zero-sugar diet soda contribute to liver problems? The researchers and existing literature propose several mechanisms. Artificial sweeteners may alter the gut microbiome — the community of bacteria in the intestines. Changes there can influence metabolic functions, including how the body processes fats and sugars. (MORE NEWS: Maxwell House Rebrand: “Maxwell Apartment” Misses the Mark) These sweeteners may trigger cravings for sweets. Once the body senses something sweet, it might boost desire for sugar, potentially undermining dietary restraint. Some evidence suggests that artificial sweeteners can confuse signals of hunger and fullness, tricking the brain’s regulation systems. Although traditionally insulin reactions are associated with sugar, some studies suggest that artificial sweeteners may still provoke insulin spikes in certain individuals — a response that can contribute to metabolic stress on the liver. Strengths and Limitations This study has several strengths. First, it used a large sample size over a long period. Second, it compared both sugary and diet drinks and considered the effects of replacing them with water. However, the authors and outside observers note some important caveats: The study is observational, not experimental. It can show associations but cannot prove causation. Beverage consumption was self-reported, which may introduce measurement error or bias. People may misremember or misstate what they drank. The full paper had not yet appeared in a peer-reviewed journal, meaning some methodological details and limitations remain unknown. Despite these caveats, the associations are strong and consistent, prompting a reconsideration of how “safe” artificial sweeteners truly are. Implications for Consumers Given these findings, what should individuals do? The authors suggest caution. They argue that both sugar-sweetened and artificially sweetened diet soda should be limited. Importantly, replacing either kind of beverage with water appears safer. Water reduces metabolic burden, allows proper hydration, and avoids introducing substances that may stress the liver. In short, water remains the best choice for everyday hydration. Occasional consumption of diet or sugary beverages may not be disastrous, but relying on them heavily may carry unrecognized risk. What More Do We Need to Know? Before drawing definitive conclusions, more research is required. Specifically: Peer review and publication: The full study needs formal scrutiny and evaluation in a scientific journal. Intervention trials: Randomized controlled trials (if ethical and feasible) could help clarify cause and effect. Mechanistic studies: Work on gut microbiome changes, insulin responses, and liver metabolism can uncover how artificial sweeteners impact health. Longer follow-up: Monitoring participants for more than a decade could reveal longer-term outcomes. Diverse populations: Including people of different ages, ethnicities, and health statuses may reveal whether risks vary across groups. The Takeaway The alarming news of this study raises serious questions about the safety of diet drinks. Although many view them as healthier alternatives to sugary sodas, the evidence now suggests they may contribute to liver disease — perhaps even more than sugar itself. While causality is not proven, the strong associations, potential biological mechanisms, and comparative safety of water point toward a prudent approach: limit both sugary and diet beverages and make water your go-to. Ultimately, we need further research to confirm these findings, understand why they occur, and explore safer alternatives. In the meantime, consumers should be cautious about assuming diet drinks are harmless. Cut through the noise. Drown out the spin. Deliver the truth. At The Modern Memo, we’re not here to soften the blow — we’re here to land it. The media plays defense for the powerful. We don’t. If you’re done with censorship, half-truths, and gaslighting headlines, pass this on. Expose the stories they bury. This isn’t just news — it’s a fight for reality. And it doesn’t work without you.
Autism Hope Grows With Promising Developments
Big news is swirling around autism research, and it has parents, doctors, and advocates paying attention. For years, families have asked why autism rates keep climbing and what can be done to help children thrive. Now, two new developments may offer clues and hope. While these findings remain preliminary, they carry real promise. The Possible Link Between Tylenol and Autism President Donald Trump and U.S. health officials point to studies that suggest a possible connection between acetaminophen (best known as Tylenol) use during pregnancy and a higher risk of autism in children. They allege that expectant mothers who take large amounts of acetaminophen may unknowingly increase the odds of autism or ADHD in their children. God bless you, President Trump, for being brave. pic.twitter.com/E9Hweu8d2Y — Secretary Kennedy (@SecKennedy) September 22, 2025 This theory is based on several long-running studies, including the Boston Birth Cohort and the Nurses’ Health Study. Researchers reported patterns that seem to connect prenatal acetaminophen use with later developmental challenges. Officials like FDA Commissioner Marty Makary say the data are “too strong to ignore.” Of course, not everyone agrees. Tylenol’s manufacturer, Kenvue, disputes the claims, saying sound science does not prove a causal link. Tylenol made a statement on its website: Many independent doctors also warn that much more research is needed before conclusions are drawn. Still, the fact that this conversation is now on the national stage could mark a turning point. It signals that researchers may finally be on to something about one of the many possible contributors to autism. (MORE NEWS: Gen Z Credit Scores Drop, But Future Looks Bright) Trump Raises Concerns on Childhood Vaccinations President Trump also brought to light another issue he believes deserves national attention: childhood vaccinations. Trump warned against over-vaccinating babies and young children, saying, “It’s too much liquid, too many different things are going into that baby at too big a number the size of this thing. When you look at it, it’s like 80 different vaccines and beyond vaccines, 80, and you give that to a little kid.” Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. echoed those concerns, emphasizing that families deserve to be heard. “Some 40-70% of mothers who have children with autism believe that their child was injured by a vaccine. President Trump believes that we should be listening to these mothers instead of gaslighting and marginalizing them like prior administrations.” “Some 40-70% of mothers who have children with autism believe that their child was injured by a vaccine. President Trump believes that we should be listening to these mothers instead of gaslighting and marginalizing them like prior administrations.” – @SecKennedy pic.twitter.com/491tqIpgKy — The White House (@WhiteHouse) September 23, 2025 The comments highlight a larger debate about medical freedom, parental choice, and how government agencies handle vaccine schedules for children. Both Trump and Kennedy framed the issue as one of respect for parents and accountability from institutions that have too often dismissed their voices. A Cancer Drug May Offer New Hope The second development is even more uplifting for families already living with autism. A cancer drug called leucovorin, long used for anemia and chemotherapy support, is now being tested for new purposes. Early studies show that leucovorin may help non-verbal children with autism begin to speak, improve social skills, pay attention longer, and reduce repetitive behaviors. Doctors who have studied leucovorin in this new context are calling the results encouraging. Imagine a child who has never spoken a word suddenly beginning to form sentences after treatment. Parents in early studies have reported exactly that. To be clear, leucovorin is not yet approved by the FDA for autism treatment. Right now, doctors can only prescribe it “off-label.” But regulators are already reviewing evidence and have hinted they may update the drug label to reflect potential use in speech-related deficits tied to autism. That would be a major step forward. The Autism Action Plan: A Three-Part Strategy The White House also laid out a structured Autism Action Plan that signals a serious national commitment. The plan focuses on three major steps. Informing Doctors and Families The FDA will issue a physician notice and update safety labels on acetaminophen, citing a potential association between prenatal use and adverse neurodevelopmental outcomes. The Department of Health and Human Services will also launch a nationwide campaign to educate families and protect public health. Making a Therapeutic Available The FDA will recognize leucovorin as the first therapeutic for children with cerebral folate deficiency and autistic symptoms. Once approved, state Medicaid programs will be able to cover leucovorin for autism spectrum disorder. At the same time, the National Institutes of Health will conduct confirmatory trials to better understand its impact. Increasing Research Investment Through the Autism Data Science Initiative, the NIH will invest more than $50 million to fund 13 new projects. These efforts are designed to push forward understanding, therapies, and long-term solutions for autism. Rep. Mary Miller weighs in on this bold plan: For decades, politicians ignored the rise of autism in America. President Trump is taking action. His Autism Action Plan will inform parents, expand treatment, and fund research, finally delivering answers families have needed for years. This is the leadership we prayed for! pic.twitter.com/qAMxd2xTDM — Rep. Mary Miller (@RepMaryMiller) September 22, 2025 Why Families Should Pay Attention This is where the story gets exciting. Autism affects about one in 31 eight-year-olds, according to the CDC. That’s a big jump compared to past decades. Parents, teachers, and doctors have worked tirelessly to adapt, but the need for answers is growing. With support now coming directly from the Trump administration, there is new momentum to get to the bottom of things. That support could move the needle forward on both research and practical help for families. For years, much of the focus has been on behavioral therapies and classroom strategies. Those tools help, but they don’t address the underlying biology. Now, with possible environmental links like acetaminophen and vaccines and potential medical treatments like leucovorin, science may finally be uncovering deeper…
Diet Soda Speeds Brain Aging, RFK Jr. Targets Additives
A new study published in the journal Neurology suggests that drinking diet soda every day may speed up brain aging. Researchers followed 12,772 adults in Brazil for eight years. They found that people who consumed the most artificial sweeteners had a much faster decline in memory and thinking skills. The results were striking. Heavy users showed a 62 percent faster decline. That decline equaled about 1.6 extra years of brain aging. The study looked at several popular sweeteners. These included aspartame, saccharin, acesulfame-K, erythritol, xylitol, and sorbitol. Tagatose was the only one that did not show harm. All the others were linked to measurable cognitive decline. New Study Published in @GreenJournal: Some sugar substitutes linked to faster cognitive decline. https://t.co/XcZJVtIGHC#AANscience #BrainHealth pic.twitter.com/FWCdtJg0es — American Academy of Neurology (@AANmember) September 4, 2025 Midlife Habits Matter The findings showed the strongest impact in adults under 60. People with diabetes were also more vulnerable. Older adults over 60 showed no major difference, but the researchers warned that habits in midlife set the stage for brain health later on. Cognitive decline often begins decades before symptoms appear. A loss of 1.6 years of brain function may not sound dramatic, but across a population it is significant. This makes diet choices in middle age especially important. People often believe switching to diet soda protects their health. The research shows the story may be more complicated. Artificial sweeteners may reduce sugar intake, but they could come with hidden risks. (RELATED NEWS: SNAP Soda Ban: Ending Taxpayer Junk Food Subsidies) What the Experts Say Claudia Kimie Suemoto, the study author and a neurologist at the University of São Paulo, explained that people often see artificial sweeteners as harmless. She said the results suggest they may not be harmless, especially with frequent use in midlife: “Low- and no-calorie sweeteners are often seen as a healthy alternative to sugar, however our findings suggest certain sweeteners may have negative effects on brain health over time,” Other physicians note that reducing sugar can still help some people. But they also encourage natural alternatives when possible. Not everyone agrees on the interpretation. Industry groups argue that these sweeteners remain safe. They point out that all of the common sweeteners studied are approved by the Food and Drug Administration. The Trump Administration’s Warning However, the Trump Administration’s “Make Our Children Healthy Again” Assessment, released in May 2025 by the Make America Healthy Again Commission, directly addressed these additives. The commission, chaired by HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., stated: “Artificial sweeteners like aspartame, sucralose, and saccharin, used widely in diet sodas and sugar-free foods, have been observed to interfere with the gut microbiome in some studies. Gut microbiome shifts have been linked to obesity, metabolic issues, and possibly glucose intolerance. The classification of aspartame as possibly carcinogenic (Group 2B) by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) further complicates the understanding of these widely used substances, especially given the existence of conflicting research results.” Kennedy has made it clear that he is on a mission to bring these risks to light. His push is not just about raising awareness but about eliminating harmful additives from the American diet altogether. By targeting products that undermine metabolic and brain health, RFK Jr. has positioned this fight as central to protecting the next generation. Why This Matters The debate highlights a bigger question. What is the real cost of relying on artificial substitutes? Diet sodas and low-calorie snacks are everywhere. People turn to them to manage weight or blood sugar. Yet brain health may be part of the tradeoff. Studies like this raise awareness about long-term risks. They also remind us that brain aging is not just a concern for seniors. For people in their 40s and 50s, the choices made today may shape how sharp the mind feels at 70 or 80. The study adds to a growing body of evidence that diet and lifestyle strongly affect the brain. What You Can Do Experts recommend moderation above all. Cutting back on artificial sweeteners can lower risk. Reading labels helps, since many “monk fruit” or “stevia” products are mixed with other sweeteners like erythritol. Choosing whole foods, fruits, and naturally sweetened items offers a safer path. Exercise also plays a key role. Physical activity helps the brain produce protective proteins and supports memory. Good, healthy habits form a stronger shield for long-term health. (RELATED NEWS: Tracy Beanz Reveals MAHA’s Mission & What Comes Next In Fascinating Interview) The Bigger Picture Artificial sweeteners have already faced criticism. Some past research connected them to gut health problems and metabolic changes. Others raised questions about possible links to strokes or heart issues. While the science is not settled, the pattern is clear. When used in excess, these substitutes may not deliver the safe solution people expect. None of this means sugar is healthy. High sugar intake is a proven risk factor for diabetes, obesity, and heart disease. The challenge is replacing sugar. That leaves many people searching for better alternatives. Small amounts of honey, maple syrup, or fruit can satisfy a sweet craving without the same risks. A Wake-Up Call for Consumers The study’s authors stressed that their results show association, not cause. Still, the message is clear enough for everyday life. If you drink diet soda daily, it may be time to cut back. Brain health is precious, and the habits you build now may protect you later. This is not a call to panic. It is a reminder to stay alert and informed. Labels and marketing often sell artificial sweeteners as a free pass. Science now suggests the pass may come with hidden costs. The best steps are simple. Limit sweeteners, eat healthy foods, and stay active. Your brain depends on it. Cut through the noise. Drown out the spin. Deliver the truth. At The Modern Memo, we’re not here to soften the blow — we’re here to land it. The media plays defense for the powerful. We don’t. If you’re done with censorship, half-truths, and…
AI Stethoscope Spots Deadly Heart Conditions 15 Seconds
A Breakthrough in Heart Care Researchers at Imperial College London developed an AI-enabled stethoscope, according to Fox News. It detects three serious heart conditions in just 15 seconds. These include heart failure, atrial fibrillation, and heart valve disease. The results emerged from a large trial involving over 12,000 symptomatic patients across many GP practices. A smart stethoscope powered by AI can detect heart failure, atrial fibrillation or valve disease in just 15 seconds 🩺@ImperialMed’s Dr Patrik Bächtiger says it’s “incredible” how quickly AI could deliver results from a simple exam. Read more ⬇️https://t.co/dLlfvKrZx0 pic.twitter.com/EMoCEOjZws — Imperial College London (@imperialcollege) September 3, 2025 How the AI Device Works The device is compact—about the size of a playing card. It records both heart sounds and electrical signals. Then it sends the data to the cloud. Artificial Intelligence analyzes the information. Within seconds, results appear on a smartphone. Doctors gain instant insights into potential heart problems. (MORE TECH NEWS: Pregnancy Robots: Miracle or Ethical Nightmare?) Strong Trial Findings in General Practice Patients tested with the AI stethoscope were twice as likely to receive a heart failure diagnosis. They were 3.5 times more likely to be diagnosed with atrial fibrillation. They were nearly twice as likely to receive a heart valve disease diagnosis. These rates far exceeded those from traditional stethoscopes. Early Detection Saves Lives Early diagnosis can save lives. Many patients learn they have heart disease only after arriving in emergency care. By then, treatment options shrink. Quick detection enables earlier intervention. It can reduce hospital stays and improve long-term health outcomes. AI Limits and Concerns The technology is not foolproof. Around two thirds of patients flagged for potential heart failure later tested negative. False positives can cause anxiety and lead to extra testing. Researchers emphasize that AI stethoscopes suit only symptomatic cases—not routine screening in healthy individuals. Challenges for AI in Clinical Use Adoption remains a hurdle. Around 70% of clinicians who initially used the device stopped within a year. Many cited difficulty integrating it into daily practice. Streamlined design and seamless workflow fit are crucial for broader uptake. Real-World Reach: Pregnancy Care Insights A separate study conducted by the Mayo Clinic showed that an AI-enabled digital stethoscope helped detect twice as many cases of pregnancy-related heart failure compared to usual care. This trial took place in Nigeria. It found that AI-assisted screening was also 12 times more likely to detect severe heart pump weakness, known as peripartum cardiomyopathy. Pregnant women often experience symptoms like shortness of breath, fatigue, and swelling. These can mimic normal pregnancy signs. Yet early detection is vital for treatment and for protecting mothers’ lives. Demilade Adedinsewo, M.D., cardiologist at Mayo Clinic and lead investigator of the study said: “Recognizing this type of heart failure early is important to the mother’s health and well-being. The symptoms of peripartum cardiomyopathy can get progressively worse as pregnancy advances, or more commonly following childbirth, and can endanger the mother’s life if her heart becomes too weak. Medicines can help when the condition is identified but severe cases may require intensive care, a mechanical heart pump, or sometimes a heart transplant, if not controlled with medical therapy.” AI-enabled stethoscopes can close diagnostic gaps. Dr. Adedinsewo emphasized how mothers lack a simple, non-invasive, safe screening test. Artificial Intelligence tools could improve access to early heart detection. They could help obstetric providers refer patients faster to specialists. New 🗞️ 🚨! @AnnFamMed: AI tools show promise in detecting cardiac dysfunction among young women as part of preconception cardiovascular care! #AI #CardioObstetrics #WomensHealth @MayoClinicCV https://t.co/evBM3HbGKU pic.twitter.com/PvwKkzeuSK — Demi Adedinsewo, MD (@DemiladeMD) April 29, 2025 Looking Ahead Expansion plans are underway. Regions like South London, Sussex, and Wales may soon incorporate the AI tool in community clinics. Broader use could democratize advanced diagnostics across primary care settings. Meanwhile, Mayo Clinic’s work highlights how Artificial Intelligence can transform obstetric heart screening. With more validation and ease of use, the tool could become a game-changer in maternal health. Balancing Promise with Caution In an interview with Fox News, Cardiothoracic surgeon Dr. Jeremy London said: “The AI stethoscope should be used for patients with symptoms of suspected heart problems, and not for routine checks in healthy people. AI is a framework, not as an absolute, because it can be wrong. Particularly when we’re taking care of people … we must make certain that we are doing it properly.” The AI stethoscope upgrades a centuries-old tool. It produces faster and more objective heart assessments. It supports early diagnosis and may reduce heart-related deaths. Yet care remains key. Misfiring alarms and integration issues must be addressed. Artificial Intelligence should augment—not replace—human care. In Conclusion The AI stethoscope offers exciting possibilities for heart health. It speeds diagnosis. It strengthens early detection—especially in vulnerable patients like pregnant women. When used wisely, it can change primary care and improve patient outcomes. With thoughtful rollout and clinical backup, it may save lives and transform heart care. Beyond this single tool, the potential of AI in medicine is immense. As algorithms grow more accurate and devices become easier to use, AI can serve as a powerful diagnostic partner across specialties. It can detect disease earlier, support overworked physicians, and expand access to quality care in underserved areas. From stethoscopes to imaging, from lab work to personalized treatment plans, Artificial Intelligence is reshaping the front lines of medicine. The future promises a healthcare system where doctors and Artificial Intelligence work side by side—human expertise enhanced by machine precision. This partnership could deliver faster answers, better outcomes, and healthier lives for millions around the world. Forget the Headlines. Challenge the Script. Deliver the Truth. At The Modern Memo, we don’t tiptoe through talking points — we swing a machete through the media’s favorite lies. They protect power. We confront it. If you’re sick of censorship, narrative control, and being told what to think — stand with us. Share the story. Wake the people. Because truth dies in silence — and you weren’t made to stay quiet.
EXCLUSIVE: 20,000,000 Sick Americans Abandoned By Medical ‘Oligarchy’ Controlled By Elites; Can We Fix It?
Opinions expressed are solely those of the author(s). In former President Biden’s January 2025 farewell speech, he warned of the risk of the U.S. becoming an oligarchy, a government controlled by a select group of ultra-wealthy and elite individuals. While Biden was referring to the government, my over two-decade career in healthcare has led me to see a similar dynamic in science and medicine. For years, this elite group’s dominance went unchallenged, accepted by both the medical community and the public, perhaps out of naivety or complacency. However, the COVID-19 pandemic pulled back the curtain, offering the public a rare glimpse into how medical policies and decisions are made, revealing the sway of these elites. Rise of Medical Censorship Debates over treatments, vaccine development, vaccine mandates, and public health strategies like lockdowns and school closures showcased the power dynamics at play. Over time, as some of these decisions were questioned or refuted, there emerged a demand for accountability and a questioning of expertise, with some moves seen as missteps or swayed by external pressures rather than scientific merit alone. Adding fuel to the fire, these elites mocked and insulted anyone, including their peers and colleagues, while calling for censorship of those questioning their dominance and views. Who are these elites, and what role do they play in medicine? They are highly educated individuals from prestigious institutions whose influence shapes both public opinion and medical practice through their research and academic roles. Their control is solidified by publications in high-impact journals, which set the standards for medicine. In federal health agencies like the NIH, FDA, or CDC, they wield significant power over policy, treatment approval, and research funding. Through books, media, and platforms like TED talks, they also mold public perception and policy, often setting the health agenda. Their decisions can skew healthcare towards specific philosophies or interests. The dominance of these elites rests on three pillars: control of information, gatekeeping opportunities, and influencing policy and practice. They manage information flow through the peer-review system, where high-impact journals act as gatekeepers, often favoring insiders. This control shapes medical education and practice. Their prestigious roles and platforms grant them access to funding and career opportunities, making it tough for outsiders to challenge or innovate within established narratives. Questioning their orthodoxies and dominance will often lead them to publicly insult you, question your credentials and training, and send journalists looking for a story and a social media mob after you. Silencing The Truth On COVID-19 and the Vaccines My collaboration with Dr. Bruce Patterson on long COVID research over the last four years has shown similar patterns. Long COVID, a condition defined as new onset symptoms persisting beyond three months post-SARS-CoV-2 infection, is affecting over 20 million Americans and 65 million people worldwide. The research focus, funding, and narrative around long COVID are heavily shaped by these same academics and medical elites, influencing which symptoms are addressed, treatments pursued, and patient management strategies adopted. There is a risk that novel insights or treatments might struggle for acceptance unless they align with the views of these influential figures. This dynamic is starkly illustrated by the NIH RECOVER COVID initiative, a $1.6 billion US taxpayer-funded effort on long COVID that has been criticized for its shortcomings. A report in STATNEWS highlighted a lack of transparency in funding criteria and dispersal; criticized the glacial pace of research; and noted the failure to set up well-designed clinical trials to study various therapeutics. Research on symptoms and patient surveys has minimal clinical utility in 2025 when millions of people continue to suffer and enough published research points to vascular inflammation driving the underlying pathology. Competition Over Collaboration I have observed more competition rather than collaboration among long COVID research groups. The divisive politicization of our country has falsely and cruelly framed long COVID as a quasi-liberal female psychiatric disorder. Likewise, those people suffering from post-COVID-19 vaccine syndrome, a condition similar to long COVID, have been ignored, smeared, and abused as “anti-vaxxers.” With the newly confirmed Robert F. Kennedy as Secretary of Health and Human Services and the nomination of Dr. Jay Bhattacharya at the helm of the NIH, there exists a tremendous opportunity for both leaders to shape the long COVID narrative by shifting towards an inclusive and transparent policy-making process and fostering environments for collaborative rather than competitive research. Besides fostering collaboration and transparency in research funding, well-designed clinical trials on FDA approval pathways are desperately needed for the millions of disabled and suffering patients. By addressing these areas, there’s a chance to mitigate the oligarchic tendencies within medical science, increase accountability, and better serve the health needs of the population, particularly those with conditions like long COVID. Ram Yogendra M.D., M.P.H. is a board-certified anesthesiologist with a diverse background in medicine and public health. He has experience in infection control and surveillance from prior public health roles before shifting to clinical practice. Dr. Yogendra now contributes to research on Long COVID and post-COVID vaccine syndrome, co-authoring several studies on immune responses and treatments. Follow him on X @dryostradamus Read Dr. Ram Yogendra’s articles here: Long COVID diagnostic with differentiation from chronic lyme disease using machine learning and cytokine hubs – Nature Case series: Maraviroc and pravastatin as a therapeutic option to treat long COVID/Post-acute sequelae of COVID (PASC) – Frontiers Immune-Based Prediction of COVID-19 Severity and Chronicity Decoded Using Machine Learning – Frontiers Persistence of SARS CoV-2 S1 Protein in CD16+ Monocytes in Post-Acute Sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC) up to 15 Months Post-Infection – Frontiers Get News. Take Action. The Modern Memo was not designed to be your go-to site for breaking news; we’re better than that. You’re reading this post because you care more about America’s future than simply reposting rage-inducing headlines. You are the kind of patriot who wants to take action with your new knowledge; this is where we come in. Like you, we’re absolutely sick and tired of not being able to shape policy or protect American families outside of election…
- 1
- 2