"Given its significant role in the immune system, Zn has demonstrated positive effects and potential therapeutic benefits in the treatment of COVID-19."
Agreed. Yours is a discussion among researchers (published papers) and mine was recommendations by a governmental body dedicated to summarizing and recommending based on the most current research to date.
People not actively in the research domain can cause a lot of issue by leaving the stodgey, status-quo-driven arena of authoritative recommendations, especially with health standard of care. I hate that is a bit credentialist; however, we have similar restraints on what makes cars roadworthy and able to participate in society at large, so its not without precedent.
What is your point? That the NIH's COVID-19 ideas about zinc are outdated and might be harmful?
They they try to obfuscate by making bold only one part of this statement? "The Panel recommends against using zinc supplementation above the recommended dietary allowance"
So it is not that they recommenced against taking zinc, just zinc over 11mg.
But what if someone is zinc deficient even though it goes against their own guidelines? Should they not even recommend testing for zinc deficiency?
I appreciate that you are bringing up singleton studies to make your case. You would do well to bring in metastudies as well, and recognize that general recommendations are based on many studies and conservative action from status quo as a general principle.
One thing you might seek to curtail is a frenzied "us versus them" axiom when it comes to science and research. Academia/R&D exist in the proverbial Serengeti of limited resources and where the jackels feed in each other, not as a mafia, and they aren't conspiratorially seeking the demise of the unwitting.
And deny you the pleasure of proactively and sufficiently supporting your argument? Nah -- proof is on the claimant.
I proved my claim sufficiently: zinc is not currently recommended as a treatment or preventative for COVID-19, per my linked source (which is current and, unless you are actively in the research domain, reasonably authoritative). I will admit that I did not communicate that they did have a carve out in the recommendations for clinical studies regarding zinc, but I did not feel that was material to the discussion..
But we can see that the NIH is going against what’s been shown in meta studies.
Let me tell you a story. My friend was in the World Trade Center when the other tower was hit by a plane. There were being held back by authority figures like security guards telling them not to leave the building because it’s safest. He said forget about that and got a bunch of people to break through the security guards. By the time they reach the 10th floor, the second plane hit their building and they were buffed around the stairwell like ragdolls. if you listen to authority, he would be dead.
Submitting to authority is the problem. Questioning authority is science. Its fine to go along with whatever the NIH believes, but that doesn’t make it true nor helpful.
