According to reports by The National Institutes on Health and National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), the populations most vulnerable to the coronavirus are individuals who smoke or vape marijuana, or have a history of smoking or vaping marijuana.
NIDA reports that “Because it attacks the lungs, the coronavirus that causes COVID-19 could be an especially serious threat to those who smoke tobacco or marijuana or who vape:”
A report published by the Journal of the American Medical Association
reviewed data from China and found that the case fatality rate for COVID-19 was
6.3 percent for people with chronic respiratory disease, compared with 2.3
percent overall (National Institute on Drug Abuse, 2020).
NIDA also reports that vaping can harm lung health just as smoking can,
and as such, people who vape can be exposed to increased risk from COVID-19.
In 2019, the country experienced a vaping crisis in which as many as
2,739 people were hospitalized and 68 people died (Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention, 2020). The more than 2,700 people who were hospitalized and
suffer from residual complications associated with vaping-related lung illness
are at an increased risk of severe COVID-19.
NIDA concludes: “We can make educated guesses based on past experience that people with compromised health due to smoking or vaping and people with opioid, methamphetamine, cannabis, and other substance use disorders could find themselves at increased risk of COVID-19 and its more serious complications-for multiple physiological and social/environmental reasons. The research community should thus be alert to associations between COVID-19 case severity/mortality and substance use, smoking or vaping history, and smoking- or vaping-related lung disease.”
Reviewed by researchers from: University of Colorado at Denver, Harvard Medical School, Boston Children’s Hospital, University of Connecticut, Yale University University of Kansas, and more.
Today’s highly potent marijuana represents a growing and significant threat to public health and safety, a threat that is amplified by a new marijuana industry intent on profiting from heavy use. State laws allowing marijuana sales and consumption have permitted the marijuana industry to flourish, and in turn, the marijuana industry has influenced both policies and policy-makers. While the consequences of these policies will not be known for decades, early indicators are troubling. This report, reviewed by prominent scientists and researchers, serves as an evidence-based guide to what we currently observe in various states. We attempted to highlight studies from all the “legal” marijuana states (i.e., states that have legalized the non-medical use of marijuana). Unfortunately, data does not exist for several “legal” states, and so this document synthesizes the latest research on marijuana impacts in states where information is available.
A woman who received treatment for Gender Dysphoria (GD) as a teenager says the puberty-delaying drugs and testosterone prescribed to her has caused irreversible damage to her physical and mental health. Keira Bell is now taking Tavistock (gender affirmation clinic) to court. Keira says her transition turned out to be nothing more than a “coping mechanism” and that there was no real investigation into the other mental health issues she was going through. Keira adds that the transition left her feeling more depressed and suicidal and solved nothing.
Sky News research suggested that 35 psychologists have resigned from the children’s gender-identity service in three years. Six of them have now raised concerns about hormone treatment being given to children with GD. The London clinic sees children under 18, including some cases who are as young as three. Around half of children are put on drugs to pause their puberty, known as hormone blockers.
Ms Bell said she found her experience at the Tavistock Centre so distressing that she has since decided to de-transition. “It’s very difficult because you have to live with the physical changes you’ve experienced, especially when it comes to things like surgery,” she said.
“The whole process is really traumatic looking back on it, there’s no going back from it really because you are changed forever visibly.”
Ms Bell’s legal team will argue the centre’s approach was unlawful because children could not give informed consent for this kind of treatment and the potential risks of treatment were not adequately explained.
Scrutiny of the transgender “affirmative” treatment model is intensifying, and inquiries or reviews are underway in Australia, the UK, Sweden, Brazil and Germany. According to a new watchdog body called, the Society for Evidence-Based Gender Medicine (SEGM), many mainstream doctors are unaware that children’s hospital gender clinics carry out invasive medical treatments based on low-quality evidence. US physician William Malone, the spokesman for SEGM explained that the best treatment for such children should be found through scientific study, investigation and open debate. There has been an exponential rise in troubled teenagers seeking to transition. Many reportedly come to gender clinics with pre-existing mental health problems, autism, suppressed same-sex attraction, a history of child sex abuse or family trauma, and there is debate about whether they are getting the right treatment.
Hundreds of young transgender people are regretting their decision to change their sex as they are now seeking help to return to their original sex, a woman who is setting up a charity has told Sky News. Charlie Evans, 28, was born female but identified as male for nearly 10 years before detransitioning.
Sky reports that the number of young people seeking gender transition is at an all-time high but very little is heard about those who may come to regret their decision.
Dr. Michelle Cretella, president of the American College of Pediatricians has said that Other studies have found that while there is a “honeymoon period” of “reported relief and happiness” following sex reassignment treatment, it does not last. “Ten years beyond transition, however, rates of additional mental illness begin to rise precipitously, to the point that thirty years following surgical transition (mutilation), the suicide rate is 19 times greater than that of the general population.”
Lawyers for Dr Jacques de Vos, who has been charged by the HPCSA for allegedly advising a mother that her healthy 19 week unborn baby is a human being, have given notice to the HPCSA that US professor Priscilla Coleman may be called as an expert witness.
Prof Coleman, Professor of Human Development and Family Studies, Bowling Green State University, Ohio, USA is a leading international expert on abortion and mental health. According to Prof Coleman, “over the past several decades, the number of peer-reviewed studies identifying adverse mental health outcomes associated with abortion have increased dramatically”.
She states that “hundreds of studies have revealed that women who choose abortion experience increased risk of mental health problems, including substance abuse, anxiety, depression, suicidal ideation and suicide, among other conditions and symptoms”.
Her research offers the largest quantitative estimate of mental health risks associated with abortion available in the world. Results (involving 877 297 participants, 163 880 of whom experienced an abortion) revealed that women who aborted compared to women who have not, experienced 81% increased risk for mental health problems. The results revealed that women who have abortions have the following increased risks: anxiety disorders 34%, depression 37%, alcohol abuse 110%, marijuana abuse 220% and suicide behaviours 155%.
After many delays on the part of the HPCSA since 2017, Dr De Vos pleaded “not guilty” to professional misconduct before a HPCSA Professional Conduct Committee in December 2019. The HPCSA prosecutor must now commence with evidence at the hearing scheduled on 2 April 2020 in Cape Town.
Dr De Vos, who is a member of Doctors For Life International (DFL) is supported by DFL and legal team (De Wet Wepener Attorneys and Adv Keith Matthee SC) on a pro bono basis. For more information contact Doctors For Life at [email protected] or 032 481 5550.
This week Thursday, 13 February
2020 Prof. Chris Warton will be representing Doctors For Life International
(DFL) in a TV debate on the topic of abortion. The debate will be a live
broadcast between 06:00am & 08:00am on “Groot Ontbyt” on Kyknet as
well as “Groot FM”. (It’s a TV and a radio station combined)
Prof. Warton is a professor in
anatomy at the University of Cape Town, and one of DFL’s longest standing
members. Please tune in and support Prof Warton and DFL by sending comments to
the station’s SMS and whatsApp lines below during the show.
Irene H. Ericksen, M.S.* and Stan E. Weed, Ph.D.**
Purpose. To evaluate the global research on school-based comprehensive sex education (CSE) by applying rigorous and meaningful criteria to outcomes of credible studies in order to identify evidence of real program effectiveness.
Methods. The Researchers examined 120 studies of school-based sex education contained in the reviews of research sponsored by three authoritative agencies: the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, the U.S. federal Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Their reviews screened more than 600 studies and accepted only those that reached a threshold of adequate scientific rigor. These included 60 U.S. studies and 43 non-U.S. studies of school-based CSE plus 17 U.S. studies of school-based abstinence education (AE). The Researchers evaluated these studies for evidence of effectiveness using criteria grounded in the science of prevention research: sustained positive impact (at least 12 months post-program), on a key protective indicator (abstinence, condom use—especially consistent use, pregnancy, or STDs), for the main (targeted) teenage population, and without negative/harmful program effects.
Results. Worldwide, six out of 103 school-based CSE studies (U.S. and non-U.S. combined) showed main effects on a key protective indicator, sustained at least 12 months post-program, excluding programs that also had negative effects. Sixteen studies found harmful CSE impacts. Looking just at the U.S., of the 60 school-based CSE studies, three found sustained main effects on a key protective indicator (excluding programs with negative effects) and seven studies found harmful impact. For the 17 AE studies in the U.S., seven showed sustained protective main effects and one study showed harmful effects.
Conclusions. Some of the strongest, most current school-based CSE studies worldwide show very little evidence of real program effectiveness. In the U.S., the evidence, though limited, appeared somewhat better for abstinence education.
* Senior Research Analyst, The Institute for Research & Evaluation, Salt Lake City, Utah, U.S.A. ** Founder & Director, The Institute for Research & Evaluation, Salt Lake City, Utah, U.S.A.
Click HERE for a PDF file of the study, available for FREE download and distribution.
New state-level data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, the most authoritative study on drug use conducted by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Administration (SAMHSA), finds that marijuana use in “legal” states among youth, young adults, and the general population continued its climb.
Dagga use rates in “legal” states continue to drastically outnumber the use of marijuana/dagga in states that have not legalized the drug. Highlights include:
Past-month marijuana use among young people aged 18-25 in “legal” states has increased 8 percent in the last year (30.94% versus 28.62%). Use in this age group is 50 percent higher in “legal” states than in non-legal states (30.94% versus 20.66%).
Past-month youth use (aged 12-17) in states with commercial sales continued its recent upward trend. Since last year, “legal” Washington experienced the largest surge in past month youth use with an 11 percent increase (9.94% versus 8.96%). Colorado experienced a four percent increase (9.39% versus 9.02%).
Massachusetts overtook Colorado as the top-ranking state for overall first-time use, which is now number two.
Past-month youth use in “legal” states is 40% higher than in non-legal states (8.92% versus 6.26%). Past-year youth use in “legal” states is roughly 30% higher than in non-legal states (15.82% versus 12.10%).
First-time youth use in “legal” states is 30% higher than non-legal states (6.96% versus 5.38%)
“This data shows that the marijuana industry is achieving its goal of hooking our kids on today’s highly potent marijuana,” said Dr. Kevin Sabet, a former senior drug policy advisor to the Obama Administration. “As we learned just this week from the Monitoring the Future survey, the number of young people who perceive marijuana as being harmful is at a historic low. Given the recent data linking high potency marijuana with serious mental health issues, addiction, and future substance abuse, this is extremely concerning.
Adopted by the 70th WMA General Assembly, Tbilisi, Georgia, October 2019
The WMA reiterates its strong commitment to the principles of medical ethics and that utmost respect has to be maintained for human life. Therefore, the WMA is firmly opposed to euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide.
For the purpose of this declaration, euthanasia is defined as a physician deliberately administering a lethal substance or carrying out an intervention to cause the death of a patient with decision-making capacity at the patient’s own voluntary request. Physician-assisted suicide refers to cases in which, at the voluntary request of a patient with decision-making capacity, a physician deliberately enables a patient to end his or her own life by prescribing or providing medical substances with the intent to bring about death.
No physician should be forced to participate in euthanasia or assisted suicide, nor should any physician be obliged to make referral decisions to this end.
Separately, the physician who respects the basic right of the patient to decline medical treatment does not act unethically in forgoing or withholding unwanted care, even if respecting such a wish results in the death of the patient.
Please read the following articles about Dr de Vos:
A hearing by the Health Professions Council of SA (HPCSA) against an anti-abortion doctor got off to a rocky start and had to be temporarily adjourned on Tuesday in Cape Town. Jacques de Vos, 32, is facing charges of unprofessional conduct and was prohibited from practising medicine due to his views on abortion. READ MORE
A doctor, prohibited from practising medicine over his views on abortion, will face the Health Professions Council of South Africa (HPCSA) on Tuesday. Doctor Jacques de Vos reportedly believes abortion constitutes the killing of an unborn human being. De Vos was a medical intern at 2 Military Hospital in Wynberg when he made the utterance to a patient. He was then fired more than two years ago. READ MORE
An intern doctor and anti-abortionist appeared before a disciplinary hearing yesterday for allegedly dissuading a pregnant woman from terminating her pregnancy and likening it to the “killing of a human being”. READ MORE
A former military hospital doctor will appear before a disciplinary inquiry in Cape Town on Tuesday after being barred from practising as a doctor. Dr Jacques De Vos, who was a medical intern at 2 Military Hospital, was suspended two years ago after advising a patient that abortion is the killing of an unborn human being. READ MORE
Former Military Hospital doctor, Dr Jacques de Vos, has been charged by the Health Professions Council of South Africa (HPCSA) for advising that abortion is the killing of an unborn human being. Dr De Vos, who is a member of Doctors For Life International (DFL) will finally be able to respond to charges after waiting more than two years since being barred from practicing as a doctor.
Dr De Vos was a medical intern at 2 Military Hospital when he was suspended from the gynaecology rotation and refused to be signed off. As a result, Dr De Vos has also been prevented from commencing his community service year, effectively barring him from practicing medicine in South Africa for the past two years. Despite numerous efforts by Dr De Vos and his legal team, Dr De Vos has not received any assistance from the SA Military Health Service or the HPCSA to continue with his career.
Adv Keith Matthee SC, instructed by De Wet Wepener Attorneys, will represent Dr De Vos when he appears before a six-member panel disciplinary enquiry scheduled for 27 and 28 August 2019 in Cape Town. This case is likely to attract great interest in the medical community as healthcare practitioners such as Dr De Vos are often victimized and discriminated against for upholding the sanctity of life for unborn children and for advising women of the adverse effects of abortion on the mother of the unborn child.
The hearings are open to the public. The venue is yet to be confirmed by the HPCSA.
For more information, contact Martus de Wet of De Wet Wepener Attorneys at 057 004 0004 or [email protected]