What They DON’T Teach You In Medical School
I had the privilege of speaking with medical students from the University of Arizona, delving into their thoughts on nutrition and their current studies in medical school.
It’s intriguing, and somewhat disheartening, to note that the curriculum still emphasizes a fundamental understanding of cholesterol, impacting their perceptions of superfoods like red meat.
Why is it that a nutrient-rich, whole food like red meat is often considered harmful to humans, when our evolution spans thousands of years with meat as a primary dietary staple?
We know that red meat has exceptional bioavailability, boasting essential nutrients such as taurine, which has demonstrated its role in human longevity…
Source: YouTube
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.
Tom
| #
Most doctors are brain dead drug marketers.
Reply
Saeed Qureshi
| #
Medical training and degrees prepare doctors to listen to or watch symptoms, followed by some clinical tests (which may or may be scientifically valid, as currently established with PCR tests) to match with some medicines (chemicals, mostly potent and non-physiological).
Doctors, by design, are not trained for critical thinking and finding “causative inference,” “root cause,” etc. (as mentioned many times in the interview). To study such effects, one must study/research chemistry (subject or science), which, for the most part, is absent from their education and training.
For example, the word bioavailability mentioned here, although presented as a medical/pharmaceutical term, is a chemical term derived from the body’s kinetics of chemicals (chemical kinetics). Bioavailability studies are commonly conducted for evaluating pharmaceutical products, particularly for developing generic products.
However, critically evaluating commonly required bioavailability study protocols, one would find they are not scientifically validated for their intended purpose. Hence, results and claims would almost certainly be irrelevant (epidemiology or not). I have explained this aspect in our book (Slaying the Virus and Vaccine Dragon), available from Amazon. Please consider reading it.
More information may also be found here (https://bioanalyticx.sellfy.store/).
Reply