Hello, readers.

Today, we’re diving into a topic that rarely gets discussed, yet affects 75% of American adults: imperfect vision.

Most of us long for 20/20 vision without relying on prescription glasses or contacts. But three out of four of us aren’t that lucky. And if you want to fix it for good, you have to go through the dreaded S-word: surgery.

LASIK eye surgery has long been presented as a permanent solution, and while the procedure is outpatient, the idea of cutting into the eye and permanently removing corneal tissue with a laser makes people hesitate.

That hesitation may be more justified than most realize.

While laser eye surgery is generally successful, it isn’t gentle. And for some patients, the side effects can include dry eyes, visual disturbances, and irreversible complications.

But recently, a chemistry professor made a mistake in the lab, and what followed was the discovery of a procedure that corrects vision without cutting the eye at all.

No lasers. No tissue removal. Just electricity, chemistry, and reshaping.

Enjoy this free article from The Epoch Times and discover how a complete accident could one day be the gentler alternative to LASIK.

Discover More From Epoch Health

This article originally appeared at The Epoch Times and was republished with permission. Pictures added. Emphasis mine.

By George Citroner

A chemistry professor trying to heat cartilage with electricity made a mistake that could change eye surgery.

Michael Hill at Occidental College accidentally used too little current in his experiment—and stumbled upon a discovery that might replace LASIK with a gentler treatment that reshapes corneas without ever cutting the eye.

The discovery may offer hope for the millions of people living with poor vision who want an alternative to glasses and contact lenses but are wary of LASIK’s risks.

While laser eye surgery is generally successful, it involves cutting into the eye and can cause complications, including dry eyes, vision problems, and, in rare cases, severe side effects.

Happy Accident Behind the Discovery

The breakthrough happened entirely by chance when Hill and his collaborator, Dr. Brian Wong, a professor of otolaryngology-head and neck surgery at the University of California–Irvine, were frustrated with their attempts to reshape cartilage using lasers.

Hill said they decided to try heating the material using an electric current, but accidentally used a far smaller current than they intended. They expected to see the cartilage bubbling and shaking. However, when Wong touched the cartilage, it wasn’t hot—suggesting another effect was at play.

While Wong is a medical professional, Hill is a physical chemist, and it was their partnership that allowed them to connect the dots.

Low electrical currents change the pH of cartilage, loosening molecular bonds and making tissues more malleable.

“And it’s like, this is electrochemistry,” Wong said. “That’s hydrogen and oxygen being evolved, so the discovery was entirely by accident on cartilage—100 percent by accident.”

Alternative to Carving the Eye With a Laser

Hill’s team has developed a technique called electromechanical reshaping (EMR) that uses small electric currents to make the cornea—the clear, dome-shaped front part of the eye—more malleable, then molds it into the correct shape.

The electrical current makes the cornea tissue more moldable, like clay. Once the electricity stops, the tissue locks into its new configuration.

In tests on rabbit eyes, the process took about a minute—comparable to LASIK’s speed but without incisions, expensive laser equipment, or tissue removal.

The cornea focuses light onto the retina. If it’s misshapen, vision becomes blurry. LASIK surgery corrects this by using a laser to burn a small amount of material to reshape the cornea, but it’s an invasive procedure with potential risks.

“LASIK is just a fancy way of doing traditional surgery. It’s still carving tissue—it’s just carving with a laser,” Hill said in a statement.

He presented his findings at the American Chemical Society’s fall meeting, held from Aug. 17 to Aug. 21.

The team repeated the process on 12 rabbit eyeballs, 10 of which had simulated nearsightedness.

In all cases, the treatment adjusted the eye’s focusing power, indicating potential for vision correction. The cells in the eyeballs survived because the researchers carefully controlled the tissue’s acidity levels.

They also demonstrated that the technique might reverse some corneal cloudiness caused by chemical damage, which currently requires corneal transplants.

Hill and Wong are now investigating whether the cornea can be reshaped without incisions using EMR.

Dr. James R. Kelly, an ophthalmologist at Kelly Vision and director of Refractive Surgery Education at Northwell Health in New York, who was not involved in the study, told The Epoch Times that EMR could “in theory” significantly reduce certain complication risks by avoiding incisions or ablation.

“There’s no flap to dislocate, no laser-induced tissue removal, and less disturbance to the corneal nerve supply,” he said. This could mean fewer dry eye symptoms after surgery.

“Additionally, if EMR proves reversible, that would be a major safety advantage over current laser-based techniques,” Kelly said.

Greater Safety and Accessibility

Hill noted that the team’s goal was to come up with a technique that was more accessible and safer than current laser-based treatments.

However, EMR temporarily alters the tissue pH, and there are “potential risks” involved—and those risks can only be sorted out through a live study, he said.

“We have data on ex vivo specimens that suggest the electrochemical technique does not cause acute changes to the underlying collagen structure of the cornea, nor does it immediately cause cellular necrosis, but these data are very, very limited,” Hill said.

Kelly said his biggest concern is whether the reshaping will hold up over time and remain uniform.

He noted that the cornea is “biologically active” and that its collagen structure and hydration can change with healing, aging, or inflammation. Without long-term in-vivo data, “we don’t know if the refractive effect will regress, shift unpredictably, or affect corneal transparency.”

Kelly said that “durability, stability, and optical quality” over many years will be key tests for EMR before it can be considered a viable alternative to LASIK, and he believes it could be 20 years or more before this technique becomes commercially available—if it ever does.

While funding uncertainties have temporarily halted progress, Hill remains optimistic, noting that there’s a “long road” between what has been accomplished and clinical use.

“Our next steps are definitely to carry out a live-animal study,” he said.

Thanks for reading! If you found this valuable, The Epoch Times has a special offer for Vigilant Fox readers:

Unlock their full library of Epoch Health articles — plus everything else on the site — for just $1/week for your first year. That’s 75% off the normal price. Claim it here. Cancel anytime.

Start Reading — 75% Off

More from Epoch Health:

The Calf Muscle Is Your ‘Second Heart’—How to Look After It

Side Effects of 30 Antidepressants Ranked and Compared: Lancet Study

How to Remove Fluoride From Your Water at Home

Share

The Vigilant Fox

Healthcare professional turned independent journalist. Exposing the stories mainstream outlets bury.

Happy January 6, readers. I hope you are ready for the media onslaught framing this day as the “worst attack on democracy” in history.

But speaking of onslaughts, there has been no greater assault on the human mind in modern history than the plague known as pornography.

Pornography is a huge problem. It goes beyond harming relationships; it literally changes the mind itself. And chances are you know somebody who is addicted to it.

Studies show that 70–90%+ of men under 40 have viewed pornography at some point. The more alarming figure is that 40–60% of men consume it regularly.

The good news is that these changes to the brain are not permanent. They are reversible, so long as the person has the desire to quit.

Enjoy this free article from The Epoch Times and discover valuable information on what porn actually does to the brain, along with methods that can help quash this addiction. This is a tough topic, but it’s an important one. I hope it serves you well.

Discover More From Epoch Health

This article originally appeared at The Epoch Times and was republished with permission. Pictures added. Emphasis mine.

By Arsh Sarao & Makai Allbert

What begins as a choice to watch pornography can evolve into a neurological and physical battle, with new research showing that frequent viewing rewires the brain in ways that mirror drug addiction.

The new study, published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, gives insights into how frequent pornography use may rewire the brain’s reward and control circuits, leading to neurological arousal, behavioral changes, and possible dependency, comparable to that observed in opioid addicts.

Obsession-Led Brain Rewiring

Conducted at Chengdu Medical College in China, the study involved 21 healthy college students who watched pornographic content to varying degrees and had no history of substance use. The participants were split into two groups: occasional, low-frequency pornography use, and those with a chronic obsession.

A 10-minute pornography video was selected for the experiment. Before and after watching the video, researchers measured participants’ cognitive functioning and reaction times. Further, while participants watched the video, their real-time neural activity, vital body signs, and facial expressions were also recorded.

The findings revealed that frequent pornography consumption creates three distinct changes in how our brains and bodies respond.

1. Brain Reward Circuits Get Hijacked

When the frequent porn users watched the video, their brain patterns showed features similar to those in people addicted to drugs such as cocaine or opioids, according to the researchers.

The brain areas associated with decision-making, self-control, and reward anticipation—the ventrolateral prefrontal cortex, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, and frontopolar area, respectively—experienced enhanced connectivity.

Such changes may lead the viewer to continue watching pornography, resulting in compulsive behavior, even prioritizing pornography over work, socializing, or other activities they used to enjoy.

Further, regular exposure to pornography leads to intense and sustained dopamine release, which in turn builds tolerance and desensitization. What used to arouse someone may no longer be sufficient, causing the person to seek more extreme content to experience the same level of feeling.

2. Emotional Responses Mirror Drug Use

Beyond neurological changes, the study also found that the emotional reactions in porn users resembled those observed in drug addiction.

For example, opioid users experience intense calmness, euphoria, pain relief, and a sense of blurred perception, which leads to a decreased heart rate. Similarly, researchers noticed that participants watching pornography had decreased heart rate, with the frequent pornography users exhibiting a more pronounced drop.

The emotional facial expressions while watching the 10-minute video revealed even more telling patterns. Frequent porn watchers displayed heightened facial expressions of pleasure and happiness, similar to the euphoria reported by drug users.

However, they also displayed significantly more anger and sadness than infrequent watchers, suggesting greater emotional fluctuations within the frequent group. According to the researchers, these emotional ups and downs may stem from conflicting feelings of arousal, withdrawal-like distress, and impaired emotional control in the brain.

Most concerning, frequent porn watchers were less surprised and had more numb expressions, similar to the intense calmness caused by opioid drugs. Further, this group showed higher anxiety and depression.

In contrast, the casual porn watchers showed more expressions of disgust and fear, which the researchers suggest may indicate they were less immersed and less emotionally blunted. This pattern implies they retained a more typical defensive reaction to explicit content.

3. Clouded Thinking

Cognitive function is also significantly affected by pornography use. The study measured participants’ accuracy and reaction times in completing a color and word test before and after the viewing session and found that chronic porn users had a greater decline in both.

The results highlight how frequent pornography watching may hijack a person’s ability to regulate attention and make sober judgments.

The Question of Addiction

The study’s findings raise important questions about how to interpret the observed brain changes. Nicholas Borgogna, an assistant professor at the University of Alabama–Birmingham who specializes in addiction and sexual health, cautions against jumping to conclusions about “pornography addiction.”

Borgogna, who was not associated with the study, told The Epoch Times that there’s a debate over whether people who develop pornography problems from failed impulse control should be considered “addicted.”

He said that because sex is inherently one of the most reinforcing activities for humans, pornography can exploit this novelty and lead to impulse-control problems.

The Chengdu researchers noted that prolonged overactivation of the reward system could lead to “withdrawal reactions” such as anxiety, irritability, depression, and anger if one stopped watching pornography for an extended period.

However, there’s little evidence for true withdrawal reactions, Borgogna said. Someone who has looked at pornography every day for a year is probably not going to start vomiting and shaking from lack of pornography if they go without it for a few days. The brain is dynamic and constantly changing, suggesting that any effects may be reversible, he said.

On the other hand, John Foubert, dean of the College of Education at Union University and a former highly qualified expert for sexual assault prevention with the U.S. Army, supports the addiction framework to recognize and treat problematic pornography use.

Pornography addiction is just like a behavioral addiction to substance abuse or gambling, Foubert told The Epoch Times. “There’s very clear evidence that porn changes the brain.”

Though the use of pornography is a private matter, it does affect those around us, he said. For instance, his research found that the more people use pornography, the less likely they are to intervene to help prevent a sexual assault.

The idea that one should do whatever is pleasing can easily lead one down an undesirable road, he said.

Unlearn Pornography

Because of the brain’s neuroplasticity, it is possible to naturally rewire its pathways.

Psychotherapy is the main treatment for problematic pornography use.

Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT), for example, shows particularly promising outcomes. An evidence-based form of psychotherapy, it focuses on observing and accepting negative thoughts and urges, being mindful of the present moment, and living purposefully.

To treat problematic pornography watching, ACT uses a technique called cognitive defusion—helping participants detach from their obsessive pornography-related thoughts by helping them identify priorities beyond porn cravings. Participants are guided to accept the urges without acting on them and stay committed to life’s bigger goals.

A 2016 randomized clinical trial on ACT’s effectiveness showed remarkable results. Participants reported around a 92 percent reduction in pornography viewing after 12 therapy sessions, and 54 percent completely stopped viewing pornography post-treatment.

Additionally, integrating holistic approaches, such as meditation practices, can help reduce distressing emotions and foster greater self-awareness.

Ultimately, overcoming porn cravings may be less about restricting viewing. The key lies in “looking beyond oneself and pursuing something that’s bigger,” Foubert said.

Thanks for reading! If you found this valuable, The Epoch Times has a special offer for Vigilant Fox readers:

Unlock their full library of Epoch Health articles — plus everything else on the site — for just $1/week for your first year. That’s 75% off the normal price. Claim it here. Cancel anytime.

Start Reading — 75% Off

More from Epoch Health:

The Calf Muscle Is Your ‘Second Heart’—How to Look After It

Side Effects of 30 Antidepressants Ranked and Compared: Lancet Study

How to Remove Fluoride From Your Water at Home

Share

The Vigilant Fox

Healthcare professional turned independent journalist. Exposing the stories mainstream outlets bury.

Merry Christmas Eve, readers.

I hope you are all primed and ready to spend time with family, exchange gifts, eat good food, and most importantly, honor our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ this Christmas.

Speaking of food, that brings us to today’s topic: gluten.

Millions think they’re “gluten-sensitive”… yet an astonishing 97% of those people don’t react to gluten at all.

Many experience very real symptoms and naturally assume gluten is to blame. But according to research, in the vast majority of cases, gluten isn’t the culprit.

So what’s actually causing those symptoms?

When researchers dug deeper, they discovered the real trigger was something far more common than gluten that rarely gets discussed.

Enjoy this free article from The Epoch Times and discover why gluten so often gets blamed by mistake, and what may really be driving the symptoms millions are trying to avoid.

Discover More From Epoch Health

This article originally appeared at The Epoch Times and was republished with permission. Pictures added. Emphasis mine.

By Amy Denney

The hunt for gluten-free food on menus and store shelves might be an unnecessary aggravation for most people who are avoiding gluten for their health. The likely culprit for a majority of gluten reactions may be irritable bowel syndrome (IBS).

True gluten sensitivities are rare, if they exist at all, according to a comprehensive review published in The Lancet on nonceliac gluten sensitivity that has collected decades of research.

Diagnosis Dilemma

Blinded studies included in the review revealed a pattern: Those with suspected nonceliac gluten sensitivity reacted the same way to gluten, wheat, or a placebo.

“That told us something else—not gluten—was driving symptoms,” co-author Jessica Biesiekierski, an associate professor at the University of Melbourne, told The Epoch Times in an email.

The review highlights a problem with diagnosing nonceliac gluten sensitivity. Unlike celiac disease—an autoimmune disorder in which gluten, a protein found in wheat, rye, and barley, damages the small intestine—nonceliac gluten sensitivity has no biomarker. It’s a diagnosis of elimination made after a person is found to react to gluten, and celiac and wheat allergies have been ruled out.

In many cases, nonceliac gluten sensitivity is self-reported, including in research studies. The authors noted that less than 3 percent of self-reported cases are validated by objective testing, and when testing is conducted, no more than 30 percent constitute nonceliac gluten sensitivity.

Also problematic is the overlap between nonceliac gluten sensitivity and IBS. Up to 80 percent of those with suspected nonceliac gluten sensitivity meet the diagnostic criteria for IBS, according to the review.

Patients who reacted even when gluten wasn’t given to them, plus the prevalence of other food intolerances, suggest altered nervous system sensitivity, as well as psychological factors, may be at play.

Evidence suggests a gut-brain connection, putting nonceliac gluten sensitivity in a category with disorders of gut-brain interaction, which includes functional motility disturbances.

Those with suspected gluten sensitivity also improve—not just their gut symptoms but also overlapping IBS issues such as chronic pain and fatigue, brain fog, and depression—on a low-FODMAP diet designed for IBS. FODMAP is an acronym for a group of carbs known to cause digestive issues. The low-FODMAP diet is a temporary elimination diet used to help people with IBS identify their specific food triggers.

“Whether [nonceliac gluten sensitivity] represents a discrete condition or a subset of patients with IBS and specific dietary triggers remains unclear,” the authors wrote.

More studies and better diagnostic criteria are needed, according to the review, particularly in light of the tendency to self-diagnose nonceliac gluten sensitivity.

Despite that celiac disease affects just 2 percent of the population, gluten-free sales are projected to jump from $7 billion to $11 billion by 2033, fueled by the widespread belief that avoiding gluten promotes weight loss and gut health.

Gluten-Free Problems

Gluten-free products are not only more expensive, but also often lower in fiber, folate, and minerals such as zinc and iron, Biesiekierski said, and can lead to nutritional deficiencies. Narrowing the diet can upset gut bacteria, which can exacerbate IBS symptoms and lead to eating-related anxiety, she added.

“Millions of people have cut out gluten unnecessarily,” she said. “Understanding what’s really behind symptoms helps people eat more freely and get the right treatment instead of avoiding foods they don’t need to.”

Changes in the gut microbiota and altered central nervous system processing are among the hallmarks of gut-brain disorders. Dysregulation can cause neurons to fire pain signals to the brain during digestion, which we begin to associate with particular foods.

“The concepts presented in this review article reflect my observations in practice,” Wendy Busse, a registered dietitian, told The Epoch Times. Her approach to food sensitivities shifted when she realized that food restriction often trapped her clients in a cycle of developing additional sensitivities. That’s because when we are using diets to monitor for gastrointestinal symptoms, we are more likely to become hypervigilant—a stress level that can put us at risk for more reactions to any food we reintroduce.

“Food sensitivities are complex, and treatment should address the whole person—including how the body reacts to food, their relationship with food, and the social factors that influence both,” she said. Social factors may include avoiding eating out or with certain people, for example, if it raises stress.

What to Do

The first step if you suspect a gluten sensitivity is to get testing for celiac disease and wheat allergy. “These tests are accurate and help rule out serious immune or allergic causes,” Biesiekierski said.

Once you know gluten isn’t the culprit, focus on eating an overall healthy diet. If that doesn’t bring relief, she said, seeing a dietitian for oversight with a short-term low-FODMAP diet can be helpful.

When people cut out gluten, they’re removing a type of carbohydrate called a fructan, which is also in other foods such as onions and garlic. Focusing solely on gluten when the cause of the digestive issues may be certain specific carbs can prevent the gut lining from healing. As a short-term elimination diet, the low-FODMAP approach often allows patients to reintroduce once-problematic foods without issues.

VIGILANT FOX NOTE: FODMAP stands for Fermentable Oligosaccharides, Disaccharides, Monosaccharides, and Polyols. Foods high in FODMAPs often include wheat-based foods like bread, pasta, cereal, crackers, and baked goods, due to their high fructan content. Other common offenders include onions and garlic, sugary processed foods, sweetened drinks, and products made with high-fructose corn syrup.

Dealing with underlying stressors can also help. Biesiekierski’s team is currently working on an international clinical trial comparing a low-FODMAP diet with exposure therapy—eating trigger foods—that aims to retrain the gut-brain connection. She urged anyone with IBS symptoms to participate.

Psychological factors such as fear, food avoidance, and a more anxious nervous system do shape physical symptoms, Biesiekierski noted, and shouldn’t be minimized.

“These findings highlight how strongly the brain and gut interact—expectations can shape how we physically feel.”

Thanks for reading! And Merry Christmas

Subscribe to The Epoch Times

More from Epoch Health:

How to Remove Fluoride From Your Water at Home

Side Effects of 30 Antidepressants Ranked and Compared: Lancet Study

How Pornography Hijacks the Brain

The Vigilant Fox

Healthcare professional turned independent journalist. Exposing the stories mainstream outlets bury.

About 500,000 Americans are diagnosed and treated for Lyme disease every year.

Chances are, you — or someone you know — has dealt with it. Lyme disease often starts as just a tick bite that goes unnoticed, and then it’s accompanied by weeks or months of fatigue, joint pain, or brain fog.

For many people, the most unsettling part comes after treatment. They did what the doctors told them to do. They took antibiotics. And yet, they never fully felt like themselves again.

Lyme disease is common, treatment is standardized, and still a significant number of patients are left with lingering symptoms.

So why do these people still feel so off? The explanation is often murky. Was the infection really gone? Was it autoimmune? Or was it something doctors couldn’t measure — or didn’t fully understand?

That’s why a recent set of studies, as covered by The Epoch Times, caught my attention.

Researchers are closing in on two important advances:

1.) An overlooked antibiotic that clears Lyme infection at dramatically lower doses than the current standard treatment…

2.) And a clearer explanation for why symptoms can persist long after antibiotics are finished.

If you or someone close to you has dealt with Lyme disease, or you’re worried about what happens after a tick bite, this article is worth reading.

Enjoy this free article and explore The Epoch Times’ full catalogue for more daily health insights.

Discover More From Epoch Health

This article originally appeared at The Epoch Times and was republished with permission. Pictures added. Emphasis mine.

By Cara Michelle Miller

Scientists may be closing in on two major advances in the fight against Lyme disease: an overlooked antibiotic that eliminates the infection at exceptionally low doses and new insights into why symptoms often persist long after treatment.

In a pair of studies published recently in Science Translational Medicine, scientists showed that piperacillin—a Food and Drug Administration-approved antibiotic—cleared Lyme infections in mice at doses up to 100 times lower than those of doxycycline, the current first-line treatment.

Unlike doxycycline, piperacillin targets the Lyme disease bacteria specifically, sparing the gut microbiome from the disruption that typically accompanies doxycycline use.

“What was remarkable to us was how well piperacillin worked at really low doses,” Brandon L. Jutras, a professor in the microbiology-immunology department at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine and lead researcher, told The Epoch Times. “We don’t need to provide it at a concentration that could kill other microbes.”

The team also found that remnants of the Lyme bacteria can remain in the body after being treated with antibiotics, which may explain why some people experience chronic symptoms even after being treated for Lyme infection.

Peptidoglycan—a component of Lyme bacteria’s cell wall—can linger in the body, triggering prolonged immune reactions and helping explain the symptoms of post-treatment Lyme disease (PTLD), where some patients continue to experience symptoms for months or even years after the infection is thought to be cleared.

A More Targeted Approach

Lyme disease is an infectious illness that is spread to people through the bites of infected black-legged ticks and can lead to neurological and heart complications if untreated.

Piperacillin works by interfering with the unique way Borrelia burgdorferi, the bacterium responsible for Lyme disease, builds its cell walls—a process essential for bacterial survival.

Because of this targeted mechanism, researchers believe piperacillin will spare the gut microbiome, which is often disrupted by broader-spectrum antibiotics like doxycycline. However, whether this more targeted approach could help prevent PTLD wasn’t addressed in the study.

Jutras’s team screened nearly 500 FDA-approved drugs, tracking how each compound affected the bacterium’s ability to build its distinctive cell wall.

“We could literally watch what happened to the cell wall when we added antibiotics,” Jutras said. “Piperacillin disrupted that process in a way that was incredibly specific to Borrelia.”

Currently, piperacillin is used to treat pneumonia and urinary tract infections and is not approved for use against Lyme disease in humans.

Beyond treatment, the researchers also see promise in piperacillin as a potential preventive measure. The idea is that one dose, received right after a tick bite, could stop the infection before it starts.

Early diagnosis is challenging since small tick bites may often go unnoticed, early symptoms may not appear for days or weeks, and not all patients develop the telltale bull’s-eye rash.

Diagnostic tests often rely on antibodies that take time to form, resulting in false negatives during early infection.

“You get bit by a tick. You go to your doctor. Right now, they might tell you to wait for symptoms or a positive test result,” Jutras said. “But with piperacillin, the idea is that you could receive a single prophylactic dose. It wouldn’t harm your microbiome, and it might prevent illness altogether.”

Jutras noted that while the findings make piperacillin a promising option, it must first be tested and proven effective in human trials before physicians can prescribe it.

Some experts also caution that any antibiotic—even at low doses—can contribute to antibiotic resistance.

“The question is: does the benefit of potentially preventing Lyme disease outweigh the risk to that person’s microbiome and the collective antibiotic resistance concern that we collectively face?” Dr. Clayton Bell, a physician who specializes in integrative approaches to Lyme disease, told The Epoch Times in an email.

“If piperacillin is proven to be highly effective, then that is a no-brainer in favor of preventing this potentially debilitating medical condition,” he said, adding that piperacillin is only available in intravenous or intramuscular form, so it’s unlikely to be practical for widespread preventive use after a tick bite.

Side effects of doxycycline may include gastrointestinal discomfort, increased sensitivity to sunlight, and potential risks to bone and tooth development in children. It’s also avoided during pregnancy.

Piperacillin, commonly used to treat pneumonia and urinary tract infections in combination with another antibiotic (tazobactam), carries risks of allergic reactions or changes in liver function. However, researchers note that the much lower dose used in this study—and the fact that it was not combined with a second antibiotic—may result in a safer profile.

Why Lyme Symptoms Persist

Lyme disease is now the most common vector-borne disease in the United States, with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimating that approximately 500,000 Americans are diagnosed and treated each year.

Unlike most infections, where the concern is primarily the initial acute phase, a significant worry with Lyme disease is that even after treatment, some people develop chronic symptoms of fatigue, pain, and brain fog that don’t respond to further treatment.

A 2022 study from Harvard University found that 14 percent of those treated for Lyme disease went on to develop PTLD.

There is currently no single approved treatment for PTLD. Management typically focuses on relieving symptoms such as fatigue, joint pain, and brain fog through a combination of supportive care, lifestyle changes, and in some cases, extended or repeated antibiotic courses.

Jutras and his team believe that lingering bacterial debris may trigger an immune response that mimics chronic illness, even when no live bacteria remain. These peptidoglycan fragments were found in the liver and joint fluid of patients with Lyme arthritis, where they continued to provoke an immune response.

Compared with other bacteria, Lyme bacteria’s peptidoglycan is more resistant to breakdown, possibly because of its unique structure—a feature that scientists say is altered by the tick’s biology.

Holistic Approaches for Prevention

To help reduce the risk of persistent symptoms, many doctors who specialize in Lyme treatment take a holistic approach to prevention and recovery.

By lowering the number of lingering pathogens and supporting immune function, these strategies can help manage and even reduce the chances of developing PTLD.

Bell highlighted the importance of identifying co-infections, such as Bartonella, Babesia, Ehrlichia, Anaplasma, or Rocky Mountain spotted fever, as well as addressing mold exposure and mycotoxins. “If co-infections or mold toxins are present and go untreated, the patient will have a much more challenging time recovering from Lyme,” he said.

Herbal remedies such as Cryptolepsis and Japanese knotweed may help reduce bacterial load and strengthen the body’s natural defenses.

Once symptoms indicating an acute infection are gone, these two botanicals may be a superior choice to antibiotics for long-term maintenance therapy after infection, Bell said.

Clean tick bites with soap and water, and remove any attached ticks by using tweezers to pull them upward—without twisting or crushing them.

Early symptoms of Lyme disease, occurring 3 to 30 days after exposure, include:

• Bull’s-eye rash (erythema migrans)

• Fever, chills, or fatigue

• Muscle aches and joint pain

• Swollen lymph nodes

Later symptoms, which may occur weeks to months after infection, include:

• Severe joint swelling or pain

• Drooping on one side of the face (facial palsy)

• Numbness or tingling

• Irregular heartbeat

• Cognitive issues, such as memory loss

Thanks for reading! If you found this valuable, The Epoch Times has a special offer for Vigilant Fox readers:

Unlock their full library of Epoch Health articles — plus everything else on the site — for just $1/week for your first year. That’s 75% off the normal price. Claim it here. Cancel anytime.

Start Reading — 75% Off

More from Epoch Health:

Avoid Taking These 3 Supplements Too Casually as They May Increase Cancer Risk

Popular Artificial Sweetener May Increase Insulin Levels, Research Shows

How to Remove Fluoride From Your Water at Home

Share

The Vigilant Fox

Healthcare professional turned independent journalist. Exposing the stories mainstream outlets bury.

When I wake up in the morning, I always enjoy a simple meal of scrambled eggs with salt and pepper. It’s nutritious, takes 10 minutes to make (including cleanup), and best of all, it’s delicious.

However, there is a lot of conflicting information when it comes to eggs. For decades, eggs were considered dangerous because they are high in cholesterol. But around the 2010s, large studies showed that dietary cholesterol has little effect on blood cholesterol for most people.

And if you’ve followed this Substack and the summaries based on the work of A Midwestern Doctor, you’ll know full well that lowering cholesterol to reduce heart disease risk isn’t actually such a great strategy.

Back to eggs. They’re literally a superfood. Eggs are:

• A high-quality protein source without a lot of calories

• An excellent source of selenium - an antioxidant mineral that supports thyroid function and immunity.

• Packed with healthy fats

• One of the few natural foods that contains vitamin D

• Full of B-vitamins needed for energy and cellular repair

• And more

But once you get past “Are eggs healthy?” another question hits: “What eggs should I buy?” Conventional eggs, cage-free eggs, free-range eggs, pasteur-raised eggs, organic, not organic — what’s the real difference?

I didn’t fully know the answer to that question before I read the following article from The Epoch Times. If you love eggs like me, you’ll appreciate the insights here and will walk away knowing which egg choice is right for you.

Enjoy this free article and explore The Epoch Times’ full catalogue for more daily health insights.

Discover More From Epoch Health

This article originally appeared at The Epoch Times and was republished with permission. Pictures added. Emphasis mine.

By Emma Suttie D.Ac, AP

Michael Jimenez is the founder and CEO of JMZ Farms in Texas, where he raises approximately 500 chickens and produces organic, pasture-raised eggs.

“I feed my hens a certified organic feed, and they are pasture raised—meaning that I have them on pasture 24/7,” he told The Epoch Times.

Jimenez says he chose organic, pasture-raised methods to provide customers with the highest quality eggs—completely natural and free of chemicals. His approach was inspired by regenerative farming advocate Joel Salatin, whom Jimenez discovered through videos at age 12.

“Starting with that one chicken I had—it really inspired me to want to build my home farm,” said Jimenez.

With egg prices soaring and avian flu concerns on the rise, consumers are paying closer attention to what egg labels actually mean.

Marc Dresner of The American Egg Board noted that eggs remain safe to eat.

“The USDA and FDA say consumers can be confident in the safety of eggs. There is no evidence that bird flu can be transmitted to humans through properly handled and cooked food, including eggs,” he told The Epoch Times via email.

He added that farmers and their families eat the same eggs they sell and work daily to ensure quality and safety.

What Egg Carton Labels Mean

Egg labels provide key details about:

• How hens were raised: Cage systems, cage-free, free-range, or pasture-raised

• What hens ate: Organic feed, grains, or forage like bugs

• Egg quality and size: Based on USDA grading (AA, A, B)

• Safety: Storage and transport standards to prevent foodborne illness

Some labels are regulated by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA); others come from third-party certifiers with their own criteria. Some claims are unregulated and used primarily as marketing terms.

USDA Oversight and Grading

The USDA offers a voluntary grading system:

• Grade AA: Firm whites, centered yolks, clean, unbroken shells

• Grade A: Slightly less firm whites

• Grade B: Often used for processed eggs; may have stained but intact shells

The USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service inspects facilities and hatcheries multiple times a year. The Food Safety and Inspection Service and the FDA oversee production, storage, and transportation.

Types of Labels: What They Mean

Here’s what the most common egg labels actually mean, and how they compare in terms of farming practices, welfare standards, and oversight.

Conventional Eggs

Although practices vary, most conventional eggs come from hens raised in battery cages—small enclosures that typically hold five to 10 hens. These systems are designed to maximize production and reduce costs, but raise concerns about animal welfare.

Key characteristics of conventional egg production include:

• Restricted movement: Hens often cannot spread their wings, perch, or engage in natural behaviors

• Beak trimming: Common to prevent injuries from overcrowding

• Grain-based diets: Often include genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and synthetic additives

• Antibiotic use: May be administered preventively, though usage is regulated

• Lack of outdoor access: Hens remain indoors unless otherwise labeled

Conventional eggs are the most widely available and affordable option, but their production typically involves less stringent animal welfare and environmental standards.

Cage-Free

The USDA grants the cage-free label only to eggs that have been graded (AA, A, or B). All other cage-free claims come from third-party certifiers, which set their own criteria.

Eggs may be labeled:

• Grade AA cage-free

• Grade A cage-free

• Grade B cage-free

USDA cage-free standards require:

• Hens are not in cages but live indoors in large barns

• They have space to roam, access to food and water, and can exhibit limited natural behaviors

• Typically no outdoor access unless specified

• USDA certification applies only if the eggs are graded; otherwise, third-party verification is required

Jimenez says that commercial farms have altered the definition of egg labels through government regulation. For example, cage-free eggs come from hens that aren’t confined to individual cages but are still housed inside large metal barns—typically around 30 feet by 400 feet—with no windows. While hens can move freely within the barn, the environment often becomes dusty, dirty, and stressful due to poor ventilation and overcrowding.

Free-Range

Like cage-free eggs, the USDA grants the free-range label only to eggs that have been USDA-graded and display the official shield logo. USDA-certified free-range eggs must meet the following requirements:

• Similar to cage-free, with added access to an outdoor area

• Outdoor space may be fenced or netted; not all areas have grass or vegetation

• Hens must be able to perform natural behaviors, such as foraging

Considerations:

The USDA does not specify how much space hens must have, how often they must go outside or for how long, or what type of outdoor space hens have access to—whether grass, dirt, gravel, or concrete.

Jimenez says that with free-range eggs, hens are housed in the same large metal barn as cage-free hens but have access to a door that leads to an outdoor area. However, the yard doesn’t necessarily have grass.

“What tends to happen with hens is that because they go on that same grass over and over again, it turns to dirt, and no grass can grow in that area. And so that’s why I have to periodically move my hens, because if I don’t move them, the area they’re in will become dirty and nasty, and then I end up getting infected birds, or even sick birds,” he said.

A 2021 Canadian study found that free-range eggs had similar protein but more linoleic acid (a healthy fat) and less cholesterol than conventional eggs.

Another study fed hens varying levels of conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) and found that one breed—Brown Dwarf layers—produced lower-cholesterol yolks when fed 2.5 percent CLA. However, no direct link was found between blood cholesterol and yolk cholesterol in hens.

Pasture-Raised

The term “pasture-raised” is not regulated by the USDA, so its meaning depends on third-party certifications or individual farm practices.

• Not regulated by the USDA

• Third-party certifiers typically require 108 square feet of pasture per hen and rotational grazing

• Some farms may use this label without certification—consumers can contact farms for clarity

Certified Organic

All eggs labeled “organic” must be certified under the USDA’s National Organic Program. These standards cover feed, housing, and animal welfare and are among the most stringent for commercial egg production.

• Hens must eat 100 percent organic feed free of GMOs, synthetic pesticides, and fertilizers

• No antibiotics or hormones (note: hormones are banned in all U.S. poultry)

• Must have year-round outdoor access and room to engage in natural behaviors

• Indoor spaces must include natural light, nesting boxes, and perches

Considerations:

While the USDA requires that organic hens have continuous, year-round outdoor access, it does not regulate how often they go outside, how much time they spend outdoors, or the exact size and quality of the outdoor area. However, producers must offer a defined amount of outdoor space and are encouraged to promote outdoor activity.

Labels Versus Nutrition

In addition to animal welfare concerns, many people wonder about the health benefits of the eggs they buy—and whether nutrition varies based on the label.

Emily Arkin, a registered dietitian nutritionist based in Washington, D.C., said the variety of labels can be confusing, especially for those looking to make healthy choices.

“Anytime there’s a food that has a lot of choices built into shopping for it, people are going to have questions, and often it’s juggling a few considerations. They’re considering price, but you also want it to be a nutritionally sound choice,” she told The Epoch Times.

Arkin noted that eggs are excellent sources of both protein and fat, and while micronutrient levels may vary slightly depending on the hens’ diets, those differences tend to be minimal.

“Generally, this is not going to wildly shift the nutrient content of the eggs,” she added.

Rachel Gargano, chief registered dietitian at Live it Up, emphasized that eggs provide an excellent source of protein that the body can absorb and use efficiently. While both the egg whites and yolk contain protein, the yolk holds most of the egg’s essential micronutrients—including choline, selenium, and vitamin A—as well as the antioxidants lutein and zeaxanthin.

When asked how nutrition varies between egg types, Gargano said labels can be misleading and may give the impression that hens are given more space to roam and roost than they actually do, adding, “Sadly, this isn’t always the case.”

Gargano said that while pasture-raised hens generally spend more time outdoors with access to natural forage, the biggest nutritional difference may come from their varied diet and increased sun exposure.

“Having part of their feed come from grass and other plants, as well as spending more time in the sun, may enhance the nutritional quality of their eggs, potentially allowing for more vitamin E, vitamin D, and omega-3 fatty acids,” she added.

Arkin said one of the biggest misconceptions is that there are major nutritional differences between different types of egg labels, when in reality, most are quite similar.

She also noted that people often believe they should avoid eggs if they have high cholesterol.

“We’ve found—maybe 10 years ago—that dietary cholesterol doesn’t make up a huge portion of blood cholesterol, which is what’s being measured. So, there is room for egg consumption, even for folks that have some of those cardiovascular risk factors,” she added.

Gargano agreed, noting that while hens that forage may lay eggs with more nutrients, the overall impact on someone’s diet is likely small.

“If you’re eating several eggs per day, then it may make a bigger impact, but if only a few eggs per week, then the nutritional benefits may be negligible.”

Ultimately, Gargano said that for many consumers, the decision about which eggs to buy often comes down to personal values.

“Do we care about the welfare of the animals? Is organic important to us? And does the current cost negate either of these? These are the bigger drivers of our consumer habits,” she said.

Egg Certification Labels Explained

Although third-party certification has specifics for each label, a chart of the key components is below.

Other Labels

Hormone Free

The FDA does not permit the use of hormones—including artificial, added, or steroid hormones—in the production of chickens (or pork) in the United States.

If you see a label on eggs that says “raised without hormones,” it must, by law, be followed by the statement: “Federal regulations prohibit the use of hormones.”

The USDA has banned the use of all hormones in poultry since the 1950s.

All Natural/Natural

Neither the USDA nor the FDA regulates this term. However, according to the USDA website, “natural” means nothing was added to the eggs.

Omega-3 Enriched

Omega-3 enriched eggs mean that hens were supplemented with rich sources of omega-3s—such as algae, flaxseed, or fish oils—to increase the omega-3 content of their eggs.

The USDA and the FDA do not regulate the use of the term “omega-3 enriched.”

However, if a label claims a specific amount of omega-3s, the producer must provide evidence to the FDA, which verifies that label claims are truthful and accurate.

Vegetarian-Fed

Vegetarian-fed means that hens were given a diet of grains and plant-based ingredients with no animal by-products.

However, since chickens are naturally omnivores, bugs and worms are part of their typical diet.

The term is not defined or regulated by either the USDA or the FDA.

Final Thoughts

The growing number of labels on egg cartons allows consumers to make choices based on their values and priorities.

Whether you care about animal welfare, environmental impact, nutritional quality, or farming practices, you can support the kind of egg production that aligns with your preferences by choosing where to spend your money—at the grocery store or a local farm.

According to Jimenez, in recent years—with events like COVID-19 and now avian flu—more people have turned to local farms for their eggs because grocery store shelves were often empty.

Dresner says, “It’s important to know that whichever egg you choose, you’re getting a wholesome, nutritious, high-quality protein, and you can’t make a wrong choice.”

Thanks for reading! If you found this valuable, The Epoch Times has a special offer for Vigilant Fox readers:

Unlock their full library of Epoch Health articles — plus everything else on the site — for just $1/week for your first year. That’s 75% off the normal price. Claim it here. Cancel anytime.

Start Reading — 75% Off

More from Epoch Health:

How to Remove Fluoride From Your Water at Home

Thousands of Bottles of Blood Pressure Drugs Recalled Due to Cross-Contamination

I Report on the MAHA Movement. When I Put It to the Test I Lost 65 Pounds

Share

The Vigilant Fox

Healthcare professional turned independent journalist. Exposing the stories mainstream outlets bury.

Dear readers,

I have some exciting news, and if you like health insights, this is a big one.

As I’ve previously mentioned in this newsletter, I find The Epoch Times to be a highly valuable news organization. Their interviews and reporting during COVID were unparalleled, and I love their non-biased approach to journalism. They’re true professionals.

I’ve been speaking closely with them, and they’ve allowed me to share with you one free health article every week right here on this Substack.

No subscription or credit card needed. You can read it right here, and my hope is that you always find them worth your time because I’ll be handpicking each one before it makes its way here.

The Epoch Times is the only major publication (if you don’t include Substack) that I pay my personal money to read. I find their reporting that stellar. And for Vigilant Fox readers, they are offering a special deal. You’ll see that at the end of this article.

Subscribe now

Now, for today’s free health article…

As you well know from COVID, sometimes medical advice can come out of thin air. Remember 6 ft social distancing? They made it up. But what about other tropes like “Get your dental checkup every 6 months” or “Get your colonoscopy at (now) 45”?

Regarding the latter, I’ve always wondered what the real risk of skipping a colonoscopy was, and thought, “Wait, can something bad happen to me in the process?”

Thanks to Yuwei Zhang, M.D., Ph.D., and The Epoch Times, we finally have more clarity on those questions. Enjoy this free article from Epoch Health, and explore their full catalog for more daily health insights.

Discover More From Epoch Health

This article originally appeared at The Epoch Times and was republished with permission. Pictures added. Emphasis mine.

By Yuwei Zhang, M.D., Ph.D.

Although many view a colonoscopy as an uncomfortable or even scary procedure, around 15 million of them are carried out annually in the United States, and 60.6 percent of people aged 50 to 75 without a personal history of colorectal cancer have had one in the past 10 years.

It’s believed that a colonoscopy not only helps find cancer but also prevents cancer from developing from polyps. Because of its high level of sensitivity and specificity, colonoscopies have been regarded as the gold standard for colon cancer screenings for a long time.

Unexpected Result From a Major Colonoscopy Study

However, a major clinical study, the Nordic-European Initiative on Colorectal Cancer (NordICC) study published in 2022, raised questions about the efficacy of colonoscopies.

The study suggested that colonoscopies don’t save as many lives as previously thought.

Researchers recruited 84,585 participants in Poland, Norway, Sweden, and the Netherlands; 28,220 were in the invited group (invited to have a colonoscopy), and 56,365 were in the usual-care group.

At the end of the 10-year follow-up, the risk of colorectal cancer-related death at 10 years was 0.28 percent among participants in the invited group and 0.31 percent in the usual-care group (control group). The risk of death from any cause was 11.03 percent in the invited group and 11.04 percent in the usual-care group.

In terms of adverse events, 15 people had major bleeding after polyp removal. According to the study, there were no screen-related deaths within 30 days after colonoscopy.

The incidence of colon cancer has dropped significantly since 1975. Most people believe that this is due to increased screening and improved treatment.

Since there were no randomized clinical trial data on colonoscopies for colorectal cancer before, the NordICC trial sparked a heated discussion: Can colonoscopies truly prevent colon cancer?

If the benefit isn’t what people have expected, the colon cancer-screening landscape could be totally reshaped.

The Study Invokes Intense Debate

Numerous doctors argue that NordICC’s researchers should maintain follow-up in their study, and assessments of other current trials may shed light on the advantages of screening colonoscopies after 10 years. Follow-up time is very important, as many believe that the benefit of a colonoscopy is treating precancerous polyps. It may be decades before we see the long-term benefit of colonoscopy screenings.

Doctors perceive the results of the NordICC study differently for the following reasons.

First, the trial had lower-than-expected participation—only 42 percent underwent colonoscopy—and provides no information on adherence to guidelines for polyp surveillance.

Most think the study doesn’t change the value of colonoscopies. The test would’ve lowered cancer risk by 31 percent and cut the probability of dying from colorectal cancer by 50 percent if compliance had been 100 percent, according to the research findings.

Also, the tested countries have a higher mortality rate and incidence rate compared to the United States. U.S. clinicians favor colonoscopies, while European health systems rely far more on flexible sigmoidoscopy, which only examines the lower part of the colon.

However, countries without screening programs still witnessed improvements in colorectal cancer mortality. A comment on the findings published in The Lancet Oncology stated that firm conclusions can’t yet be drawn on the causal relationship between colon cancer mortality and national screenings.

Second, the operator affects the colonoscopy’s effectiveness. The adenoma detection rate is the percentage of screening colonoscopies in which one or more adenomas are found.

Patients are better protected from adenoma development by endoscopists with higher adenoma detection rates.

Third, the study was done among European populations and may not be representative of the various demographics in the United States.

The Risks of Colonoscopy

The benefits and risks depend on compliance with the screening protocol, the chance of meeting with an experienced endoscopist, and your own risk of developing colon cancer.

For a person with a family history of colorectal cancer, it might be more beneficial to keep a close look and a healthy diet.

On the other hand, a healthy lifestyle doesn’t guarantee that you won’t have colorectal cancer. First-degree relatives of people with colorectal cancer are at a sixfold increased risk of colon cancer before 50 years old. Second- and third-degree relatives correspond to 1 1/2 and three times increased risk, a two- to threefold increased risk of colorectal cancer.

A doctor may determine that you’re at high risk if you have a family history of colon cancer or you have a history of colon polyps or inflammatory bowel disease.

Colonoscopies are still the gold standard if cancer is suspected in a patient. And it will benefit patients most if a cancer is found and removed in the adenoma-carcinoma sequence (the development of cancerous change in a dysplastic polypoid lesion).

The prognosis of patients with colorectal cancer varies according to the site of cancer, with right-sided tumors having the most severe prognosis, making an early diagnosis in this group of patients especially important.

However, there are many risks for colonoscopies—in addition to the risk of sedation.

The risks of colonoscopies include major bleeding (14.6 events per 10,000 performed), perforation (3.1 per 10,000), or infection. These rates are higher than in sigmoidoscopy, a less expensive, less invasive method that can be performed without sedation.

A colonoscopy is more invasive and burdensome than other colon cancer tests, such as fecal testing and sigmoidoscopy, and it requires more clinical resources.

A few medical organizations have dropped the recommended age to begin colorectal cancer screening to 45 from 50. The reason for this is that scientists are striving to learn more about the causes, the biology, and how to prevent the illness from developing earlier in life. Several risk factors have become more prevalent over the past 45 years, such as obesity, sedentary lifestyles, and smoking, which can lead to more instances of early-onset cancers. Poor diet, particularly one high in processed meat and fat and low in fruits and vegetables, is increasingly being linked to early-onset colorectal cancer. Several studies have also discovered that being overweight or obese may increase one’s risk of developing colorectal cancer with early onset.

Since colorectal cancer is still relatively rare, affecting less than 1.8 per 100,000 younger adults (below age 40), lowering the screening age might be a burden and not cost-effective. In addition, the trend of new young patients might be because of early screening and overdiagnosis, which could further burden the person.

The below figure shows the long process of colon cancer development. If the in situ cancer is identified very early, the five-year survival rate may improve. But no one can really tell how long it takes for a cancer cell to grow into something lethal, and there are other risks to consider that may affect outcomes, as well.

Weigh Both Sides

Deciding whether it’s cost-effective to do a colonoscopy will be based on your own risk of developing colorectal cancer, depending on your family history and other risk factors.

If you develop severe bleeding due to receiving an endoscopy, harm is 100 percent likely. To avoid the chance of harm, or if you can’t tolerate a colonoscopy, some studies have proven that a fecal immunochemical test (simple poop test) for screening patients at increased risk for colorectal cancer has high overall diagnostic accuracy, given its safety, simplicity, low cost, accuracy, and minimal discomfort.

We still need better data on a colonoscopy’s benefits and risks. To account for comorbidities, oncological treatments, stage-related differences at the time of diagnosis, family history, and other risk factors, additional in-depth patient-level data are required.

Ideally, when a patient sees a doctor, the doctor would provide him personalized advice; for example, “Mr. Smith, your chance of getting colorectal cancer is X percent based on all the information you’ve provided.”

However, there are many uncertainties in life. Even in the way you cook, what ingredients you use, and how they were processed—it’s hard to digitize such factors, as there’s no single model to predict a person’s risk. Tailoring colorectal cancer screening approaches to each person based on their risk factors and precision screening may improve the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of colonoscopy screening.

Thanks for reading! If you found this valuable, The Epoch Times has a special offer for Vigilant Fox readers:

Unlock their full library of Epoch Health articles — plus everything else on the site — for just $1/week for your first year. That’s 75% off the normal price. Claim it here. Cancel anytime.

Start Reading — 75% Off

More from Epoch Health:

Medicare Slashes Prices for 15 Prescription Drugs

FDA Issues Notice in Recall of More Than 140,000 Bottles of Common Statin Medication

How to Remove Fluoride From Your Water at Home

Share