Don't bury the lede!
When narratives undermine investigation, and a few remarks in regards to fear porn and the current Substack climate.
This is the “final post” in the Catecholamine series. This article itself does not necessarily relate to Catecholamines, but comes about partially in response to the role Catecholamines play on our bodies. Regardless, this post can be considered a separate post that raises concerns over fear porn and how the drive to push narratives may obfuscate real leads in the COVID discourse.
Edit: A citation was included for smoking and sympathetic activation. Also, lead was changed to “lede”. Thank you to ABD for pointing that mistake out!
When narrative trumps investigation
In my prior post I wanted to bring to light how easily narratives can cloud actual investigation and fact-finding by glossing over things that we really should not.
In the case of athletes the notion that these groups are healthy may obfuscate any intention to look deeper and see that many factors may act synergistically with the vaccines to lead to the uptick in cardiovascular disease, myocarditis, or sudden cardiac failure.
In essence, the need to push a narrative against the vaccine may bury any ledes to look even deeper and consider other necessary factors.
I became aware of this circumstance last year when similar issues came about by vaccine zealots.
At the end of December last year I wrote a paid member’s post about a UK bodybuilder named John Eyers:
I encourage my paid members to read this post, although I’ll provide a short summary below.
John Eyers was a man in his 40’s who was an ardent bodybuilder who took the sport very seriously.
As word grew about the COVID vaccines he became rather skeptical of them. Unfortunately, John Eyers would eventually become infected with SARS-COV2 and succumb to the virus, with some of his last words being that he wished that he got vaccinated.
As sad as the story is, many mainstream outlets jumped onto this story as an example of how even healthy people die from COVID, and hence why even healthy people should get vaccinated.
Although many of the reports came out in the Summer of 2021 with limited information, it would be a piece from The Guardian released months later with interviews with Eyers sister, friends, and family members that pushed a harrowing tale of the “healthy anti-vaxxer” who paid the ultimate price.
The Guardian article didn’t provide much in regards to why Eyers, a supposedly “healthy” man succumbed to the virus only with doctors pontificating on some genetic factors playing a role.
And it was because of this reporting that I was rather skeptical and wanted to contextualize this death in greater detail.
As noted, Eyers being a bodybuilder focused on his aesthetics, and being in his 40s which may be considered relatively old for the sport, we should not overlook the fact that AAS may have been a contributing factor in his death.
Now, there’s no way of knowing if Eyers himself was on steroids, but given the fact that bodybuilding is the top sport in AAS use one cannot discount this possibility.
So why is the use of AAS a crucial factor in SARS-COV2 infection?
In short, androgens and more specifically Testosterone upregulate ACEII expression, and this led many doctors and researchers to wonder if hormones may play a factor in the gender differences in outcomes from SARS-COV2 infection1.
Given the fact that observational data showed that men were more at risk for severe illness especially in men with signs of androgenic alopecia2 (baldness due to elevated Testosterone levels) studies were conducted to see if Testosterone was a key factor.3,4
Interestingly, observational data showed that in men with androgenic alopecia who were prescribed anti-androgens the incidence of severe COVID was lower than expected5, and it was this observation that led researchers to look to see if anti-androgens may be effective in combating the virus.
As an aside, remember the supposed dig Scott Alexander had against Cadegiani for prescribing anti-androgens when Cadegiani himself appears to clearly work out? Well, Alexander probably should have dug a little deeper and understood why anti-androgens are being prescribed rather than use such an argument to one-up dissenting viewpoints.
Given all of these factors, we may infer that the use of AAS and activation of androgen receptors and the release of Testosterone may upregulate ACEII expression, making people such as Eyers more susceptible to infection and severe disease.
And so John Eyers was a case of the media burying the lede: in order to enforce the narrative that people must be vaccinated they created an image of the seemingly healthy individual who would die from the virus and be made a martyr for the vaccine cause.
If healthy people such as Eyers can die, then all of us are at risk!
In some sense this story is one that comes from the opposite side of the coin.
As much criticisms I have against these vaccines I’m also growingly concerned that narrative may trump any attempt to dig deeper and find answers, essentially since narratives critical of the vaccine may bury the lede for many stories or reports.
A clear case of this were the initial posts about the two adolescent males and their autopsy report6, with many people even here on Substack lamenting that these were two perfectly healthy teenagers who died because of the vaccine.
We know most readers aren’t reading these studies themselves, and so rather than discuss such findings this instead caused an uproar in the comments section.
I’ve noted real concerns over ADHD and its association with Catecholamine dysfunction, as well as the fact that many stimulants carry a black box warning indicating elevated risk of cardiovascular disease- all of which should provide context to Teenager A in the autopsy report.
Granted, we really have no other information to work off of so we can’t tell to what extent ADHD or stimulants would have factored into his death, but that doesn’t mean that we should overlook this possibility.
And it’s because this point was undermined that many people may not have looked deeper into other possible factors.
We can see this as well in the case report of a 22-year old South Korean man7 who died post-vaccination- another seemingly healthy male with no other extraneous circumstances (we are led to believe).
The autopsy report here even obfuscates a critical fact:
The deceased was 22-year-old male military recruit. His blood pressure was elevated on physical examination 17 and 7 months before his death (156/94 mmHg and 128/74 mmHg, respectively), but he was otherwise healthy. On June 13, 2021, 5 days after the first dose of BNT162b2 mRNA vaccination, he complained to a colleague of chest pain at 1:00 AM, during a smoke break, and went to bed. At 8:00 AM, he was found unconscious hunched beside the bed. He was taken to an emergency department and was found to have ventricular fibrillation on electrocardiography. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation was performed for two hours, but he could not be resuscitated.
So this young man seemed healthy, yet he appeared to have gone on a smoke break indicating that he at least smokes (information on how often and for how long he has smoked is not provided) .
It probably goes without stating, but smoking activates the sympathetic nervous system and the release of Catecholamines8 → another Catecholamine-related factor worth examining that may be undermined by the narrative.
In all of these cases the need to push a perception that all of these cases are only occurring in healthy individuals with the sole factor being the vaccine takes a nuanced, highly contextual discussion and provides a superficial response that only creates more pontification rather than much needed investigation.
In short, I implore readers, publishers, and medical professionals to not go down the route of pushing further divisive narratives if it removes any nuanced discussion. Here are clear cases in which all of these so-called “healthy” individuals may have underlying factors that provide a much more detailed perspective into the adverse reactions post-vaccination, and yet rather than discuss these factors we may just forego any discussion to instead make proclamations that rile up the base.
As the saying on the front of my Substack (whatever that place is called) states:
Be science-driven, not narrative-driven.
In regards to fear porn…
Going along with this train of thought, I’ve become rather dismayed to see the level of fear being pushed among COVID skeptics. This is completely expected by the zealots we run counter to, but more and more it appears that, at times when things seem to be returning to “normal” (being used VERY loosely here) there appears to be an increasing level of fear being stoked among readers.
I’ve commented that I’ve seen several people respond with remarks that they don’t know what they are reading, but they know they’re supposed to be scared (???) or that they need to stop going on Substack for their own mental sanity.
I’m not sure what Substacks are in all of these people’s feeds, but it makes one wonder if the only thing they see when they go onto Substack is constant messaging that the world is going to end or that we’re all doomed.
I can tell you all personally my feed tends to lean that way…
And now that Substack has a “recommended” feature this negativity seems to have been ramped up even further. Even among recommended articles I hardly see anything that is informative or positive, and given the fact that recommended articles are provided by other publishers and who they read that tells me that the morose air on Substack is rather pervasive.
Hell, one Substack I keep getting recommended is one about people who suddenly died, and opening one of these posts mentioned a woman who crossed the divide on the highway and collided with cars going the opposite direction. No other information was provided, and yet this was somehow an indication that this was caused by the vaccines- as if people never crossed divides before the vaccine rollout.
It’s almost as if everything is now being blamed on the vaccines by virtue of reports insinuating so.
This doesn’t mean that vaccines may not be a factor, but that also doesn’t mean that this specific case is an example of the vaccines causing the scenario outlined above.
I’m continuously reminded of the term infodemic and the initial intent of the phrase [context included]:
What exactly do I mean by the "infodemic"? A few facts, mixed with fear, speculation and rumor, amplified and relayed swiftly worldwide by modern information technologies, have affected national and international economies, politics and even security in ways that are utterly disproportionate with the root realities. It is a phenomenon we have seen with greater frequency in recent years—not only in our reaction to SARS [original SARS outbreak], for example, but also in our response to terrorism and even to relatively minor occurrences such as shark sightings.
— David Rothkopf, The Washington Post, 11 May 2003
Reports that were rare are now being amplified and used to push a given narrative. We’ve seen this quite often on both sides of the political spectrum, and we continue to see this now on both sides of the COVID argument.
This is rather concerning, because it’s an indication that people are more inclined to be told what to think rather than how to think.
I always thought this phrase was rather ludicrous- telling people how to think still had an air of authoritarianism with it. But I general understand what is meant with such a phrase now.
For instance, someone reporting on a study, providing very superficial summaries to which everyone comments on is an example of being told what to think. You’re being told that this is what a study says and this is how you should interpret said study. Take the situation with the recent Icelandic study that was passed around Substack.
Contrast that with the notion of how to think, which may go through a study and pick it apart, telling readers why this is something concerning with the study or why these results may not be what they appear to be. As such, this method is more akin to outlining what to look out for so that readers can use this information and get a deeper understanding of the studies they come across- showing readers how to think.
This is a crucial difference that is made even more concerning seeing how many people yearn to be told what to think. Comments that people aren’t scientists or aren’t trained to read studies, or people who want “layperson” speak rather than a nuanced discussion is indicative of a complacent mass that isn’t striving to learn or educate themselves.
It is not for the need to dumb down information that it becomes more accessible that should drive me to report studies the way that I do, but more the fact that I want to empower people to become more knowledgeable and have a better understanding of COVID and the world at large that I try not to dumb things down. It’s far more important to elevate people rather than to dumb it down.
I’ve remarked on occasion, although maybe not explicitly on Substack, that in the absence of knowledge people turn to fear, and turning to fear people become hysterical and paranoid. Maybe I hijacked it from Yoda, but it goes without saying that knowledge is a powerful too that we tend to waste and instead draw from emotional appeals.
For those who don’t know, phalanges are fingers…
When I first started this Substack I made mention of the AIDS epidemic and the dynamics between gay men and the medical establishment. At a time when many gay men were being undermined and left out of the dark in regards to clinical studies, all while their friends and loved ones needlessly died, many of these same men rallied together and took matters into their own hands.
Rather than sit around and do nothing, many people decided to educate themselves on HIV/AIDS including clinical trials on drugs, eventually to the point that many of these people were able to speak in town/community meetings at the same level as those of the doctors trying to treat this ailment.
Contrast this to the peanut gallery that was reporters during the COVID press briefings and we can understand why hardly any valuable information came out from the CDC/NIH- no one was bothering to ask important questions that informed and educated the public.
Not to go on too much of a tangent, but in regards to the level of fear porn being pushed we can see that there’s a certain appeal and addictive nature to these stories. They draw our attention in with clickbait titles and it creates for a shared space for people to lament and rant, even if we understand that the stress and anxiety caused by fear porn doesn’t do much to help our mentality.
Dr. Malone wrote a post recently about fear porn being bad for one’s health, and Stephanie Brail of Wholistic continues to remark about concerns over fear porn as well.
However, the research into Catecholamines got me thinking…
So far we’ve discussed Catecholamine release in response to physiological stressors such as vaccination, yet we didn’t discuss that Catecholamines are released in response to ALL STRESSORS. They are, after all, responsible for the flight-or-fight response.
As such, Catecholamines are released during times of mental stress and fatigue. This is noted quite frequently in even some of the prior literatures I cited.
The review from Qi, Z. & Ding, S.9 that I referenced when discussing obesity and Catecholamines also mentioned social stress being a prime factor in obesity and sympathetic nervous activation:
Psychosocial stress has become another contributor to the development and maintenance of obesity in children and adolescents except high-fat diet and physical inactivity (10, 11). Chronic psychosocial stress, combined with a high-fat/ high-sugar diet, has been shown to activate SNS and accelerate diet-induced obesity and the metabolic syndrome (12). An interesting study shows that social overcrowding is a chronic stress that increases adiposity in mice (13). Prenatal and postnatal exposure to a high-fat diet elevates SNA and arterial pressure in rabbits (14, 15). Social defeat stress activates thermoregulatory sympathetic premotor neurons (16). Chronic social stress increases sympatheticadrenal-medullary axis activity in mice (17) and enhances sympathetic innervation of primate lymph nodes (18). Clearly, chronic exposure to either high-fat diet or social stress stimulates SNS and further leads to chronic and low grade sympathetic activity.
As well as the review from Street, et. al.10 raising concerns that chronic stress from lockdowns and release of Catecholamines may be contributing to the increased rates of precocious puberty among Italian girls:
The effect of stress within households has not been specifically addressed either by current studies, and may differ between Countries depending on differences in the adoption of restrictions to fight the pandemic. Families in Italy have often been forced to live in relatively small homes facing “distance learning”, “smart working”, and “financial problems” because of a reduction or loss of a regular income for long periods of time. It remains, therefore, to be elucidated whether these aspects could have had or have an effect on the timing of puberty.
Chronic stress can come from anywhere, and the chronic stress from worrying about loss of jobs, income, and lockdowns are detrimental to our bodies.
But so too does fear porn. Stress form reading stories intended to blackpill readers are likely to be detrimental on the body as well and release Catecholamines.
In a very ironic, dark twist the stress and fear of getting COVID may make one susceptible to COVID. Likewise, the stress and fear from myocarditis may, by virtue of elevating Catecholamine and activating the flight-or-fight response, even elevate the risk of myocarditis from a vaccine.
It’s as if the stress and anxiety from an adverse reaction may elevate one’s risk of suffering an adverse reaction.
Now, that’s a rather hyperbolic statement, but should we really deny this as being a possibility given all that has been previously outlined?
ALL FACTORS need to be weighed, including the fact that inundation of negativity that leaves one fearful and anxious also leaves one more susceptible to disease.
In short, we must remember that, as tantalizing as fear porn may be, they’re the empty calories of over-processed, vacuous reporting that may leave us more ignorant rather than informed. Understand what you consume as a reader and what you gain from what you have read. It certainly doesn’t mean that fear porn shouldn’t be consumed (fear porn itself is rather subjective), but it’s a reminder that readers must be conscientious of what they are consuming and whether such consumption is good for their health or completely detrimental to your well-being.
They call it fear porn for a reason!
So, at this point I’m rather tucked-out on Catecholamines. The current review is not exhaustive, and further investigation into other factors will be necessary. However, hopefully the information here outlines why these case reports may provide key features that are worth investigating further. Remember that each case of an adverse reaction or a death tells the story of the individual. It’s the case that provides a window into the person’s health history. When we look at these people we should keep in mind the totality of factors that led to the current situation. Somewhere in that person’s history may be important details that can help find the truth.
If you enjoyed this post and other works please consider supporting me through a paid Substack subscription or through my Ko-fi. Any bit helps, and it encourages independent creators and journalists outside the mainstream.
Stárka, L., & Dušková, M. (2021). Androgens in SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus infections. Physiological research, 70(S2), S145–S151. https://doi.org/10.33549/physiolres.934724
Moravvej, H., Pourani, M. R., Baghani, M., & Abdollahimajd, F. (2021). Androgenetic alopecia and COVID-19: A review of the hypothetical role of androgens. Dermatologic therapy, 34(4), e15004. https://doi.org/10.1111/dth.15004
Hussain, A. N., Hussain, F., & Hashmi, S. K. (2020). Role of testosterone in COVID-19 patients - A double-edged sword?. Medical hypotheses, 144, 110287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mehy.2020.110287
Giagulli, V. A., Guastamacchia, E., Magrone, T., Jirillo, E., Lisco, G., De Pergola, G., & Triggiani, V. (2021). Worse progression of COVID-19 in men: Is testosterone a key factor?. Andrology, 9(1), 53–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/andr.12836
Mauvais-Jarvis F. (2021). Do Anti-androgens Have Potential as Therapeutics for COVID-19?. Endocrinology, 162(8), bqab114. https://doi.org/10.1210/endocr/bqab114
James R. Gill, Randy Tashjian, Emily Duncanson; Autopsy Histopathologic Cardiac Findings in 2 Adolescents Following the Second COVID-19 Vaccine Dose. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1 August 2022; 146 (8): 925–929. doi: https://doi.org/10.5858/arpa.2021-0435-SA
Choi S, Lee S, Seo JW, Kim MJ, Jeon YH, Park JH, Lee JK, Yeo NS. Myocarditis-induced Sudden Death after BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 Vaccination in Korea: Case Report Focusing on Histopathological Findings. J Korean Med Sci. 2021 Oct;36(40):e286. https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2021.36.e286
Middlekauff, H. R., Park, J., & Moheimani, R. S. (2014). Adverse effects of cigarette and noncigarette smoke exposure on the autonomic nervous system: mechanisms and implications for cardiovascular risk. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 64(16), 1740–1750. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2014.06.1201
Qi, Z., & Ding, S. (2016). Obesity-associated sympathetic overactivity in children and adolescents: the role of catecholamine resistance in lipid metabolism. Journal of pediatric endocrinology & metabolism : JPEM, 29(2), 113–125. https://doi.org/10.1515/jpem-2015-0182
Street, M. E., Sartori, C., Catellani, C., & Righi, B. (2021). Precocious Puberty and Covid-19 Into Perspective: Potential Increased Frequency, Possible Causes, and a Potential Emergency to Be Addressed. Frontiers in pediatrics, 9, 734899. https://doi.org/10.3389/fped.2021.734899
I am very grateful for this series of essays … it has, among other things, reminded me of an important principle … Don’t confuse correlation with causation! Thank you for doing this, it’s valuable information.
Such an excellent series! Big thanks, and I can’t wait to go back and read it again to see what I missed the first time.
I do think many people are quite comfortable being told what to think. Mental Sloth Syndrome. There aren’t enough skeptics these days.