#37: Faulty Rat Science Part I

Dynamism Biohack Podcast: How to Make the Right Nutritious Choices Despite Conflicting Expert Opinions

Oops...

No slides found, please add at least one Slide Template to the choosen language.

var rs_eslider = document.getElementById("rev_slider_16_17"); rs_eslider.style.display = "none"; console.log("No slides found, please add at least one Slide Template to the choosen language."); ✓ Fact Checked

✓ Fact Checked

Close

This New Life Family Chiropractic Center, PC content is medically reviewed or fact checked to ensure factually accurate information.
With strict editorial sourcing guidelines, we only link to academic research institutions, reputable media sites and, when research is available, medically peer-reviewed studies. Note that the numbers in parentheses (1, 2, etc.) are clickable links to these studies.
The information in our articles is NOT intended to replace a one-on-one relationship with a qualified health care professional and is not intended as medical advice.

In this training: EXPOSED: The Fatal Flaw of Modern Science Your Doctor Doesn’t Know About! This is the single best mainstream radio show ever heard on the topic of Modern Medical Science on the Topic of Animal Research. There really is no rational argument on the other side of this so this topic just sort of sits there, a truth bomb hiding in plain sight!

Simply put, applying animal models to study human diseases will not work. Species differences in anatomy and physiology including, organ structure and function, toxin metabolism, antibody physiology, chemical, drug, nutrition absorption, and mechanisms of DNA repair among a whole host of other differences between humans and other species. I’m going to explore the rat myth, the science to why it won’t work!

(function(d, s, id) {<br /> var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];<br /> if (d.getElementById(id)) return;<br /> js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;<br /> js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/sdk.js#xfbml=1&version=v2.5";<br /> fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);<br /> }(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

	2,746

I discuss:

• Why the science we use to validate treatments for heart disease models, cholesterol and metabolism, cancer research and even nutrition give an anamorphic distorted view of the reality
• How science is legally allowed to manufacture evidence and hide that bad results

I am really excited to start you on this journey and I hope to add a lot of value to your life as a whole.

Show Transcript:

Nutrition is remarkable in its ability to have people with completely opposite views saying they have science to support completely opposite views.

Frustrating isn’t it? What are we suppose to believe?

Welcome to Dynamism Biohack, my name is Dr. Matt Hammett Wellness & Nutrition Expert, Lifestyle Trainer and Movement Enthusiast. In each week I’m going share with you how to make the right nutritious choices despite conflicting expert opinions where I help you to discover how to unlock your inner aborigine or your inner greatness. Thank you for spending this time with me today, so let’s get into the training.

MOST LABORATORY EXPERIMENTS IN SCIENCE use rats. While I was preparing my thesis to co-author with a nanotechnologist expert for funding to develop our pain biosensor ideas, I discovered that the ideas I borrowed from boy genius Jack Andranka would only work for a rat!

One of the most striking discoveries I made in my own scientific journey was what I call the lab rat race. Simply put, applying animal models to study human diseases will not work. Species differences in anatomy and physiology including, organ structure and function, toxin metabolism, antibody physiology, chemical, drug, nutrition absorption, and mechanisms of DNA repair among a whole host of other differences between humans and other species.

In my case, I realized the creation of the world’s first human pain biosensor would require human studies. Specific antibodies get released during inflammation and tissues react and behave very differently between species. This training is devoted to the finding in my own discovery which led me to the decision not to continue co-authorship for the research and why I recommend natural health first choice for all human beings.

And that leads us to the next Dynamism Biohack: Faulty Rat Science; Part I.

Research from the Office of Technology Assessment found that between 3.4 and 3.7 million rats are killed each year in laboratory experiments. Estimates from other sources range as high as 23.6 million every year.1 Rats differ strikingly from humans in many respects, rendering rat experiments difficult to extrapolate data to compare or make recommendations for people. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and the pharmaceutical industry admit this. The FDA reports that 92% of drugs approved for testing in humans fail to receive approval for human use. The National Institutes of Health reports that 95 out of every 100 drugs that successfully pass animal trials and go into human clinical testing fail during the human clinical trial phase. In addition, more than half of the few drugs approved are later withdrawn or relabeled due to serious or lethal adverse effects in humans. Nevertheless, scientists continue to use rats and other animals for human research.

Animal research is a multi-billion dollar industry with high commercial interest. It is one of the major reasons we continue animal research and why it is fiercely defended despite the obvious limitations, dangers, and hindrance against the battle of human diseases.

CHANGE OCCURS IN STEPS

The leading killer of American adults is heart disease, silent and deadly. Due to similar genetic makeup (and get this: we are apparently closest in terms of DNA… to rodents!), rats are commonly used to create medications for human disease. The problem is evident; rats are very different from us in so many ways. To say otherwise, is a flat out lie, a lie funded by billions of dollars.

Regarding heart disease, rats differ from us in the ways they process fat and cholesterol. Rats have a much higher activity of a particular liver enzyme called 5-desaturase.2 Now, don’t get weirded out by the science, again, I will always bring it back to practicality. But I can’t explain this without getting into the geeky star trek version of myself. So bear with me. At any rate this enzyme changes the chemical structure of various tissues including the liver, the adrenal glands, the kidneys, platelets, and fat. Therefore the various tissues would process differently from a biochemical standpoint, with different results compared to humans.

In a fact a researcher at Boston’s Tufts University said the result is that “the rat is not an appropriate human model for studies involving lipids.”3 To contrast, another researcher wrote, “It is not possible to extrapolate directly from rat to human studies because of differences in plasma lipoprotein [cholesterol and triglycerides] the metabolism between the species” is vastly different.4

In humans, cholesterol in the liver forms bile acids. From the liver, they are excreted into the gallbladder and the intestine. Rats secrete their bile acids very differently from humans. In rats, they go directly into the intestine, as they lack a gallbladder.5 Rats make a bile acid called muricholic acid, and humans do not manufacture bile acids at all.6 Rats have a unique ability to eliminate cholesterol from their body via the muricholic acid they produce.

Rats, unlike humans, are very resistant to changes in serum cholesterol and are also resistant to diet-induced plaques in the arteries making rat studies invalid and incomplete for human analysis.
Now. You may ask, aren’t the scientist aware of this? Oh yeah, and here lies the so called bliss of modern science. So instead of respecting natural law and obvious species differences, we artificially create a bypass.

In this case, scientists have to adapt to these differences by creating artificial environments. In other words, to try to get around Mother Nature, researchers manufacture specific lesions in rats; they feed rats a combination of cholesterol, thiouracil (an anti-thyroid drug), casein, and cholic acid (a bile acid).7

In contrast, natural lesions found in humans happen when we add bad fats like saturated fats to diets. When science manufactures a by-pass way to get around Mother Nature, it messes with the entire biochemical and ecological chain. BAD IDEA.

You simply can’t do that if you want a high quality valid research study. They will produce data, but it will never be real evidence. It would amount to manufactured evidence derived out of a vacuum, only existing in a controlled lab. The manufactured lab is today’s golden standard in science, and like me, many experts are calling for a change.

So far in our story, you know how passionate I am about this because I found my mother half on the bed and half off the bed trying to call for help, dead from a heart attack. The scary fact of it all was, no one knew she had a heart problem. When I discovered that scientists were quarreling about research like this, I knew we need an entirely different paradigm. I asked the simple question.

Does this rat model make sense?

In dealing with the third leading cause of death, heart disease, which killed my mother, we find rat studies are the preferred model for research even though researchers are quarreling about some significant species differences.

So for example in heart disease, rats have much higher levels of the enzyme ATPase in the heart. ATPase is imperative for energy metabolism making rats resistant to digitalis drugs used in humans for heart failure. Rats also have a unique and different cardiovascular system; their normal heart rate is 300-500 beats per minute, compared to the human 60-80 beats per minute.8

Changes like this in heart rates between differing species, is enough to stop any further research in any area of science in zoology, marine biology, where they don’t swap out one species from another. When we compare findings from experts in these disciplines, they would never consider furthering these experiments. The difference in heart rate would spark an entire different conversation here, just know, in other -ologist not dealing with humans, they would hault any further cardiolovascular studies because of these species differences.

When we get into cancer experiments, it gets worse. Researchers are saying that rat to human cancer experiments has gone awry. In fact, when we hear in the news media that we might be closer to a cancer cure, know that they are talking about a rat or a mouse cure, not a human. In fact, Dr. Richard Klausner, former Director of the National Cancer Institute stated, “We have cured cancer in mice for decades- and it simply didn’t work in humans.”

Cancer, which took my dad’s life, is the second most common cause of death in the U.S. Once again we have vast differences between species when studying cancer. Cancer research is a tough topic to tackle. So for our purposes just know that rats differ from humans in many ways that have major effects on cancer research.

Let me illustrate this with a few examples I could find from comments by scientists pushing away from rat science; let us start with nutrition; unfortunately, we get our nutrition advice from rats, too. We can use beta-carotene and vitamin A as an example. Compounds central to cancer and nutrition research include beta-carotene and related compounds called carotenoids. The human biochemistry converts beta carotene into Vitamin A. Therefore, beta carotene is a precursor of Vitamin A. We need Vitamin A for a variety of well understood reasons, like healthy skin and mucus membranes, our immune system, and eye health including vision. Carotenoids are the pigments that give fruits and vegetables their vibrant colors. They also act as antioxidants which gives strong cancer-fighting properties.

Rats handle beta-carotene markedly differently from human beings. Rats have the ability to form Vitamin A by splitting carotenoids within the cells lining of their unique intestinal walls using a particular enzyme lacking in humans. Rats convert most of the dietary carotene to Vitamin A.

Humans, in contrast, do not have the ability to make Vitamin A. We need to absorb substantial amounts of unchanged carotenoids from our diet and store approximately 15 percent of it in the body.9 People save about 100-200 mg of carotenoids in our fatty tissue.10 The rat does not store beta-carotene in the fatty tissue. In fact, scientists have only found small amounts of beta-carotene in their livers. Once again, researchers attempt to compensate for this by artificially supplementing with large amounts of beta-carotene to design their studies in order to manufacture evidence to protect their interest.11

The problems when applying this information from animal research to humans involves species differences in anatomy, organ structure and function, toxin metabolism, chemical and drug absorption, and mechanisms of DNA repair. It gives us inadequate and erroneous information when we attempt to apply animal data to human diseases, drug and even nutrition responses. Why? Because every species is unique to it’s own species.

To complicate matters further, we can take a look at some of these mechanisms by exploring Vitamin C. Everyone knows that vitamin C neutralizes free radicals, which plays a role in preventing cancer and scurvy and other physiological functions. Rats use an enzyme called L-gulono oxidase to synthesize vitamin C in the liver from glucose. Again, big problem. Humans do not have L-gulono oxidase and do not synthesize vitamin C at all.

Most animal species can synthesize vitamin C, but humans cannot do so, at all.18 Rats synthesize around 20-30 mg of vitamin C- just a fraction of the equivalent of about 7.5 grams in an adult human.12

The species difference between rats and humans it our case of Vitamin C is a classic example between the differences in vitamins and their role in organ devolpment and function, nutrient abosrption, and even the different mechansims involved in DNA repair.

Take for example scurvy in 1747. James Lind a medical apprentice is honored for being the man who cured scurvy in the 18th Century for his accidental discovery aboard his sea voyages for the Royal Navy. Almost the whole crew was experiencing the debilitating symptoms of scurvy which included open flesh sores, bleeding gums, dreadful terrors, immobility and death. Citrus fruit had already been suggested as a cure by some, but it was the sailors who ate the ship’s rats that was most peculiar. Recall that rats and other animals synthesize their own vitamin C. Whereas humans have to get it from our diet, apparently for the sailors, eating rats or citrus fruit.
The first time science brought a rat into the laboratory for study was in 1828. It took the next 30 years to create the first animal domesticated for purely scientific reasons. In other words, for over 100 years, we did not understand why eating the rats on that ship cured scurvy, nor did we understand the species differences between species and the erroneous impact that may have on our world today when clinicians think they have a valid argument when they refer to rat studies when formulating drug therapies for humans.

This current mainstream ideology in science right now, is the single most important invention since the invention of fire! And like fire, it has the ability to consume and destroy us all if we fail to think through our current scientific methodologies and continue to flog any scientists who exposes these weaknesses.

In fact, our vast knowledge of species differences across a wide variety of species is only recently being discovered. The terrifying fact of this animal research is being swept under the rug.

Did you know that clinical scientists do not have to publish all of their results? For example, if they use 5 different species to study. They do not have to publish their failed results. In other words, let’s say that they published a favorable result to create a drug from a laboratory rat that showed promising results. This result could push the development of drugs for human consumption. Let’s say for our example that they used 4 other species. So they used a lab bred rat, a wild rat, a mouse, a pig, and a bird. In their study, the lab bred rat showed the favorable result. But the wild rat developed kidney failure and liver disease. The mouse developed gall stones and needed the gall bladder removed to save it’s life and became diabetic. The pig became obese and developed short term memory issues and dementia after one week of experimentation, and the bird lost it’s ability to fly, suffered nerve damage, vision issues, it’s ability to thrive and just sat immobile unto death. The scientists would only have to publish the favorable result they created from the laboratory rat, a rat not found that way in the wild, a man-made creation.

This is an accurate fictional story to explain real world science and so called evidence based practice most clinical doctors are not aware of because they do not study clinical scientific methodology. While I admit for our story here, I used very real human side effects to drugs, because these very real human side effects actually do occur this way with the other species scientists are not legally required to report!

If you like today’s training, please like it, love it, leave a comment. How did it help you in your scientific journey? How did it help you lighten up, move better and live fuller. In our next training, I’m going to continue this rat saga, and tackle more of the cancer research. Until next time, lighten up, move better and live fuller.

Want to hear more about animal research? Watch Dr. Matt on Facebook!

(57)

The post #37: Faulty Rat Science Part I first appeared on New Life Family Chiropractic | Drs. Matt & Trish Hammett.