Can you spot the 3-5 errors in this research that allowed the researchers-organization to reach the conclusion that is most profitable for their sponsors?
I am increasingly convinced that the “medical profession” is mostly a cult centered around the worship of drugs generally but also the disempowerment of patients to keep them sick and dependent on those same drugs. I have sufficiently reviewed and established this fact on numerous occasions and various different articles for the past 20 years.
Unfortunately, despite the advancing science supporting nutritional therapeutics, the medical profession is not advancing its own science to embrace anything out of its drug-centered paradigm. I have been, I continue to be, and I am increasingly bothered in particular by the medical profession’s mismanagement of chronic pain, which is why I'm launching some new initiatives in that regard this year and into 2027. This new August 2026 study published by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinology is a good example of medical propaganda designed to look like scientific and “statistically significant” clinical research. Their reported “highlights” are as follows from their original posting of this article at 10.1016/j.eprac.2026.08.001:
Current clinical guidelines recommend routine biochemical screening for vitamin B12 deficiency in metformin users. However, the evidence is based on non-specific and outdated definitions of vitamin B12 deficiency.
In a large, consecutive real-world cohort of 3,958 adults with diabetes, we estimated prevalence of vitamin B12 deficiency, comparing metformin versus non-users, using contemporary diagnostic criteria for vitamin B12 deficiency.
The prevalence of vitamin B12 deficiency was substantially lower than previously reported. Among patients with type 2 diabetes, prevalence was 2.3% in metformin users versus 2.0% in non-users (adjusted prevalence difference: 0.38% [95% CI: −1.9 to 1.1]).
I have provided the PDF above, but all you have to do is read the abstract to see their strategic errors. Looking at their METHODS section makes the strategy all the more clear:
Metformin exposure was defined as current use of metformin, including daily dose and duration, compared with non-use.To screen for possible vitamin B12 deficiency, we applied an algorithm that has been routinely used in our laboratories since 2022 (Figure 1). As a first step, the algorithm measures P-B12. If P-B12 exceeds 250 pmol/L, a deficiency is unlikely. If the level is ≤ 250 pmol/L, the algorithm proceeds to MMA measurement and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). MMA is a marker of intracellular B12 depletion, but can also be elevated in cases of impaired renal function [14]. If the MMA level exceeds the age-specific upper reference limit and eGFR is > 60 mL/min, the findings suggest a likely vitamin B12 deficiency, warranting further clinical assessment [14, 15]. If MMA is elevated but eGFR was ≤ 60 mL/min, the result is deemed inconclusive, as the elevation can be attributed to either vitamin B12 deficiency or reduced renal function.
I have described this technique previously as “strategic stupidity” which is a type of sophisticated-appearing “big word”-using mathematically supported double-talk in the service of any given paradigm.
The spell only works on people who are within the cult-like mentality, similar to the use of racist dog-whistling when politicians use subtle racial slurs to appeal to a racist section of the targeted electorate.
Can you spot the 3-5 errors in this research that allowed the researchers-organization to reach the conclusion that is most profitable for their sponsors?
All medical organizations are in bed with Big Pharma, as exemplified below:
