Home Assessment for Mold Beyond Air Testing…
”Clinical Pearls” From A Medically Important Remediation Specialist…
James Weber
JW Evironmental Remediation Services
11373 Trade Center Dr Suite 250
Rancho Cordova, CA 95742
Call or Text James: 916-540-8595
Call or Text our Office: 916-529-1003
Email James: james@jwenviro.com
Email our Office: admin@jwenviro.
(For the Complete Print Substack and Video Interview Click Here)
To Discuss Medical Detoxification for Mold Illness (CIRS) Call Kirk Hamilton PA at 916-489-4400
Interview Summary…
(Transcript Summary and Patient Outline was generated by ChapGPT and edited and reviewed by interviewer Kirk Hamilton PA)
In this interview, Kirk Hamilton, PA-C, and medical mold assessment and remediation specialist James Weber emphasize that successful treatment of mold-related illness depends not only on detoxification or medical protocols, but on accurately identifying and removing mold sources from the home or workplace. Weber explains that many standard mold inspections miss the real problem because they rely too heavily on brief air sampling, which provides only a limited moment-in-time snapshot and often fails to detect mold hidden in walls, floors, ceilings, crawl spaces, attics, or other water-damaged building materials. Instead, he describes a medically relevant assessment as a detailed physical investigation of the home that includes taking a thorough water-damage history, looking for subtle signs such as swollen baseboards, water stains, warped materials, hidden leaks, or suspicious construction patterns, and, when needed, performing deeper investigation or targeted surface sampling. He remarks his flashlight and experience are really his best assets in assessing for mold. He notes that dust-based testing such as ERMI can be more clinically useful than air testing because it reflects historical contamination and identifies mold to the species level, helping distinguish toxic water-damage molds from more common outdoor molds. Weber also explains that remediation often extends beyond simply cutting out visibly damaged materials, because contamination can spread throughout the house via dust and HVAC systems, making whole-home decontamination and small-particle cleaning important parts of recovery, and in some cases requiring occupants to temporarily vacate during a thorough project. Throughout the discussion, both speakers acknowledge the financial, emotional, and psychological barriers families face in accepting mold as a health issue, especially when symptoms are systemic rather than respiratory, but they stress that careful education, a realistic assessment process, and a patient-centered remediation plan can make a significant difference, with Weber noting that many clients report substantial health improvements after proper remediation.
Share
__________________________________________________
Patient Oriented Handout…
Home Assessment for Mold Beyond Air Testing
Key Points and Action Plan
Mold-related illness is often not just a problem of “bad air” but a problem of hidden water damage and contamination within the home. If your doctor suspects mold exposure, it is important to understand that simply detoxifying your body probably won’t help enough if the source of exposure remains in your environment. Mold can grow in water-damaged materials such as walls, floors, ceilings, baseboards, crawl spaces, attics, and around plumbing or roof leaks, and it is often not visible or obvious. Many people assume that if they do not see black spots or smell a musty odor, there is no mold problem, but this is often not true. Hidden mold may still trigger inflammation, immune dysfunction, fatigue, brain fog, sinus issues, skin changes, digestive symptoms, sleep disruption, and many other whole-body symptoms.
(See Patient and Physician Drop-Downs at www.SurvivingMold.com )
Why a Home Mold Evaluation Matters
A proper home evaluation is often the most important steps in recovery when mold exposure is suspected. Traditional inspections may rely mostly on air testing, but air testing has major limitations. It measures only a small sample of air at one moment in time and may miss mold that is trapped inside walls, under flooring, in ceilings, or in other hidden areas. A normal air test does not guarantee that the home is free of mold problems.
A more useful approach often combines:
A detailed history of the home
A careful physical inspection for water damage
Review of past leaks, overflows, roof issues, plumbing problems, or hidden moisture
Dust testing such as ERMI, when appropriate
Additional targeted testing or direct inspection of suspicious areas
The goal is not just to “test for mold.” The goal is to find where water damage exists, because mold grows where building materials have been wet.
Key Points You Should Know
1. Mold usually follows water damage
Mold growth is most likely where there has been moisture. Even “small” past events can matter, including:
Even if these problems happened years ago, they may still leave behind damaged materials that support mold growth.
2. Mold is often hidden
You may not see obvious fuzzy growth. Common clues may be much more subtle, such as:
Water stains on ceilings or walls
Swollen or warped baseboards
Buckling or damaged flooring
Staining under carpet
Damp-smelling closets, bathrooms, or cabinets
Areas near windows, tubs, showers, sinks, dishwashers, washing machines, or toilets
Problems in crawl spaces and attics
3. Air testing alone is often not enough
Air testing can miss hidden problems because mold is not always actively floating in the air at the time of the test. A house may still have significant contamination even if air samples look “normal.”
4. Dust testing may provide more useful information
Dust-based testing, such as ERMI (or ERMI, Endotoxin, Actinomyces), may be helpful because dust collects what has been present over time. This makes it more of a historical picture of the home rather than a single snapshot. Some dust tests can also identify mold more specifically than air testing.
5. Not all mold is the same
There are many species of mold. Some are more associated with water-damaged buildings and potential toxicity, while others are more commonly found outdoors. The goal is not zero mold everywhere. The goal is to identify whether the home has problematic mold associated with water damage and indoor contamination.
6. Cleaning alone usually does not fix an active mold problem
If there is active mold growth in building materials, deep cleaning the house without removing the source usually does not solve the problem. It may temporarily lower some contamination, but it often delays proper treatment if the damaged materials remain.
7. Remediation is more than cutting out visible mold
Proper remediation may include:
Removing water-damaged materials
Investigating hidden areas further
Containment of affected areas
Cleaning contaminated dust from the entire home
Small-particle cleaning of surfaces, cabinets, furniture areas, and other reservoirs of contamination
Even if mold is found in only a few rooms, contamination may spread through air movement and HVAC systems, so other areas of the home may still need detailed cleaning.
8. Some families need to leave the home during remediation
Depending on how extensive the contamination is, people may need to temporarily vacate the home during a thorough remediation. This is more common when multiple rooms, flooring, crawl spaces, or attic areas are involved.
9. Filters can help, but they do not replace remediation
A HEPA filter may help reduce airborne particles and improve day-to-day air quality, but it does not remove mold growing inside walls, floors, or other damaged materials. Air purifiers are supportive tools, not substitutes for proper remediation.
10. Improvement often requires both medical care and environmental correction
For many mold-sensitive patients, health improvement depends on both:
If the home remains contaminated, patients may continue to feel sick despite supplements, binders, detox protocols, or other treatments.
Signs You Should Consider a Mold-Savvy Home Evaluation
You may want a deeper mold assessment if:
Your doctor suspects mold exposure
Your symptoms worsen at home and improve away from home
You have abnormal mold-related labs or screening results
You have a high ERMI or other dust tests.
You know of prior water damage in the home
You have chronic unexplained symptoms and standard evaluations have not helped
Previous inspectors only did air testing and told you everything was fine
You live in an older home or one with repeated leaks, damp areas, or prior flooding
What a Better Home Assessment Often Includes
A more thorough assessment may involve:
Reviewing the age and history of the home
Asking about known leaks, overflows, stains, repairs, or odors
Inspecting ceilings, baseboards, windows, bathrooms, kitchens, laundry areas, crawl spaces, and attics
Looking beneath carpet or behind materials when appropriate
Documenting visible water damage or mold
Recommending further targeted testing when needed
Creating a remediation plan based on what is actually found
What to Do If Your Home Was Already “Checked”
If your house was “cleared” based only on air testing, that does not necessarily mean there is no problem. You may need a more experienced inspection if:
the inspector spent very little time in the home,
did not inspect crawl spaces or attics,
did not look for hidden water damage,
did not review the home’s history in detail, or
relied mostly on air samples.
Patient Action Plan
Step 1: Review your health history
Write down your current symptoms and note whether they improve when you are away from home. Common issues may include fatigue, brain fog, headaches, sinus symptoms, coughing, sleep problems, digestive issues, skin changes, mood changes, or unusual inflammatory symptoms.
Step 2: Gather your home history
Make a list of any known or possible water events, even if they seemed minor:
roof leaks
plumbing leaks
toilet overflows
window leaks
dishwasher or laundry leaks
HVAC condensation or drain problems
past flooding
musty or damp areas
stains on ceilings, walls, or baseboards
Step 3: Look for visible clues
Walk through your home and note:
stained ceilings
warped baseboards
peeling paint
damaged drywall
warped flooring
carpet discoloration
damp closets or cabinets
signs of moisture near sinks, tubs, toilets, windows, and appliances
Do not disturb suspicious materials aggressively, and do not assume that lack of visible mold means lack of contamination.
Step 4: Ask what kind of testing was done
If you already had an inspection, find out:
Was it only air testing?
Was dust testing performed?
Were crawl spaces and attics inspected?
Were areas of known water damage investigated?
Was there a detailed moisture or building-material assessment?
Step 5: Consider dust testing if appropriate
If your clinician recommends it, dust testing such as ERMI may provide useful information to support the need for a more thorough inspection, especially when symptoms or labs suggest mold exposure.
Step 6: Get a mold-savvy inspection
Seek someone who understands medically important mold assessment, not just routine real-estate style air sampling. You want someone focused on finding water-damaged materials and hidden reservoirs of contamination.
Step 7: Do not rely on air purifiers alone
Use a true HEPA filter if desired for support, but remember that filters do not remove mold growth hidden in building materials.
Step 8: Address the source
If mold or water-damaged materials are found, the source needs to be corrected. This may include repair, removal, containment, and whole-home cleaning, depending on the extent of the problem.
Step 9: Follow through with cleanup
If remediation is recommended, ask for a clear plan that explains:
what areas are affected,
what materials need removal,
whether further investigation is needed,
whether you should leave the home temporarily,
and what decontamination or cleaning should follow.
Step 10: Continue medical follow-up
Work with your healthcare professional during and after environmental correction. Many patients need a combination of environmental treatment and medical support for best results.
Questions to Ask a Mold Inspector or Remediation Specialist
Before hiring someone, ask:
Are you aware of “Medically Important Mold Testing and Remediation”
Are you aware of CIRS (Chronic Inflammatory Response Syndrome)
Do you rely only on air testing?
How do you look for hidden water damage?
Do you inspect crawl spaces and attics?
How do you decide where mold is likely to be?
What kind of cleaning or decontamination do you recommend after removal?
When do patients need to leave the home during remediation?
How do you distinguish outdoor mold from indoor water-damage mold?
Bottom Line
If mold illness is suspected, the home (or work space) must be evaluated thoughtfully and thoroughly. A normal air test does not rule out hidden contamination. The real issue is often water-damaged building materials, not just mold floating in the air. Recovery usually works best when patients address both the environment and their health at the same time.
Prior Interview RE: Mold Evaluation, July 22, 2025…
Staying Healthy Today is a reader-supported publication.
To receive new posts and support my work,
consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
For the complete post and video interview Click Here
SPIKE PROTEIN EFFECT” – Guide to Understanding the Spike Protein Effect Dr McCullough reviews public educational brochure with Dr Michael Gaeta. Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH, Focal Points, Feb 27, 2026. Spike Protein Guide . Kirk’s Comment. This document is a must…for everyone! Those who believe the altered Covid-19 Virus spike protein (SarsCov2) is harmful (unlike the SarsCov 1) should read this document to understand the differences in the Spike lethality between SarsCov1 and the man-made SarsCov2 Spike AND THEN the FURTHER pathogenic difference and increased health consequences between the Spike from SarsCov2 and that created by the mRNA Covid-19 vaccine. This report provides a very detailed understanding of why there is an increasing health risk between the latter two and virtually no risk with the SarsCov1 spike protein. Those who have no “clue” and think this infection just appeared naturally, that the vaccine was “safe and effective” and they have nothing to worry about after receiving 2-4 vaccines need to wake up for their own survival and quality of life for the rest of their years.
I can only hope, no I really believe, that when the next pandemic is “put in front of us” that those who pioneered early Covid treatment, and an awaken population, massively “Say No” to listening to the Government, World Authorities, Big Corporations and Big Pharma and will turn to trusted medical sources for the most effective way to prevent and/or treat the upcoming health crisis and never allow again an “illness” to take away our freedom of medical choice, assembly, speech and common sense. I believe we will have another opportunity to improve our “Grade” on how we collectively responded in the near future!…
GAMING – ADDICTION – HEALTH EFFECTS – 24 People Died Playing Video Games. Here’s What They Had In Common. YouTube 19:35 min:sec.
”…A 23-year-old man sat down to play video games at an internet café in Taiwan. 23 hours later, he was dead, arms stiff in rigor mortis, still reaching for the keyboard…Chen Rong-Yu’s death is among 24 cases documented in a peer-reviewed study on fatalities linked to gaming. However, this video isn’t only about extreme cases. We examine how video games physically alter your brain’s dopamine and reward systems, how the $522 billion gaming industry engineers compulsion, what brain scans show about regular gamers, and what it takes to regain control…”
Chapters:
02:47 THE SCALE OF THE THING
04:14 HOW GAMES HACK YOUR BRAIN
06:16 THE NEUROSCIENCE OF THE GAME
08:21 THE PAIN SIDE OF PLEASURE
09:48 THE ENGINEERING OF COMPULSION
11:53 THE BEAR IN THE PARK
13:23 WHAT THE DAMAGE LOOKS LIKE
15:39 THE TRAP AND THE WAY OUT
Summary…
Makai Allbert is a health journalist with a background in biomedical science and classical humanities.
This video uses the 2012 death of 23-year-old Taiwanese gamer Chen Rangu, who reportedly died of cardiac arrest after an extended session of playing League of Legends, to warn of an emerging problem about the neurological and psychological risks of excessive gaming. Allbert argues that modern video games are engineered to maximize engagement through rapid, repeatable dopamine rewards producing frequent motivation spikes that can condition the brain to prefer virtual rewards over slower, effort-based real-world gratification. Citing brain imaging research, Allbert states heavy gaming is associated with structural and functional changes in neural reward circuitry (particularly in the striatum), that blunts sensitivity to non-gaming rewards, and a cycle in which dopamine surges are followed by emotional “crashes,” reinforcing continued play. The video also critiques industry design tactics in which the games are optimized for retention rather than simple entertainment. Allbert notes that the World Health Organization (WHO) officially added “Gaming Disorder” to the 11th revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) in June 2018 and claims roughly 1 in 10 gamers may develop problems related to sleep disruption, depression, anxiety, and social impairment. While acknowledging that extreme outcomes like death are rare, the core message is that the greater risk is cumulative time displacement, emotional dysregulation, reduced real-world skill development, and reliance on fast dopamine rewards over slower, serotonin-linked well-being effects. The video concludes by recommending structured limits, temporary “screen fasts,” environmental boundaries (such as keeping devices out of bedrooms), and replacing high-stimulation habits with slower, effort-based activities to restore baseline reward sensitivity and regain intentional control over gaming behavior.
Kirk’s Comment: The explanation of how excessive gaming causes acute and increased fluctuations of the “feel good” neurotransmitter (and hormone) dopamine resulting in “highs and crashes” reminds me of the same effect from ultraprocessed foods with rapid uptake of sugars and fat in the context of a low fiber, micronutrient poor, ultraprocessed food diet. With time not only are those foods leading to micronutrient deficiency, but they stress our endocrine system with rapid, strong and repeated release of these hormones/neurotransmitters which can “dull” receptor sites in the short-term and consumed in excess over time “exhaust” these glands output and can lead to chronic diseases as well as mood disorders.
When I was young my mother was very strict about us watching TV (black and white at the beginning, remember the first show I could watch late at night “Star Trek” – I’m 68 years-old) and really I didn’t watch a lot because I was out playing all kinds of sports, hiking and exploring freely outside. When I watch my grandson’s “whip” through games or building things on their computers/iPADS at amazing speed and with such dexterity I have to admire it and pray that somehow they are learning something positive. But my first instincts (and valid ones) when I visit them is “let’s get outside and move” and “get away from those devices.” And I flash back to my childhood and teenager years of being a “moving machine”. Not in a hyperactive way but I think a “normal” balanced way. Obviously video screens, tablets, phones and computers are here to stay and whatever comes next, but the balance of physical activity, a whole food nutrient dense diet, sleep and “quiet time” (nature, meditation, prayer and restful sleep) will be critical for our present and future society.
Dr. Peter McCullough, Mon Feb 23, The McCullough Report.
Battle for Science Takes the International Stage. COVID-19 vaccine debacle, plummeting trust in medical orthodoxy, pursuit of medical truth. Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH, Focal Points, Feb 13, 2026.
(Summary and outline from transcript generated by Otter.AI and ChatGPT with permission from Peter McCullough, MD and edited by Kirk Hamilton PA)
Expert Panel Summary…
The February 9–10, 2026 “Battle for Science” panel hosted by Lighthouse TV in Apeldoorn presenting prominent COVID-19 policy critics—including Peter McCullough, Del Bigtree, Sucharit Bhakdi, Vibeke Manniche, Alexandra Henrion-Caude, Martin Haditsch, Angus Dalgleish, Mattias Desmet, Theo Schetters, Astrid Stuckelberger, and former MP Andrew Bridgen—to argue that the COVID-19 pandemic response reflected systemic failures in scientific integrity, data transparency, and regulatory oversight. Central themes included claims that mortality figures were inflated by changes in death certification practices, that excess mortality patterns in 2021–2022 warrant independent investigation, and that lockdowns and healthcare disruptions contributed to delayed diagnoses and indirect harms. Multiple speakers challenged the safety evaluation, liability protections, and regulatory approval processes for mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, contending that long-term safety data were insufficient and that adverse event reporting systems were not adequately investigated, while some distinguished between traditional vaccines and newer genetic platforms. The panel also criticized media censorship and restrictions on debate, framing the period as one of “eminence-based” rather than evidence-based medicine, and incorporated psychological interpretations such as “mass formation theory” to explain public compliance. Overall, the discussion portrayed the pandemic era as a watershed moment in the relationship between science, governance, and public trust, calling for full release of health data, independent reassessment of mortality and vaccine safety statistics, legal accountability where appropriate, and a renewed commitment to open scientific discourse.
Kirk’s Comments: Alex Jones’s coining of the term “Information Wars” is really the way our world functions, but I don’t think I realized how much until maybe 5-10 years ago and my awareness of the vastness of this “Information War” is expanding daily with social media and AI. The bottom line is I realize how much people are hearing (and not hearing) about the facts just regarding the real “Causes and Consequences” of the Covid 19 pandemic and mRNA vaccines. While many are informed it seems an “equal” part of the population and health professionals are absolutely “clueless.” And maybe many don’t want to know because they don’t want to believe they allowed themselves to be injected by a toxic compound (mRNA vaccine) of which the end result may be ongoing negative health consequence …or they don’t want to believe someone close to them died needlessly by avoiding early multi-drug and nutrient treatment and oral/nasal hygiene…or went to the hospital for ineffective therapies at best, and possibly life-ending therapies at worse…in addition to consequences of human isolation. Health professionals may have to live with by hanging on to their beliefs that they did the best they could and don’t want to admit that some people may have died from those actions or lack there-of. One “take home” from this panel is there is some progress moving forward with the truth coming out. There are more of “us” than we might think and that is enough to make a profound difference and reach the “100th Monkey” threshold that will lead to taking the mRNA Vaccines off the market; “re-imagining” all vaccine safety and efficacy testing; professional and big pharma accountability; and getting real help legally, financially and medically for the vaccine injured. With time and evidence, it is hard not to believe the abject intentionality of the whole Covid-19 pandemic, mRNA vaccines as a clearly designed plot by the world elites who have control of big pharma and world governments to make money and do harm.
Key Points and Outline From Experts Panel
“Battle for Science: Dissent, Data, and COVID Debates”
Hosted by Lighthouse TV | February 9–10, 2026 | Apeldoorn, Netherlands
The “Battle for Science” panel brought together a coalition of high-profile COVID-19 policy critics—clinicians, scientists, journalists, and a former parliamentarian—to argue that pandemic policy, mortality reporting, and vaccination campaigns represented a profound breakdown in scientific integrity, transparency, and public trust. Moderated by biomedical engineer Ivor Cummins, the event featured speakers including Peter McCullough, Del Bigtree, Sucharit Bhakdi, Vibeke Manniche, Alexandra Henrion-Caude, Martin Haditsch, Angus Dalgleish, Mattias Desmet, Theo Schetters, Astrid Stuckelberger, and former UK MP Andrew Bridgen, among others.
Central Themes and Arguments
1. Excess Mortality and Death Classification
A major focus was the claim that COVID-19 mortality data were distorted by changes in death certification practices. Several speakers argued that counting deaths “with” a positive PCR test rather than strictly “from” COVID-19 inflated mortality statistics, particularly in the United States and Europe. Panelists questioned why, in their view, there was insufficient public or journalistic scrutiny of excess mortality patterns during 2020 compared with post-vaccine rollout periods (2021 onward).
They cited:
Alleged financial incentives for hospitals tied to COVID diagnoses.
Limited autopsy confirmation of viral pneumonia in reported COVID deaths.
Cross-country comparisons (e.g., Sweden vs. UK) to argue that lockdown stringency did not clearly correlate with mortality outcomes.
Calls for full public access to raw mortality and health registry data.
Speakers contended that post-2021 excess mortality trends warrant independent investigation, asserting that authorities have been reluctant to release granular datasets.
2. Lockdowns and Indirect Harm
Some panelists argued that excess mortality in 2021 and beyond was partly attributable to lockdown-related disruptions:
Delayed diagnoses (e.g., cancer, cardiovascular disease).
Reduced access to routine medical care.
Mental health deterioration and socioeconomic stress.
The claim was that policy responses—rather than the virus itself—produced long-term public health damage.
3. Vaccines: Safety, Liability, and Regulation
A substantial portion of the discussion centered on vaccine safety, liability protections, and regulatory standards.
Key arguments included:
Allegations that COVID-19 mRNA vaccines did not undergo sufficiently long-term safety testing before mass rollout.
Concerns about adverse event reporting systems (e.g., VAERS in the U.S.) and whether signals were adequately investigated.
Criticism of legal frameworks shielding manufacturers from liability (notably referencing U.S. policy changes in 1986).
Broader skepticism about childhood vaccine schedules and the lack of placebo-controlled trials for some legacy vaccines.
While some speakers rejected all vaccines as unsafe, others argued that traditional vaccines can be effective and safe when subjected to rigorous, transparent testing, distinguishing them from what they described as novel mRNA “platform technologies.”
4. Data Transparency and Censorship
Panelists asserted that:
Governments and public health bodies limited access to key datasets.
Social media platforms censored comparisons between COVID-19 and influenza.
Public debate was constrained by what they described as a coordinated narrative.
Speakers framed transparency as the central corrective mechanism—calling for open release of:
5. Psychological and Sociological Dimensions
Prof. Desmet expanded on his theory of “mass formation,” arguing that fear, social isolation, and institutional messaging created conditions for widespread conformity within academia and society. He suggested that highly educated populations may be particularly vulnerable to “expert blindness” when identity becomes tied to institutional narratives.
The discussion framed the pandemic as not only a biomedical crisis but also a psychological and cultural event shaped by group dynamics and authority structures.
6. “Organized” Crime and Institutional Corruption
Some panelists went further, alleging:
Regulatory capture by pharmaceutical interests.
Criminal misconduct in vaccine production and procurement.
Suppression of dissent within academic and governmental institutions.
These claims were expressed by some speakers characterizing the pandemic response as deliberate wrongdoing rather than systemic failure.
7. Tipping Point and Public Awareness
During audience Q&A, discussion turned to whether a societal “tipping point” had been reached. Speakers cited:
Approximately 30% vaccine refusal rates in some countries as evidence of substantial dissent.
Personal anecdotes of vaccine injury within audience networks.
The importance of interpersonal communication rather than waiting for institutional reversal.
The message emphasized grassroots dialogue as the primary path toward what they described as accountability and reform.
Tone and Framing
The tone of the event was openly adversarial toward:
Speakers frequently described the pandemic response as fraudulent, criminal, or ideologically driven rather than evidence-based. The framing positioned the panel as scientific dissenters engaged in a struggle for transparency and justice.
Overall Summary
The “Battle for Science” panel presented a coordinated critique of COVID-19 mortality reporting, lockdown policies, vaccine safety oversight, regulatory frameworks, and media narratives. The central thesis was that the pandemic response reflected systemic corruption and suppression of dissent, leading to distorted data, excess mortality, and erosion of scientific integrity.
Panelists called for:
Full data transparency
Independent reanalysis of mortality and vaccine safety data
Legal accountability where wrongdoing is proven
A cultural shift toward decentralized, health-empowerment models
The event framed the COVID era as a watershed moment in the relationship between science, governance, and public trust—arguing that the future of scientific credibility depends on open inquiry, unrestricted debate, and institutional reform.
CLICK HERE To listen or watch this “Battle for Science: Dissent, Data, and COVID Debates” Go to 47:11 min:sec also to watch introduction to Del Bigtree’s, “An Inconvenient Study” then watch a panel of experts on vaccine safety in general. There is no study showing a vaccine is safe and effective.
Nutrition, Prevention and Integrative Medicine…
VACCINES – MMR – MMRV – DEATHS – Deaths Following MMR and MMRV Vaccination in the United States.”…Conclusions: We identified a serious mortality safety signal following MMR/MMRV vaccination in the United States…Future research should prioritize active surveillance cohort studies, detailed autopsies with virologic testing, and record-linked datasets capable of assessing background mortality and determining causal relationships….”
Share
Cancer…
BREAST CANCER – IVERMECTIN – MEBENDAZOLE – 51 year old South Carolina woman with Stage 4 Breast Cancer reports after 3 months: Nodal metastasis shrinks 2.5cm to 0.8cm, Cancer free with 0 ctDNA! William Makis, MD, Covid Intel, Feb 25, 2026.
CANCER – FEBENDAZOLE – Cancer is a Parasite: Kill It With the Safe, Over-the-Counter Antiparasitic Fenbendazole. New Book by Ben Fen (William F. Supple, Jr., Ph.D.) out today March 3, 2026, Ben Fen, Fenbendazole Can Cure Cancer, Mar 03, 2026.
COLON CANCER TEST – New Blood Test for Colon Cancer Screening: Shield™ from Guardant Health. Find out if this is right for you. Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH, Focal Points, Mar 02, 2026.
1) A Cell-Free DNA Blood-Based Test for Colorectal Cancer Screening. N Engl J Med. 2024;390(11):973–983.
2) FDA Advisory Committee Strongly Recommends Approval For Guardant Health Blood Test For Colorectal Cancer. Guardant Health Perspective | Jun 11, 2024.
3) Guardant Health. Shield Instructions for Use (LBL‑000349 R1), 2024.
GLIOBLASTOMA – IVERMECTIN – MEBENDAZOLE – CBD Oil– 34 year old South Carolina man with GLIOBLASTOMA IDH-Wildtype reports after 3 months: Tumor shrinking! William Makis, MD, Covid Intel, March 01, 2026.
LUNG CANCER – IVERMECTIN – FENBENDAZOLE, MEBENDAZOLE – 52 year old Illinois man with Stage 4 NSCLC Lung Cancer metastatic to bones, brain reports after 2 months: CEA dropped 719 to 18!! William Makis, Intel, Feb 24, 2026.
LUNG CANCER – FENBENDAZOLE – ALBENDAZOLE – 65 year old BULGARIAN man with Stage 4 Small Cell Lung Cancer reports after 2 months: Tumor shrinks from 10cm to 2cm, brain mets gone!! William Makis, Covid Intel, Feb 25, 2026.
LYMPHOMA – IVERMECTIN – FENBENDAZOLE – 85 year old ARIZONA Man with B-Cell Lymphoma reports after 10 months – in Remission!! William Makis, MD, Covid Intel, Feb 24, 2026.
PANCREATIC CANCER – IVERMECTIN- FENBENDAZOLE – 68 year old man from the MIDDLE EAST with Stage 4 Pancreatic Cancer reports after 8 months: IN REMISSION!! William Makis, MD, Covid Intel, Mar 04, 2026.
PROSTATE CANCER – IVERMECTIN, FENBENDAZOLE -MEBENDAZOLE – 80 year old man in SAUDI ARABIA with Stage 4 Prostate Cancer metastatic to bones reports after 3 months: incredible response! William Makis, MD, Covid Intel, Feb 24, 2026.
Covid Syndrome…
LONG COVID – LOW DOSE NALTREXONE (LDN) – Low-Dose Naltrexone as an Adjunct to the McCullough Protocol Base Spike Detoxification™ in Long COVID Management. Symptom control improved while body is ridding itself of Spike Protein. Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH, Focal Points, Feb 25, 2026.
”…Integrating LDN with the McCullough Protocol Base Spike Detoxification™ potentially amplifies therapeutic outcomes through complementary mechanisms:
Spike Protein Clearance: Nattokinase and bromelain enzymatically degrade spike fragments and dissolve fibrinaloid microclots, while curcumin dampens NF-κB–driven inflammation.
Neuroimmune Recovery: LDN reduces microglial hyperactivation and rebalances neuroimmune signaling, addressing post-viral fatigue and brain fog.
Homeostatic Restoration: Curcumin and bromelain’s anti-inflammatory properties complement LDN’s endorphin-mediated immunomodulation, promoting autonomic stability and mood improvement.
Glutathione and Mitochondrial Support: Novel formulations such as Ultra N-Acetylcysteine can be co-administered for redox balance, further aiding spike protein denaturation and potential clearance (Armine & McCullough,® 2025)…”
Byambasuren O. et al. Effect of Low-Dose Naltrexone for Long COVID: Systematic Review., medRxiv (2025)
Minnesota Department of Health. Low-Dose Naltrexone for Treatment of Long COVID. (2024)
Low-dose naltrexone and NAD+ for the treatment of patients with persistent fatigue symptoms after COVID-19.”…treatment with LDN and NAD+ is safe and may be beneficial in a subset of patients with persistent fatigue after COVID-19. Larger randomized controlled trials will have to confirm our data and determine which patient subpopulations might benefit most from this strategy…”
Share
To Discuss Medical Questions or Make an Appointment Call Kirk Hamilton PA at 916-489-4400
Dr. Joe Dispenza’s Website
Falun Dafa – Truthfulness, Compassion and Forbearance
Brief Introduction to Falun Dafa
Books & Recent Writings of Mr. Li Hongzhi
Video & Audio Materials
Take an Online Class
Kirk Hamilton PA-C
Health Associates Medical Group
3301 Alta Arden, Suite 3
Sacramento, CA 95825
(916) 489-4400 (w)
krhammer@surewest.net
StayingHealthyToday.Substack.com
www.StayingHealthyToday.com
www.HealthyLivingforBusypeople.com
www.KwikerMedical.com
Staying Healthy Today is a reader-supported publication. For the full post click below
To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
