Premium Only Content
Is Meat Bad for you?
Check out my Substack to get my free weekly newsletter covering 5 interesting points from the week!
â–²SUBSTACK: https://josepheverettwil.substack.com/
â–²DISCORD: Join the $5 tier on my Patreon to join the WIL discord! - https://www.patreon.com/WILearned
â–²Twitter: https://twitter.com/JEverettLearned
â–²IG: https://www.instagram.com/josepheverett.wil/
For business inquiries: [email protected]
・Check out the artist who made heme-chan here: audreylovegren.com
LINK TO PDF OF SCRIPT WITH LINKS TO SOURCES: https://www.patreon.com/posts/33873653
*A couple people asked me to respond to a youtuber's video response to this video. Since I expect more comments about this, I'll point out just one thing for now:
( TLDR : Youtuber makes a video saying I've misrepresented a study - say my words don't match the study I referenced. He was looking at the wrong study.)
At 11:22 of the video response he says "This is where things get really bad and I think he needs to correct this in some way..." and brings up the part of my video where I said "Unfortunately, it looks like iron supplements don't cut it for pregnant women. Despite taking prenatal vitamins with iron, 58% of the women had iron levels below normal." He goes on to say that he looked forever at this study that I referenced, only to find that this 58% figure was no where in the study and that I was blatantly misrepresenting the study. Moreover, he says "Worst of all, this [study] actually undermines his whole video on heme iron, because all 19 of those women were given heme iron throughout their pregnancy..." That is, he's suggesting that if there is a 58% of women who had low levels of iron despite supplementing with iron, these women were actually supplementing with heme iron and therefore heme iron is not effective for maintaining iron levels in pregnant women.
Ironically, this is a misinterpretation on his part.
The reason he couldn't find that 58% figure in that particular paper of mine he was looking at was because it was the wrong study. The source for the statement "Despite taking prenatal vitamins with iron, 58% of the women had iron levels below normal" is NOT the study he was looking at - "Maternal hepcidin is associated with placental transfer of iron derived from dietary heme and nonheme sources."
The source for the 58% figure is "Maternal prenatal iron status and tissue organization in the neonatal brain."
-
10:18
Colion Noir
5 hours agoViral TikTok Proves Gun Owners Wrong?
31.3K35 -
DVR
Badlands Media
16 hours agoMAHA News [11.28] Team MAHA Dropping Bombs, Pesticide Fight, Campbell's Soup Outed, Save Ranchers
10.7K1 -
1:01:18
DeVory Darkins
5 hours agoBREAKING: Trump issues fatal update to National Guard shooting
114K80 -
49:57
The Quartering
4 hours agoTrump UNLOADS, Walmart Black Friday Madness & Trans Taco Bell Attack
24.6K35 -
39:51
Tucker Carlson
4 hours agoGeorge Galloway Speaks Out on Being Forced Into Exile After Criticizing Ukraine War
39.7K106 -
21:23
Neil McCoy-Ward
3 hours ago🔥 While You're Working Hard... They're Planning To Take EVERYTHING From You!!!
12.1K11 -
2:13:37
Side Scrollers Podcast
6 hours agoTwitch CONTROVERSY Hit New Low + Reddit Mods QUIT + FireMAN is Now Sexist + More | Side Scrollers
72.8K7 -
5:31
John Rich Official
13 days agoThe Righteous Hunter by John Rich
29.2K15 -
59:51
Rebel News
5 hours agoEby threatens to block pipeline, Guilbeault out of cabinet, Land disputes continue | Rebel Roundup
30.4K4 -
1:45:59
Robert Gouveia
6 hours agoAmerican Soldier DEAD! Trump Furious! Afghan 'Vetted by CIA'! Third World FREEZE!
55.3K55