... Vitamin-D Rollout following 82% reduction in COVID-19 deaths in Spain

[BADecker]

~

The question is, are you going to keep on with this charade? Or are you going to, at least, admit that the possibility exists that Covid might be close to 100% a lie, and that the pandemic IS possibly a 100% lie, even if you don't believe it is a lie?

BADecker.

I'll admit any possibility initially, and am willing to be swayed by hard evidence. But in this instance the evidence is overwhelming that something caused huge numbers of extra deaths in 2020, and that the peaks coincided with the rise of Covid, and the troughs coincided with lockdowns. It's pretty conclusive, and the evidence is derived from many countries and many different sources.

I know that you and I have very different perspectives on most topics, but I'm drawn to the—perhaps erroneous—assumption that you start from a desired conclusion, and then seek out evidence to corroborate a thing that you've already decided. Obviously I think I'm impartial, but I'm aware that of course I also have my own biases... it's very difficult for anyone to assess issues with 100% perfect objectivity and no preconceived notions.

I think I'd be more comfortable discussing things with you if you could give me an example of sometime in the past where you've had a firm conviction on something but you then changed your opinion completely when confronted with evidence.

An example from me would be that I used to argue that all religions should be abolished, because they brought nothing but conflict and persecution, and were in essence evil. Since then, whilst I still don't believe in god, I've come to understand from speaking to people with strong beliefs that religious affiliation brings huge social benefits and can often be a force for good. I would now argue a much more nuanced perspective.

Could I have an example from you?

Del Bigtree of The Highwire (https://www.bitchute.com/channel/okiFK5CwQrZS/) has interviewed all kinds of people in authority who have shown that total deaths in the US aren't any more than any year. You may need to go to some past videos to find those that talk about death statistics... past videos up to March.

Search on "US total death statistics 10 years" - https://duckduckgo.com/?q=us+total+death+statistics+10+years&t=ffab&ia=web - to find all kinds of websites that show death stats are similar for each year. Much of their info comes from the CDC website which shows similar... similar deaths each year.

I'm not here to make you feel comfortable with me.
If you aren't willing to acknowledge the fact that Covid stats
don't change the total US death count,
according to loads of sites,
sites that are having a difficult time of reconciling total deaths along with Covid death counts,
what's the difference if you don't feel all cozy about me?

Do the search as listed above. Do other searches with similar wording. For example, look at knoema at https://knoema.com/atlas/United-States-of-America/Death-rate. Note that they talk about death rates per year falling from 1971 to 2020. Then note that their chart shows death rates going down from 1950 to about 2010, and then going back up to 2020, but never coming close to 1950. Then note their table right next to the chart. The table shows a rather steady death rate increase from 2012/2013, every year thru 2020. There wasn't any Covid jump except if Covid started back a decade ago. Still, none in 2020 that was a greater rate of increase.

Other charts and tables here and there show completely different things. But how could they show different when the CDC suddenly said that 94% of formerly called Covid deaths were really from comorbidities. Most death statistic sites haven't picked up on this 94% drop that came about suddenly. Pick the charts you like, and kiss and hug them.

[1715619259]

1715619259

[Cnut237]

I think I'd be more comfortable discussing things with you if you could give me an example of sometime in the past where you've had a firm conviction on something but you then changed your opinion completely when confronted with evidence.

I'm not here to make you feel comfortable with me. [...] what's the difference if you don't feel all cozy about me?

Comfortable was perhaps the wrong word. I'm suggesting that you're arguing in bad faith. That you have decided without evidence that Covid is a scam/cover-up/conspiracy, and have then sought out selective evidence to back-up your already entrenched position.
If you give an example, as I have done, of some time when you've changed your opinion based on evidence, then I'll happily reassess my theory. If you can't do that, then you're undermining every argument you've ever made.

[BADecker]

I think I'd be more comfortable discussing things with you if you could give me an example of sometime in the past where you've had a firm conviction on something but you then changed your opinion completely when confronted with evidence.

I'm not here to make you feel comfortable with me. [...] what's the difference if you don't feel all cozy about me?

Comfortable was perhaps the wrong word. I'm suggesting that you're arguing in bad faith. That you have decided without evidence that Covid is a scam/cover-up/conspiracy, and have then sought out selective evidence to back-up your already entrenched position.
If you give an example, as I have done, of some time when you've changed your opinion based on evidence, then I'll happily reassess my theory. If you can't do that, then you're undermining every argument you've ever made.

Wow! I was just kinda sounding off when I said, "Pick the charts you like, and kiss and hug them." I knew you already did that. But I thought you were sincerely interested. You can lead the horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

It was kinda fun. And I respect that you don't even choose to look. Hey, man. This is a forum. We kinda slap each other on the back like good ol' buds, even though we go different ways when we leave.

[Cnut237]

Could I have an example from you?

If you give an example, as I have done, of some time when you've changed your opinion based on evidence, then I'll happily reassess my theory. If you can't do that, then you're undermining every argument you've ever made.

Well, I tried.

[BADecker]

Could I have an example from you?

If you give an example, as I have done, of some time when you've changed your opinion based on evidence, then I'll happily reassess my theory. If you can't do that, then you're undermining every argument you've ever made.

Well, I tried.

You didn't even go to the sites in post #43, above. You say you tried, but you didn't. There's a difference between saying something and actually doing it.  Or didn't your clicker work on your mouse when you clicked the links in #43?

Lol

[BADecker]

Haven't you guys heard? The sun isn't the same anymore, therefore it won't cure covid. It's been replaced with a fake sun. The liberals did it.

https://i.imgur.com/ERNgDKy.jpg

Try to keep up on the latest BADecker, sheesh.

Revelation 19:17:

And I saw an angel standing in the sun, who cried in a loud voice to all the birds flying in midair, "Come, gather together for the great supper of God,...

There are some Bible scholars and others, who are convinced that over the 7,500-year history of the earth, the angel in the sun has changed once or twice... maybe 3 times. They base this on the fact that the sun has drastically changed at certain places in history, as recorded by the peoples living in those times.

They say that practice makes perfect. But they are wrong. Nothing ever reaches perfection. But keep practicing, and you might even surpass BADecker sometime.

[franky1]

Revelation 19:17:

And I saw an angel standing in the sun, who cried in a loud voice to all the birds flying in midair, "Come, gather together for the great supper of God,...

and that there is the quote which will trigger badeckers next cult.
replace 'angel' with 'ufo' and there you have the suicide cults that think if they gather together and have a last supper and then kill themselves, they will get to meet aliens(god)

[Cnut237]

And I saw an angel standing in the sun

If you look at the sun for any length of time, then you're not going to see very much at all, and will probably need a trip to hospital.

who cried in a loud voice

Sound doesn't travel through space. If the angel is in the sun, this is an issue.

to all the birds flying in midair, "Come, gather together for the great supper of God,...

Birds don't understand exhortations in spoken English.

I'm not being flippant, just trying to illustrate the point that if you don't accept facts and science as an argument, and use faith-based arguments, then you are starting from a conclusion and seeking out whatever corroborates your pre-set opinion, rather than starting from a position where you seek out facts to determine whether or not your assumed conclusion is correct. Which goes back to the discussion of a couple of days ago: have you ever changed your mind about anything, based on evidence?

[BADecker]

Revelation 19:17:

And I saw an angel standing in the sun, who cried in a loud voice to all the birds flying in midair, "Come, gather together for the great supper of God,...

and that there is the quote which will trigger badeckers next cult.
replace 'angel' with 'ufo' and there you have the suicide cults that think if they gather together and have a last supper and then kill themselves, they will get to meet aliens(god)

I don't blame you. After all, this is one of the best ways to hide the cult of modern medicine - especially vaccines. Suggest that somebody else is starting an opposing cult, even when it is not true.

And I saw an angel standing in the sun

If you look at the sun for any length of time, then you're not going to see very much at all, and will probably need a trip to hospital.

who cried in a loud voice

Sound doesn't travel through space. If the angel is in the sun, this is an issue.

to all the birds flying in midair, "Come, gather together for the great supper of God,...

Birds don't understand exhortations in spoken English.

I'm not being flippant, just trying to illustrate the point that if you don't accept facts and science as an argument, and use faith-based arguments, then you are starting from a conclusion and seeking out whatever corroborates your pre-set opinion, rather than starting from a position where you seek out facts to determine whether or not your assumed conclusion is correct. Which goes back to the discussion of a couple of days ago: have you ever changed your mind about anything, based on evidence?

Looking at the sun doesn't have anything to do with the angel who stands in the sun. He still stands in the sun.

Sound traveling through space doesn't have anything to do with an angel speaking in a loud voice.

Yet we have at least several varieties of birds who can speak English. But since the original was written in Greek, and since God can easily speak the language that birds understand, this isn't even relevant.

Science is something like an iceberg. We see the top of it floating above the water. We can examine some of the top that we see. But we have no idea about the part under water. Science know so very little about what there is to know scientifically.

[Cnut237]

Looking at the sun doesn't have anything to do with the angel who stands in the sun. He still stands in the sun.

You don't know he's there unless you see him.

Sound traveling through space doesn't have anything to do with an angel speaking in a loud voice.

You don't know what he's said unless you hear him.

Science know so very little about what there is to know scientifically.

God of the gaps is not a compelling argument.

2000 years ago: "We do not know what causes lightning, therefore it must be a god throwing lightning bolts from the sky."
1000 years ago: "We do not know what keeps the planets in their courses. There must be angels pushing them along."
500 years ago: "We do not know what causes diseases, therefore they must be punishments from God."
200 years ago: "We do not know how the many species of plants and animals could have appeared, therefore God must have created them."
100 years ago: "We do not know how the universe started, therefore God must have done it."
60 years ago: "We do not know how genes are passed from parent to child, therefore traits must be imprinted upon the soul."

As science advances, the domain of things caused by God diminishes. Eventually there will be hardly anything left. Faith and religious belief confer certain social benefits, but there is no underlying truth to them.

[hartley]

Vitamin D steers the immune system away from highly inflammatory pathways and toward a pathway that is more regulated. You’re going to get enough vitamin D if you eat a relatively healthy meal and get some sunlight, this can boost your immune system very effective.
In times like these it’s more important than ever to know what’s in our bodies. Vitamin D can keep exposure to COVID-19 from becoming an infection that can cause you and other people harm.

[BADecker]

Looking at the sun doesn't have anything to do with the angel who stands in the sun. He still stands in the sun.

You don't know he's there unless you see him.

When God let John see it so he could write it in the Revelation, John saw it.

Sound traveling through space doesn't have anything to do with an angel speaking in a loud voice.

You don't know what he's said unless you hear him.

When God let John hear it so he could write it in the Revelation, John heard it.

Science know so very little about what there is to know scientifically.

God of the gaps is not a compelling argument.

2000 years ago: "We do not know what causes lightning, therefore it must be a god throwing lightning bolts from the sky."
1000 years ago: "We do not know what keeps the planets in their courses. There must be angels pushing them along."
500 years ago: "We do not know what causes diseases, therefore they must be punishments from God."
200 years ago: "We do not know how the many species of plants and animals could have appeared, therefore God must have created them."
100 years ago: "We do not know how the universe started, therefore God must have done it."
60 years ago: "We do not know how genes are passed from parent to child, therefore traits must be imprinted upon the soul."

As science advances, the domain of things caused by God diminishes. Eventually there will be hardly anything left. Faith and religious belief confer certain social benefits, but there is no underlying truth to them.

"God of the gaps" is the wrong term. The correct term is "mankind of the gaps." God doesn't have any gaps. It's the gaps in the understanding and knowledge of man.

God is Almighty. All the knowledge and strength of combined mankind is smaller in size when compared with God, than an atom of hydrogen in our universe if the universe were packed solidly with atoms of hydrogen.

God knows everything. He made everything through the cause and effect that He started in the creation. In order for there to be the complexity of mankind in our present time, God tossed everything out in the Beginning in just the right way so that cause and effect produces complexity right now.

As science advances, they will soon come to the understanding of how great God really is. But if they try to fight or ignore this truth, they will only destroy themselves with their science.

Vitamin D steers the immune system away from highly inflammatory pathways and toward a pathway that is more regulated. You’re going to get enough vitamin D if you eat a relatively healthy meal and get some sunlight, this can boost your immune system very effective.
In times like these it’s more important than ever to know what’s in our bodies. Vitamin D can keep exposure to COVID-19 from becoming an infection that can cause you and other people harm.

This is reasonably correct. The question is, who knows for sure if a good healthy meal really gives us enough vitamin D - or any other nutrient - for times of trouble, like Covid. It certainly isn't your average doctor... who gets one small nutrition course in his whole medical training.

[BADecker]

Let's say it another way. As of today, there are 467,518 US Covid deaths listed on worldometer.- https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/.

These deaths are before the 94% that the CDC says were due to comorbidities.

These deaths are comparable to the way Spain is reporting deaths in the OP article. What I mean is, Spain hasn't taken the comorbidities into account. This means that the application of high doses of vitamin D aren't only reducing Covid, but they are also reducing deaths from comorbidities... cancer, heart disease, diabetes, flu, pneumonia, loads of things.

In the US, we would have had only 18% of the deaths we had that were originally attributed to Covid, if we had used vitamin D, and if we could say we were comparable to Spain. This means we would have had only 84,153 Covid deaths in the US with vitamin D alone.

Think about it. The CDC says all kinds of contradictory things. The whole Covid thing is a lie. Those who died would have died anyway, without Covid. Fewer would have died because the medical only made the whole thing worse when they blindly tackled Covid. The vaccine will only make it worse than ever... as we are seeing.

[BADecker]

All those comorbidities that the CDC was talking about when they said that their original Covid death count was comorbidities... those deaths are from things like cancer, heart disease, diabetes, and other thing... not Covid. Now we are finding that many of those comorbidity deaths from the last 30 years could have been cured with the use of somewhat mega-doses of vitamin D.


Battling skin cancer: Vitamin D may be used to boost anti-tumor activity, study finds

British researchers have found that vitamin D helps fight a serious form of skin cancer known as melanoma. In a study published in the journal Cancer Research, they reported that increasing vitamin D levels can help suppress a signaling pathway linked to the growth and spread of melanoma cells.

“[What’s] really intriguing is that we can now see how vitamin D might help the immune system fight cancer,” said Julia Newton-Bishop, a professor of dermatology at the University of Leeds and one of the study researchers.
Increasing Vitamin D receptor expression increases immune activity against melanoma

Melanoma is a form of skin cancer that begins in cells known as melanocytes. While less common than basal cell carcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma, it is more dangerous because it spreads more easily to other organs if left untreated at an early stage. In the United States, nearly 7,000 people die from melanoma every year, while only 2,000 die from basal and squamous cell carcinoma.

Past studies have linked low levels of vitamin D in the body to a worse melanoma outcome. But the precise mechanisms behind this had been unclear. To that end, Newton-Bishop and her team investigated what happens when cells lack a protein called vitamin D receptor (VDR). Vitamin D cannot bind to cells unless the cells have VDRs on their surfaces.

The researchers obtained samples from 703 human melanoma tumors and 353 metastatic ones (tumors that have spread from the original site) to study the expression of the gene that has the instructions for making VDR. Within these samples, they looked for links between the gene’s expression and other features, such as the thickness of the melanoma tumors, how fast they grew and genetic alterations that caused faster tumor growth.

[Tash]

All those comorbidities that the CDC was talking about when they said that their original Covid death count was comorbidities... those deaths are from things like cancer, heart disease, diabetes, and other thing... not Covid. Now we are finding that many of those comorbidity deaths from the last 30 years could have been cured with the use of somewhat mega-doses of vitamin D.


Battling skin cancer: Vitamin D may be used to boost anti-tumor activity, study finds

British researchers have found that vitamin D helps fight a serious form of skin cancer known as melanoma. In a study published in the journal Cancer Research, they reported that increasing vitamin D levels can help suppress a signaling pathway linked to the growth and spread of melanoma cells.

“[What’s] really intriguing is that we can now see how vitamin D might help the immune system fight cancer,” said Julia Newton-Bishop, a professor of dermatology at the University of Leeds and one of the study researchers.
Increasing Vitamin D receptor expression increases immune activity against melanoma

Melanoma is a form of skin cancer that begins in cells known as melanocytes. While less common than basal cell carcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma, it is more dangerous because it spreads more easily to other organs if left untreated at an early stage. In the United States, nearly 7,000 people die from melanoma every year, while only 2,000 die from basal and squamous cell carcinoma.

Past studies have linked low levels of vitamin D in the body to a worse melanoma outcome. But the precise mechanisms behind this had been unclear. To that end, Newton-Bishop and her team investigated what happens when cells lack a protein called vitamin D receptor (VDR). Vitamin D cannot bind to cells unless the cells have VDRs on their surfaces.

The researchers obtained samples from 703 human melanoma tumors and 353 metastatic ones (tumors that have spread from the original site) to study the expression of the gene that has the instructions for making VDR. Within these samples, they looked for links between the gene’s expression and other features, such as the thickness of the melanoma tumors, how fast they grew and genetic alterations that caused faster tumor growth.

I say 80-90% of all ills in nothing more than wrong lifestyle.
Not enough SUN, not enough of essential vitamin A, B6, B9, B12, C and D and the minerals zinc, selenium, iron and copper

[BADecker]

All those comorbidities that the CDC was talking about when they said that their original Covid death count was comorbidities... those deaths are from things like cancer, heart disease, diabetes, and other thing... not Covid. Now we are finding that many of those comorbidity deaths from the last 30 years could have been cured with the use of somewhat mega-doses of vitamin D.


Battling skin cancer: Vitamin D may be used to boost anti-tumor activity, study finds

British researchers have found that vitamin D helps fight a serious form of skin cancer known as melanoma. In a study published in the journal Cancer Research, they reported that increasing vitamin D levels can help suppress a signaling pathway linked to the growth and spread of melanoma cells.

“[What’s] really intriguing is that we can now see how vitamin D might help the immune system fight cancer,” said Julia Newton-Bishop, a professor of dermatology at the University of Leeds and one of the study researchers.
Increasing Vitamin D receptor expression increases immune activity against melanoma

Melanoma is a form of skin cancer that begins in cells known as melanocytes. While less common than basal cell carcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma, it is more dangerous because it spreads more easily to other organs if left untreated at an early stage. In the United States, nearly 7,000 people die from melanoma every year, while only 2,000 die from basal and squamous cell carcinoma.

Past studies have linked low levels of vitamin D in the body to a worse melanoma outcome. But the precise mechanisms behind this had been unclear. To that end, Newton-Bishop and her team investigated what happens when cells lack a protein called vitamin D receptor (VDR). Vitamin D cannot bind to cells unless the cells have VDRs on their surfaces.

The researchers obtained samples from 703 human melanoma tumors and 353 metastatic ones (tumors that have spread from the original site) to study the expression of the gene that has the instructions for making VDR. Within these samples, they looked for links between the gene’s expression and other features, such as the thickness of the melanoma tumors, how fast they grew and genetic alterations that caused faster tumor growth.

I say 80-90% of all ills in nothing more than wrong lifestyle.
Not enough SUN, not enough of essential vitamin A, B6, B9, B12, C and D and the minerals zinc, selenium, iron and copper

That was really the point. If a little mega-dosing with vitamin D can reduce comorbidity deaths by 60% to 82%, think of what full and complete, proper nutrition could do for people. EVERYBODY might live to be over 100.

[Tash]

Lot of things will emergncy correct the misteaded body.
As I see it the best treatment is the oral nutrition therapie (vitamins D,C,A,E, and zinc)
Obvious with enough sun fruit vegies and less frequencies, covid is barly noticed or non existend  to start with.
https://www.energetichealthinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Position-Paper-v24-Reduced-Size.pdf

[Cnut237]

Lot of things will emergncy correct the misteaded body.
As I see it the best treatment is the oral nutrition therapie (vitamins D,C,A,E, and zinc)
Obvious with enough sun fruit vegies and less frequencies, covid is barly noticed or non existend  to start with.
https://www.energetichealthinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Position-Paper-v24-Reduced-Size.pdf

The best approach is to take the vaccine. This not only protects you, but also helps to reduce transmission and so protects the as-yet-unvaccinated people as well.

But yes, there is evidence that vitamin D helps... and arguably vitamin D supplementation is a good idea anyway for people living at higher latitudes, and also dependent on skin pigmentation.
A healthy lifestyle in general helps to keep your body strong... but vaccination is the most important element here.

[Tash]

Lot of things will emergncy correct the misteaded body.
As I see it the best treatment is the oral nutrition therapie (vitamins D,C,A,E, and zinc)
Obvious with enough sun fruit vegies and less frequencies, covid is barly noticed or non existend  to start with.
https://www.energetichealthinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Position-Paper-v24-Reduced-Size.pdf

The best approach is to take the vaccine. This not only protects you, but also helps to reduce transmission and so protects the as-yet-unvaccinated people as well.

But yes, there is evidence that vitamin D helps... and arguably vitamin D supplementation is a good idea anyway for people living at higher latitudes, and also dependent on skin pigmentation.
A healthy lifestyle in general helps to keep your body strong... but vaccination is the most important element here.

So a nut  (Cnut237) on the internet knows more then someone working a lifetime long in the field

Geert Vanden Bossche, DMV, PhD, independent virologist and vaccine expert, was head of vaccine develpment in German centre of infection research. vaccine wrong weapon to fight.
https://youtu.be/ZJZxiNxYLpc

As the unprecedented extent of human intervention in the Covid-19 pandemic is now at risk of resulting in a global catastrope without equal, this call cannot sound loudly and strongly enough.
https://i.ibb.co/DCXRxm1/DB2-B7201-4972-4-ED3-BA06-E30227-BFA252.jpg

[Poker Player]

The best approach is to take the vaccine. This not only protects you, but also helps to reduce transmission and so protects the as-yet-unvaccinated people as well.

That's simply not true. Vaccines do not prevent you from catching the virus or transmitting it, at least in principle it has not been demonstrated, what they do seem to do is to prevent you from developing a serious clinical picture.

So a nut  (Cnut237) on the internet knows more then someone working a lifetime long in the field

Geert Vanden Bossche, DMV, PhD, independent virologist and vaccine expert, was head of vaccine develpment in German centre of infection research. vaccine wrong weapon to fight.
https://youtu.be/ZJZxiNxYLpc

Yes well, but there are also lots doctors who think COVID vaccines are wonderful.