The Vitamin D Thread.

[Poker Player]

There are many conspiracy theories, that man never landed on the moon, that the twin towers attacks were a false flag, that COVID is a creation of Bill Gates and that vaccines are microchipped, etc.

I don't believe in most conspiracy theories (unlike some on this board, lol), but I do believe in some of them, and in particular in the one I am going to expose.

Mainly what I will defend is that the importance of vitamin D is at least minimized, when not directly attacked, by the pharmaceutical industry because optimal levels of vitamin D make us have a stronger immune system, and thus need less medication. Although I open the thread not only to talk about the possible conspiracy, but also about all the benefits and disadvantages it may have.

If you ask your doctor if you should sunbathe, he will tell you, if he follows the current guidelines, that you should sunbathe sparingly, not in the middle of the day and using sunscreen.

This is what has been said for about half a century, and the result can be seen in the following graphs on melanoma cases:



And this in the USA:



This increase in cases, according to the official version, is due to everything but the recommendations given causing the increase in cases.

Without denying that exposure to the sun's rays can have a detrimental effect and lead to melanoma, I believe that short exposures, without burning the skin (and without applying sunscreen), have more benefits than harm in this regard.

I have read a lot of articles on this subject over the years and I don't want to turn this post into an academic article with lots of citations, so I will quote sparingly to show that there is some evidence suggesting that optimal vitamin D levels may reduce the risk of melanoma:

"Results suggest that both deficient and insufficient serum levels of vitamin D are associated with melanoma and that a trend seems to be present with a reduced risk of melanoma when vitamin D approaches normal values."

Source: 25-Hydroxyvitamin D serum levels and melanoma risk: a case-control study and evidence synthesis of clinical epidemiological studies

Then, in Role of vitamin D serum levels in prevention of primary and recurrent melanoma we can read:

(From the conclusion): "This result agrees with other studies that recognize a deficiency status of vitamin D as a possible predisposing factor for the development of melanoma. The hypothesis is supported by the deficit of the known anti-proliferative and antiangiogenics effect attributable to calcitriol, which would have an antitumor action."

Vitamin D and the immune system

Vitamin D's best known function is to deliver calcium to the bones. Not so well known is the more important function of strengthening the immune system, although we hear more and more about it. Many articles on this subject are compiled in:

https://vitamindwiki.com/Immunity

The pharmaceutical industry tends to underestimate this function and to exaggerate the only possible adverse effect of oral vitamin D supplementation (hypercalcemia). With a stronger immune system, we need fewer drugs, and optimal levels of vitamin D can be obtained either for free by sunbathing or inexpensively through oral supplementation that is not sold exclusively by pharmaceutical companies.

Anyway, nor should we think that vitamin D is a magic substance, something like the holy grail. It may have many beneficial effects, but someone with optimal vitamin D levels but who was under a lot of stress and little sleep for several days would have a weakened immune system. It's not all about vitamin D.

Vitamin D and COVID-19

There is growing evidence that optimal levels of Vitamin D may have a beneficial effect against COVID-19 infection. Again, there are many articles on the subject compiled in:

https://vitamindwiki.com/COVID-19+treated+by+Vitamin+D+-+studies%2C+reports%2C+videos

I'm not going to get into whether vaccines would not have been needed if everyone had optimal vitamin D levels, but the evidence suggests that people with optimal vitamin D levels would have a lower risk of developing a severe clinical picture from COVID-19 than people with vitamin D deficiency. Therefore, I understand that it would be at least a good complement to the other measures, masks, vaccines, etc....

My personal experience.

About 4 or 5 years ago I discovered this issue and started to sunbathe more (with short exposures and with as much of my body exposed as possible, without sunscreen and without ever burning my skin) and taking oral vitamin D in winter. As I went way over the recommended daily amount (between 20 and 30k IU during the winter months), I had blood tests done to measure vitamin D and calcium. My calcium has always been normal despite sometimes exceeding 100 ng/ml of vitamin D in my blood.

As for the effects: all positive. Better sleep, better mood and above all (and this is something that people who have optimal vitamin D levels usually report) I haven't had a cold or the flu since then (no COVID either), even though I used to get colds before and it took at least a week for the symptoms to go away. Only a couple of times I felt like I was coming down with a cold but the symptoms lasted a day.

Conclusion:

I believe that most people would benefit from having optimal vitamin D levels, and the pharmaceutical industry would make less profit, lol.

I am not against medicines in general either, as they have been a great advance in the history of mankind and have contributed to lengthen life expectancy, but nowadays there is a tendency to chronically medicate people for things that could be solved in a more natural way.

[1715226503]

1715226503

[1715226503]

1715226503

[1715226503]

1715226503

[1715226503]

1715226503

[1715226503]

1715226503

[Natsuu]

I am no doctor nor have medical related degrees in me to have a valid opinion about this so I will direct my comment to your conclusion.

Based on your conclusion, you're stating that people should be treated by more natural way than drugs sold in the pharmaceuticals. But take in mind that drugs in pharmaceutical are compacted nutrients, minerals for specific reasons. Having it in capsules or tablet make it easier to be digested in the body without having complicated chemical reactions inside the body.

Though I must say that my comment is based on my knowledge right now, so I am open for clarifications.

[franky1]

vitamin D is not the sole cause of immune deficiency.

there are many factors at play
for instance VitD aids getting calcium to the bones.
but this also means calcium is the active ingredient. so having a calcium issue may be due to something else. including low calcium

no matter how much sunbathing someone does. having a calcium deficiency wont cure a calcium deficiency by sunbathing even more.
you might have already been at adequate vitD levels and just needed some calcium. so just taking more vitD/sunbathes wont help one bit. but can cause more issues.


infact excessive vit D can cause bone marrow disease
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/02/190208094330.htm

yes you can over do calcium and vit D and cause an over hardening of your bones which then cause issues with the marrow inside from being able to produce blood and immuno cells

if you are overdosing on vit D then vit D is not the solution

there is a motto.. that remains true "a balanced diet"
going excess in any direction is not going to 'strengthen' you.

[Cnut237]

I don't want to turn this post into an academic article with lots of citations

It may be too late, once I get involved

Mounting evidence demonstrates that vitamin D has important roles in regulating the immune system that should reduce COVID-19 risks; primarily by reducing survival and replication of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and by reducing the risks of “cytokine storms” by reducing pro-inflammatory cytokine production and increasing anti-inflammatory cytokine production (4). Vitamin D also promotes local ACE2 formation in the lungs, an effect known to reduce the severity of acute respiratory distress syndrome (5).

https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m1548/rr-22
4. Grant WB, Lahore H, McDonnell SL, et al. Evidence that Vitamin D Supplementation Could Reduce Risk of Influenza and COVID-19 Infections and Deaths. Nutrients 2020;12(4):E988. doi: 10.3390/nu12040988
5. Annweiler C, Cao Z, Wu Y, et al. Counter-regulatory 'Renin-Angiotensin' System-based Candidate Drugs to Treat COVID-19 Diseases in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients. Infect Disord Drug Targets 2020 doi: 10.2174/1871526520666200518073329

It does appear that the data are increasingly suggesting that vitamin D supplementation vs Covid is a good idea. Interestingly, point 5 in that paper appears to contradict the idea raised in a previous thread about ACE2. But I am not a medical professional, and my understanding of the processes involved is rudimentary.

The best and most comprehensive paper I've found is this one: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7276229/

Older age and co-morbidities are linked to an insufficient vitamin D supply. Over 60 years of age, a reduction in the synthesis of vitamin D in the skin becomes apparent, which further increases getting older. The precursor of vitamin D, 7-dehydrocholesterol in the skin declines about 50% from age 20 to 80, and the elevation of cholecalciferol levels in serum following UVB radiation of the skin shows more than a 4-fold difference in individuals aged 62–80 yrs. compared with controls (20–30 yrs). This explains the high number of older individuals with an inadequate vitamin D status.

It is firmly established that older age groups suffer worse outcomes from Covid. Is this linked to reduced vitamin D synthesis with age?

I've found a study (linked to from the paper above) that has interesting results. My bold. We need more studies, we need more data, but a pattern does appear to be emerging:

The importance of a vitamin D deficiency is shown by a recently published analysis of the COVID-19 deaths of 780 COVID-19 patients in Indonesia.


The table illustrates that old age, comorbidities and vitamin D deficiency or insufficiency contributed to outcome of the disease. Based on these data Vitamin D plasma level is an independent predictor of mortality.

[franky1]

the table above that has mean age and higher vitD  shows no determining factor.

by having lower age and higher vit d .. cancels out any relevant conclusion of both

is the less death due to age.. or vit d.. .. no one can tell

if they done a study of 100 people in 65+ group with low vit d. then 100 people in 65+ with higher vit d .. then you can make a conclusion

but having a group of 45yo with high vit d.. just messes up any conclusion about vit D

.
also having alot of vitd in blood does not mean its where it should be, accelerating bone metabolism
there are many people that cannot process vit D so it just remains in the blood. accumulating but not metabolising.
these people can have high vit d count toxifying themselves whilst still not effecting their bones.

some people need to actually find out what their body needs. and not just try everything in high doses and hope it makes them immortal. because the opposite can happen

you do not need to overdose on supplements. nor sunbathe until you are a lobster to get vit D.
just get out your basement for an hour a day and you will have what your body needs.

no pill. no prescription. no pharmacy visit. no over the counter payments
the walk to a store 30minutes away and back. is more then you need than what can be bought on the vitamin D rack inside the store

[Cnut237]

if they done a study of 100 people in 65+ group with low vit d. then 100 people in 65+ with higher vit d .. then you can make a conclusion

but having a group of 45yo with high vit d.. just messes up any conclusion about vit D

I understand your point, and yes the picture might be clearer if we were able to differentiate between two groups who are the same in age, comorbidities, general fitness etc, and differed only in vit D level. That would be ideal, and hopefully we will see studies where this is the case.

What this particular study shows is that people with high vit D tend to: be younger, have fewer comorbidities, have a vastly lower death rate, and be more active.

Of course it is difficult to disentangle the variables from one another. But the point is that if if age by itself can be considered a risk factor, then so can vit D level by itself. Whether that is simply as a proxy for age is a different question... as is the question of whether vulnerability due to age is simply a proxy for vit D.

[Poker Player]

I am no doctor nor have medical related degrees in me to have a valid opinion about this so I will direct my comment to your conclusion.

Based on your conclusion, you're stating that people should be treated by more natural way than drugs sold in the pharmaceuticals. But take in mind that drugs in pharmaceutical are compacted nutrients, minerals for specific reasons. Having it in capsules or tablet make it easier to be digested in the body without having complicated chemical reactions inside the body.

Though I must say that my comment is based on my knowledge right now, so I am open for clarifications.

In reality I believe that drug treatment is often oriented to treat the symptoms instead of the causes, and that prevention with natural measures could help to avoid much use of drugs.

Regarding what you say, they are not exactly compacted nutrients, they can be extracts, products of chemical synthesis...

A few years ago I discovered that ginger is effective in treating headaches. I think it is healthier to take a teaspoon of powdered ginger root than to take ibuprofen. Do you think I will digest ginger worse than ibuprofen? I don't think so.

vitamin D is not the sole cause of immune deficiency.

I agree and I said something like that in the OP.

if you are overdosing on vit D then vit D is not the solution

there is a motto.. that remains true "a balanced diet"
going excess in any direction is not going to 'strengthen' you.

Of course, but the question is what is a Vitamin D overdose. It is clear that taking 500K IU daily is too high a dose but as I believe current standards are too low.

The table illustrates that old age, comorbidities and vitamin D deficiency or insufficiency contributed to outcome of the disease. Based on these data Vitamin D plasma level is an independent predictor of mortality.

And that's taking >30 ng/ml as the optimal level, which is too low in my opinion.

the walk to a store 30minutes away and back. is more then you need than what can be bought on the vitamin D rack inside the store

No, that is according to current standards and is too low. We have been led to believe that with a walk at 6 pm and with only your arms (and face) exposed to the sun you are going to get enough vitamin D, and it is not true. And you don't need to get like a lobster either, don't exaggerate we know you like it.

[Mauser]

I also heard from doctors that Vitamin D is very important against covid 19. But when I ask how it is going to make a difference they remain very vague. Probably all vitamins are very important for the immun system. The only problem is that we can't vitamin D in enough quantities in fruits. The only real way to get vitamin D and store it in our body is through sun light. There is no need to buy expensive products from pharmaceutical companies for vitamin D, better to go outside everyday.

[Beparanf]

I also heard from doctors that Vitamin D is very important against covid 19. But when I ask how it is going to make a difference they remain very vague. Probably all vitamins are very important for the immun system. The only problem is that we can't vitamin D in enough quantities in fruits. The only real way to get vitamin D and store it in our body is through sun light. There is no need to buy expensive products from pharmaceutical companies for vitamin D, better to go outside everyday.

Vitamin D boost immune and the immune system is the number 1 target of COVID-19 that's why expert suggest to take that vitamins to help fight the virus in case you got it. It's not a cure nor a medicine. It just help the body to boost the immune system to fight against COVID-19 which is I agree. People just misunderstood the comments of expert that's why there is always a confusion about this topic.

[franky1]

The table illustrates that old age, comorbidities and vitamin D deficiency or insufficiency contributed to outcome of the disease. Based on these data Vitamin D plasma level is an independent predictor of mortality.

And that's taking >30 ng/ml as the optimal level, which is too low in my opinion.

the walk to a store 30minutes away and back. is more then you need than what can be bought on the vitamin D rack inside the store

No, that is according to current standards and is too low. We have been led to believe that with a walk at 6 pm and with only your arms (and face) exposed to the sun you are going to get enough vitamin D, and it is not true. And you don't need to get like a lobster either, don't exaggerate we know you like it.

taking 30ng/ml
um no..
people dont take 30ng/ml

the 30ng/ml is the measure  inside their blood. not the measure of the supplement consumption

imagine it was taking 500ui
not everyone absorbs the entire 500ui through their gut. so even that is a factor of how much gets into the blood
next comes how much they are deficient.. of which means it then gets absorbed into the bone leaving less free vitd left in the blood.
or someone that is already vitd regulated and so bones dont absorb the new vitd meaning the majority just stays in the blood. or cant metabolise it into the bone so again stays in the blood

see its not that simple.
if your body already has sufficient vitd.
or
if your bones dont absorb vitD well
or
having efficient gut digestion...
.. can all cause a higher number too

vs
if your blood was deficient
or
bad gut absorbtion
or bone deficiency but effective absorbtion
.. can cause a low count

and in both scenarios. thats not going to tell if your immunity is low or high
because it still requires other enzymes nutrients to complete the requirement of making immuno cells

...
your body has a better chance of creating vitd through sunlight than through excessive suplement digestion.. why.. because if your gut receives too much. it triggers a signal to stop certain processes within your body.

its like the diabetic dilemma. if your body cant process sugars well. cant absorb them into cells.. adding more sugar is going to cause more harm.. yes your body needs more sugar in the cell.. but just ingesting more sugar causes more problems.. because you are not thinking about the other aspects involved with how things get into the cell

you dont treat a sugar absorbtion issue with more sugar

[BADecker]

^^^ Worried about getting enough V-D without getting it in the wrong place?

You can get your V-D from many places, even eating plants and animals. But the biggest place is on your skin, and in your eyes, through sunlight hitting them and converting 'stuff' into V-D.

Want more V-D without taking it into your gut where it might have some adverse effects? Simply break open a few capsules of V-D, and mix them with a small amount of DMSO, and rub them all over your skin. Get the V-D the way nature mostly intended... absorption into and through the skin. BEFORE YOU DO THIS ALL OVER YOUR SKIN, TEST ON A SMALL PATCH OF SKIN.

NOTE: Eyes are sensitive. Until studies have been done that show that DMSO is not dangerous for the eyes, don't use it in the eyes. However, there have been a few reports in the past - where people who wanted to cure their cataracts - combined extra-finely powdered n-acetyl-l-carnosine with DMSO (and other ingredients) and used them as eye-drops to remove cataracts. As far as I have understood, these 'studies' were anecdotal, but maybe, complete fabrications. If you use DMSO with or without V-D in the eyes, you do it at your own risk.

[franky1]

badecker advertises yet another pharma product while pretending to be anti pharma

does he not even see the games his influencers are playing on him. he seems to be too much on auto-play to even have an independent thought or do independent research

[Poker Player]

Hey franky1. I put you on ignore once and removed you just for the laughs. But since I intend this to be a serious thread I'll answer you:

And that's taking >30 ng/ml as the optimal level, which is too low in my opinion.

the walk to a store 30minutes away and back. is more then you need than what can be bought on the vitamin D rack inside the store

No, that is according to current standards and is too low. We have been led to believe that with a walk at 6 pm and with only your arms (and face) exposed to the sun you are going to get enough vitamin D, and it is not true. And you don't need to get like a lobster either, don't exaggerate we know you like it.

taking 30ng/ml
um no..
people dont take 30ng/ml

the 30ng/ml is the measure  inside their blood. not the measure of the supplement consumption

Did you forget the second part of the sentence? I was talking about taking (in consideration) >30 ng/ml as an optimal level and wasn't talking referring to consuming.

I think a better range is >60 ng/ml (and up to 80 or even to 100 ng-ml).

And the other thing you say, yes of course different people can absorb vitamin D differently. Then the same person can absorb vitamin D differently, or create it if they sunbathe, depending on age or weight, for example.

[BADecker]

Simply running your own business selling products, and using freedom of speech to do it, is being outlawed. The FDA has been doing this for a long time. They don't call it what it really is, "eliminating competition," because that might limit their ability to do it. Rather, they are using illegal tactics with "dirty fighting" to force people to do what they want. If Mercola didn't stop voluntarily (since they can't get him legally) we would find him or members of his family "suicided."


Why I'm Removing All Articles Related to Vitamins D, C, Zinc and COVID-19

Over the past year, I've been researching and writing as much as I can to help you take control of your health, as fearmongering media and corrupt politicians have destroyed lives and livelihoods to establish global control of the world's population, using the COVID-19 pandemic as their justification.

I've also kept you informed about billionaire-backed front groups like the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), a partner of Bill Gates' Alliance for Science, both of whom have led campaigns aimed at destroying my reputation and censoring the information I share.

Other attackers include HealthGuard, which ranks health sites based on a certain set of "credibility criteria." It has sought to discredit my website by ensuring warnings appear whenever you search for my articles or enter my website in an internet browser.

[Gyfts]

...

Most people, not all, most, in the first world do not have a problem with excess vitamin D, they are at a deficiency because they spend their time inside, inactive, and away from the sun. In fact, this is causing testosterone problems as well (people being inactive, bad diet, lack of exercise, cause low serum testosterone levels).

See vitamin D's important effect on the immune system - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3166406/

We aren't talking about an excessive amount of vitamin D, just an amount that is sufficient for normal levels. Again, how much sunlight do you expect the average person in the first world to get?

[franky1]

Vit D does not directly increase your immunity
and if your immunity is failing due to a number of reasons. or if its already at peak efficiency vitD will not 'boost it'

Vit D aids the absorbtion of calcium and other nutrients
its the calcium that build stronger bones
which then allows for your bones to produce marrow using vit B12, iron, folic acid,
which then produces blood/immuno cells

vitD does not produce immuno cells

once you learn to separate and recognise the many steps inbetween. you might learn that suggesting 'more than norm vit D' does not directly translate to better immune system

when pregnant women are growing a babyinside them.. guess what the two main ingredients recommended to prevent bone growth defects and help imunity as they grow.
.. calcium and folic acid
bones are made of calcium.. so guess the more important ingredient.. calcium
marrow and blood.. guess the main ingredient... iron

so it doesnt matter if your swallow 5trillion iu of vitD. if your low on the actual materials that make bone. marrow and immuno cells.. your not helping yourself
...
lets use bloodsugar and insulin as an analogy.. something most people are more common with.

your body need sugar(calcium) to function for energy/fuel. and insulin(vitD) helps sugar(calcium) get into the cell to do is more important work.. get that?
having a low sugar(calcium) thus low energy(bone repair). is not cured by overdosing on insulin(vitD)... get that
overdosing on insulin(vitD) while already being low on sugar(calcium) is not going to give you the energy(bone maintenance) result.
GET THAT??

if you have high sugar(calcium) but still suffer from low energy(bad bones low blood low immunity) then and only then is it a sign that your insulin(vitd) is insufficient. but usually best to get a insulin(vitD) test to find out your levels before just taking overdoses of insulin(vitD)

and your other nutrient count test too..

the issues of low energy(low blood low immune bad bones) is not always due to low insulin(vitD) it may be due to low other nutrients

again Vit D is not the active ingredient that makes immuno cells.
its just the transport medium of nutrients

if anyone is diabetic and took too much insulin. they will not feel like they have lots of energy
taking too much vitD will not make you feel like you are immortal to all ailments

take into consideration all nutrients and a balance diet.. and actually find out which nutrient you are deficient of

it seems too many are advertising a supplement but lack explaining its function or the need of a balanced diet.

milk (vitD+calcium) is a better recommendation than supplements

here is some examples of nutritional references for things like babies milk
VitD RI      0.0072mg (7.2mcg)
folate RI    0.127mg  (127mcg)
calcium RI 554mg     (554,000mcg)

as you can see the ratio of calcium:vitD is 76944:1
which shows how much more important calcium is

just keep in mind. vitD does not create immunocells. it just helps your body absorb other nutrients.. which after several steps the other nutrients create immuno cells

so find out what your body is actually deficient of

yes vegans drinking organic coconut milk thats not fortified are getting 7x less calcium than cow milk.
so if your bones are clicking or sore after exercise.maybe its your calcium you need to look into

if you have brittle nails pale skin. cold hands. maybe its your iron you need to look into

[BADecker]

In the USA, if you haven't been taking at least 40,000 or 50,000 units of vitamin D a day, your odds of dying from cancer, heart disease, diabetes, and a lot of other diseases, go way up.

[GeorgeJohn]

@

In the USA, if you haven't been taking at least 40,000 or 50,000 units of vitamin D a day, your odds of dying from cancer, heart disease, diabetes, and a lot of other diseases, go way up.

I have seen that some that countries is into problem, in my country nobody watch your food in your weight, and rate getting cancer is high while our atmosphere is very harsh, the ozone layer or depletion really affect but no contamination of cancers per say, the only thing i know that affects my country is diabetes mellitus which causes by much of intake of food molecules that contains sugar, and it's under control.

Just wonder how USA will be consuming minerals because of health and lack of it causes harm to their system, it's a serious problem. So if i may ask what is the cause of  this disease you listed?

[Cnut237]

There is some evidence, as we've seen, that moderate Vitamin D supplementation helps to protect to an extent against the worst effects of Covid.

But I still don't understand why those who want to take something to protect themselves are unwilling to take the obvious and best protection, which is the vaccine.

Is the objection a moral one, that they don't want to support profit-seeking Big Pharma? in which case, why is there such an overlap between those who dislike the profit-seeking and those who in every other circumstance advocate zero government intervention, and to let the money flow according to free capitalism? And how does Biden's proposed patent waiver fit into all this?

Or is the objection that the vaccines don't work or aren't safe? Evidence, as I've linked to dozens of times in P&S, clearly shows that they do work and are safe, and that case numbers drop hugely once a vaccination programme gets into full swing - as we've seen to such dramatic effect in the UK.

Objection to the vaccine seems to be baseless-conclusion-led rather than data-led.

[Fortify]

I believe that most people would benefit from having optimal vitamin D levels, and the pharmaceutical industry would make less profit, lol.

I am not against medicines in general either, as they have been a great advance in the history of mankind and have contributed to lengthen life expectancy, but nowadays there is a tendency to chronically medicate people for things that could be solved in a more natural way.

While you seem to have put a lot of coincidental information together, I get the feeling that you are attributing to malice that which can be adequately explained by "accident". Since the beginning of the human species, our body has been able to produce vitamin D from sunlight or receive it from sources like eggs. In the modern world, with many people choosing to stay indoors and hooked on TV or the internet, it is a natural consequence that people are getting less exposure to sunlight. Same with food sources, people are increasingly under pressure from work and home cooking has taken a back seat, many healthy foods are shunned in favor of fast food. Now, the only part of your idea that is possibly true is that artificially created supplements might be unnecessarily expensive, but this is also driven by supply and demand. If you combine all these shifts in human behavior it is easy to see people getting less vitamin D than the past few decades, but to call it a conspiracy when it is simply self inflicted collective societal changes seems a bit silly.