JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


Handbooks


Advertising


Australian Speakers Agency



GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper



Archives

Books

Junk study on Vitamin D shows nothing much but how bad science reporting is

The Sun provides Vitamin D

The Sunlight Vitamin

UPDATED! Mea Culpa from me. The post has been corrected*.  Thanks to Rob.

__________________

More junk reporting from the Australian government broadcaster the ABC which just copies the junk science press release. Is this what we pay $1b a year for?

The Journalists missed the key factor which was blood levels of participants.

The headline says Clinical trial finds vitamin D does not ward off colds and flu  but all it really shows is that in a group that already have *normal, non-deficient levels* of Vitamin D, taking big doses of Vitamin D once a month won’t will raise your blood levels — but won’t make a big difference to your risk of respiratory infections. And it only applies to people aged 60 -74.

Most participants in the study had a normal but sub-optimal Vit D levels and after five years of sporadic high doses, were raised to optimal levels at the end.

After taking 60,000 IU each month, supplementers apparently went from having 77.5  nmol/L up to 114.8 nmol/L,. To put this in perspective, normal levels of Vitamin D start at “50” and above, and there are professors who point out that there are many reasons to aim for Vitamin D levels of “100 – 150”.  Toxicity starts from 220nmol/L.

UPDATE: As we saw in the Brenner et al study of 10,000 Germans, when people are quite deficient (below 30 nmol/L) they are twice as likely to die of respiratory diseases as people whose blood levels are normal — defined as being above 50 nmol/L. The people who are most at risk of dying are those who are clinically deficient at below 20 nmol/L. Their risk was 3 times greater.  That study showed that a shocking 40% of all respiratory deaths might possibly be due to being deficient in Vitamin D. This new study in Queensland only shows that raising Vitamin D levels in people who are not deficient won’t make much difference.

If so-called science journalists only bothered spend five minutes reading the short summary (not even the whole paper) they could report something useful. See  The Lancet Diabetes and Endocrinology. The journalists made a big deal of how the “researchers analysed self-reported health data from 16,000 Australians aged between 60 and 84”. But the study ruled out most participants, and ended up with only 2,598 people.

I rate the study: barely worth noticing.

The shoddy work by “science communicators” is just another example of how science writing becomes de facto mere repetition of press releases which are usually dependent on government funding. No hard questions asked.

If you don’t know or care much about Vitamin D3 you may want to find out how it’s linked to all cause mortality (unlike nearly every other vitamin) : Let’s solve the other pandemic: Vitamin D deficiency — to help beat Coronavirus?

In essence 2,500 people were given 60,000 IU of Vitamin D3 or a placebo once a month and followed for five years. They kept diaries for two months each year to track colds and flu like symptoms.

Diagnostic Vitamin D levels according to the conservative Royal College of Pathologists of Australia:

Mild vitamin D deficiency: 30–49 nmol/L

Moderate vitamin deficiency: 12.5–29 nmol/L

Severe vitamin D deficiency: < 12.5 nmol/L

Some professors suggest the optimal target might be more like 100 – 150 nmol/L 

Professor Robert Heaney, says that Vitamin D “enables the body to absorb calcium” and that the level should be set at 100 nmol/L

Professor Bruce Hollis, who is a world expert in Vitamin D for pregnant women and their babies, says that the baby takes nutrients from the mother and that pregnant women should have 125 nmol/L

Recent evidence reveals beneficial effects of vitamin D at serum levels around 50 ng/mL (125 nmol/L)[6],[7],[8] or higher – effects not seen at levels below 40 ng/mL (120 nmol/L), indicating a need for upward revision of the deficiency reference threshold.

Based on the data, it is reasonable to assume that, should the threshold for vitamin D deficiency be raised to a level of 50 ng/mL (125 nmol/L), the percentage of the population determined to be deficient would most-likely be closer to 90% or greater

Another group of approximately 40 experts in vitamin D have requested through their call to action that blood levels should aim to be between 100-150 nmol/L.[9]

Even with that tiny 5nmol/L improvement in their Vitamin D3 levels, participants had slightly fewer symptoms, they didn’t get quite as sick, or for quite as long. It’s not much, but imagine what they might have achieved if they raised their D levels even to “normal”?

Lead researcher and head of QIMR Berghofer’s Cancer Aetiology and Prevention group, Professor Rachel Neale, said participants who received vitamin D supplements reported they had cold and flu symptoms for slightly less time than participants who did not take the vitamin. They also had severe symptoms for less time and needed less medication to manage their symptoms.

“Our clinical trial showed that people who took vitamin D supplements were infected with colds and flus at the same rate as those who were given placebos. Those who got the supplements did, however on average, report a small reduction in the number of days they experienced symptoms (on average about half a day),” Professor Neale said.

It worth knowing that people who take Vit D3 may want to consider adding Vitamin K as well.

h.t David of Cooyal

Posts on Vitamin D3

___________

*Mea Culpa!

I misread the units, and on a post criticizing bad science writing. :-(. Ouch.  The central conclusion did not change — that their reporting of the study didn’t shed much light on what the study meant, and journalists missed the most important numbers in the study (the blood levels). But it does matter, and I apologize. Most people were not deficient to start with in this study. Instead of a moderate deficiency barely being resolved to a mild deficiency, the study shows that a sub-optimal but normal level was shifted up to an optimal level. So sporadic bolus doses did raise D levels, but most people in this study were not deficient at all, so they were not at high risk of respiratory disease mortality to begin with and the study was unlikely to improve outcomes in respiratory diseases.

REFERENCES:

Brenner, Holleczek, and Schoettker, B. (2020)  Vitamin D insufficiency and deficiency and mortality from respiratory diseases in a cohort of older adults: potential for limiting the death toll during and beyond the COVID-19 pandemic, https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.06.22.20137299v1

Pham et al (2021)  The effect of vitamin D supplementation on acute respiratory tract infection in older Australian adults: an analysis of data from the D-Health Trial, The Lancet, Diabetes and Endocrinology, https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-8587(20)30380-6

 

9.3 out of 10 based on 50 ratings

49 comments to Junk study on Vitamin D shows nothing much but how bad science reporting is

  • #
    Rob

    Hi Jo

    I dont really understand this jargon in the summary:

    “In blood samples collected from randomly sampled participants throughout the trial, the mean serum 25(OH)D concentration was 114·8 (SD 30·3) nmol/L in the vitamin D group and 77·5 (25·2) nmol/L in the placebo group.”

    Are the 114.8 and 77.5 the means, and the 30.3 and the 25.2 the standard deviations?

    I didnt go past the paywall.

    40

    • #
      Ian

      “Are the 114.8 and 77.5 the means, and the 30.3 and the 25.2 the standard deviations?”

      Yes, I think they are

      30

      • #

        Thanks Rob, Ian. My mistake! I’ve corrected the units and the interpretation. Luckily for me, the headline doesn’t change. But it does matter. The study is still junk, as are the reports on it. Journalists missed the most important factor — the blood levels. But the monthly supplements did lift Vitamin D levels. The problem in the study was that few people were deficient in this study even in the placebo group. Since the people most at risk from respiratory deaths are people below 30 nmol and even more so below 20 nmol, the study was never likely to show much improvement. Silly careless error on my part. D3 is often reported with ng/ml as well as nmol/L. Apologies. Rare error in 4,300 posts. Doh. :- (

        30

  • #
    Hanrahan

    That’s 2,000 IU/day and that is inadequate to get someone “deficient” into the “good” range, it is barely a maintenance dose. The older/fatter have a bigger problem still. I give my lady who never goes in the sun 5,000 each morn. I’m a little tanned so take an occasional dose.

    It is true that D3 has a long half life so monthly dosing is theoretically OK but not really.

    D3 supplement needs to be processed through the liver which takes a couple of days. If you think you have the rona, days matter, get an injection of the most immediately available form, ie the form the liver makes [Or is that the kidneys? 🙂 ] I just did a search on cholecalciferol and an injection is available on prescription of 600,000 iu. If I’ve got the CCP virus THAT is what I want.

    https://www.yourdiscountchemist.com.au/vitamin-d3-600-000-iu-injection.html

    Note I am NOT making a recommendation of the retailer. Never dealt with them, they just came up in a search.

    60

    • #
      Hanrahan

      BTW The oral D3 is fat soluble so vegans have their own problem. Personally I dose my Lady with her cup of bullet-proof coffee. Plenty of butter and MCT oil.

      50

    • #
      Mike Jonas

      What you (Hanrahan) say makes sense to me. And surely “60,000 IU of Vitamin D3 once a month” is not a good way if doing it? My expectation is that if you take a large dose infrequently then more of it will pass through and not be taken up into your system, and that anyway an infrequent dose isn’t as good as a frequent dose. I have never seen a bottle of pills with instruction “take x pills once a month”, they all specify a daily dose. And surely a daily dose would always be a lot better.

      30

  • #
    DevonshireDozer

    The problem is that the MSM is equally useless everywhere in the world. They are no more than a collective propaganda unit.

    Billions of people, who aren’t necessarily inherently bad people, believe whatever twaddle the BBC/ABC etc. put out. As a good example, I know of a woman who is a keen photographer. Every day, she takes a photograph to accompany a journal. A recent entry contained the following paragraph (copied & pasted):

    “Terrible new from the World Meteorological Organization today, their report from consolidating data from 5 key agencies from around the World states that: av global temp was 14.9C (1.2C above the av 1850-1900); we’ve just seen the warmest decade on record; the warmest years have been the last 6: the top 3 are 2020, 2019 and 2016.” .

    After decades of bombardment, she clearly believes such things without question. Moreover, she still believes in the institutions behind it – and that is the fundamental problem. I am going to assume that the widespread fiddling of data by the BoM in Australia (there’s a hidden irony in there) has been replicated elsewhere, but as Mark Twain is supposed to have said; “It is easier to fool someone than to convince them they have been fooled”.

    Whether it is climate change, mask wearing or anything else, real science is up against religion and other greedy, manipulative forces. I despair.

    DevonshireDozer.

    170

    • #
      Hanrahan

      I wasn’t watching closely but it seems POTUSelect claims that if one mask is good, two is better.

      Have met some drunks with that attitude.

      60

  • #
    Analitik

    I read a report on this study a few days ago and the thing that instantly caught my eye was the single dose per month being the supplement. At that point,it was obvious that this study was designed to fail, just like the early ones for hydroxychloroquine for CoViD.

    110

    • #
      sophocles

      I agree. I read it and did some back of the envelope sums. They failed to impress me.

      More to the point: it failed to come anywhere near my personal experience. If it does not protect me from colds and other respiratory tract infections, something must be. I haven’t had one for six years now bar a veny minor influenza about three years ago.

      I don’t hide from other people — I go to the supermarket three times per week and wander around the shopping malls (which are surprisingly empty — must be a recession). I don’t wear a mask. (All the masks seem to be too small because they are b****y uncomfortable.)

      So what is protecting me? Since I started vit-d maintenance, I haven’t had a respiratory tract infection bar once in 2018. It was H1N1 and was so mild I more or less ignored it. I took it to my doctor, out of curiosity, who sent in blood samples for testing. Next thing he was panicking at me over the phone while he told me what it was. I felt a long long way from being at death’s door and at the end of week two it had gone. Completely. It was so nice of my doctor to do all my panicking for me. I can recommend it. It’s sort of fun.

      I measure my vit-d levels every six months in late February (the SH Summer) and late August (the SH Sickness Season.). Last measurement (aug) was 218 nm/L. That seems healthy enough.

      40

      • #
        David-of-Cooyal-in-Oz

        G’day S,
        Glad to hear of your success with vitamin D.
        I’m a late starter on supplementation and have put myself on 10,000 IU per day in the expectation of reaching about 50ng/ml (125 nmol/L), up from (40 /100) by the time of my next blood test, which will be soon.
        But I’ve not seen any guidelines for a maintenance dose. Fauci was reported to be on 6000 IU per day and I’m assuming that’s for maintenance??
        What amount do you use?
        Cheers
        Dave B

        10

        • #
          sophocles

          David:
          I use two sources – the sun and supplementation.

          I aim for a day or a couple of days solar exposure every couple of weeks. The last few months have been poor but the Americas’s Cup racing seems to have brought the sun back.

          I’m 68 YO, and overweight but not largely so, so I supplement with 6000 IU/day of D3 to compensate for the cloudy days, age and weight. If I were younger I would probably be using 4000IU to 5000IU per day. I get 30 mins sunshine when I can, either side of summer, 15 mins/day during summer. (Prevents burning but a white skin makes plenty of D3. I will find out next month if I should cut back my vitamin D — that’s my next test. The Sunshine provides vit-D and Nitric Oxides which are good for the cardio system.)

          I take as close to 120 mcg/day of vitamin K2, as I can (daily doses should be about 120mcg/day for males and 90mcg/day for females) and 35mg zinc per day. (New Zealand soil is largely volcanic and is rather poor with regard to zinc content — not to mention selenium, iodine, and cobalt. The cows get better diets than the people. Iodine is added to our salt, two brazil nuts per week takes care of the selenium, and aerial topdressing takes care of the cobalt which is deficient in the high country and affects trees not people.)

          I snack on peanuts for Magnesium. A handful per day seems about right. (Love peanuts but more than a handful per day has … umm … consequences).

          I take 500mg of vitamin C per day too. This is since the H1N1 bug I had in 2018.
          I must be doing something right, because I feel good. Very good.
          I have a blood test for vit-D every six months — a good engineer/scientist always measures.

          Hope this helps you.

          10

          • #
            David-of-Cooyal-in-Oz

            Thanks sophocles,
            That’s good. That you’re using 6000 IU as your supplement supports my thought that that is probably a minimum maintenance intake, at least for people who can’t get adequate sun exposure. I don’t. While I’m outside and in the sun for sufficient time most days I’m always covered from hat to boots, not only against sunburn but also against various nasties like paper wasps, briar and thistle thorns or wind chill effects.
            One of the surprises I tripped over is that vitamin D requires the presence of a cofactor, iron, for complete efficacy, and the iron requires the vitamin D for the same.
            I’m also taking zinc, with quercetin, in the expectation that the zinc will stop the replication of the virus if it gets into a cell.

            I’m still playing it safe, living 25kms out of town, and that with no local transmission so far, so my regime hasn’t been tested. Except I’ve had no hay fever symptoms at all since I started.
            ….
            Coming back to the report, I reckon they missed the most important finding from their 5 years, that their dose, considered huge* in some papers, is safe, even over an extended period, so a bolus dose over the first few days is reasonable. Something to be considered by anyone seeking to get a level of protection in advance of any exposure, remembering that it takes about 2 weeks to be processed by the liver and kidneys to get into its useable form in the blood.

            Cheers
            Dave B
            * The official recommended intake is about 600 (!) IU per day, which may be enough to prevent rickets, but certainly not Covid.

            10

  • #
    FrankH

    After taking 60,000IU each month, supplementers apparently went from having a moderate deficiency of 25 nmol/L only up to 30 nmol/L — which just, by 1 nmol– qualifies them for the definition of “mild” deficiency.

    If a deficiency of 25 is bad, a deficiency of 30 is worse, not better. I can work out what it means from the context but that is really bad English.

    20

    • #
      Deano

      And it shows just how well the ‘journalist’ understands the issue they are reporting.

      10

      • #

        And, ouch, mea culpa from me. See my update. They went from 77 up to 125 nmol/L. Not deficient in the first place.

        Shifting from sub-optimal up to optimal may improve other biomarkers, but the big advantage in Vit D with respiratory infections seems to occur in people with serious deficiences, not normal D levels.

        30

    • #
      sophocles

      FrankH:

      It’s about the equivalent of 1000 IU per day even though it works out at about 2000IU per day on average. The body regulates its blood levels very well.

      That’s a pathetic dosage. It will help prevent broken hips among those prone to it but reinforce the immune system. No.

      I use supplementation during cloudy weather. It’s been cloudy out there nearly all the time over the last 12 months. It’s boring. It’s cloudy out there right now. I have had a couple of
      good sunny days each week so far but that’s all. I’ve used them to expose my skin for 15 minutes per day at solar noon (13:30 in Auckland).

      10

  • #
    Deano

    Vitamin D deficiency leads to Ministers for Science granting taxpayer funds for valuable, much needed research like this:

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/290219853_Glaciers_gender_and_science_A_feminist_glaciology_framework_for_global_environmental_change_research

    41 citations and 141 references. Hit me with your rhythm stick.

    40

  • #
    Earl Jantzi

    Anyone who thinks a vitamin D deficient person should take a once a month dose is deficient in another key area as well. Our bodies were designed to get sunlight every day, so a daily small dose will raise the level and keep it up much better than a monthly megadose.
    A lot of times a little common sense goes a long way. Try it some time.

    90

    • #
      WokeBuster

      I wonder how much of the cancer scare overreach has made some portion of the population vitamin D deficient with all health related issues consequences.

      30

      • #
        sophocles

        `Slip slap slop’ means somewhere about 50% of NZ’s population is vitamin D deficient.

        20

      • #
        Hanrahan

        They did a study of Australian dermatologists below Lat 36. The results are as you would expect:

        For the study group, the average serum 25(OH)D was34.4 nmol ⁄L (range 5–84). Only six (13%) of the derma-tologists had serum 25(OH)D levels > 50 nmol ⁄L but seven (15%) had serum 25(OH)D levels <20 nmol ⁄L.There was no significant difference in the average serum25(OH)D level between men (35 mol ⁄L) and women(34 nmol ⁄L) or between white Australians (35 nmol ⁄L)and Asian Australians (35 nmol ⁄L).

        The average serum 25(OH)D level of the controls was 44.7 nmol ⁄L (range 19–170), which was significantly higher than that of the dermatologists (P< 0.05). In total,13 controls (21%) had serum 25(OH)D levels ‡50 nmol ⁄L,and 3 (4.7%) had serum 25(OH)D levels < 20 nmol ⁄L.There was no significant difference in the average serum 25(OH)D between men and women.

        20

        • #
          sophocles

          … one doctor who made a video on vit-d, (only a couple of years ago) claimed most Australian dermatologists were in danger from “adult” rickets. I found that highly amusing at the time.

          I see nothing has changed …

          20

    • #
      sophocles

      You’re right. The body is very efficient at controlling D 3. It dumps what it perceives to be ‘surplus’ out the kidneys. We all know where that goes.

      In the absence of weekly blood levels, that study appears to be a waste of time. Ok D 3 can stick around for three weeks but the researchers don’t seem to have monitored active levels. Big mistake.

      30

    • #
      tom0mason

      YES Earl Jantzi,

      As with nearly all vitamins and mineral uptake, small and regular daily dose work much better than large doses between long periods.
      Part of the today’s problem is modern diets of excessive carbs and sugar, that’s damaging to the body. Humans ARE omnivores, and as such require animal derived protein, vitamins and minerals, which satisfies hunger pangs better than any amount of chips, quinoa, seaweed and sugary deserts and sodas.

      Also see Dr. John Campbell video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNji13yoW9g about vitamin D.

      50

  • #
    roman

    Anything to ensure as many as possible get sick with the covid. Which is difficult given it doesn’t do anything to anyone who isn’t already climing a stairway to heaven.

    Oh, and [snip] the ABC.

    10

  • #
    Steven Fraser

    I’ll mention some personal experience from several years ago.

    I had vit D tested a number of years ago, and my values were low. I do not recall the specific nmol/L value. My PCP prescribed a 10-week course of D3 supplementation, 50,000 IU per week. After the course, retest showed serum vit D was in the normal range, and his recommendation was that my daily intake after that (maintenance) should be 3000 IU.

    Your mileage may vary.

    30

  • #
    William Astley

    Humans do not understand what are the horrific long-term effects of Vitamin D deficiency. The Vitamin D research is quite advanced and is understood at a microbiological level. The worldwide Vitamin D deficiency is a human tragedy.

    People who are severely Vitamin D deficient look different. Young people are obese, white skin, and lack confidence. Due to the failure of the Skeletal system, they stoop and are clumsy. Same ‘symptoms’ for old people who are almost all severely Vit. D deficient. They are often picked on by school mates. They start to get pre-diabetes symptoms. Phantom pain.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-55622371

    This is an article about a 25-year-old, UK woman who is severely Vitamin D deficient and who died of covid.

    Vitamin D supplements, when taken, produced free Vitamin D, in the human body, for 24 hours. After which the Vitamin D is absorbed by the fat and is no longer available as free Vitamin D.

    Free Vitamin D is required to enable human cells to access their copy of own DNA which is included in every cell. Evolution put a copy of our DNA in every cell in our body; Because that DNA contains the blueprint (which evolution found) to enable the cell in question to build a chemical producing module that sits on the cell in question, to produces bioactive chemicals.

    The human body over hundreds of thousands of years developed specialized bioactive chemicals to protect against virus attacks, brain damage due to age, protect against inflammation that leads to arthritis and heart attacks, enables the human body to control calcium in the body stream, and on and on. Amazing number of good things. A textbook could be written on all of the interesting ways Vitamin D deficiency causes human chronic ‘diseases’.

    Humans get so called chronic diseases when they are vitamin D deficient. These are ‘diseases’ that do not go away and Medical Science gives chemicals to reduce the pain and then cuts of limbs and helps train the blind people and provides dialysis machines to keep them alive longer in pain …. Pre-diabetes, Diabetes, and ‘phantom’ pain.

    And cut off limbs (feet and legs) that die, because of circulation problems. The circulation problems are caused by liver malfunction which then kills the kidneys and the failure of a system that holds a person up and must work as a system to protect the spine from breaking.

    There are 29 million people in the US who are suffering from type 2 diabetes. Type 2 diabetes is the leading cause of non-birth blindness in the US and is also the reason for the majority of the amputations in the US.

    Comment: Why would there be hundreds of sweaty stinky noisy National guards in the Congressional building? Did you see the pictures of them sleeping on the floors?

    Bruce Hollis is the lead Vit D researcher in the US. This video presentation explains free Vit D vs Vit D that has been absorbed in the body.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QrU1yrmNIqc

    Results of a Prostate Cancer/Vitamin D Trial: Effectiveness Safety Recommendations

    Bruce H Hollis

    Finally, Missing link between vitamin D prostate cancer

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25327758/

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960076015300091?via%3Dihub

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960076015300091?via%3Dihub

    Incidence rate of type 2 diabetes is >50% lower in Grassroots Health cohort with median serum 25–hydroxyvitamin D of 41 ng/ml than in NHANES cohort with median of 22 ng/ml

    30

    • #
      William Astley

      This is an excellent video where Bruce Hollis specifically explains why monthly Vitamin D supplements or weekly Vitamin D supplements does not protect the human body.

      Hollis refers to his own 2013 paper which specifically addresses the scientific, biological difference in the bloodstream, difference for the individual cells, between taken Vitamin D supplements daily, weekly, or monthly.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0InGyklAtd0&list=PLSG5Oz8_zGOos48odfoR7BZhG4Tkoha-o

      Why would there be Medical Industry studies done weekly/monthly Vitamin D supplements? The fake medical studies happened after Hollis’ paper. Studies are being done to hide Vit D same corrupt reason/agenda as studies which were done to hide HCQ. Blood pressure lowering drugs, are taken daily. The irony is taking Vitamin D supplements (4000 UI to 8000 UI, depending on body mass) daily corrects the internal problems that cause high blood pressure.

      10

  • #
    William Astley

    This is an interesting paper that discusses the unexplained puzzles about Influence. This paper solved the covid problem and the Influenza problem. This of course applies to covid which is just a very deadly, designed virus. Humans when they are Vitamin D optimum are immune/protected the damaging effects from almost all viruses, including covid.

    https://virologyj.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1743-422X-5-29

    On the epidemiology of influenza (Published in 2008, roughly 60% of all medical costs are due to Vit D deficiency)

    Recent discoveries indicate vitamin D upregulates the endogenous antibiotics of innate immunity and suggest that the incongruities explored by Hope-Simpson may be secondary to the epidemiology of vitamin D deficiency.

    We identify – and attempt to explain nine influenza conundrums:

    (1) Why is influenza both seasonal and ubiquitous and where is the virus between epidemics? (2) Why are the epidemics so explosive?
    (3) Why do they end so abruptly?
    (4) What explains the frequent coincidental timing of epidemics in countries of similar latitude? (5) Why is the serial interval obscure?
    (6) Why is the secondary attack rate so low?
    (7) Why did epidemics in previous ages spread so rapidly, despite the lack of modern transport? (8) Why does experimental inoculation of seronegative humans fail to cause illness in all the volunteers?
    (9) Why has influenza mortality of the aged not declined as their vaccination rates increased?

    We review recent discoveries about vitamin D’s effects on innate immunity, human studies attempting sick-to-well transmission, naturalistic reports of human transmission, studies of serial interval, secondary attack rates, and relevant animal studies.

    We review recent discoveries about vitamin D’s effects on innate immunity, human studies attempting sick-to-well transmission, naturalistic reports of human transmission, studies of serial interval, secondary attack rates, and relevant animal studies.

    We hypothesize that two factors explain the nine conundrums: vitamin D’s seasonal and population effects on innate immunity, and the presence of a subpopulation of “good infectors.” If true, our revision of Edgar Hope-Simpson’s theory has profound implications for the prevention of influenza.

    60

  • #
    sophocles

    Hmm. Things are coming home to roost for the not so big anymore Big Tech companies:

    Facebook and Twitter have lost a combined (US)$51 billion in market cap following their bans of President Donald Trump last week as investors balked at the tech giants’ surprise censorship of Trump roughly two weeks before his term was set to end.

    This is just the start for them …

    $51 billion in just one week — that makes 51billion per week, so it’s not the end yet 😀

    50

  • #
  • #
    Hanrahan

    I can buy, retail, 360 gels @ 5,000 IU for under $20. Why hasn’t any [AFAIK] government started a population wide supplementation program to reduce COVID?

    I’ll answer my own Q: No money in it for big pharma.

    90

  • #
    Annie

    There was talk of it in the UK a while ago but I’m not aware that much was done about it.
    I’ll ask my mother if it happened when I next talk to her. Her care home is a good one; I hope they picked up on that. I try to send info to my siblings about this but can’t force feed them.

    30

    • #
      Hanrahan

      Annie, I heard that talk too but I’ve heard nothing since. The Nordic countries have been supplementing in food, the way thiamin is here, for some time I believe.

      Talking of siblings my bro has prostate cancer and I recommended V D3 but he was indignant “I don’t do that sort of thing”. I can’t hit him over the head.

      30

  • #
    tom0mason

    Watch the VERY IMPORTANT! Medcram video …
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mdc7T2UTHBI to see the other studies that roundly contradict this scurrilous study. If you really wish to know a better version of the truth download and read all the papers referenced in the video.

    40

  • #

    I am more concerned that government cherry picks studies to support the plethora of restrictions. Of greater concern is the idea of using the Services NSW app as a COVID vaccine passport. The UK is also talking about COVID passports. Airlines are supporting no jab no fly. On one hand we are all being told getting the vaccine will be voluntary. Then the bite comes. It is voluntary but if you don’t get the vaccine and can’t produce a vaccine passport then you won’t be able to travel, use various services, go to public events or enter your workplace (forced to work from home). Eventually you won’t be able to leave your house unless you can show a green (COVID Passport) tick on your mobile phone. As far as work goes, how long until your workplaces says, “Sorry we can’t have you not attending meeting in the workplace. If your not prepared to get the vaccine and can’t enter the workplace you will have to be let go.” ? Is this now starting to sound like the Soviet Union, East Germany, China, North Korea and yes Nazi Germany? A vaccine is hardly voluntary if you become a prisoner in your own house for not getting it.

    70

  • #

    OK. Rare Mea Culpa from me. See notes above.

    Post Updated — This paragraph added:

    UPDATE: As we saw in the Brenner et al study of 10,000 Germans, when people are quite deficient (below 30 nmol/L) they are twice as likely to die of respiratory diseases as people whose blood levels are normal — defined as being above 50 nmol/L. The people who are most at risk of dying are those who are clinically deficient at below 20 nmol/L. Their risk was 3 times greater.  That study showed that a shocking 40% of all respiratory deaths might possibly be due to being deficient in Vitamin D. This new study in Queensland only shows that raising Vitamin D levels in people who are not deficient won’t make much difference.

    70

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      I didn’t save the link but early in this topic there was a Youtube with a (clinical) doctor discussing the different rates of respiratory illness in the south and north of the UK and the lesser rate in Australia, and seasonal differences too. He mentioned the different UV levels people were exposed to and the effect of weather. It seems to me that regardless of studies that there is benefit in Vitamin D supplements to offset modern lifestyles. Not any of us are hunter gatherers used to lwearing little when outdoors (and our governments were doing their utmost to reduce the number on beaches)..

      I leave it there, my spellchecker has gone berserk. Is this a symptom of Vitamin deficiency?

      20

  • #
    Roger Evans

    An interesting analysis and some statistics of the effect of Vitamin D with regard to Covid 19 at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ha2mLz-Xdpg

    00

  • #
    Mark Smith

    D3 has a half life of about 3 days and then changed to D2. D2 only lats a few hours. Taking a large dose 10000 IU D3 is dangerous to take.

    01

    • #
      Hanrahan

      More likely it has months. How else could primitive man have seen it through winter?

      We know that those overweight need more to raise their serum levels. It is my belief that it is stored in body fat and as primitive man burnt up that fat over a hard winter, the D3 was released. Unlike early man we don’t burn fat over winter though. 🙂

      I see no virtue in occasional mega doses.

      BTW D2 is a precursor to D3, not the reverse.

      30

    • #
      sophocles

      Mark:

      ergocalciferol is vit D2 and is vegetable in origin, whereas D3 is cholecalciferol and is manufactured in our bodies from UVB Sunlight and Cholesterol meeting in our skin.

      Ergocalciferol converts to D3 (or is converted) in the body, so I think you have that back to front.

      Taking a large dose 10000 IU D3 is not dangerous. The dosages for this survey were 60000 IU for D3, also not dangerous.

      Suggest you visit vitamindwiki.com and romp and play through its resources and get your facts straight.

      10

  • #
    CHRIS

    I am diabetic (type 2, insulin injections of 100 micro units per day), and asthmatic. My GP advised me to have 1000mu VItamin D per day. I still follow her recommendation and have had no respiratory problems for 20 years. My view is that Vitamin D intake depends on the individual’s needs…anything else is garbage

    00

  • #
    Yonason

    Vitamin D (hormone, actually) is essential to many bodily functions, especially sleep and repair during sleep. Other factors, like the proper gut bacteria, are also critical.

    Here’s an overview.
    https://vimeo.com/425560545

    The “sweet spot” is 60-80ng/ml (150-200 nM/ml).

    As some have pointed out above, everyone is different, so how much one needs to take, if any at all, depends on a variety of factors. One needs to have their blood levels monitored when one is taking a high dose.

    From what I’ve seen, one shouldn’t exceed 100 ng/ml (250 nM/ml), and best to stay in the “sweet spot” range, if one can.

    10