The Marshall Protocol Study Site Home

 Moderated by: Prof Trevor Marshall  
AuthorPost
Prof Trevor Marshall
Foundation Staff


Joined: Fri Jul 9th, 2004
Location: Thousand Oaks, California USA
Posts: 15653
Status:  Offline
 
http://www.medpagetoday.com/Endocrinology/GeneralEndocrinology/42575
 
"Increasing vitamin D levels had no effect on calcium absorption in young women, researchers reported .. women who started out with vitamin D insufficiency were brought up to normal levels through supplements over a 1-year period .. But the supplementation had no effect on calcium absorption at any dose"

So, by my count at least, there is no real benefit in preventing disease, no real benefit absorbing calcium, no benefit whatsoever in taking Vit D supplements. Just temporary relief from suppressing the innate immune system. What else is there to say? :) Except - now the bad news starts, as the heavily supplemented folk start dropping by the wayside due to long term harm from taking high doses of this steroid...

The actual paper reporting the study is behind a paywall at:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jbmr.2121/abstract

..Trevor..
 
(ps: Thanks to
dnstog for sending me the link)

DNStog
member


Joined: Mon Aug 16th, 2004
Location: Sandy Springs, Georgia USA
Posts: 1072
Status:  Offline
From a 2012 study on calcium absorption for older women, by same scientist..pretty much same results.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22855333

Ron
Foundation Staff


Joined: Sun Jan 6th, 2008
Location: Eindhoven, Netherlands
Posts: 1273
Status:  Offline
"Very efficient calcium absorption at very low levels of serum 25OHD explains why people do not develop osteomalacia provided that dietary intake of calcium and phosphorus is adequate."

That is a strong statement. And a good thing they mention phosphorus.

Great find Donna!

GillyB
Support Team


Joined: Tue Jul 10th, 2012
Location: Olympia, Washington USA
Posts: 3614
Status:  Offline
I had this argument with my NP a couple of weeks ago.  Just sent her the articles.

Markt9452
Member*


Joined: Fri Oct 26th, 2007
Location: Ontario Canada
Posts: 941
Status:  Offline
Nice! :)

Prof Trevor Marshall
Foundation Staff


Joined: Fri Jul 9th, 2004
Location: Thousand Oaks, California USA
Posts: 15653
Status:  Offline
This particularly caught my eye, from the Discussion in the fulltext:
We did not find any threshold for calcium absorption at low serum 25OHD levels. There are now two cross-sectional studies of approximately 1000 women that do not show a threshold change in calcium absorption over the serum 25OHD range 10-50 ng/dl (24,25) and one study of subjects that shows a small decrease in calcium absorption when serum 25OHD < 4ng/ml (25) This is in agreement with our previous results from older women that active transport of calcium is saturated at very low levels of serum 25OHD.

Alejandro
Member*
 

Joined: Fri Dec 18th, 2009
Location: Heidelberg, Germany
Posts: 71
Status:  Offline
I had posted similar findings in the UGESA Board some months ago:

http://ugesa.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=507&sid=a611db651ec69ffbf76a44a7eb421aeb

May be it can be translated automatically with known tools.

One of the most active promotors of the theory that calcium absortion in the intestine is effective only at 25D levels > 30 ng/ml is Heaney .

http://www.grassrootshealth.net/media/download/2010-04-9-Heaney.pdf

see slide 31.

Since he published the data showing that behavior, this "dogma" has been repeated, re-published, re-discussed infinite times. The famous graph of Haney is put as an example in almost every board that discuss Vitamin D topics.

I was always very sceptic about this data as a clear dependency on the inactive metabolite is not what one would expect, but did not have better arguments (besides the MP) till I discovered a scientist that had already published serious criticism on the work of Haney and published it in:

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/92/4/835.full.pdf

Heaney had not measured anything, but took data from other people and merged data from several experiments in his famous graph. Aloia had measured Calcium absorption before but it had not published it.

Aloia et al, as difference of Haney they measured the calcium absorption using a set of data consistently taken and measured using single isotope methods in 492 healthy womans from age range 20-80 years.

The result: here was no relation between serum 25(OH)D concentrations and calcium absorption efficiency.

Event the relationship of 1,25D was very weak...

I think this history is a good example how low quality publications are taken by the press, republished so many times till almost everybody think they are true.

Cheers

Alex

Last edited on Fri Nov 8th, 2013 11:12 by Alejandro

Prof Trevor Marshall
Foundation Staff


Joined: Fri Jul 9th, 2004
Location: Thousand Oaks, California USA
Posts: 15653
Status:  Offline
The press also tend to think they are competent to act as 'arbiters of truth', based on what "sounds right" to them (or their personal physician). Often it is the blind leading the blind...

be-well
Member
 

Joined: Thu Dec 6th, 2007
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 171
Status:  Offline
There must be data out there also, about calcification of organ systems.  I wonder if there is a study of this outcome, in patient groups heavily supplementing calcium and / or D3. Or would their doctors put it down to a pre existing disease process especially if a long term steroid was in the picture. ?

This seems to have been noted in Sarcoidosis but scantily so.

angela.

Last edited on Mon Nov 11th, 2013 10:23 by be-well

NickBowler
inactive member


Joined: Wed Dec 20th, 2006
Location: Stirling, United Kingdom
Posts: 189
Status:  Offline
Bone density in blacks:

http://www.medpagetoday.com/Endocrinology/GeneralEndocrinology/43049?xid=nl_mpt_DHE_2013-11-21

Markt9452
Member*


Joined: Fri Oct 26th, 2007
Location: Ontario Canada
Posts: 941
Status:  Offline
That blacks have higher bone mineral density but lower 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels than whites has been "a perplexing paradox," wrote Michael F. Holick, MD, PhD, in an accompanying editorial.

Last edited on Sun Nov 24th, 2013 17:30 by Markt9452

Cynthia S
Foundation Staff


Joined: Wed Dec 24th, 2008
Location: N., Arizona USA
Posts: 4054
Status:  Offline
Can anyone explain what this sentence means in term of WHAT they did?

"Results were based on calculation of bioavailable 25-hydroxyvitamin D, rather than direct measurement."

I don't understand how they are using the term Bio-available. Are they suggesting that the 25D measured is some how of multiple characteristics? And somehow some of it doesn't count because it is not bio-available?

Diesel
inactive member


Joined: Fri Dec 18th, 2009
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 34
Status:  Offline
How A Vitamin D Test Misdiagnosed African-Americans

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2013/11/20/246393329/how-a-vitamin-d-test-misdiagnosed-african-americans

Meanwhile Holick, who wrote an editorial in the journal accompanying Thadhani's study, intends to keep giving his African-American patients vitamin D supplements when their blood levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D are low, even though they may not need the pills to maintain strong bones.

"There's no downside to supplementation, so it's not a big deal," Holick says.

Diesel

DNStog
member


Joined: Mon Aug 16th, 2004
Location: Sandy Springs, Georgia USA
Posts: 1072
Status:  Offline
A recent paper linked below regarding Vitamin D not helpful in preventing Osteoporosis as pushed by the "industry".

http://www.medpagetoday.com/Endocrinology/Osteoporosis/52729?

Joyful
Foundation Staff


Joined: Fri Jun 8th, 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 14155
Status:  Offline
Another review of the study:

Commercial ties may be fueling unnecessary and potentially harmful osteoporosis treatment
July 21, 2015

A complex web of interactions between industry, advocacy organisations, and academia may be fuelling enthusiasm for calcium and vitamin D supplements to prevent and treat osteoporosis, despite evidence of lack of benefit, warn doctors in The BMJ this week.

Calcium and vitamin D are highly profitable treatments that are widely recommended for osteoporosis, despite increasing evidence contradicting the practice, write Andrew Grey and Mark Bolland from the University of Auckland.

Several therapies previously recommended for osteoporosis, such as oestrogen and fluoride, have been discarded because of evidence of lack of benefit or important harm. So why are calcium and vitamin D supplements still recommended, they ask?

One possible explanation, they say, is vested interests of industry, advocacy organisations, and academia.

They searched the websites of key commercial and advocacy organisations and specialist societies to determine the extent of these interests.

They found that industry and its lobby groups fund and influence the activities and policies of osteoporosis advocacy organisations such as the US National Osteoporosis Foundation (NOF) and the Europe based International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF).

The commerical entities include supplements manufacturers, companies that produce vitamin D test kits, and the Council for Responsible Nutrition, which describes itself as the "leading trade association representing dietary supplement manufacturers and ingredient suppliers."

The NOF and IOF have not changed their positions to reflect the accumulating evidence, note the authors. In fact, after evidence accrued that calcium and vitamin D do not safely reduce fracture risk, "the nutrition industry continued to partner with osteoporosis advocacy organisations to promote their widespread use."

They argue that some prominent academics and specialist societies have undeclared commercial and academic conflicts of interest in the nutrition osteoporosis field.

They also point out that the National Bone Health Alliance (an offshoot of the NOF) recently advocated broadening the diagnostic criteria for osteoporosis, "which would lead to recommendations for treatment in 50% and 86% of American men and women aged over 75 years, respectively."

:

Source article: http://www.bmj.com/cgi/doi/10.1136/bmj.h3170

Prof Trevor Marshall
Foundation Staff


Joined: Fri Jul 9th, 2004
Location: Thousand Oaks, California USA
Posts: 15653
Status:  Offline
This review has an interesting graphic :)


wrotek
member


Joined: Thu Dec 30th, 2004
Location: Wroclaw, Poland
Posts: 2757
Status:  Offline
My grandmother is great example of this. She had 30 % on bone mass left at the end of her life, always taking a lot of vitamin D for years and calcium, had so many Th1 symptoms like facial teeth nerve pains, which i have, heart problems ...etc...

Last edited on Sat Jul 25th, 2015 12:28 by wrotek

Joyful
Foundation Staff


Joined: Fri Jun 8th, 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 14155
Status:  Offline
And how many x-rays did she get? Don't x-rays promote bone loss?

wrotek
member


Joined: Thu Dec 30th, 2004
Location: Wroclaw, Poland
Posts: 2757
Status:  Offline
I dont know, will have to ask.... But probably not much, why would she get them a lot, i dont see a reason

How many is a lot ?

Last edited on Sun Jul 26th, 2015 16:01 by wrotek

Joyful
Foundation Staff


Joined: Fri Jun 8th, 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 14155
Status:  Offline
Look up the level of radiation given when a person's bones are scanned for bone density.
The machine used in the US is the DEXA scanner.

wrotek
member


Joined: Thu Dec 30th, 2004
Location: Wroclaw, Poland
Posts: 2757
Status:  Offline
I have  absolutely no idea :) it was 20-30 years ago

Still it is amazing doctors see cases like that and they don't think why osteoporosis is not getting better and they do the same over and over again to  treat this condition

Last edited on Mon Jul 27th, 2015 17:08 by wrotek

hartley
member
 

Joined: Wed Sep 5th, 2012
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 52
Status:  Offline
I had to revisit this thread to bolster my thinking after reading this today on the BBC website...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-33757929

Prof Trevor Marshall
Foundation Staff


Joined: Fri Jul 9th, 2004
Location: Thousand Oaks, California USA
Posts: 15653
Status:  Offline
Thanks, Hartley, I will use that in my keynote in Toronto - on the hazards of Biomarker design...

Prof Trevor Marshall
Foundation Staff


Joined: Fri Jul 9th, 2004
Location: Thousand Oaks, California USA
Posts: 15653
Status:  Offline
Another paper - Vit-D supplements same value as placebo

"High-dose cholecalciferol therapy increased calcium absorption, but the effect was small and did not translate into beneficial effects on bone mineral density, muscle function, muscle mass, or falls. We found no data to support experts’ recommendations to maintain serum 25(OH)D levels of 30 ng/mL or higher in postmenopausal women. Instead, we found that low- and high-dose cholecalciferol were equivalent to placebo in their effects on bone and muscle outcomes in this cohort of postmenopausal women with 25(OH)D levels less than 30 ng/mL"

http://archinte.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=2422066

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/08/03/us-health-menopause-bones-idUSKCN0Q81TV20150803

Even though they were under 30ng/ml (12 ng/ml) :) NO BENEFIT :)

..Trevor..

leroybrown
...


Joined: Sat Oct 31st, 2009
Location: Ottawa, Ontario Canada
Posts: 4784
Status:  Offline
If everyone is deficient in vit D, how come you never hear of anyone who actually has rickets?

wrotek
member


Joined: Thu Dec 30th, 2004
Location: Wroclaw, Poland
Posts: 2757
Status:  Offline
I asked the same question to mine doctor. Rickets only occurs in young developing bones. The disease of developed bones is osteoporosis

p.s. i used to have rickets :) and they gave me vitamin D... I still have some uneven skull, mother used to put mine head on one side one time and the other side the other time, because it was so soft :D like eggshell , she was forming it LOL

Last edited on Tue Aug 4th, 2015 13:31 by wrotek

madhouse
member
 

Joined: Mon Jul 27th, 2009
Location: New Jersey USA
Posts: 27
Status:  Offline
I see this thread started several years ago but apparently nothing has changed. I work in the medical profession and Doc's still push vit D like candy. In fact all my chronic inflammatory or "autoimmune" patients are on mega doses of it. Medicare in the US requires us to council fall patients on the importance of vit D supplementation to prevent broken bones. I will not do it!

Vit D is alive and well folks! It's going to take more than a few studies to stop it.

Prof Trevor Marshall
Foundation Staff


Joined: Fri Jul 9th, 2004
Location: Thousand Oaks, California USA
Posts: 15653
Status:  Offline
Well, at least there are a series of studies now showing you are correct. However, the papers all use big words, way beyond the capabilities of Medicare decision-makers :X

Claudia
member


Joined: Fri Sep 23rd, 2005
Location: Townsville, Australia
Posts: 460
Status:  Offline
On Australian ABC radio today:
http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/rn/podcast/2015/08/hrt_20150824_1730.mp3

Here's the web page reference (in case the above podcast audio doesn't work)
http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/healthreport/calcium-vitamin-d-supplements-necessary/6720616


Cheers!
Claudia

Last edited on Mon Aug 24th, 2015 10:53 by Claudia

mvanwink5
Support Team


Joined: Fri Nov 5th, 2010
Location: Newland, North Carolina USA
Posts: 3427
Status:  Offline
Thanks, Claudia.
So, researchers are now saying, basically, 'tough luck,' and miss the chronic disease forest for the tree leaves.

Claudia
member


Joined: Fri Sep 23rd, 2005
Location: Townsville, Australia
Posts: 460
Status:  Offline
yeah, basically they are saying "we are puzzled" but at least they admit the past studies were wrong AND biased.

We have to hope they go on to ask the obvious questions about WHY they got those results! We live in hope..

Damselfly
member


Joined: Wed Jan 5th, 2011
Location: Alaska USA
Posts: 17
Status:  Offline
As a relative newcomer I am trying to catch up on protocol-related reading and research linked on the study site and anywhere else I can find it. I noted that the paper reporting a study finding that vitamin D does not improve calcium absorption, referenced in Prof. Marshall’s 10/31/2013 post in this thread is no longer behind a paywall and can be accessed in full by clicking on the same link provided in 2013. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jbmr.2121/abstract and then selecting PDF. There is so much new (to me) information – including studies such as this that turn decades of thinking upside down. My sense is that Prof. Marshall has put a puzzle together while much of the scientific community is getting more puzzled by the pieces.

Last edited on Mon Sep 21st, 2015 05:32 by Damselfly

Claudia
member


Joined: Fri Sep 23rd, 2005
Location: Townsville, Australia
Posts: 460
Status:  Offline
And another recent study - this one shows that "Vitamin D" supplementation not only does not help, it actually increases falls and fractures.

http://archinte.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=2478893

Claudia
member


Joined: Fri Sep 23rd, 2005
Location: Townsville, Australia
Posts: 460
Status:  Offline
What do we know about this lot?
http://www.sunarc.org/about.htm

Joyful
Foundation Staff


Joined: Fri Jun 8th, 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 14155
Status:  Offline
They are truly in the dark. ;)

http://www.pharmacynews.com.au/news/latest-news/doctors-slam-calcium-and-vitamin-d-conflict-of-int


Same cast of characters. Also, see Benefactors page:
Benefactors Information
SUNARC is incorporated under California law. The federal 501(c)3 form has been submitted, and SUNARC is being operated in accordance with the guidelines for nonprofit public interest corporations.
Disclosure
SUNARC receives funding from Bio-Tech Pharmacal, Inc. (Fayetteville, AR) and the Vitamin D Council (San Luis Obispo, CA).

Last edited on Tue Sep 13th, 2016 04:47 by Joyful

Claudia
member


Joined: Fri Sep 23rd, 2005
Location: Townsville, Australia
Posts: 460
Status:  Offline
Hi Joyful, thanks. I went ahead and looked them up myself and found all their conflicts of interest, plus one of their listed benefactors doesn't seem to exist.
(Someone had quoted them to me in a FB post, and I wanted to refute their stuff.)

Joyful
Foundation Staff


Joined: Fri Jun 8th, 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 14155
Status:  Offline
As the body of quality research grows,
the "More is better!" club keeps losing members ...
U-shaped relationship between vitamin D levels and long-term outcome in large cohort of survivors of acute myocardial infarction.

Claudia
member


Joined: Fri Sep 23rd, 2005
Location: Townsville, Australia
Posts: 460
Status:  Offline
A friend of mine recently told me that redheads make more vitamin D than other folks. Apart from the pale skin allowing more sun in, they are saying that the actual genetic mutation responsible for red hair (mutated MC1R gene) also causes increased production of vitamin D.
Is there any substance to this belief?
Thanks for the input!
Claudia (definitely a "carrier" of this gene, having spawned a redhead!)

Prof Trevor Marshall
Foundation Staff


Joined: Fri Jul 9th, 2004
Location: Thousand Oaks, California USA
Posts: 15653
Status:  Offline
Very little (only a few percent) of the Vit-D in the blood is generated in the skin. Each cell produces the Vit-D it needs -- without any sunlight.

Direct sunlight causes the skin to start a damage response, and the (healthy) body then generates more Vit-D internally. But nobody has been able to measure an generation of Vit-D in the skin itself - of either mice or men. This is an old-wives' tale.

I would suspect the redhead gene thing is also lacking in science.

..Trevor..

Claudia
member


Joined: Fri Sep 23rd, 2005
Location: Townsville, Australia
Posts: 460
Status:  Offline
OK, I understand about those things, but what do you know about the mutated MC1R gene that was mentioned? I didn't know anything about it, mutated or otherwise, until a friend brought the subject up. I've had a look online and found several interesting articles suggesting there is certainly something - or several things - going on with redheads apart from hair colour. This includes their being twice as likely to have Parkinson's and a link to inflammatory response. Here is one quote:
"The melanocortin 1 receptor is also active in cells other than melanocytes, including cells involved in the body's immune and inflammatory responses. The receptor's function in these cells is unknown."

- https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/gene/MC1R


This article seems to touch on both the VDR and MC1R, but I don't understand the science.
http://www.neurology.org/content/62/12/2323.short

This article, although not scholarly, was interesting:
http://www.medicaldaily.com/8-ways-having-red-hair-affects-persons-health-pain-sex-348198

Last edited on Mon Sep 19th, 2016 07:48 by Claudia

Prof Trevor Marshall
Foundation Staff


Joined: Fri Jul 9th, 2004
Location: Thousand Oaks, California USA
Posts: 15653
Status:  Offline
You should not pay any credence to any science based on Genes until the field starts to get its act together. This entire branch of Science has faded into insignificance since the discovery of the importance of Epignetics, a field too complicated for most mere mortals to attempt.

The promise of an understanding based on genes was that it was easy to apply statistical analyses to databases, and it was hoped that useful breakthroughs would result from the bean-counters 'pumping the numbers'. All that has resulted is vague associations and very little solid science. At this point in time, even the BRCA mutations are being deprecated as misleading.

All attempts to "dumb-down" understanding of how the body works have failed based on our expanding understanding of biological complexity. Take a look at some of my recent YouTube presentations for more background.

..Trevor..

Joyful
Foundation Staff


Joined: Fri Jun 8th, 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 14155
Status:  Offline
Vitamin D in Disarray:

http://www.lulu.com/shop/hywel-davies/vitamin-d-in-disarray/paperback/product-14013233.html

Claudia
member


Joined: Fri Sep 23rd, 2005
Location: Townsville, Australia
Posts: 460
Status:  Offline
Have you read that book, Joyful? Looks very interesting!

Ron
Foundation Staff


Joined: Sun Jan 6th, 2008
Location: Eindhoven, Netherlands
Posts: 1273
Status:  Offline
Did we miss Dr. Davies back in 2010? Here are some interesting quotes from this 1924 born cardiologist. I found them on this blog.

"The idea that widespread vitamin D deficiency exists in the world has never had any credibility, and the idea that vigorous supplementation is necessary therefore has to be false."

"
Nowadays it is virtually impossible to buy milk in the US that has not been laced (‘fortified’) with vitamin D. The amounts added, and the content, have been subject to dubious control, and a number of fatalities have occurred due to Vitamin D poisoning from milk."

"
The mis-labeling of this compound as a vitamin is regrettable, as it gave a potential toxin an aura of undeserved innocence. Vitamin D is not a vitamin, but a steroid, which is, in its most active form, a powerful hormone with receptors widely distributed in the tissues of the body. As with other steroids, excessive consumption has risks."

I wonder if, in the meantime, Dr. Davies has found evidence to back up (or disprove!) the following statement.

"
Sporadic deficiency does exist and must be treated, but this applies to identifiable groups such as older people in institutions."

Certainly an interesting MD and outspoken cadiologist.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hywel_Davies_(doctor)

"He believes that medicine took a wrong turning when it elected to devote the bulk of its resources to studying cholesterol and to largely inconclusive clinical trials based on flawed statistical manipulation."

Sallie Q
Support Team


Joined: Sun Jan 25th, 2009
Location: Country_town NSW, Australia
Posts: 5374
Status:  Offline
blogs
 ~4 pro-v.D
1 strongly anti-v.D
a couple inconsistent, point to anti supplementation research, but still take pharma D :?

The tide seems to be turning, but the penny has not dropped
they still think low D25 is a deficiency, not a marker for ill-health/VDR dysfunction

Last edited on Wed Jul 26th, 2017 03:14 by Sallie Q

Rico
Support Team
 

Joined: Tue May 30th, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 1278
Status:  Offline
I wonder if Dr D gave some credit to Dr M.

Trudy.Heil_NP
Health Professional


Joined: Fri Jul 4th, 2008
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona USA
Posts: 321
Status:  Offline
I ordered the book....I'll let you know.
Trudy

Claudia
member


Joined: Fri Sep 23rd, 2005
Location: Townsville, Australia
Posts: 460
Status:  Offline
A recent study / overview:

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/landia/article/PIIS2213-8587(18)30265-1/fulltext

be-well
Member
 

Joined: Thu Dec 6th, 2007
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 171
Status:  Offline
when defending my reasons not to take high dose Vit D3 some years ago, my general physician said, "unless its written in The Lancet, I needn't worry!

Prof Trevor Marshall
Foundation Staff


Joined: Fri Jul 9th, 2004
Location: Thousand Oaks, California USA
Posts: 15653
Status:  Offline
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(06)69509-3/fulltext

be-well
Member
 

Joined: Thu Dec 6th, 2007
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 171
Status:  Offline
:)

mvanwink5
Support Team


Joined: Fri Nov 5th, 2010
Location: Newland, North Carolina USA
Posts: 3427
Status:  Offline
On the other hand, the precursor metabolite to 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D, 25-hydroxyvitamin D, blocks the VDR in a manner analogous to the action of prednisolone, a corticosteroid.4
Thus, vitamin D and statins function as steroids, with each drug acting a little bit differently on the innate and adaptive immune systems. Immune diseases that are often treated with corticosteroids, including multiple sclerosis and rheumatoid arthritis, and those in which insulin receptors are important, such as type 1 diabetes, could be expected to respond both to vitamin D and to individual statins.

mvanwink5
Support Team


Joined: Fri Nov 5th, 2010
Location: Newland, North Carolina USA
Posts: 3427
Status:  Offline
So, FDA is flooding our food supply with steroids, ie 'Vit D', what could go wrong?
Obesity? Chronic disease epidemic? With the double whammy of flooding our lives with immune suppressing RF?

Tragic.

Claudia
member


Joined: Fri Sep 23rd, 2005
Location: Townsville, Australia
Posts: 460
Status:  Offline
This just out:
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2733396?guestAccessKey=97158b16-07d5-4d08-b46a-03f4b5b17705&utm_source=silverchair&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=article_alert-jama&utm_content=olf&utm_term=050819

*sigh* They are still looking at the cholesterol and being confused. Won't someone point them in the direction of "D"?

mvanwink5
Support Team


Joined: Fri Nov 5th, 2010
Location: Newland, North Carolina USA
Posts: 3427
Status:  Offline
Amy has pointed out that the cholesterol found in plaque has been shown to be bacterial in origin. In fact there are bacteria that are labeled as 'greasy' because they shed cholesterol in large quantities and that these bacteria are commonly found in the oral cavity (mouth). Further there is a strong correlation to health of the gums and teeth to heart and arterial health.

Too much to ask the doctors paid huge money to know the latest...

Claudia
member


Joined: Fri Sep 23rd, 2005
Location: Townsville, Australia
Posts: 460
Status:  Offline
Yes - regarding oral bacteria - The very first thing I noticed clearing up when I started the MP was my gums disease. Gums no longer bled and the slimy plaque on my teeth disappeared. I was left with hard plaque which needed scaling, but it was just the dead remainder of the bacterial film.



* We can help you understand chronic disease, but only your physician is licensed to give you medical care *

Powered by WowBB 1.7 - Entire site Copyright © 2004-2019 Autoimmunity Research Foundation, All Rights Reserved
Click here to view our PRIVACY POLICY
Page processed in 0.8965 seconds (97% database + 3% PHP). 17 queries executed.