my impression of the situation regarding testing and supplementation is that it is probably the modern version of snake oil. In fact Dr T Colin Campbell, who should know a thing or 2 on this subject, seems to pretty much dismiss nearly all attempts to make pronouncements on the how the nutritional components of food actually work, what is adequate and if supplements are even needed. When asked in a video around about 2020, what he eats, he just said "what my wife cooks" It can be assumed he meant she only provided WFPB meals, but he seems to avoid most attempts at reductionist analysis.
Campbell's book Whole is one of the most important nutrition books ever written. It's not nearly as well known as The China Study which is a damn shame, because it's so much better. Campbell is a relentless critic of nutritional reductionism, which is somewhat ironic given that he was a nutritional biochemist, who spent his career investigating the nitty-gritty of nutrition!
Thanks again for these in depth articles on Vitamin D.
Most of what I see about Vitamin D is people claiming it is a wonder supplement. However, it does have some detractors like this recent article basically saying Vitamin D promotes cancer and that we should not supplement it.
Lower levels of vitamin D may reduce prostate cancer risk in older men. By contrast, levels of vitamin D did not predict incidence of colorectal or lung cancers.”
Now let’s look at a cancer that is typically 100% fatal, Pancreatic Cancer.
“Higher vitamin D concentrations were associated with a 3-fold increased risk for pancreatic cancer (highest versus lowest quintile, >65.5 versus <32.0 nmol/L: OR, 2.92; 95% CI, 1.56-5.48, Ptrend = 0.001) that remained after excluding cases diagnosed early during follow-up.”
Wow, this is fascinating info! Thanks for sharing these links. I'm not - at least at this point - convinced that vitamin D promotes cancer, more that it's a marker for certain disease processes.
My level of appreciation for all the work you put into these posts can’t be expressed adequately. Nonetheless, thank you. I anxiously await reverse causation analysis as I think it will bring us full circle back to just eat real food and do all the things that bring us health and happiness. I just saw a news article yesterday about how scurvy, another vitamin deficiency, is making a comeback ostensibly from children being malnourished; likely from not eating fruits and veggies.
There have been scurvy cases reported here in Australia, mostly in the lower SES regions of major cities where parents have lower incomes and education levels. It's sad but true that many adults literally do not know what a healthy diet comprises. If kids spend all day indoors on devices, eating crap, they may well manifest 'vitamin deficiencies' like scurvy and rickets, but what they actually have is poor diet and lifestyle habits.
I love Heather Heying's sign-off on the Dark Horse podcast: "Be good to the ones you love, eat good food, and get outside." Following that simple formula for a happy, healthy life would deal with a good chunk of our chronic disease burden, straight off the bat!
Please see the research articles cited and discussed at https://vitamindstopscovid.info/00-evi/ my comments to the two previous articles where I attempt to correct mistakes, such as referring to all three compounds as "vitamin D".
The IOM 2011 recommendations are faulty - far too low a recommended level of 25-hydroxyvitamin D. The 2024 Endocrine Society recommendations are a disaster.
Since 2008 leading researchers, including Prof. Michael Hollick - who you disparage (he is a very fine person and is the world's leading vitamin D researcher) - called for 40 to 60 ng/mL (100 to 150 nmol/L) circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D to be the target for all people: https://www.grassrootshealth.net/project/our-scientists/ If everyone attained this, there would be very little sepsis, or severe influenza. There would be no COVID-19 pandemic, because the original virus would not have spread in pandemic fashion. This is probably also true of current, more transmissible, variants.
The 2024 Endocrine Society recommendations avoid a lot of evidence by concentrating strictly on RCTs (randomised controlled trials). Grassroots Health is re-activating their 2008 call of action to tackle the failings of this 2024 Endocrine Society recommendations: https://www.grassrootshealth.net/scientists-call-daction-public-health-2024/.
Please read Bill Grant's 2018 article on the campaign against vitamin D by the multinational pharmaceutical companies, who have tens of billions of dollars in revenues to lose if everyone's immune system worked properly, which is only possible with at least 50 ng/mL 125 nmol/L circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D: "Vitamin D acceptance delayed by Big Pharma following the Disinformation Playbook" https://orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/v14n22.shtml.
Dr Pierre Kory cited this in his interview with Tucker Carlson: https://nutritionmatters.substack.com/p/dr-pierre-kory-talks-with-tucker. On the pandemic, he said, in part: "We should have had a vitamin D supplementation campaign, nationwide. This would have been very easy to do." On the pharmaceutical industry's response to vitamin D: "They are terrified of vitamin D.". He starts to give a vitamin D pep-talk, using his thumb and index finger to indicate how low the normal level of 25-hydroxyvitamin D is compared to what the immune system needs, but Tucker Carlson interrupts him: “If you find yourself terrified of vitamins, you are probably on the wrong side!” - and they head off on another tangent.
Your entire approach to this topic is extremely reductionist and lacking nuance. It's apparent that you have paid precisely zero attention to the genetic variation in DBP and VDR activity that strongly influences 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels and calcitriol activity.
On the 'do viruses exist?' front, I would advocate epistemic humility as the appropriate posture - just as the Endocrine Society did in their 2024 practice guidelines. I see many people in the no-virus camp making absolutely definitive statements on matters about which they should be much more epistemically humble! There are many components of the immune system (both cellular and humoral) that appear to be adapted to responding to viruses. I think the right question to ask might be, not 'do viruses exist?' but 'what IS this thing that has been called a virus, and what is it doing in, and between, organisms?' Zach Bush has described viruses as mechanisms for conveying information. That's an interesting thought to ponder.
It seems to me that it should be virologists who show some epistemic humility, rather than assuming viruses exist. I didn’t say they didn’t exist, only that they haven’t been proven to exist, which is what the no-virus community says. Maybe the genetic material found in sick people is the result of being sick, not the cause.
An ad popped up on my iPad yesterday, one guy telling another about a dangerous virus that has been reported in 110 countries. When he said the virus name, the other guy says WHAT??? It’s called Chikungunya and the tag line of the ad was, “hard to pronounce, easy to catch.” Consider that; an ad to warn of a virus that I would bet 99.9% of people viewing it have never heard of. Did the warning come from CDC? WHO? No! I’m thinking is there no end to attempt to scare everyone into believing there are viruses everywhere just waiting to kill them?
Fear of viruses has definitely been weaponised to get people to comply. Just like fear of Islamic terrorism, and before that, fear of nuclear war, and before that, fear of reds under the bed.
my impression of the situation regarding testing and supplementation is that it is probably the modern version of snake oil. In fact Dr T Colin Campbell, who should know a thing or 2 on this subject, seems to pretty much dismiss nearly all attempts to make pronouncements on the how the nutritional components of food actually work, what is adequate and if supplements are even needed. When asked in a video around about 2020, what he eats, he just said "what my wife cooks" It can be assumed he meant she only provided WFPB meals, but he seems to avoid most attempts at reductionist analysis.
Campbell's book Whole is one of the most important nutrition books ever written. It's not nearly as well known as The China Study which is a damn shame, because it's so much better. Campbell is a relentless critic of nutritional reductionism, which is somewhat ironic given that he was a nutritional biochemist, who spent his career investigating the nitty-gritty of nutrition!
Thanks again for these in depth articles on Vitamin D.
Most of what I see about Vitamin D is people claiming it is a wonder supplement. However, it does have some detractors like this recent article basically saying Vitamin D promotes cancer and that we should not supplement it.
https://jimstephensonjr.substack.com/p/the-progression-of-stupidity?
Lower levels of vitamin D may reduce prostate cancer risk in older men. By contrast, levels of vitamin D did not predict incidence of colorectal or lung cancers.”
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211383518303526
https://www.nature.com/articles/boneres201723
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article
Now let’s look at a cancer that is typically 100% fatal, Pancreatic Cancer.
“Higher vitamin D concentrations were associated with a 3-fold increased risk for pancreatic cancer (highest versus lowest quintile, >65.5 versus <32.0 nmol/L: OR, 2.92; 95% CI, 1.56-5.48, Ptrend = 0.001) that remained after excluding cases diagnosed early during follow-up.”
https://aacrjournals.org/cancerres/article/66/20/10213/526311/A-Prospective-Nested-Case-Control-Study-of-Vitamin
Wow, this is fascinating info! Thanks for sharing these links. I'm not - at least at this point - convinced that vitamin D promotes cancer, more that it's a marker for certain disease processes.
My level of appreciation for all the work you put into these posts can’t be expressed adequately. Nonetheless, thank you. I anxiously await reverse causation analysis as I think it will bring us full circle back to just eat real food and do all the things that bring us health and happiness. I just saw a news article yesterday about how scurvy, another vitamin deficiency, is making a comeback ostensibly from children being malnourished; likely from not eating fruits and veggies.
There have been scurvy cases reported here in Australia, mostly in the lower SES regions of major cities where parents have lower incomes and education levels. It's sad but true that many adults literally do not know what a healthy diet comprises. If kids spend all day indoors on devices, eating crap, they may well manifest 'vitamin deficiencies' like scurvy and rickets, but what they actually have is poor diet and lifestyle habits.
I love Heather Heying's sign-off on the Dark Horse podcast: "Be good to the ones you love, eat good food, and get outside." Following that simple formula for a happy, healthy life would deal with a good chunk of our chronic disease burden, straight off the bat!
Please see the research articles cited and discussed at https://vitamindstopscovid.info/00-evi/ my comments to the two previous articles where I attempt to correct mistakes, such as referring to all three compounds as "vitamin D".
The IOM 2011 recommendations are faulty - far too low a recommended level of 25-hydroxyvitamin D. The 2024 Endocrine Society recommendations are a disaster.
Since 2008 leading researchers, including Prof. Michael Hollick - who you disparage (he is a very fine person and is the world's leading vitamin D researcher) - called for 40 to 60 ng/mL (100 to 150 nmol/L) circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D to be the target for all people: https://www.grassrootshealth.net/project/our-scientists/ If everyone attained this, there would be very little sepsis, or severe influenza. There would be no COVID-19 pandemic, because the original virus would not have spread in pandemic fashion. This is probably also true of current, more transmissible, variants.
The 2024 Endocrine Society recommendations avoid a lot of evidence by concentrating strictly on RCTs (randomised controlled trials). Grassroots Health is re-activating their 2008 call of action to tackle the failings of this 2024 Endocrine Society recommendations: https://www.grassrootshealth.net/scientists-call-daction-public-health-2024/.
Please read Bill Grant's 2018 article on the campaign against vitamin D by the multinational pharmaceutical companies, who have tens of billions of dollars in revenues to lose if everyone's immune system worked properly, which is only possible with at least 50 ng/mL 125 nmol/L circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D: "Vitamin D acceptance delayed by Big Pharma following the Disinformation Playbook" https://orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/v14n22.shtml.
Dr Pierre Kory cited this in his interview with Tucker Carlson: https://nutritionmatters.substack.com/p/dr-pierre-kory-talks-with-tucker. On the pandemic, he said, in part: "We should have had a vitamin D supplementation campaign, nationwide. This would have been very easy to do." On the pharmaceutical industry's response to vitamin D: "They are terrified of vitamin D.". He starts to give a vitamin D pep-talk, using his thumb and index finger to indicate how low the normal level of 25-hydroxyvitamin D is compared to what the immune system needs, but Tucker Carlson interrupts him: “If you find yourself terrified of vitamins, you are probably on the wrong side!” - and they head off on another tangent.
Your entire approach to this topic is extremely reductionist and lacking nuance. It's apparent that you have paid precisely zero attention to the genetic variation in DBP and VDR activity that strongly influences 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels and calcitriol activity.
Since viruses in general, and SARS COV2 specifically, have never been proven to exist, how can you say vitamin D would have prevented a fake pandemic?
Many supplement manufacturers are owned by Chinese pharmaceutical companies, so they will happily sell you vitamins or drugs.
To your point: "Pfizer, Unilever, Novartis, GlaxoSmithKline and other big pharmaceutical firms make or sell supplements" - https://www.elsevier.com/en-au/connect/the-link-between-big-pharma-and-the-supplement-industry
On the 'do viruses exist?' front, I would advocate epistemic humility as the appropriate posture - just as the Endocrine Society did in their 2024 practice guidelines. I see many people in the no-virus camp making absolutely definitive statements on matters about which they should be much more epistemically humble! There are many components of the immune system (both cellular and humoral) that appear to be adapted to responding to viruses. I think the right question to ask might be, not 'do viruses exist?' but 'what IS this thing that has been called a virus, and what is it doing in, and between, organisms?' Zach Bush has described viruses as mechanisms for conveying information. That's an interesting thought to ponder.
It seems to me that it should be virologists who show some epistemic humility, rather than assuming viruses exist. I didn’t say they didn’t exist, only that they haven’t been proven to exist, which is what the no-virus community says. Maybe the genetic material found in sick people is the result of being sick, not the cause.
An ad popped up on my iPad yesterday, one guy telling another about a dangerous virus that has been reported in 110 countries. When he said the virus name, the other guy says WHAT??? It’s called Chikungunya and the tag line of the ad was, “hard to pronounce, easy to catch.” Consider that; an ad to warn of a virus that I would bet 99.9% of people viewing it have never heard of. Did the warning come from CDC? WHO? No! I’m thinking is there no end to attempt to scare everyone into believing there are viruses everywhere just waiting to kill them?
Fear of viruses has definitely been weaponised to get people to comply. Just like fear of Islamic terrorism, and before that, fear of nuclear war, and before that, fear of reds under the bed.