Jump to content

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, little jim said:

Pete. thought I'd take you up on this.

The vit D might have an effect on your gums, if you were vit D deficient, but no effect whatsoever on the acretions on your teeth that the hygienist would attend to. Vit C and K important too. Capt Cook did his bit for scurvy in the RN with the vit c in sauerkraut he took on board.

Buying an electric toothbrush. (esp Philips type with the oscillating action) and a soft brush, so you brush the gums as well as the teeth, will let you look after your oral health and add to all your vit D gains. If you brush soon after eating, that will shift the plaque before it can be turned into an 'acretion'.

LJ, I take K2MK4MK7 too and mutivit for C.  Bleeding prior to supplementing was every day despite hygienist attention 6 monthly and electric brushing morn and night. Bleeding and swollen lymph nodes gone for past three years. D3 known to promote epithelial integrity and macrophages, and innate immune system so I suspect it has actions in the orifice that are not yet recognised. I was probably badly D3 deficiny for decades, so my response to supplements may be exceptional, but it is dramatic to me. Peter

https://www.mdpi.com/2218-273X/7/4/80

cathelicidins in saliva may be keeping plaque at bay by killing bacteria. D3 promotes cathelicidin synthesis.

Edited by Peter Cobbold
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

HELP THE NHS ~ I've let my adjoining empty house (fully furnished) to four NHS nurses free of charge during this National Emergency. We have a very large General Hospital at the top of the r

Very very Harsh Geko. I see a man, in an unenviable position, doing his utmost to balance the impossible tasks of trying to control the spread of a new novel virus - for which there is no treatme

By the book...

Posted Images

On 6/19/2020 at 3:12 PM, barkerwilliams said:

I note that president Macron was in London today. Did he have to drive a lorry over to avoid the mandatory quarantine regulations?

B)

 

New Vit D Video Dr John Campbell today

 

I watched that yesterday evening, he seemed pretty cheesed off at the situation in the UK but he made me laugh.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Bawface said:

You lot really need to get out more, I mean really get out more!!

:D

That will help in sunny St Albans but up here in Wales I take to the pills

Link to post
Share on other sites

The tide is slowly turning towards using D3 for COVID, and Newcastle/Tyne NHS Trust is treating pts with D3 if they are <75 nmol/L

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.06.21.20136903v1.full.pdf

Might be worth printing the pdf, for ICU doctors, just in case .................table 1 gives the protocol.

Peter

Link to post
Share on other sites

This might be false news - I can't tell yet.

I read tonight that Germany only counts the deaths of German Nationals in its totals, the same source quotes that UK hospital death figures would be in the low thousands if reported on the same basis.

Please don't take as gospel, it may well be false news, but it does allow us to take onboard the facts that all countries are reporting deaths from different bases and worrying about the UK high death rate is not necessarily a reasonable fear.

So much smoke and mirrors about this serious issue with all parties playing politics.

Alan

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, stillp said:

BHF follow ( surprise, surprise) NICE/SACN advice of supplementing with 10 mcg. A homeopathic dose: https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m2475/rr-0

BHF fail to tell what a "normal" blood level was. NICE regard anything above 25 nmol/L as not deficient. In the Asian studies risk of severe COVID or death rose steeply below 75 nmol/L ( see graph poste earlier) in a cohort average age 60.

BHF would have served their supporters better if they had included mention that PHE regard as safe supplements up to 4000IU pd. 

At some point NICE/SACN will be forced to fall on their sword. This paper based upon 1million COVID pts foretells what future RCTs will show. Hint: read the appendices first!   https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.01.20087965v3

A proportion of BHF 'customers' will suffer hypertension. There is excellent science pointing to involvement of low D3:  https://vitamindwiki.com/Hypertension  

My views on NICE are not printable but are on-line here, and most TRRers will have heard them before:   https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m2475/rr

However if the BHF splash encourages some members to look more closely at D3 and not accept their word as gospel then it has done a modicum of good.

Peter

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Independent newspaper apparently reported on vitamin D yesterday which I’ve just read on the Apple News app on my iPad.   Here’s the link https://apple.news/ArzuWcwG2SmaEe5Q4g4CagQ though I couldn’t find it on their actual web site.  The Apple News article is dated yesterday and indicates the following:

Health officials have said there is "no evidence" to suggest that vitamin D supplements can prevent or treat Covid-19.In May, research from Ireland and the US found that coronavirus patients with high vitamin D levels are more likely to survive the disease, leading to calls for an increase in supplementation.A number of unsubstantiated reports claiming that "mega doses" of vitamin D can stave off the virus have also appeared online during the pandemic.

But the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (Nice), which examined five studies on vitamin D, have since concluded there is no evidence to support taking supplements to reduce the risk or severity of Covid-19.

Paul Chrisp, director of the Centre for Guidelines at Nice, said: "While there are health benefits associated with vitamin D, our rapid evidence summary did not identify sufficient evidence to support the use of vitamin D supplements for the treatment or prevention of Covid-19.

We know that the research on this subject is ongoing, and Nice is continuing to monitor new published evidence."

And experts from the Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition said that current evidence does not support vitamin D supplementation to prevent acute respiratory tract infections - or infections of the sinuses, throat, airways or lungs - in the general UK population.

But the review stressed the importance of vitamin D for bone and muscle health.

Vitamin D helps the body to absorb calcium and phosphate, which keep bones, teeth and muscles healthy.

 

it goes on further 

Paul

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PaulAnderson said:

The Independent newspaper apparently reported on vitamin D yesterday which I’ve just read on the Apple News app on my iPad.   Here’s the link https://apple.news/ArzuWcwG2SmaEe5Q4g4CagQ though I couldn’t find it on their actual web site.  The Apple News article is dated yesterday and indicates the following:

Health officials have said there is "no evidence" to suggest that vitamin D supplements can prevent or treat Covid-19.In May, research from Ireland and the US found that coronavirus patients with high vitamin D levels are more likely to survive the disease, leading to calls for an increase in supplementation.A number of unsubstantiated reports claiming that "mega doses" of vitamin D can stave off the virus have also appeared online during the pandemic.

But the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (Nice), which examined five studies on vitamin D, have since concluded there is no evidence to support taking supplements to reduce the risk or severity of Covid-19.

Paul Chrisp, director of the Centre for Guidelines at Nice, said: "While there are health benefits associated with vitamin D, our rapid evidence summary did not identify sufficient evidence to support the use of vitamin D supplements for the treatment or prevention of Covid-19.

We know that the research on this subject is ongoing, and Nice is continuing to monitor new published evidence."

And experts from the Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition said that current evidence does not support vitamin D supplementation to prevent acute respiratory tract infections - or infections of the sinuses, throat, airways or lungs - in the general UK population.

But the review stressed the importance of vitamin D for bone and muscle health.

Vitamin D helps the body to absorb calcium and phosphate, which keep bones, teeth and muscles healthy.

 

it goes on further 

Paul

NICE ignore all science and rely exclusively upon RCTs for COVID , of which there are none, of course;https://www.nice.org.uk/advice/es28/evidence/evidence-review-pdf-8777674477

My views on NICE D3 panel are here, one of 8 responses. The Australian GP has practical advice.

https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m2475/rapid-responses

And here:   https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m2456/rr-1

Nobody is refereeing that NICE panel's decisions nor their methodology.

D3vil takes the hindmost.

Peter

 

Edited by Peter Cobbold
Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.qnis.org.uk/blog/covid-vitamin-d/

A neat summary.

Note the cutoff for severity of COVID at 75 nmol/L.  Slovakia population averages 80 nmol/L and has 1/125 th the COVID  deaths per million of UK ( average 48 nmol.L).

Peter

Link to post
Share on other sites

My goodness, Peter!  You're a scientist, yet quote, "NICE ignore all science and rely exclusively upon RCTs for COVID"  (RCTs = Randomised Controlled Trials) 

  RCTs are the bedrock, the Gold Standard of modern science and evidence-based medicine.   In the words of the BMJ, they are the only way in which "conscientious, explicit, judicious and reasonable" medicine may be practiced.    If no one has done any RCTs on VitD that does not mean that anyone with an opinion is valid.

John

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, john.r.davies said:

My goodness, Peter!  You're a scientist, yet quote, "NICE ignore all science and rely exclusively upon RCTs for COVID"  (RCTs = Randomised Controlled Trials) 

  RCTs are the bedrock, the Gold Standard of modern science and evidence-based medicine.   In the words of the BMJ, they are the only way in which "conscientious, explicit, judicious and reasonable" medicine may be practiced.    If no one has done any RCTs on VitD that does not mean that anyone with an opinion is valid.

John

John,  The entire basis of science is based upon observation, measurement, hyopthesis,deduction and causal inference.It is how we all understand the world. For some peculiar reason medicine has ditched all-embracing causal inference and put all its belief in RCTs. That may be the only way to be sure a drug is "safe" but to apply RCTs to a hormone is  dangerous. The so called Gold Standard is advising levels of hormone that are around one fifth of physiological, and that hormone promotes several hundred genes, In the context of COVID the genes turned on ny the hormone in peripheral blood monocytes and macrophages ( immune cells) have been discovered: https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/12/4/1140  Such knowledge along with many thousands of other papers  on D3 are utterly ignored by NICE D3 panel....utterly. There  were no RCTs for tobacco and the inability of medics to take up causal inference - as any true scientist would- allowed the risks of smoking to health to be obfuscated by tobacco companies for decades. The same is heppening now with COVID, the profession has been blinded by its ignornace of the scientific method. Blinded by a dependence and misplaced trust on RCTs. For drugs there is no alternative to RCTs as data is guarded by pharmas with commercial imperatives and they cannot be  trusted. But to loose sight of causal inference and apply RCTs to a hormone where there are tens of thousnads of refereed papers is INSANE.

This paper uses causal inference to establish the role of D3 in  COVID. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.01.20087965v3   reading the appendices first.image.png.ca07ca091cd3aad4dffcb2fcf9f07cf4.png

The vast majority of RCTs for D3 , in a long list of diseases (hypertension, T2DM, a range of cancers...) have been rejected by NICE on grounds of insufficient numbers. And most failed to show beefit because the D3 dose was far too low, well below physiological, and decided by a panel using doses effective against rickets, ( 25 nmol/L vs physiological 100 -125 nmol/L)

But there is light on the horizon. COVID and D3 deficiency are both global so in the fullness of time ( after hunderds of thousnad have died) the link between low D3 and severity of COVID will be unmistakable and irrefutable. The prospects then for improving the nation's health will be enormous, vastly greater than any drugs can  provide. Check  out the diseases on vitamindwiki. The science is there, it is the NICE D3 panel and the blind acceptance of its un-refereed edicts by the medical profession that is blocking the way to a longer-lived, healthier and happier nation. 

Peter

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Peter Cobbold said:

 

The vast majority of RCTs for D3 , in a long list of diseases (hypertension, T2DM, a range of cancers...) have been rejected by NICE on grounds of insufficient numbers. And most failed to show beefit because the D3 dose was far too low, well below physiological, and decided by a panel using doses effective against rickets, ( 25 nmol/L vs physiological 100 -125 nmol/L)

 

 

Does this statement Peter not just reinforce the benefit of RCT's.

 That is observation is not enough, poor trials are not enough, poor RCT's are not enough to prove either causality or efficacy or safety?

Iain

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, iain said:

Does this statement Peter not just reinforce the benefit of RCT's.

 That is observation is not enough, poor trials are not enough, poor RCT's are not enough to prove either causality or efficacy or safety?

Iain

Iain, The rickets dose was approved by RCTs and then that dose applied to RCTs for other diseases, whereas a science-based approach would use a range of doses. But that then reduces the numbers at each dose, impairing the stats. If cash was not limitng - there are no profits in D3 - big RCTs with a range of doses i/c physiological would come up with outcomes that meet NICE RCT criteria. Only rickets and colon cancer have passed.

For COVID and future pandemics the RCT approach is far too slow. Martineau's RCT is to run for 5 years. If there are too few in his sample with physiological 25(OH)D3 it will be another failure.

Safety with D3 is well established. Physiological production from sun is 10 to 20 thousand IU daily. Yet RCTs are typically only 400 to 800- because the prior rickets RCT defined that as safe. NICE COVID advice likewise is based upon rickets: dangerous to health, not neutral.

D3 works life-long and has a preventive, defensive role, not so much a therapeutic role. D3 deficincy is implicated in PD and demnetias, that develop over many years. RCTs lasting a decade or two would be hugely expensive not to mention slow to give benefit.  Observational studies on existing . long-term, high-D3 cohorts vs D3-deficnt cohorts are needed, but under-resourced.

Such is the overwhelming influence of NICE I do not expect UK to be in the lead in using D3 supplements to address COVID. It will be another nation that follows the science and acts. D3 is  certainly getting a lot of attention by scientists and a smart CSO/CMO somewhere will get poltical support to dose their nation. I calculate that around 3000IU pd pp will cost UK £30M per month retail. Peanuts. But NICE says NO, so it wont happen here. And no-one referees NICE edicts: the oracle speaks and the entire medical profession obeys - bar a very few who speak out.  Sad, and deadly.

Peter

 

 

Edited by Peter Cobbold
Link to post
Share on other sites

After 12000 page views there can only be a few TRers still on board this thread. This article is for you, especailly if nervous about over-doing the dose. The pdf is very readable.

https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202005.0265/v1

The first author has taken 60,000 IU pd for six years.

In the context of COVID we see here that the virus-'killing' cathelicidn is secreted excatly where it is needed to intercept the first virus particles we breathe in or swallow:

image.png.9eac39d045b8f5516e03ddb84bf392f1.png

Peter

Edited by Peter Cobbold
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, barkerwilliams said:

I presume if NICE were buying supplies for the Army and it came to bullets they would have to put 100 people up against a wall with 50 live rounds and 50 blanks just for the RCT.

Alan

And if the live rounds were duds..................."there is no evidence " shooting people works.

 100 is waaaay too small a  number, NICE dont get out of bed for less than 10,000 or thereabouts.

Peter

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/3/2020 at 4:27 PM, barkerwilliams said:

I presume if NICE were buying supplies for the Army and it came to bullets they would have to put 100 people up against a wall with 50 live rounds and 50 blanks just for the RCT.

Alan

No. Nice wouldn’t even be involved. Phase 1 and Phase 11 studies would have worked that out in a non human environment. The LD50%.....dose that kills 50 of the trial population would have been determined. 
Nice don’t look at pre registration data.....they look at it’s relevance in the human context after the regulatory process has licences the medication. As Peter well knows RCT patient numbers are determined by the statisticians who look at how many patients are needed to show a statistically meaningful result.

Quoting 10000 is pure nonsense. 

Iain
 

Edited by iain
Link to post
Share on other sites

10,000 might be nonsense but 65,000 excess deaths in the UK is grim reality, and that  is before the untreated cancers bite; and what about the untreated orthopaedics - how much pain to how many people is acceptable? If even some of those could have had their immune reaction minimised then where is the problem?

You have obviously swallowed the story that its not the NHS its the virus; OK but then why does that not apply globally? Some countries simply do not have the death rate of the UK strange that isn't it? .Agreed that when the virus arrived on these shores many of the population were not in a fit state to put up a reasonable defence and it was perhaps too late for many but NHS complacency in the state of health of the population is unacceptable.  

The whole health service in the UK is a disgrace, it needs to grasp the nettle of a "Health Service" not a "Sickness Service".

Alan

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The mantra the bigger the better is part of RCT dogma, as we see here:

image.png.3efa37c477efa1594c954609ba0ea2c9.png

source;  https://theconversation.com/vitamin-d-a-pseudo-vitamin-for-a-pseudo-disease-101907#comment_1827078

(he was demolished by a USA clinicians David B Karpf comments )

The fundamental problem with RCTs for D3 is they almost always use a single dose deemed safe by regulatory bodies with no dose-ranging and no reference to D3 physiology. Result: not enough D3 given > "no effect" > D3 not important. But abundant animal/cell/molec studies show D3 is intimately involved. The schism gets bigger by the month. There are now 400+ hiits on Goggle Scholar for: "COVID + 25(OH)D3 " this year. 

There is a new approach that combine causal reasoning with mathematically correct decision making, of whcih this is a relevant example:  https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.01.20087965v3

That approach is much closer to how we understand the world. And it will allow data from animal/cell/molec/gene studies to be mathematically merged with exptl interventions on humans. When that is applied to D3 there will be a ginormous , cheap and safe boost to our health, and a corresponding lightening of load on NHS. At present an enormous body of D3 scince is being wasted on the supposed Gold Standard of RCTs. For D3, and our future health, that must change.

I do approve of RCTs for drugs, I dont trust any pharma big or small.

Peter

Edited by Peter Cobbold
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, john.r.davies said:

From a friend in the US, where people seem to be allowd to do their own thing, willy-nilly:

 

 

laconic.png

John

It proves that at least some Americans are not influenced by Mr Trump, thankfully

It gives us hope

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please familiarise yourself with our Terms and Conditions. By using this site, you agree to the following: Terms of Use.