Peter Cobbold Posted January 18, 2021 Report Share Posted January 18, 2021 16 hours ago, iain said: Based on physiology, a norm can be agreed? On that basis, trail to obtain the norm in the disease conditions you state and measure effect against the accepted measures for improvement. Ie in Parkinson’s use PDQ 36 or the short form, assuming they are still,the Gold standard. For Hypertension look at bases lines before Tx and then report once the D3 therapeutic goal has been achieved, maintain that level and continue to measure BP. Surrogate end point s would of course be reduction in anti hypertensive drugs required to achieve to the target BP. Etc. Iain Iain You still viiew D3 as a therapeutic. Following physiology makes all that legisaltive stuff redundant. Chronic deficiency has so great an impact on our genes that correcting it late may well not reverse the damage done. D3 is not a drug. Peter Quote Link to post Share on other sites
iain Posted January 18, 2021 Report Share Posted January 18, 2021 Yes when its administered to replace a known deficit its a therapeutic intervention. Next. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Peter Cobbold Posted January 18, 2021 Report Share Posted January 18, 2021 4 hours ago, little jim said: "Your belief in the vaccine being best pretection is misplaced." Come on Pete that surely is not the responsible way to go for somebody with medical qualifications. LJ, Immunoscenesce is well known in the elderly, their relative lack of naive T-cells renders them less responsive to 'flu vaccines. The efficacy of SARs vaccines in the elderly must therefore be questioned. Yes, I do go for the medically qualified in the vague hope they might learn about D3, innate immunity, LL37, defensins and so forth. It is their failure as a global community to grasp the importance of D3-deficiency that is driving the pandemic. The pandemic is iatrogenic by ommission. They have failed us. For an overview search Peter H Cobbold +BMJ Peter Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Peter Cobbold Posted January 18, 2021 Report Share Posted January 18, 2021 16 hours ago, matttnz said: Wow Peter, that is some pretty industrial grade consipracy theorising going on, and maybe I do know a little more than you think. Do you really think that the "profession" would really subject so many people to extreme risk of mortality purely in the quest of better profit margins? A profession with ethics at its core (admittedly one where it gets it wrong at times) and a NHS currently drowning and run by managers trying to minimise cost to the taxpayers? One where the staff each day are putting themselves in harms way treating the profoundly unwell, who are dying in front of them despite their best efforts? If this could all be reversed by the simple administration of Vit D, it absolutely would be. To suggest otherwise is an insult to the people who currently are working horrendous hours and in incredibly stressful situations to save the lives of those people currently severely unwell with CV19. The thing I don't get about all these CV19 conspiracy questions: "virus released by China", "the real treatment is easy", "it's just the flu" etc. What would be the point? Why on earth would some international shadowy conspiracy or governments allow the deaths of 100s of thousands and the extreme economic hardships when the benefits just aren't good enough? I acknowledge completely that cheap agents can struggle at times to find suitable funding for proper studies to be conducted. It may be that VitD is an agent that can help. But to suggest that it has widespread evidence that is being ignored or suppressed is dangerous until those studies are done in a sufficiently robust way to support their use. When those studies exist, the agents are used. Pure and simple. I know this will not even begin to change your mind due to the nature of these things. Unfortunately it will likely result in a storm of replies lambasting my uninformed state. And, I will go away and have a look at some of your papers to see if there is something I have missed in Vit D in human physiology, because- despite your protests, these studies are going on in healthcare. But for others who may be reading this: Wash your hands, use a mask, social isolation and get vaccinated. Alan: Agreed, except that these are being used as indicators as to those at high risk. They're not advocating treating obesity/DM/HT etc during the acute illness as COVID management. One could argue that Vit D deficiency could be used as a marker in a similar way on the basis of the observational studies conducted. Matt, Please do me the favour of assimilating the refs in the Open Letter appproved by many D3-expert clinicians. D3-ignorance abounds in the medical profession and NZ is no exception. D3 is a sun-derived hormone/autocrine signal whose response elements demethylate DNA at 23,000 siites per cell nucleus and thereby controlling expression of at least 450 genes. Vitamindwiki is an excellent compendium of references, showing D3 implicated (or not) in a host of conditions, from autism spectrum to Alzheimers. And longevity ( Framlingham) Around 5000 papers per year are published on D3 fundamentals, and rising. Almost all is wasted becauuse the vast majority of emdics have been taught its only for rickets. And their institutions have failed ot keep pace with refresher courses. Tragic. Peter Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Peter Cobbold Posted January 18, 2021 Report Share Posted January 18, 2021 46 minutes ago, iain said: Yes when its administered to replace a known deficit its a therapeutic intervention. Next. Therapies are designed and tested against specific diseases and licensed only for that disease bythe likes of NICE. However, D3 impacts upon dozens of diseases so your apoach suffers froma surfiet of expnesive trials. Also ther is a big problem with palcebos. Once one trial has shown D3 to be effective against one disease , say T2DM, it is thereafter unethical to deprive a palcebo gropu of D33 in another trial ,say hypertension, for putting them at risk of T2DM. Fortunately restoring D3 to physiologcial levesl with either/or sunlight,UVB or supplements will be shown to greatly reduce C-19 severity and become in use globally, agaisnt all variants of the virus.Imposing D3 deficincy upon placebon groups in trials would be worse than merely unethical. The one good outcome of the pandemic is the many additional health benefits of physiologicla D3 will then become obvious and trials redundant. Peter Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Peter Cobbold Posted January 18, 2021 Report Share Posted January 18, 2021 70 French doctors recommending D3 for C-19: https://www.larevuedupraticien.fr/article/effet-benefique-de-la-vitamine-d-dans-la-covid-quelles-sont-les-donnees 100,000 IU at first signs of C-19 is reminiscent of Schwalfenberg's "hammer" we touched upona few months back. Peter Quote Link to post Share on other sites
acaie Posted January 18, 2021 Report Share Posted January 18, 2021 Food for thought from the Zoe man Tim (not Phil) Spector and his colleagues. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.11.27.20239087v1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Peter Cobbold Posted January 18, 2021 Report Share Posted January 18, 2021 17 minutes ago, acaie said: Food for thought from the Zoe man Tim (not Phil) Spector and his colleagues. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.11.27.20239087v1 Acaie, I took a quick look, cannot find any data on D3 dosage just yes/no. Spector is a known D3-sceptic I have run into him before: https://theconversation.com/vitamin-d-a-pseudo-vitamin-for-a-pseudo-disease-101907#comment_1827078 He creates his own peculiar wall of sound. Tks for the heads up Peter Quote Link to post Share on other sites
PaulAnderson Posted January 18, 2021 Report Share Posted January 18, 2021 Last weekend I went to a different branch of Aldi for my parents food shopping (they want it from Aldi and not from where I shop) and it was absolute hell. Massively overcrowded in the first aisle, no patience from other customers and hence little social distancing. I told two people to back off when they were a foot away and leaning past to reach things. I complained to the first member of staff I saw that it was far too crowded and the response was that it was controlled by head office. Appalling. I complained again at the till. Over the next couple of days it was in the news that the government were asking supermarkets to improve their safety. They must have been listening because the failings were obvious. This week I went to a different branch and late at night instead of at the weekend to avoid the squeeze. Overall I feel like many people out there are just behaving insanely. Early in the pandemic I thought that Aldi were one of the best shops, giving Pre-cleaned trolleys at the door and controlling the number of shoppers. To me, the reduction in safety management and personal care partly explains the ongoing crisis. Today’s Independent newspaper shows more disappointing figures at https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/uk-covid-death-rate-coronavirus-b1788817.html suggesting the UK has the highest death rate in the world. Paul Quote Link to post Share on other sites
stillp Posted January 18, 2021 Report Share Posted January 18, 2021 Interesting that their figures differ from those at https://ncov2019.live/ although it is difficult to make comparisons between countries, because there is little or no consistency in the way "cause of death" is recorded. Even in the UK, there's a difference between 'deaths within 28 days of a positive covid test' and 'deaths where covid is mentioned on the death certificate. Pete Quote Link to post Share on other sites
iain Posted January 19, 2021 Report Share Posted January 19, 2021 18 hours ago, Peter Cobbold said: Therapies are designed and tested against specific diseases and licensed only for that disease bythe likes of NICE. However, D3 impacts upon dozens of diseases so your apoach suffers froma surfiet of expnesive trials. Also ther is a big problem with palcebos. Once one trial has shown D3 to be effective against one disease , say T2DM, it is thereafter unethical to deprive a palcebo gropu of D33 in another trial ,say hypertension, for putting them at risk of T2DM. Fortunately restoring D3 to physiologcial levesl with either/or sunlight,UVB or supplements will be shown to greatly reduce C-19 severity and become in use globally, agaisnt all variants of the virus.Imposing D3 deficincy upon placebon groups in trials would be worse than merely unethical. The one good outcome of the pandemic is the many additional health benefits of physiologicla D3 will then become obvious and trials redundant. Peter Peter you constantly refer to Physiological levels ( probably a range) being restored when deficient. What is this level? (My degree is in Physiology albeit 37 yrs ago.) Is this level/ range universally agreed? If so then your comments re placebo etc are irrelevant. You would titrate the therapeutic intervention, namely VitD3, to achieve a value in the target physiological range. Anyone in such a study could then be followed by measuring the impact on their Co- existing disease. Of course this pre assumes that all patient preexisting diseases are stable and not acutely deteriorating. The patients base line data before VitD3 intervention would then provide the control data removing the need for placebo groups. Sunlight exposure could be monitored via a diary/ gps recorder I would think. A bit like the wrist watches used for monitoring PD symptoms. Iain Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Peter Cobbold Posted January 19, 2021 Report Share Posted January 19, 2021 Iain, I covered physiology months ago. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/07315724.2015.1039866 https://ucsd.tv/search-details.aspx?showID=29077 Robert Heaney championed physiological 25(OH), did the research, grew old and died a couple of years ago. The measurements are sound and are widely accepted as valid, by those who work on D3. Of course physiological 25(OH)D as a target fro health is not widely accepted, thats why we are in a pandemic. its not through lack of knowldedge , it's ignorace and ignoring knowledge by NICE-SACN etc that denies the medical profession that knowledge. Peter Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Peter Cobbold Posted January 19, 2021 Report Share Posted January 19, 2021 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Peter Cobbold Posted January 19, 2021 Report Share Posted January 19, 2021 NZ care home residents advised by ionsurers to take 50,000 IU pm, since in 2016 Almost all reach 25(OH)D >75 nmol/L: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27453540/ What is C-19 case fatality rate for them ? Peter Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Peter Cobbold Posted January 19, 2021 Report Share Posted January 19, 2021 1 minute ago, Peter Cobbold said: NZ care home residents advised by ionsurers to take 50,000 IU pm, since in 2016 Almost all reach 25(OH)D >75 nmol/L: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27453540/ What is C-19 case fatality rate for them ? Peter not 2016, 2011. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Bleednipple Posted January 19, 2021 Report Share Posted January 19, 2021 3 hours ago, Peter Cobbold said: NZ care home residents advised by ionsurers to take 50,000 IU pm, since in 2016 Almost all reach 25(OH)D >75 nmol/L: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27453540/ What is C-19 case fatality rate for them ? Peter CFR approx 10%: 16 deaths out of 153 cases in care facilities. Obviously a small sample and I'm sure any attempt at comparative analysis would be fraught, however apparently Vit D adequacy (if so achieved) didn't provide anything like full protection from covid fatality in that group. https://ltccovid.org/2020/08/10/new-report-the-long-term-care-covid-19-situation-in-aotearoa-new-zealand/ Nigel Quote Link to post Share on other sites
john.r.davies Posted January 20, 2021 Report Share Posted January 20, 2021 Quote Peter Cobbold in the VitD Free thread (In response to my point about them being on an isolated island): The Aussies have another advantage that I should not mention on this thread,but will. Taking Adelaide as an example thir meand 25(OH)D is 70 nmol/L compared with UK ca 50 https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2458-14-100UK summer level rises to ca 70nmol/L and C-19 deaths plummet. I dont see Oz being protected by its isolation, rather its sunshine. The downside to all that sun is nasties lurking in the undergrowth...lethal brown snakes..spiders.... Peter Peter, the 'outdoor life' favoured and possible in much of Oz (I recall a senior Aussie doctor turning up for UK duty - in summer - in shorts!) must allow more cutaneous VitD synthesis, but how do the levels reported there compare with those that VitD vs. Covid enthusiasts advocate? John Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Peter Cobbold Posted January 20, 2021 Report Share Posted January 20, 2021 1 hour ago, john.r.davies said: Quote Peter Cobbold in the VitD Free thread (In response to my point about them being on an isolated island): The Aussies have another advantage that I should not mention on this thread,but will. Taking Adelaide as an example thir meand 25(OH)D is 70 nmol/L compared with UK ca 50 https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2458-14-100UK summer level rises to ca 70nmol/L and C-19 deaths plummet. I dont see Oz being protected by its isolation, rather its sunshine. The downside to all that sun is nasties lurking in the undergrowth...lethal brown snakes..spiders.... Peter Peter, the 'outdoor life' favoured and possible in much of Oz (I recall a senior Aussie doctor turning up for UK duty - in summer - in shorts!) must allow more cutaneous VitD synthesis, but how do the levels reported there compare with those that VitD vs. Covid enthusiasts advocate? John Holick once measured 25(OH)D in Aussie dermatogists and 90% were deficient, they knew all about melanoma but had forgotten UVB for D3. Most of the 200 odd signatories to the Open Letter take 4000IU pd or more. That will give us typically ca 100-150 nmol/L a physiological level. The actual level varies with individual: uptake form gut, obesity, age. So to get 97% of a population to sufficiency defiend by US Inst Endoc of >75 nmol/L needs ca 4000 IU pd. (The cumulative figure in the NZ paper I posted earlier shows the scale of the spread in a aged cohort) Compared with max sunlight induced rate of whole-body D3 produciton of 10 to 20,000 IU per day, 4000 is within nature. While the OL focuses on covid the above "consensus" was arrived at years ago. In his book from a decade ago Holick tells us he takes a mix of supplements and sun to keep his 25(OH)D at 125 nmol/L. So the recommendation of ca 4000 IU pd has a long history it has not suddenly arisen to combat C-19. Rather, C-19 is tragically highlighting widespread global deficieny. The exact lower safe limit of 25(OH)D for avoiding severe C-19 may be around 75 nmol/L for most Caucasiains, But one third of them and BAMEs are low responders and need more. A letter to Indian doctros working in UK sent in April by the chair of BAPIO an endocrinologist recommended thay take 100,000 IU monthly, roughly equvalent to 3000 per day. Since advers effects of high serum 25(OH)D are not seen below ca 300 nmol/L, and are easily reversed, there is a good reason not to titrate dosage downwards. Several signatories take very high doses, and are fine ( although some take care with calcium in diet). Peter Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Peter Cobbold Posted January 20, 2021 Report Share Posted January 20, 2021 Andalusia synopsis http://www.drdavidgrimes.com/2021/ Quote Link to post Share on other sites
barkerwilliams Posted January 20, 2021 Report Share Posted January 20, 2021 https://www.connexionfrance.com/French-news/Leading-French-experts-advise-vitamin-D-to-counter-Covid-19 Alan Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Mick Forey Posted January 21, 2021 Report Share Posted January 21, 2021 19 hours ago, Peter Cobbold said: Andalusia synopsis http://www.drdavidgrimes.com/2021/ Peter, is there a comparison between Andalusia and the rest of Spain, who presumably did not implement the Vitamin D initiative? Mick Quote Link to post Share on other sites
john.r.davies Posted January 21, 2021 Report Share Posted January 21, 2021 There must be dozens of universities and pharma companies around the world, trying to develop alternative Covid vaccines. Here's one with a novel approach. Lancaster University, with the Biomedical Research Institute in Texas, has tested a modified chicken virus that is administered by nasal spray. The virus is harmless to humans, like the chimp virus that is the basis of the Oxford-AstraZeneca Vaccine, and like that has been modified to produce Covid spike protein. It has been tested only in animals as yet, but has been shown to provide protection against infection, and to prevent the 'shedding' of Covid virus. This second effect is one that existing vaccines are not known to do, and a nasal spray would make vaccination programmes around the world cheaper and easier to organise. BUT, early days - human trials are yet to happen, and approval for use is months away at best. See: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.01.08.425974v1.full Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Peter Cobbold Posted January 21, 2021 Report Share Posted January 21, 2021 2 hours ago, Mick Forey said: Peter, is there a comparison between Andalusia and the rest of Spain, who presumably did not implement the Vitamin D initiative? Mick Mick, Ive not seen any data mentioned. Will post if it appears. Peter Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Peter Cobbold Posted January 21, 2021 Report Share Posted January 21, 2021 2 hours ago, john.r.davies said: There must be dozens of universities and pharma companies around the world, trying to develop alternative Covid vaccines. Here's one with a novel approach. Lancaster University, with the Biomedical Research Institute in Texas, has tested a modified chicken virus that is administered by nasal spray. The virus is harmless to humans, like the chimp virus that is the basis of the Oxford-AstraZeneca Vaccine, and like that has been modified to produce Covid spike protein. It has been tested only in animals as yet, but has been shown to provide protection against infection, and to prevent the 'shedding' of Covid virus. This second effect is one that existing vaccines are not known to do, and a nasal spray would make vaccination programmes around the world cheaper and easier to organise. BUT, early days - human trials are yet to happen, and approval for use is months away at best. See: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.01.08.425974v1.full That is an approach fraught with uncertainty about longterm risk. The olfactory nerve and bulb have long been suspected as an entry route into the brain for outative causative agents of neurodegnerative diseases such as PD and Alz. Even if it is an attenuated chicken virus it is live. I would at thevery least want to be sure it cannot enter and replicate in human nerve cells. That approach may be sfae in conventional jabs but the olfactory nerbe bypasses the blood brain barrier and, to me, is disntictly iffy. Peter Quote Link to post Share on other sites
john.r.davies Posted January 21, 2021 Report Share Posted January 21, 2021 (edited) Distinctly sniffy! And any agent that cause Alzheimers or PD (premature dementia?) are very putative (theoretical) indeed! Let alone their route of entry. The logistic challenge in the Third World of nasal administration would be an enormous advantage, and many in the developed world would welcome a vaccine that doesn't need an injection! The oral polio vaccine is safer than the injected type by a factor of about a thousand. John Edited January 21, 2021 by john.r.davies Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.