Covid-19 News

    I think I have found that proper vitamn D levels will allow the body to absorb higher levels of zinc. I looked at what's going on in africa, notoriously vitamin D deficent , yet they seem to have the pandemic under control. Hydroxychloroquine is widely used and a continent wide drive to support zinc. Study's have shown that hydroxychloroquine allows the body to absorb zinc with the antibiotic protecting against bacterial infection. Much more study needs to be done to make this connection but it seems hydroxychloroquine and vitamn D usees a similar path to allow zinc to absorb into the bloodstream

    This could explain the rise in covid in ndea as they are about to pass the US in cases and deaths


    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6060930/






    Abstract

    Vitamin D is a fat-soluble vitamin playing a vital role in human physiology. Vitamin D deficiency is prevalent worldwide. This deficiency has many consequences which are still being explored, apart from the well-known skeletal complications. With this review, we aim to summarize the existing literature on Vitamin D status in India and understand the enormity of the problem. The prevalence of Vitamin D deficiency ranged from 40% to 99%, with most of the studies reporting a prevalence of 80%–90%. It was prevalent in all the age groups and high-risk groups alike. With the consequences of Vitamin D deficiency, namely, autoimmune diseases, cardiovascular diseases, cancer, and tuberculosis being explored, we can imagine the burden it would cause in our country. We need to create awareness among the public and healthcare providers about the importance of Vitamin D and the consequences of deficiency. Our Indian diet generally fails to satisfy the daily requirement of Vitamin D for a normal adult. This stresses on the need for fortifying various food with Vitamin D, through the national programs. This silent epidemic should be addressed appropriately with concrete public health action.

    Quote from Fm1

    https://www.nutraingredients-u…r.-Fauci-on-vitamins-C-D#




    Fucci recommends vitamn D and C to his social media account, question: why has a national alert not been issued?


    Fauci, who isn't exactly a large person, apparently takes 6000 IU of vitamin D daily.

    I must say the fox plays to both sides - the public and industry - so well.

    Fauci gets on a video chat with Jennifer Garner of all people! Who doesn't love her?!

    Her first words : "I just wanted to start by just saying thank you, for never lying to us"

    Now we love you too, good Dr. Fauci.

    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

    Most people 'in the know' are probably unofficially now stockpiling most of the components of our anti-bat - which is rather similar to the 12 million or so individuals and groups like the Mormons, Scientologists and other semi-religious cults in the USA who have been reported to be 'prepping' for a looming nuclear war. Interesting analogy? Underground cities springing up in disused silos for the super-rich to escape into and the isolated off-grid cabins in the woods. Trump's sabre rattling at China is certainly making everybody very worried.......I just hope he doesn't imagine one day the best way of ridding the world of COVID is a massive dose of gamma radiation! Hunker in that bunker!:)

    Quote from Dr Richard

    THHuxleynew - That ribavirin study was an exercise in idiocy - why test a compound known to reduce immunity and expect it to work in a clinical trial? I suppose you are going to argue the same for remdesivir and avigen which have been shown to have direct in vitro activity against SARS-1 and 2, and doing further research on these biochemicals (including dare I say it hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin, Zn ions and the rest of anti-bat) is just a waste of time?


    More testing has been done on HCQ than anything else - by far. so it is difficult to argue we need yet more. Most would think it is already disproportionate and disadvantages other things like Zn, Ivermectin, many other intersting possibles that have been suggested.


    I'm all for testing everything, but capacity to do this is limited.


    I do think small uncontrolled studies are usually a waste of time because it is so difficult to get useful results.

    Quote from Mark U

    I must say the fox plays to both sides - the public and industry - so well.

    Fauci gets on a video chat with Jennifer Garner of all people! Who doesn't love her?!

    Her first words : "I just wanted to start by just saying thank you, for never lying to us"

    Now we love you too, good Dr. Fauci.


    Not sure quite who is "we" here, but take that statement in context - a lot of the non-Fauci actors giving COVID comments have been highly misleading - what many would call lying.

    Quote from Mark U

    Fauci, who isn't exactly a large person, apparently takes 6000 IU of vitamin D daily.


    I'm not saying that is impossible: if he blood tests and ups the dose to get required absorption that level might be needed. But it is 10X the max RDA for typical adult. Most think the RDAs are too conservative but I'd put 1000 IU/day as max sensible without blood tests and knowing you need more.


    Where does the 6000iud come from? I do not trust "apparently takes" without knowing on what evidence this conclusion is drawn.

    Vitamin D and covid/general health:


    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.


    Lots of interesting science, factoids and statistics.



    TL:DW? VitD is really good for you and your organs, and a lot of people don't get enough.

    An in vitro study using two common nutraceuticals.

    Hopefully, in vivo studies will follow --

    RESVERATROL AND PTEROSTILBENE POTENTLY INHIBIT SARS-COV-2 INFECTION IN VITRO

    https://www.biorxiv.org/conten…0.09.24.285940v1.full.pdf

    Abstract:

    The current COVID-19 pandemic is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) and has an enormous impact on human health and economy.

    In search for therapeutic options, researchers have proposed resveratrol, a food supplement with known antiviral, anti-inflammatory and anti-oxidant properties as an advantageous antiviral therapy for SARS-CoV-2 infection.

    Here, we provide evidence that both resveratrol and its metabolically more stable structural analog, pterostilbene, exhibits potent antiviral properties against SARS-CoV-2 in vitro. Resveratrol and pterostilbene showed antiviral activity in African green monkey kidney cells and in human primary bronchial epithelial cells cultured in an air-liquid interface system. Mechanistic analyses demonstrated that both compounds actively interfere with the post-entry steps of virus replication cycle and their antiviral activity is long-lasting. Collectively, our data indicate that resveratrol and pterostilbene are promising antiviral compounds to treat SARS-CoV-2 infection and advocate

    evaluation of these compounds in clinical trials.


    Also, a list of references exploring quercetin as a preventative and therapeutic -

    https://www.thailandmedical.ne…t-for-covid-19-treatments

    Quote from Fm1

    Fucci admitted in an email that he takes 6000I/u a day


    https://www.reddit.com/r/China…amin_d_and_other_science/


    Sorry THH these are on youtube but a lot of what this doctor talks about is really informative. Please take the time to watch some if not all


    Hi FM1. OK, so I listened to the Vit D segment and the start of the variolation segment. For what I heard, I agree with everything this guy said.


    Some comment.


    High dose Vit D3 supplement. Basically, the official guidelines are low, and the jury is out as to whether they should be higher, but I'd expect so. The problem is that people vary. Vitamin D overdose is a thing, and because some people absorb it much more efficiently, and some have more in diet, any official "guarenteed to be safe" guideline must be low.


    Older people are likely to need more. Like this guy says (and like I've said) if you are concerned go get a vit D test and up your dose based on that. Problem is that it will take a few months for levels to stabilise at their new value so you will need to take say 1 test every 3 months as you vary supplement.


    Disclosure (I take, and my (older) family take) 1000 IU/day. We are not outside much, and do not have a diet high in Vitamin D.


    Also note that he commented on the association between Vitamin D deficiency and many diseases. That is all true, but it is in most cases not proven that it is causal Vitamin D => less disease. There are good candidates (deprivation etc) that would corrleate with less Vitamin D and more disease nmaking the association. Of course that does not mean there is no association. The RCT evidence applies only to some diseases (the VITAL study is really the best trial for this), and in any case it does not rule out some smaller causal link for the diseases it measures.


    I would question the science between the very high doses (6000 IU / day etc). there are two reasons you might take them without blood tests. (1) temporarily to correct deficiency quickly. (2) based on repeated blood test results, because your absorption was poor.


    In Fauci's case (the e-m could be fake, but it could also be real, looks plausible to me) I'd suggest two possibilities:

    (1) Fauci like many people is behaving totemically and taking very high dose Vitamin D on hope but no evidence, reckoning that he will recognise the side effects from OD and that it is just possible it will make a big differnece

    (2) Fauci has looked at Vit D bloods and does this because his level is still lower than he reckons is sensible.


    Neither of these is a good enough reason to change the RDA guidance - and getting approval for that is difficult because medics are ultra-cautious about that sort of thing. The caution comes from the fact that you get say 1 in 1000 outliers who are very sensitive to Vitamin D. A higher RDA might adversely affect them.


    What I do not know - and would like to know - is what are the probabilities here. What on average is the best supplement for somone of 70 years age? If you can find any good information (basically trials of supplementation vs blood levels for a decent number of people stratified by age) it would be interesting. The liver tends to saturate above certain levels with little change in output for different inputs (which is why some of the trials are using Calcifediol, the product). That is one reason why naively very high levels make less difference than you might think and arguably are a good idea. Equally, arguably there might be minor adverse consequences to such high intake.


    We know BTW that lots of vitamin D is not very harmful because Innuit people get a very high dietary intake and do not die (though overall their health may be less good, such evidence is impossible to know because too many other factors are present). the following is however interesting:


    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4709837/


    Thus this is some evidence that very high Vitamin D levels do not correlate with inflammation, but it is weak (as most of this sort of evidence positive or negative is) because it could be some other dietary factor (marine pollution etc) that correlated with the Vitamin D intake that changed results.


    It looks as though more evidence will be coming:

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28347378/

    This review summarises the evidence to date behind the comparative efficacy of vitamins D2 and D3 at raising 25(OH)D concentrations, and the potential role of vitamin D food fortification as a public health policy to support attainment of dietary recommendations in the UK. The comparative efficacy of vitamins D2 and D3 has been investigated in several intervention trials, with most indicating that vitamin D3 is more effective at raising 25(OH)D concentrations. However, flaws in study designs (predominantly under powering) mean there remains a need for a large, robust randomised-controlled trial to provide conclusive evidence, which the future publication of the D2-D3 Study should provide (BBSRC DRINC funded: BB/I006192/1). This review also highlights outstanding questions and gaps in the research that need to be addressed to ensure the most efficacious and safe vitamin D food fortification practices are put in place. This further research, alongside cost, availability and ethical considerations (vitamin D3 is not suitable for vegans), will be instrumental in supporting government, decision-makers, industry and consumers in making informed choices about potential future vitamin D policy and practice.


    I'd suggest anyone taking high dose Vitamin D would be fine (this however is NOT a recommendation) as long as they long term checked blood levels (e.g. regularly, since it build up), also a good idea to be aware of the possible toxic effects


    https://www.healthline.com/nut…s#Deficiency-and-toxicity


    Vitamin D3 has been found to increase blood levels significantly more than D2. Studies have shown that each additional 100 IU of vitamin D3 you consume per day will raise your blood vitamin D levels by 1 ng/ml (2.5 nmol/l), on average (2Trusted Source, 3Trusted Source).

    However, taking extremely high doses of vitamin D3 for long periods may lead to excessive buildup in your body.

    Vitamin D intoxication occurs when blood levels rise above 150 ng/ml (375 nmol/l). Because the vitamin is stored in body fat and released into the bloodstream slowly, the effects of toxicity may last for several months after you stop taking supplements (4Trusted Source).

    Importantly, toxicity isn’t common and occurs almost exclusively in people who take long-term, high-dose supplements without monitoring their blood levels.

    It’s also possible to inadvertently consume too much vitamin D by taking supplements that contain much higher amounts than are listed on the label.

    From those figures a total dietary intake of >1500 IU/day long term could be toxic. Older people tend to absorb it less well, so would tolerate higher levels without risk, but the size of that effect is likely to be very variable.


    On the subject of toxicity, did you read the story about the guy who died from a liquorice candy overdose (>1 bag/day for a few weeks)? I bet the licquorice manufacturers are annoyed at the PR from that...


    https://www.nhs.uk/common-heal…liquorice-be-bad-for-you/


    Can eating too much black liquorice be bad for you?

    Yes, particularly if you're over 40 and have a history of heart disease or high blood pressure, or both.

    Eating more than 57g (2 ounces) of black liquorice a day for at least 2 weeks could lead to potentially serious health problems, such as an increase in blood pressure and an irregular heart rhythm (arrhythmia).

    For most people, liquorice found in foods is safe to eat and safe when consumed in large amounts in medicines for short periods of time.





    Variolation


    The other segment (did not listen to more than start) was about possibility of variolation which we already know about. The idea that low doses of COVID can be protective by alerting the immune system without leading to harmful levels of the virus - you end up with an asymptomatic infection. the idea is that mask wearing might make this more likley by reducing exposure (when you are exposed).


    So whole population mask wearing => more asymptomatic COVID => higher population immunity (over time0 at lower death tool.


    Should stress that we do not know how large these effects are, and that details always matters. Worth gathering evidence.


    THH

    Quote from Fm1

    Provide evidence, not you personal opinion (about people not Fauci misleading over COVID)


    Non-Fauci actors misleading:


    Jed has posted a lot of the misleading stuff, and effectively falsifying health statistics, from a few Southern States that desperately don't want to close (fair enough - a political decision though IMHO misguided) and therefore cover up higher case rates, hospitalisations, etc. You can look back on this thread to find it. there is always a case for keeping stuff open and bearing the deaths, though I side with Jed in thinking it a short-term policy due to inevitable case rise. But it must go with being honest with people about what you are doing, not hiding the disease.


    Trump's self-admitted "don't want to cause panic so I played down the virus" statements together with his documented private statements that it was very dangerous (I'm sure you have all heard the recordings from Woodward) again are misleading. They have done the US harm. When things are uncertain, and difficult, being straight with people is difficult too - but it is the best course of action. Leaders who have done this have survived better so far. The UK and the US, both with leaders who like to provide an upbeat positive message, have been not straight with people and the result is just a mess in both countries.


    THH


    Its not just the southern states it is widespread. Some states are going all the way back to the beginning revising stats. Its confusing and the real problem is the media is also all over the board. Nobody knows what to believe as we are bombarded every day with new info some not very reliable. I can't say why Trump downplayed the virus but my theory is he used the pandemic playbook of the 57 and 68 pandemics turning it over to the experts not allowing to media to steal the narrative. Mistakes have been made from the beginning starting with buying 6 million test kits from china that didn't work. The advantage the administration believed they had went out the window on the FDA rejection of the tests. CDC tests were no better. That's how the US started this fight already with one hand tied behind it back. I don't look to Trump or any president to advise me on how I should react to a situation, Im not a fan of trump but I am n his policies, covid not withstanding

Subscribe to our newsletter

It's sent once a month, you can unsubscribe at anytime!

View archive of previous newsletters

* indicates required

Your email address will be used to send you email newsletters only. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

Our Partners

Supporting researchers for over 20 years
Want to Advertise or Sponsor LENR Forum?
CLICK HERE to contact us.