ApoE4.Info

I know the ideal level for Vitamin D has been a controversial topic here; no wonder with the complete absence of a universally adopted index of normal ranges, etc. Here's a great new paper that explores the current research and offers a novel therapy for addressing deficiency- upregulating VDR methylation.

If nothing else, this paper enlightened me to the fact that we are only on the frontiers of beginning to understand Vitamin D regulation.

Inflammation and vitamin D: the infection connection
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4160567/

hear hear on the fact that there seems to be no consistency in levels internationally. Very scary actually.

Here though is a heads up on a new RCT that will be large enough to show impact on some major disease groups. Unfortunately not AD, but I guess we could use CVD as a rough surrogate marker....I'll let everyone know in a couple years....

https://www.fmhs.auckland.ac.nz/en/soph ... study.html

Good to see that they are catching up to my research. I would suggest that they look into giving K2 or MK7 along with the D3 supplement.
I cant wait for the ending statement of ambiguity and the need for more money and more research when their study time is up.
In the meantime while they slug it out as to what is or may be, I will just slug mine down the ole hatch with a shot of olive oil and call it a day.

Its New Zealand. We dont have any more money This is the trial as it is and its about head to head Vit D vs nothing. Never been done before.

I'll take New Zealand for five.

You may want to read all about

The vitamin deficiency that is written all over your face.

The VIDA study is certainly a step in the right direction, Stavia. We need more RCTs, preferably assessing cognitive function.

WA, right on regarding the need for Vitamins K and A with D. As they are fat soluble, they should also be taken with some dietary fat. Chris Masterjohn has done the most work on this. I know he and others are speculating that high levels of Vitamin D (without K & A) may even lead to coronary calcium. I've heard him recommend fermented cod liver oil as a good source of all three. Here's a recent talk from him on the subject. I plan to watch later today: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9H7tbWVNrXQ&app=desktop

Your first link Julie is where they believe low vitamin d is caused by you having a disease process as the cause, which would mean that doctors do not know what the disease is or how to find which one it is in order to cure you and then you go back to your normal level. Many ms patients present with low to zero vitamin d levels, however they do not have a medical cure for ms that I am aware of at this time, yet when they boost the vitamin d levels in ms patients they see positive results reported by patients. Various cancers have verying vitamin d levels where they report they have a better survival rate. So, if you have a better survival rate you definitely live longer and if it reduces suffering symptoms in ms patients(may also extend ms life?, it has been awhile since I read about ms) there is a positive to supplementation. Plus the many other effects seen in trials that are positive.
On the other hand if you wanted to boost drug sales from pharma or keep your patient sick to make more money than vitamin d3 supplementation that would be a bad thing for your self interests to support vitamin d3 supplementation. Are people promoting this reasoning or idea or is it they just can't see the truth? Or are they correct and everyone else are the duped? This hopefully will be answered from on high and an edict issued for doctors to follow so as to create better health outcomes for their patients.

Julie - The research study you cite above is very suspect IMHO. I believe the authors are proponents of The Marshall Protocol. Please google it. As I understand it, they believe Vitamin D3 is harmful. Furthermore, I believe the first author listed is an RN and that none of them are M.D.s or Ph.D.s I find their promotion of drugs over Vitamin D troubling. Frankly, I have no idea how they managed to get into Pubmed. I did not research the reputation of that particular journal but I have doubts about it.

BTW Dr. Marshall himself is not a Medical Doctor but has a PhD in biomedical engineering. He believes that Vitamin D is immunosuppressive and that pulsed doses of antibiotics are curative. I think his position is seriously flawed and dangerous.

I know that Dr. Mercola is merely a chiropractor and derives profit from selling fear and supplements but I do think his review of The Marshall Protocol is worth reading - http://articles.mercola.com/sites/artic ... tocol.aspx

Good job rep as you have me reading more about this. They own or work for chronic illness recovery and they believe cell wall deficient bacteria l forms cause chronic inflammation and the bacteria can be killed by benicar. These bacteria l form have the ability to hide from the immune system and shut it down( this being vitamin d immune system). If the vitamin d immune system is shut down completely though, if it can be totally shut down(doubtful) but in some cells possible as that is how cancer multiplies when the tp53 gene is turned off due to not a sufficient amount in the cell, according to what I have read the cell must have the sufficient amount or tp53 will not turn on.
This will require more reading about l form bacteria. I know that doxorubicin is an antibiotic that was used to kill my white blood cells and supposedly these l form bacteria can hide in them, I do not know at this time if killing those white blood cells would kill this bacteria or not with doxorubicin. The other interesting part was I was left with about 400 white blood cells that the doxorubicin did not kill. Back to the rabbit hole, to see if there is a white rabbit somewhere in that hole.