Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Vitamin D: the New Covid-19 Chloroquine?

berthub.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 156 posts

Re: Vitamin D: the New Covid-19 Chloroquine?

#71

Post by ericb »

soperj wrote: post #36
ericb wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right. There are around 100 vaccines in development. We have vaccines that have created binding antibodies in primates already. We have some that have been given to humans and produced antibodies as well. Even pessimistically assuming 90% fail, you end up with 10 vaccines. https://www.centerwatch.com/articles/12702-new-mit-study-put...

that's not pessimistic. Regularly only 6% of vaccines make it past trials.

Do you have a source, because I provided one, and if you look, it says:

"Approval rates ranged from a high of 33.4 percent in vaccines for infectious diseases to 3.4 percent for investigational cancer treatments"

So by that source, I was wildly pessimistic.

Re: Vitamin D: the New Covid-19 Chloroquine?

#72

Post by neuronic »

StavrosK wrote: post #35
watertom wrote: post #20

Since I was a child I’ve been a walking respiratory illness machine. Bronchitis, sinusitis, flu, pneumonia, common cold, etc. During “flu” season I was usually sick for the entire season with a rotating assortment of viral respiratory issues, this lasted until about 7 years ago. 8 years ago in September I started taking 10,000 IU of vitamin D3 and 180mg of K2 daily. I haven’t had a deputies illness since. My children…

Can't you take less D3 daily to prevent calcification? 10k IU sounds like a large amount, no?

Doctors usually recommend 1k IU per day but this has been shown to be problematic. 8k-10k IU is much better. Spending a day on the beach will net you many 10ks of vitamin D (given full body exposure to the sun).

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5541280/

Re: Vitamin D: the New Covid-19 Chloroquine?

#73

Post by StavrosK »

neuronic wrote: post #72
StavrosK wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't you take less D3 daily to prevent calcification? 10k IU sounds like a large amount, no?

Doctors usually recommend 1k IU per day but this has been shown to be problematic. 8k-10k IU is much better. Spending a day on the beach will net you many 10ks of vitamin D (given full body exposure to the sun). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5541280/

Ah, okay, we usually spend threeish months on the beach, so we should be good.

Re: Vitamin D: the New Covid-19 Chloroquine?

#74

Post by gregwebs »

trevorkoob wrote: post #43

Did my masters on Vitamin D - It is very difficult to extract CLINICALLY RELEVANT information from retrospective epidemiological studies. However, there a a few things that are clear: 1. Calcium absorption from the intestine increases with vitamin D supplementation dose up to around 8-10,000 IU D3 daily. 2. 15 minutes of full body exposure in noon sun is equivalent to a dose of ~20,000 IU D3 3. There are few cases of…

This is really dangerous advice to be peddling on internet forums. Statements 1 & 2 are both misleading.

It is certainly true that a few high dosages of vitamin D are not harmful. The issue is the negative effects of having too high of a vitamin D status.

Anyone taking more than 2k IU/day should do so after consulting their doctor or at least testing of their vitamin D levels.

Re: Vitamin D: the New Covid-19 Chloroquine?

#75

Post by haltingproblem »

The article "Is Sunscreen the new margarine" argues that "what made the people with high vitamin D levels so healthy was not the vitamin itself. That was just a marker. Their vitamin D levels were high because they were getting plenty of exposure to the thing that was really responsible for their good health—that big orange ball shining down from above." [1]. If this is true, we have mistaken coincidence due to a common latent cause for causation.

The article "Limits of Vitamin D supplements" is a summary of the Lancet meta-analysis: "Vitamin D status and ill health: a systematic review", which is paywalled [2]. The review shows that Vitamin D supplementation has no clinically beneficial outcome on heart disease, stroke, or cancer.

FWIW, I have been supplementing with Vitamin D for over a decade. I would rather like Vitamin D to work because I have chronically low levels and it would be good to have such a good silver bullet of a nutrient. I have not stopped my supplementation but I do take more frequent walks in the Sun.

[1] https://www.outsideonline.com/2380751/sunscreen-sun-exposure...

[2] (https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/12/11/limits-of-vitamin-...)

Re: Vitamin D: the New Covid-19 Chloroquine?

#76

Post by abecedarius »

watertom wrote: post #20

Since I was a child I’ve been a walking respiratory illness machine. Bronchitis, sinusitis, flu, pneumonia, common cold, etc. During “flu” season I was usually sick for the entire season with a rotating assortment of viral respiratory issues, this lasted until about 7 years ago. 8 years ago in September I started taking 10,000 IU of vitamin D3 and 180mg of K2 daily. I haven’t had a deputies illness since. My children…

Another data point: 5000 IU of D3 daily for years, after testing initially at around 20 ng/dL (iir the units c); this spring my level from a blood test was >90 in the first test since then. It seems like taking 10000 IU instead would've been overkill for me.

I supplement K2 and Mg also (plus a few unrelated things). I also get sick less, though I made enough other changes I can't tell whether to credit the supplements. (The K2 definitely helped a skin issue -- I could reliably bring it back by stopping taking the K2. That's probably a pretty idiosyncratic problem of mine, but it's an example of a supplement clearly helping.)

Chris Masterjohn has suggested that high levels of vitamin D could make you more susceptible to the virus, because some papers suggest that D upregulates ACE2 expression. He thinks it's best to aim for a blood level in the 30-35 range. I don't know how seriously to take this suggestion. For now I reduced my supplement to 1000IU/day.

Re: Vitamin D: the New Covid-19 Chloroquine?

#78

Post by travisoneill1 »

elric wrote: post #53
trevorkoob wrote: post #43

Did my masters on Vitamin D - It is very difficult to extract CLINICALLY RELEVANT information from retrospective epidemiological studies. However, there a a few things that are clear: 1. Calcium absorption from the intestine increases with vitamin D supplementation dose up to around 8-10,000 IU D3 daily. 2. 15 minutes of full body exposure in noon sun is equivalent to a dose of ~20,000 IU D3 3. There are few cases of…

Re #2: the figure gets thrown around a lot. But who is outside, naked, at noon for fifteen minutes? It's really hard to translate that to anything meaningful or actionable. Here's a tool that can help calculate useful exposure depending on your location/time of year. Doesn't take clothing into account however.. https://fastrt.nilu.no/VitD-ez_quartMEDandMED_v2.html

The point is that being outside naked at noon every day for 15 minutes wouldn't hurt you. Therefore, a daily dose of 20,000 IU / day won't hurt you. Therefore, a 5000 IU supplement every day won't hurt you either.

Re: Vitamin D: the New Covid-19 Chloroquine?

#79

Post by yumraj »

watertom wrote: post #20

Since I was a child I’ve been a walking respiratory illness machine. Bronchitis, sinusitis, flu, pneumonia, common cold, etc. During “flu” season I was usually sick for the entire season with a rotating assortment of viral respiratory issues, this lasted until about 7 years ago. 8 years ago in September I started taking 10,000 IU of vitamin D3 and 180mg of K2 daily. I haven’t had a deputies illness since. My children…

Why K2? is there any relation between D3 and K2, or is that just something that you're taking?

Also, what dosage of D3 and K2 are you using for your kids?

Post reply on HN