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

Reduced cancer mortality with daily Vitamin D intake

dkfz.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 249 posts

Re: Reduced cancer mortality with daily Vitamin D intake

#131

Post by generalenvelope »

ramoz wrote: post #9

> However, when the studies were divided according to whether vitamin D3 was taken daily in a low dose* or in higher doses administered at longer intervals*, a large difference was seen. In the four studies with the infrequent hogher doses, there was no effect on cancer mortality. In contrast, in the summary of the ten studies with daily dosing, the researchers determined a statistically significant twelve percent re…

There is no recommendation made here. These are observations and far from clinical guidelines, or anything any doctor would recommend you do.

Re: Reduced cancer mortality with daily Vitamin D intake

#132

Post by bregma »

reducesuffering wrote: post #73
ck2 wrote: post #34

Last century they insisted Vitamin C prevents/cures cancer. This century it's Vitamin D with the same level of insistence. Don't hold your breath. Abstract says it all: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20799507/

You know that both of these are called "Vitamins" because they are essential to human health? You will have increased risk of many health problems with deficiencies.

Not enough is bad so more than enough must be better?

Re: Reduced cancer mortality with daily Vitamin D intake

#133

Post by generalenvelope »

kstrauser wrote: post #26

Given that D3 is dirt cheap and lots of us are low in it, is there any downside to taking a reasonable daily dose?

It costs money and won't necessarily do anything about the levels / the things that were causing the levels to be low in the first place. Highly recommend this deep dive: https://soundcloud.com/user-344313169/vitamin-d-mixdown-1

Re: Reduced cancer mortality with daily Vitamin D intake

#134

Post by maxk42 »

oppositelock wrote: post #23
SoftTalker wrote: post #3

I've been taking a daily vitamin D supplement since COVID-19 broke out in the USA. I believe there's a lot of evidence that many people are deficient in vitamin D. I don't know if supplements are the best way to attack that but it's one of the easiest ways. Getting daily sun exposure isn't always convenient and not really possible for a good chunk of the year since we have real winter here.

I have some hard numbers on this in my own health. I'm a pasty north European living in California and I get plenty of sunshine, as I enjoy the outdoors. As I got older, I got increasingly more viral infections and strep throat was a twice a year affair. It didn't occur to me that I could be vitamin-D deficient, but I was, severely. For some reason, 10+ hours of sunshine a week isn't enough for me to make my own. Ove…

What do you use for tracking your blood vitamin D levels?

Re: Reduced cancer mortality with daily Vitamin D intake

#135

Post by tick_tock_tick »

DocTomoe wrote: post #121
dcow wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This (among other things) makes me wonder why we don't have better metrics and monitoring solutions for the human body. Your option is anecdotal self-diagnosis, or a full blood panel after seeing a doctor and convincing them that you need to be tested. It seems there's room for a product that monitors your health and sends you notifications when you need to address any metrics that are falling out of normal tolerance…

Depending on your location, it is virtually impossible to get any real metrics. A few years ago, inspired by some books I've read about nutrition, I tried to get a whole bloodwork done - and then another one after a few weeks of the new nutrition regime. The idea was to have a data-based approach to changing my life. My doctor was less than helpful ('We only do full bloodwork if there is a medical indication, no I wo…

> Startup idea, anyone?

There are a few of these in the USA especially the Bay Area. Hell you can even pay for a full check up that even includes an MRI. Last checked the full service was like ~$5-6k and that includes pretty much everything you could want to know.

I've also been told you can get the same work done in Korea for a fraction of the price if your willing to take a vacation.

Re: Reduced cancer mortality with daily Vitamin D intake

#136

Post by generalenvelope »

Lots of people here are assuming that supplementing vitamin D will "treat" a low level of it, which isn't necessarily true. The level might not change, but you also might care a lot less than you think about the level specifically. Many problems can cause the level to be low, and won't be affected by raising it. Highly recommend the Barbell Medicine podcast on Vitamin D: https://soundcloud.com/user-344313169/vitamin-d-mixdown-1

Re: Reduced cancer mortality with daily Vitamin D intake

#137

Post by kwhitefoot »

lynx23 wrote: post #85

It took me a long time, and virtually no help from outside, to discover that vitamin D effectively cures my winter depression. I was never really feeling good around that time of the year, but it wasn't problematic enough to actually do something about it. But when my gut started to revolt around that time too, I started to feel distinctly unwell. So I went to my doctor, who gave me an approintment with a nutrition s…

The usual rule in Norway is to take vitamin D in months that end in R. That is, all the time except the summer. Nothing specifically to do with SAD, just that in the winter you don't get enough sunshine.

Re: Reduced cancer mortality with daily Vitamin D intake

#138

Post by ipaddr »

jewayne wrote: post #125
nicenewtemp84 wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People are so indoctrinated they for some reason actually think most doctors want to help them. I assume they also trust their dealerships service advisor.

It's so much worse than you think. Almost ALL doctors want to help. It's system (in this case, the reimbursement system) that makes it impossible to help, even though they want to. The doctors themselves have far less agency than you think.

I would say they are the least caring group of society followed by nurses. Not their fault. When everyone around you is sick all of the time you have to turn off that part that cares or you will burn yourself out.

Yourself, family, friends, favourite waitress cares about you more than your doctor.

Re: Reduced cancer mortality with daily Vitamin D intake

#139

Post by cscheid »

anonymouskimmer wrote: post #77
cscheid wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, exactly. There's a real-life example of an author group who got sufficiently annoyed at a reviewer requesting an inappropriate subgroup analysis: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6... Reviewers asked for the subgroup analysis; authors said "no, this is statistically nonsense"; reviewers said "yes, but we'll reject the paper otherwise"; reviewers said "ok, but only if you let us also spl…

The two signs bracketing the summer months (I presume this was in the northern hemisphere?). That's a potentially interesting finding. > inappropriate subgroup analysis No subgroup is inappropriate unless you know all of the values of all of the parameters. But sure, the intent they tried to demonstrate (take all sub-group analyses with a grain of salt) is a good thing to remember. Edit: To whoever downvoted me, time…

> No subgroup is inappropriate unless you know all of the values of all of the parameters

I don't know how to put it less bluntly: you're incorrect.

> But sure, the intent they tried to demonstrate (take all sub-group analyses with a grain of salt)

That's not what they intended to demonstrate. They intended to demonstrate that you need a _reason_ to want to split, and that reason needs to be given _ahead_ of the analysis. If you see the results _and then choose_ a new data analysis (that includes new subgroup analyses), your procedure is no longer statistically sound.

This is a specifically bad statistical practice called HARKing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HARKing

Re: Reduced cancer mortality with daily Vitamin D intake

#140

Post by baristavibes »

DocTomoe wrote: post #121
dcow wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This (among other things) makes me wonder why we don't have better metrics and monitoring solutions for the human body. Your option is anecdotal self-diagnosis, or a full blood panel after seeing a doctor and convincing them that you need to be tested. It seems there's room for a product that monitors your health and sends you notifications when you need to address any metrics that are falling out of normal tolerance…

Depending on your location, it is virtually impossible to get any real metrics. A few years ago, inspired by some books I've read about nutrition, I tried to get a whole bloodwork done - and then another one after a few weeks of the new nutrition regime. The idea was to have a data-based approach to changing my life. My doctor was less than helpful ('We only do full bloodwork if there is a medical indication, no I wo…

"private" or "self-paid" lab blood tests are pretty common here, just across the border in Czech Republic, I'm surprised to find out they're unavailable in Germany, do you have to route every foreigner through a medical professional? Or is the catch that they won't do a "full" blood panel?
Post reply on HN