Reduced cancer mortality with daily Vitamin D intake • Hacker News Board

Re: Reduced cancer mortality with daily Vitamin D intake

#231

Post by lynx23 » Wed, May 10, 2023, 5:49 AM UTC

nradov wrote: post #198

robertlagrant wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But alas, it turns out you have to do your own studies to improve life expectency with our western medical system It's a shame this possibility wasn't suggested before to you, but I have never seen any evidence that western medicine isn't one of the primary drivers of global life expectancy increases.

Western medicine is one of the primary drivers of global life expectancy increases only though vaccines, antibiotics, and trauma care. Other than that it has had very little effect: we could eliminate all other forms of medical care and average life expectancy would decrease only marginally. Public sanitation and food safety enforcement have had much larger effects. Where western medicine has had larger effects is in…

Thanks for saying that, I couldn't agree more. If you break your leg, western mdeicine is great. For almost everything else, it fails pretty miserably because doctors have effectively no time to actually care for an individual. If it isn't done in 5 minutes, things are getting complicated.

Re: Reduced cancer mortality with daily Vitamin D intake

#232

Post by wesapien » Wed, May 10, 2023, 5:51 AM UTC

lm28469 wrote: post #160

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…

Half of the western world is overweight/obese (75%+ in the US), the vast majority of people are massively malnourished and under exercise The market for that is very small, most of the things that kill are known, the solutions are known, there is nothing cost effective, no magic pill Optimize for the basics, you have a long way to go before individual tests bring anything to the table. If you don't exercise vigorousl…

My idea of basics would be like you can't out exercise your eating habits. Don't have a sedentary life. Supplements might not be ideal as opposed to sourcing everything from food but it goes a long way.

Re: Reduced cancer mortality with daily Vitamin D intake

#233

Post by lynx23 » Wed, May 10, 2023, 5:56 AM UTC

jjeaff wrote: post #206

nicenewtemp84 wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you saying that the doctor, upon closer questioning simply flopped and gave bad medical advice to my friend when they told him that yes it's reasonable to expect to regain full shoulder straight again without surgery? Because if so maybe my friend should sue? What is this blanket statement of "shoulder surgery should not be delayed" based on?

Doctors will often change their recommendation if patients express different priorities than the doctor initially assumed. Some people's priorities are no surgery unless absolutely necessary.

"no surgery unless absolutely necessary" is becoming the default around here, because the number of hospital-acquired infections is skyrocketing in the last years. While there were absolutely no anecdotes before 2017, the number of people infected in the hospital in my circles has exploded since then. People are talking about it, and realising that going to the hospital has a real risk of making things even worse.

Re: Reduced cancer mortality with daily Vitamin D intake

#234

Post by interestica » Wed, May 10, 2023, 6:04 AM UTC

atombender wrote: post #119

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?

Your skin releases around 10,000 IU if you spend an hour outside in full sun in the summer. So that, at least, should be quite safe. This article from the Mayo Clinic argues that vitamin D toxicity has been vastly overstated. [1] [1] https://www.mayoclinicproceedings.org/article/S0025-6196%281...

Where's that 10000 iu data point from?

And what colour is "your skin"?

Re: Reduced cancer mortality with daily Vitamin D intake

#235

Post by dennis_jeeves1 » Wed, May 10, 2023, 6:29 AM UTC

generalenvelope wrote: post #136

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-…

Your's is the correct answer, in this case there is confusion between causation and correlation.

To make matters more confusing, vitamin D indeed produce positive results for the affiliation in the short term, for some cases.

Re: Reduced cancer mortality with daily Vitamin D intake

#236

Post by pbnjeh » Wed, May 10, 2023, 6:38 AM UTC

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…

Several years ago, I started supplementing with vitamin D (D3, by the way; there is a difference) due to a history of cancer on one side of the family. I wasn't expecting to feel anything. Within two days, my mood stabilized significantly. It took me about a week of first noticing this and then thinking about what had changed in my life, to reach the hypothesis that it was the vitamin D. That was when I started noticing and paying attention to reporting and comments regarding this effect.

It's significantly more effective than any pharmaceutical or other supplement I've taken with this purpose in mind.

And, like the parent comment, I had to discover it and figure it out on my own.

If I discontinue the vitamin D, the effect goes away. Except in the summer, if and only if I'm outside and getting plenty of sun exposure.

By the way, I think that initial dose was 1000 or 2000 IU, daily. Not an "extreme" dose, compared to some I hear about, but significantly more than the U.S. FDA's recommended daily allowance (RDA).

AS I understand it, the FDA's RDA was developed (decades ago) as basically the amount that prevents rickets disease.

These days, I take it together with some K2. Supposedly, the K2 helps keep calcium fixed in your bones; higher doses of vitamin D work to mobilize it, both weakening bones and causing calcium deposits where you don't want them. CAUTION: This is what I've heard from some medical professionals, but I can't vouch for it.

With vitamin D supplementation, as with most things, moderation and appropriate dosing are probably important. However, my OPINION based upon my experience is that the FDA's RDA is too low.

Re: Reduced cancer mortality with daily Vitamin D intake

#237

Post by lynx23 » Wed, May 10, 2023, 6:38 AM UTC

chii wrote: post #216

BeetleB wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but based on this case, it’s obvious the person isn’t getting enough sunlight, and they communicated that to the doctor, and so why not do a trial of something like vitamin d? Can we get to the specifics? How would you propose the doctor do it? Let's say the doctor prescribes a certain dosage per day. How will the doctor know it is helping this particular patient? How long should the trial continue before he sees r…

This is why most doctors don't start recommending such medication until it is proven to work. They cannot and don't want to be held liable for damages. For example, if it did turn out that prolonged vitamin D supplementation causes an unexpected issue, what then? Would the patient have been OK with that? Or would their response have been the exact opposite of what the OP was suggesting? Self-medication is acceptable,…

Liability, tell me about it. At the age of 7, I underwent an operation without knowledge or consent of my parents. A few weeks later, my remaining 20% eyesight was down to almost 0%. IOW, so that everyone understand: I was used as a subject for a medical experiment. And here you are, telling me that doctors will never do anything because they are so afraid? Sorry, you are living in a different world as I do... I hope you never enter mine.

Re: Reduced cancer mortality with daily Vitamin D intake

#238

Post by lynx23 » Wed, May 10, 2023, 6:52 AM UTC

hackermatic wrote: post #173

Arete314159 wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SSRI's make money, B12 shots and Vitamin D don't. Just a coincidence I'm sure.

Most SSRIs don't make money. I just ordered a 90-day supply of the generic version of my SSRI (actually an SNRI) for $45. And in looking it up, I realized that I overpaid because I went through my insurance, while GoodRx would get me the same pills from a local pharmacy for $20.

My D for a whole winter costs me €20. Strongly prefer that over any sort of "fucks-with-your-head"-drug.

Re: Reduced cancer mortality with daily Vitamin D intake

#239

Post by pbnjeh » Wed, May 10, 2023, 7:10 AM UTC

nradov wrote: post #198

robertlagrant wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But alas, it turns out you have to do your own studies to improve life expectency with our western medical system It's a shame this possibility wasn't suggested before to you, but I have never seen any evidence that western medicine isn't one of the primary drivers of global life expectancy increases.

Western medicine is one of the primary drivers of global life expectancy increases only though vaccines, antibiotics, and trauma care. Other than that it has had very little effect: we could eliminate all other forms of medical care and average life expectancy would decrease only marginally. Public sanitation and food safety enforcement have had much larger effects. Where western medicine has had larger effects is in…

Sanitation and hygiene, dental care, antibiotics, and vaccines.

In some cases, improved diet.

Those are, I believe, the biggest factors in increasing life expectancies.

Perhaps also pregnancy and infant care, getting 0 to 5 year olds past historically high death rates. And, sadly, an area (not the only one) where the U.S. has regressed significantly.

Re: Reduced cancer mortality with daily Vitamin D intake

#240

Post by technocratius » Wed, May 10, 2023, 8:50 AM UTC

SoftTalker wrote: post #42

AlecSchueler wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Overfishing is serious enough at this point that I'd rather take a small health risk than contribute to it.

A lot of fish you would buy at the supermarket is farm-raised. Especially catfish, salmon, and tilapia.

Unfortunately, a lot of farm-raised fish are fed smaller fish from natural ecosystems, effectively shifting but maintaining the overfishing problem.

If you care about omega-3 (you probably should) without contributing to overfishing (again, imho you probably should), get an algal-oil based supplement. Prices are pretty competitive nowadays.