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

Vitamin D reduces incidence and duration of colds in those with low levels

ijmpr.in

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 241 posts

Re: Vitamin D reduces incidence and duration of colds in those with low levels

#171

Post by trilogic »

mapontosevenths wrote: post #168
trilogic wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> It is in fact (by personal experience) essential for the health You might be right, but this study doesn't show that because it's a genuinely bad study. Someone serious should do a real study on it.

This was meant for Gwerbret (but he deleted the comment). Now is to whom may concern :) Standing by your words you think this paper is shady and you are questioning the work and results behind it. Moreover your comment somehow is on the very top it misleading the users or at least ridiculing the paper. Answering to you: It is indeed very much connected to the LEVELS of Vit D not the absence of it. You fail to understand and acknowledge the importance of the results (even though you already know and confirm the benefits of Vit D). Regulating the levels of it (keeping them higher then average) it prevents health issues by regulating many biological functions/pathways, raising the immunity and lifespan in general. This is the real cure which prevent incredibly terrible future health issues and suffering.

Edit: Just for this effort, this paper deserves Credit. Bravo.

Re: Vitamin D reduces incidence and duration of colds in those with low levels

#172

Post by johnisgood »

zahlman wrote: post #169
cj wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I took 10k iu via a multivitamin for a few months, and ended up with Vitamin D levels 5x higher than the maximum on the labcorp reference range. "Vitamin D toxicity" It took many months to get the levels back to normal. Vitamin D is one of those things that once you overdose, it takes many months for the levels to slowly come down after you stop supplementing. Be careful with Vitamin D! The downside to having high le…

> An excess of vitamin D causes abnormally high blood concentrations of calcium, which can cause overcalcification of soft tissues, including arteries and kidneys. Symptoms appear several months after excessive doses of vitamin D are administered. A mutation of the CYP24A1 gene can lead to a reduction in the degradation of vitamin D and thus to vitamin toxicity without high oral intake (see Vitamin D § Excess). > Tre…

> An excess of vitamin D causes abnormally high blood concentrations of calcium

That is what supplementing K2 with D3 is for, too.

Re: Vitamin D reduces incidence and duration of colds in those with low levels

#173

Post by patel011393 »

Take it from an academic like me that peer review in just over a month is rare and a sign of low-quality editorial work at the journal (the exceptions would be the most open, progressive journals like PCI and similar).

The formatting/style and peer review history alone are enough for me to doubt this. Of course, the other users' points about study design and lack of transparency make it even harder to trust the claims.

Re: Vitamin D reduces incidence and duration of colds in those with low levels

#174

Post by [deleted] »

keybored wrote: post #157
unionjack22 wrote: post #38

Vitamin D, red light therapy, insulin attenuating response of a walk, immunological benefit of allergen exposure, cognitive noise reduction and rest response of walks in forests. Man keeps trying to bring the outdoors inside.

How do I bring outdoors to the wage slave office? And how do I bring light to the pre-work and afterwork when there is no sun at those times? The practical man uses technology to offset the prison built for him. The hapless enabler farms “pithy” HN points in his LED-lit room.

[deleted]

Re: Vitamin D reduces incidence and duration of colds in those with low levels

#175

Post by 0xbadcafebee »

cj wrote: post #127
johnisgood wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

50 IU is nothing. 3000 IU is something. I have MS, so I need to supplement at least 10k IU. And yeah, it does not absorb well unless you eat some fat.

I took 10k iu via a multivitamin for a few months, and ended up with Vitamin D levels 5x higher than the maximum on the labcorp reference range. "Vitamin D toxicity" It took many months to get the levels back to normal. Vitamin D is one of those things that once you overdose, it takes many months for the levels to slowly come down after you stop supplementing. Be careful with Vitamin D! The downside to having high le…

Are you aware of the history of setting acceptable levels of Vitamin D? Basically, 100 years ago, people experimented with cures for TB by giving patients one to two orders of magnitude higher dosage than the "vitamin D toxicity" levels reported today. Like insanely high numbers. Strangely enough, most people did recover from the TB, but they kept getting the treatments anyway, and that in a few instances led to bone issues. So for some reason that doesn't seem to be documented, they set the "safe level" of vitamin D to be something like two orders of magnitude lower than the level that actually caused issues. And that level has never been changed.

All of the studies I've seen around Vitamin D supplementation has shown that the "safe level" reported today is way, way lower than it should be. People appear to be just fine taking 10k IUs for months on end, even 7 years in one study. I think what we're learning is that the "safe level" is a very wide spectrum; some people could possibly be harmed from a low level, whereas some people are perfectly fine at a very high level.

Re: Vitamin D reduces incidence and duration of colds in those with low levels

#176

Post by bluGill »

schuyler2d wrote: post #161
bluGill wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many animals can. There are a gene for it, humans don't have it. There is a lot of speculation as to why, but nothing really stands out (possibly just random chance - if you eat enough there is no advantage to keeping the gene and in turn no loss from losing it. However I'm unable to rule out other possibilities) https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3145266/ is a really interesting survey of the issue across many…

From the article: > Another argument supporting the suggestion that species which have lost their GLO gene were under no selective pressure to keep it, is that all species which have lost their GLO gene have very different diets but all of them have diets rich in vitamin C What would a diet poor in vitamin C be considering that "everything else" makes it? I guess root vegetables? It feels like, if anything, this woul…

That is probably a question for a nutritionist not me. My understanding is Grains, root vegetables, and meat are all low in vitamin C. Likely other things as well. But I'm not a nutritionist (I've read enough that I think I'm right here, but not enough to state it with confidence), so take the above with plenty of salt.

Re: Vitamin D reduces incidence and duration of colds in those with low levels

#177

Post by switchbak »

IAmBroom wrote: post #134
yadaeno wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Allergy shots work very well.

Privileged comment. Walks in a controlled greenhouse without allergenic pollinators also work, but the poor can't easily access either in the US.

Privileged commenter. Not everyone has access to a cell phone or the internet, so they can't respond to your statement. Not to mention some people have bad dyslexia or eyesight issues. We could play this game forever, and we'd all be dumber for it.

Walking in a forest is something that much of humanity can do, and it's not a particular privilege (in the pejorative modern sense) - even if there are a small number of people that have issues that would prevent this.

Re: Vitamin D reduces incidence and duration of colds in those with low levels

#179

Post by mwambua »

hinkley wrote: post #109
nickff wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I find your comment enjoyably pithy, in the case of vitamin D, many humans are currently living at latitudes which they are not suited to (skin being too dark to generate enough vitamin D given the insolation), and eating diets which do not provide them with sufficient amounts of it (the carnivore diets of Inuits and similar groups being a good contrast).

It’s criminal that the US sent Somalian refuges to live in Minnesota. Those are some seriously brown people in the land of no vitamin D. Pretty big population in Seattle as well, which is worse due to cloud cover.

It's only criminal if they aren't provided with the education/information they need to live healthy lives (which is possible with the right diet/supplements).

Re: Vitamin D reduces incidence and duration of colds in those with low levels

#180

Post by johnisgood »

0xbadcafebee wrote: post #175
cj wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I took 10k iu via a multivitamin for a few months, and ended up with Vitamin D levels 5x higher than the maximum on the labcorp reference range. "Vitamin D toxicity" It took many months to get the levels back to normal. Vitamin D is one of those things that once you overdose, it takes many months for the levels to slowly come down after you stop supplementing. Be careful with Vitamin D! The downside to having high le…

Are you aware of the history of setting acceptable levels of Vitamin D? Basically, 100 years ago, people experimented with cures for TB by giving patients one to two orders of magnitude higher dosage than the "vitamin D toxicity" levels reported today. Like insanely high numbers. Strangely enough, most people did recover from the TB, but they kept getting the treatments anyway, and that in a few instances led to bone…

Yes, and many people are fine with 10k IU for months because their body just does not absorb it well.

And some people, like those with MS (such as I) need to take more than usual. Someone I know has MS and takes 20k IU and gets regularly tested.

Post reply on HN