Studies show an aggressive vitamin D campaign could have prevented nearly all COVID deaths

WeR0206

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2014
18,384
23,370
1
2020evidence.org
" . . . The peer-reviewed study, published in the journal PLoS ONE, looked at vitamin D levels before a person contracted COVID-19 and the disease’s severity and mortality.

Researchers from Azrieli Faculty of Medicine of Bar-Ilan University and the Galilee Medical Center found that patients with vitamin D deficiency (less than 20 ng/mL) were 14 times more likely to have a severe or critical case of COVID-19, compared to those with levels of vitamin D at more than 40 ng/mL. "

https://www.theepochtimes.com/vitam...-to-severe-deadly-covid-19-study_4256464.html
 
  • Like
Reactions: john4psu

The Spin Meister

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2012
22,446
24,798
1
An altered state
" . . . The peer-reviewed study, published in the journal PLoS ONE, looked at vitamin D levels before a person contracted COVID-19 and the disease’s severity and mortality.

Researchers from Azrieli Faculty of Medicine of Bar-Ilan University and the Galilee Medical Center found that patients with vitamin D deficiency (less than 20 ng/mL) were 14 times more likely to have a severe or critical case of COVID-19, compared to those with levels of vitamin D at more than 40 ng/mL. "

https://www.theepochtimes.com/vitam...-to-severe-deadly-covid-19-study_4256464.html
Could this be the reason why obese people are at a much higher risk?

I am not well versed on vitamin D metabolism so maybe some one could help me out. But I do know that Vit D is a fat soluble vitamin and can build up in fatty tissues. So does the D in obese people get locked up in fatty tissues and loses its immune system effectiveness? Do they need higher D intake to compensate?

And when people lose weight they seem to fair better if infected with Wuhan, even if the weight loss is a small percentage of body weight. Does the process of losing weight free up D and store the immune system?
 

rumble_lion

Well-Known Member
Aug 7, 2011
21,591
5,030
1
" . . . The peer-reviewed study, published in the journal PLoS ONE, looked at vitamin D levels before a person contracted COVID-19 and the disease’s severity and mortality.

Researchers from Azrieli Faculty of Medicine of Bar-Ilan University and the Galilee Medical Center found that patients with vitamin D deficiency (less than 20 ng/mL) were 14 times more likely to have a severe or critical case of COVID-19, compared to those with levels of vitamin D at more than 40 ng/mL. "

https://www.theepochtimes.com/vitam...-to-severe-deadly-covid-19-study_4256464.html

Yeah, you don't want to be deficient in vitamin D. I take 2,500 iu a day.

Other factors with vitamin D.

In addition, since vitamin D is fat-soluble, people with higher amounts of body fat will 'sequester' vitamin D in fat cells, leading to lower amounts circulating in the blood. Due to this, people with obesity typically need higher amounts of vitamin D to maintain adequate levels and/or to correct a deficiency.​
Background: Whether dark skin produces less vitamin D after UVB radiation than fair skin remains controversial.​
Objective: To compare 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25-(OH)-D] levels after a single UVB exposure in fair (phototype II-III) and black-skinned (phototype VI) volunteers.​
Methods: Fair-skinned volunteers (n = 20, 4 males/16 females, mean age: 23.2 years) and black-skinned (n = 11, 6 males/5 females, mean age: 23.8 years) received a single total body UVB exposure (0.022 J/cm(2)). The 25-(OH)-D levels were measured on days 0, 2 and 6.​
Results: On day 0, all volunteers were severely vitamin D deficient. On day 2, 25-(OH)-D levels of fair-skinned volunteers increased significantly (median: 11.9-13.3 ng/ml, p < 0.0001), but not in black-skinned people (median: 8.60-8.55 ng/ml, p = 0.843). Again, on day 6, 25-(OH)-D levels of fair-skinned volunteers increased significantly (median: 11.9-14.3 ng/ml, p < 0.0001), but not in black-skinned people (median: 8.60-9.57 ng/ml, p = 0.375).​
Conclusion: This study suggests that skin pigmentation negatively influences vitamin D synthesis.​
People over age 50 have an increased risk of vitamin D deficiency and the risk increases with age. As people age they lose some of their ability to synthesize vitamin D from sunlight. Vitamin D also needs to be activated in the kidney before it can be used by the body and this function also decreases with age.​
 

The Spin Meister

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2012
22,446
24,798
1
An altered state
Yeah, you don't want to be deficient in vitamin D. I take 2,500 iu a day.

Other factors with vitamin D.

In addition, since vitamin D is fat-soluble, people with higher amounts of body fat will 'sequester' vitamin D in fat cells, leading to lower amounts circulating in the blood. Due to this, people with obesity typically need higher amounts of vitamin D to maintain adequate levels and/or to correct a deficiency.​
Background: Whether dark skin produces less vitamin D after UVB radiation than fair skin remains controversial.​
Objective: To compare 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25-(OH)-D] levels after a single UVB exposure in fair (phototype II-III) and black-skinned (phototype VI) volunteers.​
Methods: Fair-skinned volunteers (n = 20, 4 males/16 females, mean age: 23.2 years) and black-skinned (n = 11, 6 males/5 females, mean age: 23.8 years) received a single total body UVB exposure (0.022 J/cm(2)). The 25-(OH)-D levels were measured on days 0, 2 and 6.​
Results: On day 0, all volunteers were severely vitamin D deficient. On day 2, 25-(OH)-D levels of fair-skinned volunteers increased significantly (median: 11.9-13.3 ng/ml, p < 0.0001), but not in black-skinned people (median: 8.60-8.55 ng/ml, p = 0.843). Again, on day 6, 25-(OH)-D levels of fair-skinned volunteers increased significantly (median: 11.9-14.3 ng/ml, p < 0.0001), but not in black-skinned people (median: 8.60-9.57 ng/ml, p = 0.375).​
Conclusion: This study suggests that skin pigmentation negatively influences vitamin D synthesis.​
People over age 50 have an increased risk of vitamin D deficiency and the risk increases with age. As people age they lose some of their ability to synthesize vitamin D from sunlight. Vitamin D also needs to be activated in the kidney before it can be used by the body and this function also decreases with age.​
Wow, you answered that as I was typing my question! Nice job, rumble!
 

rumble_lion

Well-Known Member
Aug 7, 2011
21,591
5,030
1
Could this be the reason why obese people are a much higher risk?

I am not well versed on vitamin D metabolism so maybe some one could help me out. But I do know that Vit D is a fat soluble vitamin and can build up in fatty tissues. So does the D in obese people get locked up in fatty tissues and loses its immune system effectiveness? Do they need higher D intake to compensate?

And when people lose weight they seem to fair better if infected with Wuhan, even if the weight loss is a small percentage of body weight. Does the process of losing weight free up D and store the immune system?


I am not well versed on vitamin D metabolism so maybe some one could help me out. But I do know that Vit D is a fat soluble vitamin and can build up in fatty tissues. So does the D in obese people get locked up in fatty tissues and loses its immune system effectiveness? Do they need higher D intake to compensate?

Yes. but it's not the only factor. Age, skin color and the amount of sun you receive also are factors. In other words it's probably just best to take a supplement and call it a day.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Spin Meister

WeR0206

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2014
18,384
23,370
1
2020evidence.org
When the patient has covid bring them to a tanning salon to get the vitamin D.
If the corrupt assholes running our govt made it a point to inform people about proper vitamin D3 levels hardly anyone would get severe covid you asshat. It can be used as a therapeutic but it’s mainly a preventative measure. Broad spectrum protection with a fraction of the risk associated with a novel shot that has no long term safety data.
 

HartfordLlion

Well-Known Member
Sep 28, 2001
21,858
14,729
1
No no no, we can’t be having people take some simple vitamin D3 supplements, they must take a novel shot with no long term safety data instead…yeah that’s the answer!

Meta-analysis:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8541492 (COVID-19 Mortality Risk Correlates Inversely with Vitamin D3 Status, and a Mortality Rate Close to Zero Could Theoretically Be Achieved at 50 ng/mL 25(OH)D3: Results of a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis)

Good summary of recent studies:

“What if we could simply have advised everyone last March to supplement with vitamin D (and active forms of D for those with absorption issues)? An endless stream of academic research demonstrates that not only would such an approach have worked much better than the vaccines, but rather than coming with sundry known and unknown negative side effects, it would have induced immeasurable positive side effects in the population for an array of other health concerns.

I recently changed doctors in search of a physician who actually follows science rather than political protocols from government and Big Pharma. My wife was searching through my medical records and found that eight years ago, my D level was just 18 ng/mL, well below the cutoff for insufficiency. Yet my former doctor never informed me of it or flagged it as a concern. Fast-forward to today after months of supplementing, thanks to the advice of people like Dr. Ryan Cole, and my level is at 67. This likely means that when the pandemic hit last March, my levels were still woefully low.

According to a new German study, the difference between a level of 18 and one over 50 is the difference between life and death. Why has this education not gotten out to the public, especially now that we are in the winter season, when there is essentially no natural vitamin D from sunlight above the 37th parallel? Or is the obfuscation by design?

With studies having shown zero correlation between lockdowns, masks, and vaccines and better COVID outcomes, there are now 142 studiesvouching for the near-perfect correlation between higher vitamin D levels and better outcomes in COVID patients. It is likely the area of COVID-19 treatment research that has the most data behind it. However, a recent German study stands out from all of them because it comes the closest to proving this ironclad correlation to be causation.

Not only did the German researchers find a linear relationship between vitamin D levels and mortality from COVID, they found essentially zero morbidity for those with a D level above 50 ng/mL. The reason this study is so important relative to the dozens of others tracking D levels with COVID outcomes is because it measured the levels months before the patients got COVID as well as after the infection onset. “In most studies, the vitamin D level was determined several days after the onset of infection; therefore, a low vitamin D level may be the result and not the trigger of the course of infection,” note the authors.

This study, however, followed 1,601 hospitalized patients, 784 who had their vitamin D levels measured within a day after admission and 817 whose vitamin D levels were known before infection. As an adjunct to this sample, researchers also analyzed the long-term average vitamin D3 levels documented for 19 countries. The observed median vitamin D value over all collected study cohorts was 23.2 ng/mL, which is considered insufficient. The results were remarkable.

“At a threshold level of 30 ng/mL, mortality decreases considerably,” found the authors. “In addition, our analysis shows that the correlation for the combined datasets intersects the axis at approximately 50 ng/mL, which suggests that this vitamin D3 blood level may prevent any excess mortality. These findings are supported not only by a large infection study, showing the same optimum but also by the natural levels observed in traditional people living in the region where humanity originated from that were able to fight down most (not all) infections in most (not all) individuals.”

Based on these findings, they conclude that people should test their blood levels and supplement to get their levels over 50. Studies have already shownthat one is 14 times more likely to die from COVID with vitamin D deficiency

The reality is that most people’s levels are below 30 and many are closer to zero, especially among the elderly population. It is beyond criminal that 20 months into this endeavor there has not been a national campaign percolating down to primary care physicians to test and supplement vitamin D levels accordingly. Think of the numerous benefits of vitamin D — from a healthier immune system and stronger bones to decreased risk for heart attack and cancer — as opposed to the risks of so many of the other things we are harnessing to “fight” this virus. Why on earth would vitamin D not become the new vaccine when it provides more protection against the virus than any vaccine?

What is particularly scandalous is that the authors found that black people living in northern countries have lower vitamin D levels in general, and yet there has been no governmental push to raise awareness of their vitamin D deficiency. Instead, there is a relentless effort to shame them into taking shots that are unsafe and ineffective.

As the authors explain, the main cause of death from COVID stems from a “cytokine storm” when the body’s immune system releases too many toxic cytokines as part of the inflammatory response to the virus. Vitamin D is the key regulator of those cells, and the insufficient amount of D is nearly synonymous with a greater risk for a cytokine storm. In many ways, a cytokine storm is literally the outcome of vitamin D deficiency.

We’ve had 20 months to get our levels over 50, and certainly at least over 30. I had my levels increase by approximately 50 ngs/mL in a half year. Had the public been doing this at the same time, most deaths could have been avoided. Those with absorption problems could have been given the active form of D – either calcifediol or calcitriol – to raise their levels, bypassing the liver’s metabolic process very quickly. Studies have shown that almost anyone hospitalized with low levels but given the active form of D did not progress to the ICU thereafter.

A new study from Turkish researchers found that even a rapid regimen of regular vitamin D3 with the aim of getting people’s levels over 30 was wildly successful compared to people without supplementation. They found that those who used their treatment protocol to get their levels over 30 — even if they had comorbidities — were much better off than those without comorbidities who didn’t supplement. “Our treatment protocol increased the serum 25OHD levels significantly to above 30 ng/mL within two weeks,” concluded the authors. “COVID-19 cases (no comorbidities, no vitamin D treatment, 25OHD <30 ng/mL) had 1.9-fold increased risk of having hospitalization longer than 8 days compared with the cases with comorbidities and vitamin D treatment.”


Hence, if one believes government can violate human rights and place mandates on one’s body to get a job, if the government made a rule that you have to get your D level over 50 in order to get a job, at least it would be following the science. Not only are people with high D levels better off personally, unlike vaccinated individuals with low D levels, they are much less likely to affect other people by spreading the disease because they have lower viral loads. A meta-analysis of 23 published studies containing 11,901 participants found that one who is vitamin D-deficient was 3.3 times more likely to get infected with SARS-CoV-2 than one who is not deficient.

As a nation, we have been willing to harm our children, society, economy, mental health, and physical health with masks, lockdowns, shots, and experimental therapeutics that have zero or limited proven efficacy. Why would we not try an approach that comes with positive, rather than negative, side effects for our whole health? Perhaps the answer lies in what Big Pharma doesn’t want us to know about the benefits of high-dose vitamin D — not just for COVID but for other ailments they rely upon for their existence. All the political policies flow downstream from there.”

50 ngs/mL how does that relate to IU or mcg which is on most D3 bottles?
 
  • Like
Reactions: bourbon n blues

The Spin Meister

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2012
22,446
24,798
1
An altered state
That's just a stupid comment.
Methinks it a joke. But a joke with some truth to it.....maybe. People who spend an hour or more outside have higher Vit D because the sunlight stimulates the skin to make it. Do know for sure but since the tanning booth lights cause the skin to tan they probably also cause Vit D synthesis.

Dr Malarkey says that Nov through April the sun is too low and the days too short to stimulate Vit D synthesis so people should take Vit D no matter how much time they spend outside.
 

bourbon n blues

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2019
17,207
19,463
1
Methinks it a joke. But a joke with some truth to it.....maybe. People who spend an hour or more outside have higher Vit D because the sunlight stimulates the skin to make it. Do know for sure but since the tanning booth lights cause the skin to tan they probably also cause Vit D synthesis.

Dr Malarkey says that Nov through April the sun is too low and the days too short to stimulate Vit D synthesis so people should take Vit D no matter how much time they spend outside.
I don't give him that much credit.
 

bourbon n blues

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2019
17,207
19,463
1
There is no profits to be made pushing prevention. Are entire system is built on for profit disease treatment.
It's not the system, it's the consumer. People don't want to do the work. I understand prevention more than most, and when I say most near the the top of the charts .
I was arguing with family doctors about weight training forty plus years ago and they knew they didn't know what they were talking about. I did the work for my health so much that my mri last month showed no arthritis in my knees( tore a meniscus dragging a weight sled) at age 58.
I've dialed it back after that injury but I've squatted over 500lbs and deadlifted over 600 for ten years prior. I was stretching before yoga was cool. I was going to get soft tissue work snd seeing s chiropractor since college..
I listened to them . I went against the grain. Most people ate too F ing lazy. It's your body take care of it yourself.
 

HartfordLlion

Well-Known Member
Sep 28, 2001
21,858
14,729
1
It's not the system, it's the consumer. People don't want to do the work. I understand prevention more than most, and when I say most near the the top of the charts .
I was arguing with family doctors about weight training forty plus years ago and they knew they didn't know what they were talking about. I did the work for my health so much that my mri last month showed no arthritis in my knees( tore a meniscus dragging a weight sled) at age 58.
I've dialed it back after that injury but I've squatted over 500lbs and deadlifted over 600 for ten years prior. I was stretching before yoga was cool. I was going to get soft tissue work snd seeing s chiropractor since college..
I listened to them . I went against the grain. Most people ate too F ing lazy. It's your body take care of it yourself.

I wouldn't say doctors don't see the benefits of weight training. My mom fell and fractured her back. The PT they gave her was mostly light weight training. Between the pain and being 88 yrs old she had real issues just getting off the chair and position herself with her walker, just no arm/shoulder strength. Trouble is it is too little to late. My father in law had the same issues.

IMO, you need to do some type of weight bearing exercises just in case you have to do simple things a getting out a chair after you have an injury. The older you get the more important it is.
 

rumble_lion

Well-Known Member
Aug 7, 2011
21,591
5,030
1
It's not the system, it's the consumer. People don't want to do the work. I understand prevention more than most, and when I say most near the the top of the charts .
I was arguing with family doctors about weight training forty plus years ago and they knew they didn't know what they were talking about. I did the work for my health so much that my mri last month showed no arthritis in my knees( tore a meniscus dragging a weight sled) at age 58.
I've dialed it back after that injury but I've squatted over 500lbs and deadlifted over 600 for ten years prior. I was stretching before yoga was cool. I was going to get soft tissue work snd seeing s chiropractor since college..
I listened to them . I went against the grain. Most people ate too F ing lazy. It's your body take care of it yourself.

It's not the system, it's the consumer. People don't want to do the work. I understand prevention more than most, and when I say most near the the top of the charts .

Couldn't it be both? Drs. get little if any training on diet and exercise. The whole treatment agenda has been taken over by corporations. They pay for most of the health research studies done now and those studies pretty much dictate care guidelines. The stuff they are researching is surprise, drugs the companies want to sell in order to make a profit. Reading a book right now - "Sickening" by John Abramson.

One thing you want to make sure you minimize your chances of needing to use the health care system. Sad but true. For myself I was able to make a dietary change that resulted in losing 20 pounds and lowering my cholesterol enough to stop taking medication for it. I could have a heart attack tomorrow but at least I'm doing everything I can to minimize the chances.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Spin Meister

bourbon n blues

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2019
17,207
19,463
1
Listen , doctors read the room and almost ate hospital/ health organization employees. DIY. Change the system by changing yourself .
 

The Spin Meister

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2012
22,446
24,798
1
An altered state
I wouldn't say doctors don't see the benefits of weight training. My mom fell and fractured her back. The PT they gave her was mostly light weight training. Between the pain and being 88 yrs old she had real issues just getting off the chair and position herself with her walker, just no arm/shoulder strength. Trouble is it is too little to late. My father in law had the same issues.

IMO, you need to do some type of weight bearing exercises just in case you have to do simple things a getting out a chair after you have an injury. The older you get the more important it is.
If she is still capable keep her doing light weights. Will take time but it will help.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: bourbon n blues

bourbon n blues

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2019
17,207
19,463
1
It's not the system, it's the consumer. People don't want to do the work. I understand prevention more than most, and when I say most near the the top of the charts .

Couldn't it be both? Drs. get little if any training on diet and exercise. The whole treatment agenda has been taken over by corporations. They pay for most of the health research studies done now and those studies pretty much dictate care guidelines. The stuff they are researching is surprise, drugs the companies want to sell in order to make a profit. Reading a book right now - "Sickening" by John Abramson.

One thing you want to make sure you minimize your chances of needing to use the health care system. Sad but true. For myself I was able to make a dietary change that resulted in losing 20 pounds and lowering my cholesterol enough to stop taking medication for it. I could have a heart attack tomorrow but at least I'm doing everything I can to minimize the chances.
Listen, I can be caustic . But I applaud anyone who takes the steps. Take care of yourself.
When I say I tell doctors what we're going to do I am serious.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jjw165

bourbon n blues

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2019
17,207
19,463
1
I wouldn't say doctors don't see the benefits of weight training. My mom fell and fractured her back. The PT they gave her was mostly light weight training. Between the pain and being 88 yrs old she had real issues just getting off the chair and position herself with her walker, just no arm/shoulder strength. Trouble is it is too little to late. My father in law had the same issues.

IMO, you need to do some type of weight bearing exercises just in case you have to do simple things a getting out a chair after you have an injury. The older you get the more important it is.
I was 15, it was 1978. And 1981. And my life since .
 

The Spin Meister

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2012
22,446
24,798
1
An altered state
It's not the system, it's the consumer. People don't want to do the work. I understand prevention more than most, and when I say most near the the top of the charts .

Couldn't it be both? Drs. get little if any training on diet and exercise. The whole treatment agenda has been taken over by corporations. They pay for most of the health research studies done now and those studies pretty much dictate care guidelines. The stuff they are researching is surprise, drugs the companies want to sell in order to make a profit. Reading a book right now - "Sickening" by John Abramson.

One thing you want to make sure you minimize your chances of needing to use the health care system. Sad but true. For myself I was able to make a dietary change that resulted in losing 20 pounds and lowering my cholesterol enough to stop taking medication for it. I could have a heart attack tomorrow but at least I'm doing everything I can to minimize the chances.
Good for you. Read Dr Mark Hyman from the Cleveland Clinic. Or watch a couple YouTube videos he did. Fantastic stuff, great for your health and avoiding the sick care system we have.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jjw165

rumble_lion

Well-Known Member
Aug 7, 2011
21,591
5,030
1
Listen, I can be caustic . But I applaud anyone who takes the steps. Take care of yourself.
When I say I tell doctors what we're going to do I am serious.

Listen, I can be caustic . But I applaud anyone who takes the steps. Take care of yourself.

Agreed.

When I say I tell doctors what we're going to do I am serious.

You get to talk to a doctor? Most of them are working for hmo's or whatever and it appears to me they are allocated 10 minutes per patient. Just enough time to gather the symptoms to determine what prescriptions are needed.
 

KnightWhoSaysNit

Well-Known Member
Jul 19, 2010
7,996
7,267
1
I've dialed it back after that injury but I've squatted over 500lbs and deadlifted over 600 for ten years prior.

There is no bed in my master suite. Instead, it has rubber flooring and an Inspire FT2. You would love it -- an integrated Smith Bar. My gym also has a 45 degree back extension bench, a treadmill for the wife, and a big screen TV hooked to a powered sound system.

The public gym is too far away. This significant investment is an incentive to use it.

I am not a bulk lifter. For now I train with high reps to get strength with minimal size and more flexibility. (Golf).

Your squat and dead lift numbers are out of range for this system -- quite a bit beyond my capabilities too -- but I think for most people it is great. Then again you probably don't golf.

The guy who just bought the house closest to mine also has an FT2. It's a second home so the equipment will stay at his primary residence for now.

It's worth it to have something like this. You can be doing something at the house and train at the same time. My gym is adjacent to the kitchen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jjw165

WeR0206

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2014
18,384
23,370
1
2020evidence.org
Bump. Instead of a novel vaccine with no longer term safety data folks could just take some Vitamin D3 (4,000 IU's/day is what this study used):


Objective​

. To determine the efficacy and safety of VD-supplementation in the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection in highly exposed individuals.

Methods​

. A double-blind, parallel, randomized trial was conducted. Frontline healthcare workers from four hospitals in Mexico City, who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 infection, were enrolled between July 15 and December 30, 2020. Participants were randomly assigned to receive 4,000 IU VD (VDG) or placebo (PG) daily for 30 d. RT-PCR tests were taken at baseline and repeated if COVID-19 manifestations appeared during follow-up. Serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 and antibody tests were measured at baseline and at day 45. Per-protocol and intention-to-treat analysis were conducted.

Results​

. Of 321 recruited subjects, 94 VDG and 98 PG completed follow-up. SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was lower in VDG than in PG (6.4 vs. 24.5%, p <0.001). The risk of acquiring SARS-CoV-2 infection was lower in the VDG than in the PG (RR: 0.23; 95% CI: 0.09–0.55) and was associated with an increment in serum levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 (RR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.82–0.93), independently of VD deficiency. No significant adverse events were identified.

Conclusions​

. Our results suggest that VD-supplementation in highly exposed individuals prevents SARS-CoV-2 infection without serious AEs and regardless of VD status.
 

KnightWhoSaysNit

Well-Known Member
Jul 19, 2010
7,996
7,267
1
Bump. Instead of a novel vaccine with no longer term safety data folks could just take some Vitamin D3 (4,000 IU's/day is what this study used):


Objective​

. To determine the efficacy and safety of VD-supplementation in the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection in highly exposed individuals.

Methods​

. A double-blind, parallel, randomized trial was conducted. Frontline healthcare workers from four hospitals in Mexico City, who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 infection, were enrolled between July 15 and December 30, 2020. Participants were randomly assigned to receive 4,000 IU VD (VDG) or placebo (PG) daily for 30 d. RT-PCR tests were taken at baseline and repeated if COVID-19 manifestations appeared during follow-up. Serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 and antibody tests were measured at baseline and at day 45. Per-protocol and intention-to-treat analysis were conducted.

Results​

. Of 321 recruited subjects, 94 VDG and 98 PG completed follow-up. SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was lower in VDG than in PG (6.4 vs. 24.5%, p <0.001). The risk of acquiring SARS-CoV-2 infection was lower in the VDG than in the PG (RR: 0.23; 95% CI: 0.09–0.55) and was associated with an increment in serum levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 (RR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.82–0.93), independently of VD deficiency. No significant adverse events were identified.

Conclusions​

. Our results suggest that VD-supplementation in highly exposed individuals prevents SARS-CoV-2 infection without serious AEs and regardless of VD status.

Some speculate that viruses are worse in the winter because people spend more time indoors in closer proximity to others. I am wondering if it's more about the loss of sun exposure.
 

WeR0206

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2014
18,384
23,370
1
2020evidence.org
Some speculate that viruses are worse in the winter because people spend more time indoors in closer proximity to others. I am wondering if it's more about the loss of sun exposure.
It's probably a combination of things but getting less sun in the winter and therefore less vitamin D is definitely one of the main reasons.