http://vitalplan.com/blog/why-you-may-need-more-vitamin-d-especially-now?

Why You May Need More Vitamin D — Especially Now

Why You May Need More Vitamin D — Especially Now

By Dr. Bill Rawls Posted 06-30-2020

Vitamin D has gotten a lot of attention in the past several years. Maybe you’ve heard how common it is to have low levels. Or perhaps you’ve heard the reports linking a D deficiency to various health risks and conditions. Now it’s in the news again as researchers work to figure out if vitamin D may play a role in COVID-19 outcomes.

So does that mean you should be getting more? Here’s what to know about this important nutrient and ways it can help keep you healthy.

Why You Need Vitamin D

While we humans easily get many of the vitamins and nutrients we need from healthy, whole foods, vitamin D is the exception. It’s often called “the sunshine vitamin,” because the main way we get it (outside of supplementation) is by making it when our skin is exposed to UV light. Otherwise, D is similar to other nutrients and vitamins in that it plays an essential role in ensuring cells can function properly.

Ayurvedic pills as healthy lifestyle symbol. Vitamin capsule background

Let me explain. Vitamins are generally known as cofactors: They act as a key piece or component of the complex biological machinery that allows each cell in the body to perform its specific function the way it’s supposed to. Vitamin D also acts as a chemical messenger that relays crucial signals to cells and various systems.

While vitamin D is important for many types of cells and functions throughout the body, there are two main areas where it’s especially vital:

1. Vitamin D Allows the Body to Absorb Calcium.

We all need calcium for strong bones as well as for our nervous system, and it’s pretty easy to get the calcium your body requires by eating a healthy diet and/or taking supplements. But without adequate vitamin D, it wouldn’t matter how much calcium you consume — your body could not take in the mineral from your gut nor maintain steady calcium levels in your blood.

Doctor in office holding x-rays of a hand and wrist

When you aren’t absorbing or getting enough calcium, the body ends up stealing the calcium that’s stored in your bones. That leaves your bones weak — and you vulnerable to fractures.

Studies have long shown that low levels of vitamin D in the blood increases the risk of fractures in older adults. What’s more, additional research suggests that taking vitamin D supplements along with calcium may help reduce fractures in people over age 65, especially women.

2. Vitamin D Helps Regulate Immune Function.

Virtually all types of immune cells have vitamin D receptors, and the vitamin is known to help control the immune response in ways that may both enhance immunityand potentially guard against autoimmune diseases. For example, vitamin D helps regulate the activity of various types of immune system cells — white blood cells, B cells, T cells, monocytes — in ways that decrease the production of inflammatory cytokines (proteins secreted by the immune system) while increasing anti-inflammatory cytokines.

white blood cells attacking microbe in blood stream

In other words, healthy vitamin D levels help promote a proper inflammatory and immune response. In that way, it helps mitigate or prevent some of the potential damage that might otherwise be caused by inflammation or an improper immune response (as is the case with autoimmune disorders).

This regulatory role is one potential factor in why low vitamin D levels are linked to autoimmune diseases such as multiple sclerosis and type-1 diabetes, as well as improved immunity against viruses, including respiratory pathogens and the flu. For example, research suggests that low levels of vitamin D may increase the risk of developing MS by around 40%. Conversely, other research finds that higher levels of the vitamin is linked to lower disease activity and progression.

As far as general immunity is concerned, one study found that adults with low levels of vitamin D were more likely to have reported recently having a cold, cough, or upper respiratory infection. It’s also been suggested that increased sun exposure during warmer months may be one reason colds and the flu are less common in summer than in the winter.

The Vitamin D and COVID-19 Connection

The new coronavirus infects the upper respiratory system and causes much of its damage by triggering an immune system overreaction — it can unleash what’s called a “cytokine storm” that kills healthy cells and damages healthy tissue. So it would make sense that vitamin D’s regulatory powers might be helpful. However, as of now, the research is mixed and there’s still a lot we don’t know about the virus, its effects, and the potential role of vitamin D.

For example, one rapid review published in early May concluded there was no evidence suggesting a vitamin D deficiency left people more prone to infection or severe illness, or that vitamin D might help treat COVID-19. Other studies have come to similar conclusions.

Horizontal close up portrait of young male laboratory scientist working on vaccine effective against new virus

That said, research released around the same time by researchers in Indonesia found that vitamin D deficiency was linked to an increased risk of death due to COVID-19. Other preliminary studies likewise suggest that low vitamin D levels could be a factor in COVID-19 severity, including hospitalization.

So, while it’s still too early to say whether vitamin D is important in your body’s natural defenses against COVID-19, there are a lot of other good reasons to make sure you’re getting adequate vitamin D right now.

Other Ways Vitamin D Keeps You Healthy

In addition to supporting healthy bones and proper immune function, vitamin D also helps deliver these health benefits:

Promotes Heart Health

Inflammation — which is part of your body’s immune response and so is partly regulated by vitamin D — plays a big role in the development of cardiovascular diseases. Vitamin D is also key for keeping arteries flexible and functioning properly, which helps maintain healthy blood pressure.

Stabilizes Mood

Vitamin D is needed for normal brain function, and research has linked low levels with depression. Although it’s not entirely clear how exactly vitamin D may influence mood disorders, a 2008 study found that vitamin D supplements reduced symptoms.

Reduces the Risk of Diabetes

Studies report that low vitamin D translates to a higher risk of type-2 diabetes, potentially because the vitamin may influence insulin sensitivity. (Diabetes develops when your body becomes less sensitive or resistant to the hormone, and so can’t properly regulate blood glucose.) For that reason, vitamin D may also help maintain a healthy weight.

Promotes Longevity

Low serum levels of vitamin D were associated with higher all-cause mortality than normal levels (above 30 ng/mL), according to a report in the American Journal of Public Health.

Are you Vitamin D Deficient?

There’s a good chance you might be. Unlike with other common vitamins and nutrients, for which deficiency is relatively rare, having low vitamin D levels is incredibly common.

A study of more than 26,000 U.S. adults found that 29% were vitamin D deficient, and 41% were vitamin D insufficient according to thresholds outlined by the Endocrine Society. Those thresholds:

  • Vitamin D deficiency: Less than 20 ng/mL (or less than 50 nmol/l — serum level of vitamin D is measured in two different units of measurements)
  • Vitamin D insufficiency: Between 20 nmol/l and 30 ng/mL (or between 50 nmol/l and 75 nmol/l).

The risk for deficiency is even higher for those with darker skin. Their higher levels of melanin — natural pigments that make skin darker — naturally blocks UV light, hampering the body’s ability to readily make vitamin D with relatively modest sun exposure. One study, for example, found that a full 93% of African-American men living in Chicago had vitamin D levels below 30 ng/mL — the average was just 17.2 ng/mL — compared to 70% of Caucasian men who had insufficient vitamin D levels.

What’s more, your vitamin D stores may fluctuate with the season and can depend a lot on where you live and how much time you spend outside. For example, if you live in colder climates and spend long winters indoors, your levels during, say, December, are likely to be lower than they are in July.

Cottage against the night sky with the Milky Way and the arctic Northern lights Aurora Borealis in snow winter Finland, Lapland

So, it’s worth asking your doctor about getting tested at least once a year, if not twice, and about supplementing. Likewise, if you suffer from a chronic illness, which stresses cells and can deplete vitamin stores more readily, consider having your vitamin D levels tested a few times a year.

Guidelines on what vitamin D levels ideally should be vary a bit. For example, while the Endocrine Society recommends a target between 30 and 50 ng/mL, the National Institutes of Health considers between 20 and 50 ng/mL to be adequate for adults. In my former medical practice, I found that healthy people generally had levels between about 30 to 40 ng/mL.

And, although you’ll find some experts who suggest either you don’t need that much or need much more, be cautious — especially of overdoing it. Artificially boosting your levels higher than 50 ng/mL could cause neurological and other toxicity issues.

3 Ways to Get Vitamin D

Spend Time in the Sun.

This is not a free pass to skip SPF, however. Everyone’s skin is different and requires different exposure to fill their vitamin D coffers. However, the lighter your skin, the higher your risk of skin cancer and skin damage from unprotected UV exposure.

back view of woman canoeing on a sunny lake

So, find a balance of UV exposure and skin protection that works for you — and err on the side of caution. Maybe that means spending a few minutes in the sun first before reaching for your bottle of sunscreen. Or, perhaps you always protect the sensitive skin of your face, neck, and chest before leaving home, but keep your arms or legs exposed slightly longer.

One study in the U.K., for example, found that just 13 minutes of midday summer sun three times a week (exposed to only 35% of skin surface) yielded levels between 20 and 32 ng/mL for most Caucasians. African Americans, meanwhile, may need many times that amount, according to researchers.

When considering what might work for you, take into account factors such as:

  • Your tendency to burn
  • Your personal skin cancer risk, including your family history
  • Which areas on your body might need more protection
  • Whether you take supplements or consume fortified foods to fill any potential D gap

Eating plenty of antioxidant-rich fruits and vegetables can also help provide some internal protection from small doses of sun exposure.

Eat Fatty Fish and Other Foods with Vitamin D.

Salmon and tuna are top food sources of D, while egg yolks and some cheeses also contain it in small amounts. And some foods, most notably milk, are fortified with vitamin D, so check labels.

Take a Vitamin D Supplement.

Supplements are an effective way to ensure you’re getting enough D no matter how much or little time outdoors you spend. The government’s recommended dietary allowance is 600 IU (or 15 mcg) per day for adults, but talk to your doctor about what might be best for you and how often to monitor levels.

Pile of fish oil omega 3 gel capsules on wooden board

For example, if you have darker skin you may need more than 600 IU — potentially up to 2,500 IU, suggests the researchers of the Chicago study. Those with chronic illnesses may want to consider taking more, as well. On the other hand, people with lighter skin who spend a lot of time outdoors during summer months may not need to supplement as much.

However you mix and match your lifestyle and dietary tactics to get enough vitamin D, now’s a good time to start paying attention if you aren’t already — for your immunity, bones, mood, heart and metabolic health, and overall wellness and longevity.

References
1. T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Harvard University. March 2020. “Vitamin D.” The Nutrition Source. https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/vitamin-d/
2. Aranow, Cynthia. “Vitamin D and the Immune System.” Journal of Investigative Medicine. 2011 Aug; 59(6): 881-886.
3. Ascherio, Alberto et al. “Vitamin D as an Early Predictor of Multiple Sclerosis Activity and Progression.” JAMA Neurol. 2014;71(3):306-314.
4. Ginde, Adit A. et al. “Association Between Serum 25-Hydroxyvitamin D Level and Upper Respiratory Tract Infection in the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey.” Arch Intern Med. 2009;169(4):384-390.
5. Lee, Joseph, Oliver van Hecke and Nia Roberts. “Vitamin D: A rapid review of the evidence for treatment or prevention in COVID-19.” The Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. May 1, 2020. https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/vitamin-d-a-rapid-review-of-the-evidence-for-treatment-or-prevention-in-covid-19/
6. Raharusun, Prabowo et al. “Patterns of COVID-19 Mortality and Vitamin D: An Indonesian Study.” April 26, 2020. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3585561
7. Jorde, R. et al. “Effects of vitamin D supplementation on symptoms of depression in overweight and obese subjects: randomized double blind trial.” Journal of Internal Medicine. 2009. 264(6): 599-609.
8. Lips, Paul et al. “Vitamin D and Type 2 Diabetes.” J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol. 2017 Oct;173:280-285.
9. Garland, Cedric F. et al. “Meta-analysis of All-Cause Mortality According to Serum 25-Hydroxyvitamin D.” Am J Public Health. 2014 August; 104(8): e43–e50.
10. Liu, Xuefeng, Ana Baylin and Phillip D. Levy. “Vitamin D Deficiency and Insufficiency Among US Adults: Prevalence, Predictors and Clinical Implications.” Br J Nutr 2018 Apr;119(8):928-936.
11. Northwestern University. “One size doesn’t fit all for vitamin D and men: African-American men in northern regions especially need high doses of supplements.” ScienceDaily. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/09/110920100100.htm.
12. National Institutes of Health. “Vitamin D: Fact Sheet for Health Professionals.” https://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/VitaminD-HealthProfessional/
13. Rhodes, Lesley E. et al. “Recommended Summer Sunlight Exposure Levels Can Produce Sufficient (> or =20 Ng ml(-1)) but Not the Proposed Optimal (> or =32 Ng ml(-1)) 25(OH)D Levels at UK Latitudes.” J Invest Dermatol 2010 May;130(5):1411-8.

______________________

For more:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/07/02/experts-criticize-government-review-of-vitamin-d-for-covid-19/

https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/01/10/vitamin-d-increases-protection-against-infection-new-model-suggests/

https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2018/03/12/the-importance-of-vitamin-d-k-and-magnesium-for-lyme-msids-patients/

https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/06/15/the-functional-medicine-approach-to-covid-19-virus-specific-nutraceutical-botanical-agents/

 

 

 

https://www.lymedisease.org/nh-lyme-insurance-bill/

TOUCHED BY LYME: New Hampshire Lyme insurance bill heads to governor

 

 

 

 

 

https://events-na4.adobeconnect.com/content/connect/c1/841425677/en/events/event/shared/1741061809/event_registration.  Register Here

Wednesday 8 July 2020, 08:00 AM – 07:00 PM

The Fourteenth Meeting of the Tick-Borne Disease Working Group (TBDWG) will be held on July 8, 2020, from 9:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Eastern Time. This is an on-line meeting and everyone is welcome to attend.

For this fourteenth meeting, the TBDWG will review the draft 2020 report to the HHS Secretary and Congress and review and approve graphics and images for the report. The 2020 report will address ongoing tick-borne disease research, including research related to causes, prevention, treatment, surveillance, diagnosis, diagnostics, and interventions for individuals with tick-borne diseases; advances made pursuant to such research; federal activities related to tick-borne diseases; and gaps in tick-borne disease research. A full agenda will be posted on the website prior to the meeting.

Public comment may be provided verbally or in writing. Thirty minutes has been set aside for verbal comments. Persons who wish to provide verbal or written comments should review directions at the Tick-Borne Disease Working Group website.

Written comments and requests to make verbal comments must be received by midnight Wednesday, June 24, 2020, Eastern Time to be included in the public record.

For additional information about the meeting, please visit the Tick-Borne Disease Working Group website.

 

 

 

 

 

https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712(20)30534-8/fulltext

Treatment with Hydroxychloroquine, Azithromycin, and Combination in Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19

Henry Ford COVID-19 Task Force

Highlights

  • As of May27, 2020 there are over 1,678,843 confirmed cases of COVID-19 claiming more than 100,000 lives in the Unites States. Currently there is no known effective therapy or vaccine.
  • According to a protocol-based treatment algorithm, among hospitalized patients, use of hydroxychloroquine alone and in combination with azithromycin was associated with a significant reduction in-hospital mortality compared to not receiving hydroxychloroquine.
  • Findings of this observational study provide crucial data on experience with hydroxychloroquine therapy, providing necessary interim guidance for COVID-19 therapeutic practice.

Abstract

Significance

The United States is in an acceleration phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. Currently there is no known effective therapy or vaccine for treatment of SARS-CoV-2, highlighting urgency around identifying effective therapies.

Objective

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the role of hydroxychloroquine therapy alone and in combination with azithromycin in hospitalized patients positive for COVID-19.

Design

Multi-center retrospective observational study

Setting

The Henry Ford Health System (HFHS) in Southeast Michigan: large six hospital integrated health system; the largest of hospitals is an 802-bed quaternary academic teaching hospital in urban Detroit, Michigan.

Participants

Consecutive patients hospitalized with a COVID-related admission in the health system from March 10,2020 to May 2,2020 were included. Only the first admission was included for patients with multiple admissions. All patients evaluated were 18 years of age and older and were treated as inpatients for at least 48 hours unless expired within 24 hours.

Exposure

Receipt of hydroxychloroquine alone, hydroxychloroquine in combination with azithromycin, azithromycin alone, or neither.

Main Outcome

The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality.

Results

Of 2,541 patients, with a median total hospitalization time of 6 days (IQR: 4-10 days), median age was 64 years (IQR:53-76 years), 51% male, 56% African American, with median time to follow-up of 28.5 days (IQR:3-53). Overall in-hospital mortality was 18.1% (95% CI:16.6%-19.7%); by treatment: hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin, 157/783 (20.1% [95% CI: 17.3%-23.0%]), hydroxychloroquine alone, 162/1202 (13.5% [95% CI: 11.6%-15.5%]), azithromycin alone, 33/147 (22.4% [95% CI: 16.0%-30.1%]), and neither drug, 108/409 (26.4% [95% CI: 22.2%-31.0%])​.
Primary cause of mortality was respiratory failure (88%); no patient had documented torsades de pointes. From Cox regression modeling, predictors of mortality were age>65 years (HR:2.6 [95% CI:1.9-3.3]), white race (HR:1.7 [95% CI:1.4-2.1]), CKD (HR:1.7 [95%CI:1.4-2.1]), reduced O2 saturation level on admission (HR:1.5 [95%CI:1.1-2.1]), and ventilator use during admission (HR: 2.2 [95%CI:1.4-3.3]). Hydroxychloroquine provided a 66% hazard ratio reduction, and hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin 71% compared to neither treatment (p < 0.001).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this multi-hospital assessment, when controlling for COVID-19 risk factors, treatment with hydroxychloroquine alone and in combination with azithromycin was associated with reduction in COVID-19 associated mortality. Prospective trials are needed to examine this impact.
_____________________
Excerpt:
Dr. Meryl Nass has uncovered a hornet’s nest of government sponsored Hydroxychloroquine experiments that were designed to kill severely ill, Covid-19 hospitalized patients. On June 14th Dr. Nass first identified two Covid-19 experiments in which massive, high toxic doses – four times higher than safeof hydroxychloroquine were being given to severely ill hospitalized patients in intensive care units.

Regarding the anti-viral Remdesivir:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/07/02/remdesivir-for-covid-19-not-backed-by-results/

Excerpt: 

Remdesivir isn’t cheap.  In fact, this article states it costs $320 per vial and will be sold for $3,120 per 6 vial treatment:  https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/06/stunning-faucis-remdesivir-costs-9-per-dose-will-sold-3000-per-dose-china-company-linked-soros-will-also-mass-produce-drug/ That’s a lot of money for a drug that hasn’t even been shown to lower viral load.

Hydroxychloroquine in the other hand costs $1 per treatment, while chloroquine costs a measly 30 cents!  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/05/11/podcast-evidence-supporting-hcq-azithromycin-for-covid-19/

The article also points out an ugly conflict of interest web between Gilead, the manufacturer of Remdesivir and UNITAID which Soros, Gates, and the Clinton Health Access Initiative, are large investors – with Drs. Fauci and Birx associated with the Clinton Health Access initiative.  And of course, Dr. Fauci has worked with Gilead for a long, long time. Government employees should not be allowed to have financial ties to manufacturing companies and then turn around and make public health policy.

 https://principia-scientific.org/a-tale-of-2-drugs-deep-state-chose-money-power-over-lives/

Excerpt:

Approximately $70 million in U.S. taxpayer funding began Gilead’s partnership with the U.S. Army, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and National Institutes of Health (NIH) to develop remdesivir. Initially for treating Ebola, it failed to show benefit and was shelved. If remdesivir is used to treat COVID-19, Gilead shareholders, not the taxpayers, will profit.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32560202/

Interrupted Blood Feeding in Ticks: Causes and Consequences

Affiliations expand

Free article

Abstract

Ticks are obligate hematophagous arthropods and act as vectors for a great variety of pathogens, including viruses, bacteria, protozoa, and helminths. Some tick-borne viruses, such as Powassan virus and tick-borne encephalitis virus, are transmissible within 15-60 min after tick attachment. However, a minimum of 3-24 h of tick attachment is necessary to effectively transmit bacterial agents such as Ehrlichia spp., Anaplasma spp., and Rickettsia spp. to a new host. Longer transmission periods were reported for Borrelia spp. and protozoans such as Babesia spp., which require a minimum duration of 24-48 h of tick attachment for maturation and migration of the pathogen.

Laboratory observations indicate that the probability of transmission of tick-borne pathogens increases with the duration an infected tick is allowed to remain attached to the host. However, the transmission time may be shortened when partially fed infected ticks detach from their initial host and reattach to a new host, on which they complete their engorgement.

For example, early transmission of tick-borne pathogens (e.g., Rickettsia rickettsii, Borrelia burgdorferi, and Brucella canis) and a significantly shorter transmission time were demonstrated in laboratory experiments by interrupted blood feeding.

The relevance of such situations under field conditions remains poorly documented.

In this review, we explore parameters of, and causes leading to, spontaneous interrupted feeding in nature, as well as the effects of this behavior on the minimum time required for transmission of tick-borne pathogens.

____________________

**Comment**

Partial feeding is not rare and needs to be taken into account. Unfortunately, authorities have followed a tightly controlled narrative when it comes to transmission times – which has only served to hurt patients for decades.

There are cases where Lyme (borrelia) has been transmitted within hours:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2016/12/07/igenex-presentation/

Excerpt:

Bob Giguere of IGeneX states a case by Dr. Jones of a little girl who went outside to play about 8:30a.m. and came inside at 10:30 with an attached tick above her right eye.  By 2 o’clock, she had developed the facial palsy.  At the hospital she was told it couldn’t be Lyme as the tick hadn’t been attached long enough.  They offered a neuro-consult…..

By 4pm she couldn’t walk or talk.

Do not believe what the “experts” tell you about transmission times!

Authorities also talk about ticks having a “grace period” before they transmit which is hog-wash:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/03/10/grace-period-for-ticks-nope/

For more:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2017/04/14/transmission-time-for-lymemsids-infection/

https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2019/04/26/three-strains-of-borrelia-other-pathogens-found-in-salivary-glands-of-ixodes-ticks-suggesting-quicker-transmission-time/

https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2019/11/14/study-shows-ticks-can-transmit-rickettsia-immediately/

https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2017/06/28/powassan-can-kill/