If You Doubt That Vitamin D3 Helps To Prevent Viruses . . .

Post by **tex** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 12:57 pm

Please read this, from Dr. John Cannell, of the Vitamin D Council:

September 17, 2009

I’m writing to alert readers to a crucial email from a physician who has evidence vitamin D is protective against H1N1 and to ask you, the reader, to contact your representatives in Washington to help protect Americans, especially children, from H1N1 before winter comes.

Dear Dr. Cannell:

Your recent newsletters and video about Swine flu (H1N1) prompted me to convey our recent experience with an H1N1 outbreak at Central Wisconsin Center (CWC). Unfortunately, the state epidemiologist was not interested in studying it further so I pass it on to you since I think it is noteworthy.

CWC is a long-term care facility for people with developmental disabilities, home for approx. 275 people with approx. 800 staff. Serum 25-OHD has been monitored in virtually all residents for several years and patients supplemented with vitamin D.

In June, 2009, at the time of the well-publicized Wisconsin spike in H1N1 cases, two residents developed influenza-like illness (ILI) and had positive tests for H1N1: one was a long-term resident; the other, a child, was transferred to us with what was later proven to be H1N1.

On the other hand, 60 staff members developed ILI or were documented to have H1N1: of 17 tested for ILI, eight were positive. An additional 43 staff members called in sick with ILI. (Approx. 11-12 staff developed ILI after working on the unit where the child was given care, several of whom had positive H1N1 tests.)

So, it is rather remarkable that only two residents of 275 developed ILI, one of which did not develop it here, while 103 of 800 staff members had ILI. It appears that the spread of H1N1 was not from staff-to-resident but from resident-to-staff (most obvious in the imported case) and between staff, implying that staff were susceptible and our residents protected.

Sincerely,

Norris Glick, MD
Central Wisconsin Center
Madison, WI

Dear Dr. Glick:

This is the first hard data that I am aware of concerning H1N1 and vitamin D. It appears vitamin D is incredibly protective against H1N1. Dr. Carlos Carmago at Mass General ran the numbers in an email to me. Even if one excludes 43 staff members who called in sick with influenza, 0.73% of residents were affected, as compared to 7.5% of staff. This 10-fold difference was statistically significant (P<0.001). That is, the chance that this was a chance occurrence is one less than one in a thousand.

Second, if you read my last newsletter, you will see that children with neurological impairments, like the patients at your hospital, have accounted for 2/3 of the childhood deaths for H1N1 so far in the USA. That is, the CDC knows, because they reported it, that patients with neurological impairments are more likely to die from H1N1.

The problem is that I cannot get anyone in authority at the CDC or the NIH to listen. I need readers to email or call their senators and congresspersons in Washington.

Ask your senator or congressperson to contact the CDC and NIH to complain about CDC and NIH inaction on Vitamin D and H1N1. Also, ask your senators and representative to demand congressional hearings on Vitamin D and H1N1, before it is too late. Here is the link below, just click it and follow instructions to contact your own represenatives.

http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml

John Cannell, MD
President
Vitamin D Council
585 Leff Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93422

Here's another letter from another doctor:

1:30 PM PST, Wednesday, September 16, 2009

Dear Dr. Cannell:

Thanks for your update about the hospital in Wisconsin. I have had similar anecdotal evidence from my medical practice here in Georgia. We are one of the 5 states with widespread H1N1 outbreaks.

I share an office with another family physician. I aggressively measure and replete vitamin D. He does not.

He is seeing one to 10 cases per week of influenza-like illness.
In my practice-- I have had zero cases. My patients are universally on 2000-5000 IU to maintain serum levels 50-80 ng/ml.

Ellie Campbell, DO
Campbell Family Medicine
3925 Johns Creek Court Ste A
Suwannee GA 30024

Dear Dr. Campbell:

That’s good news. Now, if we just had a way for the CDC and the NIH to pay attention.

Critics say we should not recommend vitamin D to prevent influenza until it is proven to do so (It has not been).

The critics are thus saying, although they seem not to know it, you should be vitamin D deficient this winter until science proves being vitamin D sufficient is better than being Vitamin D deficient. Such advice is clearly unethical and has never ever been the standard of care.

This is not rocket science. If I am wrong, and Vitamin D does not prevent influenza, what is lost? A few dollars. If they are wrong, and it does prevent influenza, what is lost? So far, the CDC says 41 kids are dead from H1N1, and the flu season has not yet started.

Please contact your senators and congresspersons. Ask them to have hearings on vitamin D and H1N1:

http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml

John Cannell, MD
President
Vitamin D Council
585 Leff Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93422

This is pretty convincing evidence, IMO.

Tex

Post by **Rosie** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 1:37 pm

That's amazing, Tex. I'm going to start taking more Vit. D right now! My husband works at a University, and classes start next week. He's convinced that he's doomed to get Swine Flu!

Rosie

Post by **tex** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 2:01 pm

If he takes megadoses of D3 each day, for a few days, he should be able to get his level up to where he will be resistant.

Or, he can get some Tamiflu, (if his doctor will write a prescription, and he should, considering your husbands position, and the risk of him spreading it among his classes), taking it for three days, beginning during the first two days after the first symptoms appear, will prevent H1N1 from developing.

Tex

starfire · Post by **starfire** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 2:56 pm

Thanks for posting that and than you for making us aware earlier about the importance of vit D. to our health.

Love, Shirley

Post by **tex** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 3:42 pm

Actually, it was Polly who first brought up Dr. Cannell's work, and brought his newsletter to our attention. She deserves all the credit for making us aware of vitamin D3. I'm just another disciple.

Love,
Tex

kimpatt · Post by **kimpatt** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 9:09 pm

What doses of D3 do you all take? Do you have your levels tested first to assess deficiency? Which brands do you prefer?

Post by **tex** » Sun Sep 20, 2009 8:43 am

I take Spring Valley, 2,000 IU tablets. I'm taking one per day now, and during the shorter days of winter, when the sun is scarce, and I'm not likely to be out in it much, I take 2 per day. I stop taking them in the summer, because I live in Central Texas, and I'm out in the sun more, during the summer They're free of allergens, and the list of things that they do not contain, is longer than the ingredient list. It does not specifically say "No Soy", however, but I don't see any soy ingredients in the ingredient list, either, so I'm not sure why they failed to mention it in the "excluded" list. They also contain 111 mg of calcium, as an added bonus.

I didn't test my level initially, but I had it tested about the end of July, (since I was still taking 4,000 per day, then), and it was 96.8, (at the top of the range). That's why I decided to stop taking it for the summer, and cut the dose to 2,000 IU in the spring and fall. I get a lot of sun while I'm working, and Texas is a pretty sunny state.

I believe that Polly takes at least that much, and maybe slightly more, since she lives at a higher latitude. If I'm exposed to someone with a cold or flu, (such as in a meeting in a small room, where someone is sneezing or coughing frequently), I often double or triple the dose for a few days. Anyway, here's what the bottle looks like:

http://www.shopping.com/xPO-Nature-s-Bo ... 00-Tablets

Tex

Post by **Rosie** » Sun Sep 20, 2009 11:28 am

I told my DH all about the protective benefits of Vit. D for flu, and he started taking extra right away. He had been taking a 1000 U pill once a day. Is 4000 units a day what you would suggest? He spends much of his free time out on the golf course, but slathers up with sunscreen. I recently read that you can get the equivalent of 10,000 units a day from sunshine, but of course it's getting later in the year, and we are a lot further north than Texas, living in Oregon.

I'm taking extra too. I was getting about 1000 units/day with my calcium pills and thought that was enough, but when I was tested last May, I had 32 ng/ml, low normal. My PCP suggested taking more or spending a bit more time in the sun. Of course, back then I was having MC diarrhea, and probably not absorbing as much.

Rosie

Post by **tex** » Sun Sep 20, 2009 12:16 pm

I would think that 4,000 IU would be adequate, as long as his level is not significantly low to begin with, because it sounds as though he's likely to regularly pick up at least some vitamin D from exposure to sunlight, on a regular basis. I believe that it's easily possible to accumulate enough sunlight in 15 or 20 minutes, at midday, to make 10,000 IU of vitamin D, (without sunscreen, of course), but your body has to have sufficient time to process it, before wiping or washing the skin where the sunlight was absorbed. Many people tend to wipe it off, or wash it off, before the chemical conversion process is allowed to finish, so they lose a lot of the vitamin D.

32 ng/ml is not a bad level - you're probably a lot better off than the general population. I agree, though, a higher level would probably be beneficial, and would boost your resistance to viruses. We probably have a lot fewer cloudy days, most years, here in Texas, (our average annual rainfall where I live, is 35 inches, which is relatively low - I'm not sure what the average rainfall might be where you live, because it ranges from the single digits in many of the eastern areas of the state, to as high as 200 inches in a few spots in the western counties, but the odds are that you have a lot more rainy weather than we have here where I live, so sunlight may be less available. For all I know, though, you may have less atmospheric haze to reduce the intensity of sunlight, in the PNW.

Tex

Post by **Rosie** » Sun Sep 20, 2009 1:14 pm

Tex, I never knew about not wiping or washing the skin. How long does the chemical conversion take once I'm out of the sun?

At issue with the weather is if it's warm and sunny enough to go out in shorts and short sleeves. Here in the Willameete Valley part of Oregon it's cloudy and drizzly most of the winter, although the summers are dry, sunny and mild. Once the 8 month rainly season starts, we're all pretty covered up. Even our faces don't get much sun exposure. :rainyscene:

Take a look at the "Seattle Sombrero", that many wear. http://www.outdoorresearch.com/site/sea ... brero.html

Rosie

Post by **tex** » Sun Sep 20, 2009 3:52 pm

Rosie wrote:Tex, I never knew about not wiping or washing the skin. How long does the chemical conversion take once I'm out of the sun?

That's a good question, and I don't know the answer, since it probably proceeds at different rates, depending on previtamin D3 concentrations, and temperatures, and other factors. Somewhere, I've seen a French research article on this topic, that included a chart, I believe, but I can't find it now, (naturally). The article at the following link discusses the way that the conversion takes place, but it doesn't offer much information on how long the conversion takes, except to point out that the process takes about 12 days to complete, (in a laboratory setting), and roughly one-tenth the time in/on the skin. It's the natural oils that need to remain on the skin, so a combination of soap and water, (and vigorous rubbing), is obviously more detrimental than just a light water rinse, (with no soap, scrubbing, or rubbing). I would venture to guess that at least half a day is required to get any significant amount of conversion, and over a day, to get most of the benefit.

http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/79/3/362

Since you live north of the 38th parallel, though, it's impossible to obtain any vitamin D from the sun where you live, for over 4 months, during the winter, no matter how much skin you expose, or how long you try to soak up the sunlight, (because of the position of the sun, during those months). Just over the border, in Canada, vitamin D from the sun is unavailable for at least 5 months. In fact, anyone north of the 35th parallel, (which crosses the panhandle of Texas), is unable to obtain any vitamin D3 from sun exposure for roughly 3 months, or more, during the winter. That makes supplementation necessary, if decent serum D3 levels are to be maintained during the winter months.

Incidentally, concerning the use of sunscreen, you might find the following information interesting, (this is from the Vitamin D Council Newsletter of March, 2009, for which a link is provided below):

Ironically, sunscreens may increase the risk of melanoma. Westerdahl J. et al.

Sunscreen use and malignant melanoma. Int J Cancer. 2000 Jul 1;87(1):145–50. Gorham ED et al.

Do sunscreens increase risk of melanoma in populations residing at higher latitudes? Ann Epidemiol. 2007 Dec;17(12):956–63.

In one of the best studies, the factor most associated with increased melanoma risk was the use of sunscreens. Subjects who often used sunscreens had triple the melanoma risk compared with subjects who never used sunscreens. Skin color and higher numbers of sunbaths were significant protective factors. Subjects who took more than 30 sunbaths per year were ten (10) times less (less) likely to have melanoma, compared with subjects who took less than 20 sunbaths per year. However, sunbaths had no protective value when they were associated with sunburns. Wolf P, et al. Phenotypic markers, sunlight-related factors and sunscreen use in patients with cutaneous melanoma: an Austrian case-control study. Melanoma Res. 1998 Aug;8(4):370–8.

Other studies show the risk is increased only with intermittent UV exposure, and not with chronic exposure. Walter SD, King WD, Marrett LD. Association of cutaneous malignant melanoma with intermittent exposure to ultraviolet radiation: results of a case-control study in Ontario, Canada. Int J Epidemiol. 1999 Jun;28(3):418–27.

This month, Dr. Dianne Godar, of the United States Food and Drug Administration, published a fascinating paper indicating UVA light, even through window glass, is responsible for the melanoma epidemic. She points out the melanoma epidemic began long before sunbeds; the dramatic increase is only in indoor workers, not outdoor workers; low 25(OH)D levels predict melanoma; all-year tans protect against melanoma; and melanoma patients who expose themselves to the sun live longer than those who don't. Of the 14 published studies, she reported only two found a positive association between solar UV exposure and melanoma; seven found no association; and five studies found an inverse association, that is, the more sun-exposure the less melanoma. Godar DE, Landry RJ, Lucas AD. Increased UVA exposures and decreased cutaneous Vitamin D(3) levels may be responsible for the increasing incidence of melanoma. Med Hypotheses. 2009 Apr;72(4):434–43.

Ironically, sunscreens appear to dramatically increase the risk of melanoma, probably by increasing the amount of time one spends in the sun. Until recently, sunscreens only blocked vitamin D-producing UVB and let UVA through. That is, the sunscreen-promoting dermatologists many be partially responsible for melanoma epidemic.

The red emphasis is mine, of course.

http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/newslett ... arch.shtml

That looks like a pretty good rain hat. If it ever rained here in Texas, I'd have to order me one of those.

Tex

Post by **Rosie** » Sun Sep 20, 2009 5:17 pm

Tex, thanks so much for the information and that link. I got a lot of extra information there. For example, my husband takes statins and has complained a bit about his muscles feeling more tired and a bit achey. He realizes that statins can cause this myalgia. One of the articles at The Vitamin D Council website discusses a recent scientific article showing that statin patients who have myalgia have a lower average Vit D3 level than those who didn't, and that the myalgia could be reversed by increasing their Vit D3 levels to 48 ng/ml. So yet another reason to get those levels up. He has never had a test for Vit D3 levels with his physicals. Doctors don't seem to think about ordering them for men. We have the same PCP, and she has ordered that test for me twice, because of concerns about osteoporosis (thin white female, lol)

I didn't know that it's only a few months of the year that you can get Vit D from the sun. In olden times the body must have stored it up during the summer to last through the winter. Now people mostly work indoors. When I was a kid, we worked in the fields all summer without any sunscreen. We wore hats and just got tanned. Nice to know that it probably won't add to my melanoma risk.

Rosie

Dee · Post by **Dee** » Sun Sep 20, 2009 6:26 pm

Hello,
My Vitamin D number is 30.4...
I'm currently only taking 1,500 IU's of D3 a day.
Any suggestions on what amount to up it to??
Also, Jack is working part-time for an auto auction company & is in & out of car dealers cars, repos, etc., plus riding in a 14 seater bus with other drivers after delivering or picking up cars.
I'd really like to get him on a maintenance dose of D3 now. How much???
Is it recommended for children to take D3, also??? Wonder how much???
Thanks A Bunch
Love
Dee~

Post by **tex** » Sun Sep 20, 2009 9:04 pm

Dee,

With the days growing shorter, at your latitude, I would think that somewhere in the range of 4,000 to 5,000 IUs daily, total would be a reasonable dose to take, until late spring. I believe that's what Polly takes. Maybe she'll give us an update on that, when she has a chance to log on, again.

For Jack, I believe that he couldn't go too far wrong with at least 2,000 IUs daily, during the fall and spring, and at least twice that, during the four months of winter weather. The reason I say "at least", is because that should keep his 25(OH)D level up in the lower part of the recommended range, but IMO, he should keep his level up in the upper part of the recommended range, because at the upper levels, D3 has been shown to help prevent prostate cancer, where it doesn't exist, and it has also been shown to help slow down, and even stop development, in existing cases. It's difficult to say how much he might need to take, in order to keep it in the, say, 80 to 90 ng/mL range, but I would think that something in the range of 3,000 to 4,000 IUs during the fall and spring, and 6,000 to 8,000 IUs during the 4 winter months might be a reasonable plan. In order to get his level up there where it needs to be, though, initially, he probably needs to start taking at least 5,000 IUs daily, for several months, and then get his level tested, to see where he stands. After adjusting the dose, (probably upward), then he might need to test the level again, every few months, in order to get a feel for how his dosage is translating to the serum 25(OH)D level, and he can adjust the dose, as needed. Be sure that the lab tests for 25(OH)D, (not 1,25-dihydroxy-D).

Vitamin D3 also helps to prevent, (and helps to retard the development of), breast cancer. Please read the section titled Vitamin D Treats Prostate Cancer!, in the newsletter I cited above, (I'll copy the link here, too).

http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/newslett ... arch.shtml

If you click on the link that says breast cancer, in the newsletter article, it will take you to a more detailed report on breast cancer and vitamin D, (I'll also copy the link here):

http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/cancerBreast.shtml

If you click on the link that says prostate cancer, in the newsletter article, it will take you to a more detailed report on prostate cancer and vitamin D, (I'll also copy the link here):

http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/cancerProstate.shtml

Kids are a little trickier to make recommendations for, since not as much research has been done on their vitamin D needs, but it should be quite safe for them to take 2,000 IUs per day, according to this research article, and more probably wouldn't hurt:

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/ ... 052308.php

You're most welcome.

Love,
Tex

kimpatt · Post by **kimpatt** » Sun Sep 20, 2009 9:22 pm

I second Dee's questions on the questions for kids' dosing...does anyone know what's safe? I'll also post the question to my holistic pediatrics weblist and post any info I find regarding D3 and kids.
We're in Virginia now, having moved from Florida, so I feel we'll have to be more intentional about D3 intake.
Regarding testing your serum levels, did your GPs do that for you? Or GI docs? I've not yet asked for serum D3 here (just moved & don't have MD yet), but with conventional MDs, every time I've asked for a test or treatment that isn't the most "mainstream" of tests, I get 'poo-pooed' and told that it isn't necessary...

This is a bit off-topic for the D3 conversation, but:
I'm struggling with the decision to find a regular GP with referral to GI doc for all of my MC (and possible eosiniophilic issues) and probably another referral to a more studied MC or EG expert...or going with a DO/naturopath who will be far more expensive but will treat me holistically & will likely listen to my complaints/desires without bias...

I know it won't be a simple doctor's visit or two once I get started with someone here, and with the kids taking up most of my day, I'm hoping to find the most efficient path to testing/treatment. I'd like to do the Spectracell testing, as well, and the nearest practitioner is 100 miles away. I think my Enterolab results are genuine, but I'd like to have my allergies re-tested (maybe blood test this time), to get confirmation on what I'm dealing with...would also like to have a practitioner who will willingly check D3 and other less conventional markers... your thoughts? What route would you take?