Group items tagged

Vitamin D in an ecological context. Björn LO, Wang T. Int J Circumpolar Health. 2000 Jan;59(1):26-32. PMID: 10850004

Serum vitamin D concentration and prostate cancer risk: a nested case-control study. Ahn J, Peters U, Albanes D, Purdue MP, Abnet CC, Chatterjee N, Horst RL, Hollis BW, Huang WY, Shikany JM, Hayes RB; Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial Project Team. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008 Jun 4;100(11):796-804. Epub 2008 May 27. PMID: 18505967 doi:10.1093/jnci/djn152 CONCLUSION: The findings of this large prospective study do not support the hypothesis that vitamin D is associated with decreased risk of prostate cancer; indeed, higher circulating 25(OH)D concentrations may be associated with increased risk of aggressive disease. In summary, results from this large prospective study of men who underwent standardized prostate cancer screening in the context of a screening trial do not support the hypothesis that higher serum vitamin D status is associated with decreased risk of prostate cancer. The study showed no association of vitamin D level with nonaggressive disease; however, it raises the possibility that higher vitamin D level may be associated with increased risks for aggressive disease, although a clear monotonic dose-response relationship was lacking. Along with recent reports of adverse associations for higher vitamin D status and risk of pancreatic (32) and esophageal (33,34) cancer, caution should be taken in recommending high doses of vitamin D or sunlight exposure to the general public for prostate cancer prevention. Future analyses are warranted to confirm these results and to further clarify the effects of vitamin D on aggressive prostate cancer.

"For what reason I don't know, but this January 2009 editorial by William Faloon of the Life Extension Foundation is making the rounds. Perhaps it just came available on the web. It's a good read, particularly in light of the billions and trillions of dollars the thieves & thugs in DC are about to flush down the crapper on your behalf. Some notable excerpts. A large number of new vitamin D studies have appeared in the scientific literature since I wrote my plea to the federal government. These studies don't just confirm what we knew 16 months ago-they show that optimizing vitamin D intake will save even more lives than what we projected. For instance, a study published in June 2008 showed that men with low vitamin D levels suffer 2.42 times more heart attacks. Now look what this means in actual body counts. Each year, about 157,000 Americans die from coronary artery disease-related heart attacks. Based on this most recent study, if every American optimized their vitamin D status, the number of deaths prevented from this kind of heart attack would be 92,500. To put the number of lives saved in context, tens of millions of dollars are being spent to advertise that Lipitor® reduces heart attacks by 37%. This is certainly a decent number, but not when compared with how many lives could be saved by vitamin D. According to the latest study, men with the higher vitamin D levels had a 142% reduction in heart attacks."

Does having enough sunlight and vitamin D give us more power to tolerate gluten and not develop damaging self-destructive auto-antibodies? It's unlikely we'll know in any good RCT (randomized controlled trials). No drug company will put up lettuce $$ to determine that good ol' cheap FREE UVB unblocked-sunshine is going to trump their $2-3/day drug (or super-sized vitamin D analogue) in a head-to-head trial. That's just absurd. And they're not stupid... because they pay staticians a lot of lettuce to figure that out for them.