THE PROBLEM: THE VACCINE IS INEFFECTVE--VITAMIN D AND ZINC ARE EFFECTIVE.
To manage such a problem, the authorities, worldwide, try to discourage people from analysing pretty simple situations, presenting and repeating false realities and creating fear.
On a daily basis, false stories are presented, discouraging people from listening to dissenters, even on the most benign alternatives, such as vitamin D. They also impose censorship.
In the knowledge of the fact that low vitamin D level result in respiratory illnesses, the WHO title below discourages further inquiry: when they know something, they will tell us.
Dr. Michael Cohen, interviewed by Dr. John Campbell, reported as follows: "I started taking high doses of vitamin D and I also told my entire patient population, telling them on an individual basis, it's not enough to go by, scientifically, but I have... close to 2000 patients in my clinic... and I keep telling them that, I keep reinforcing it, and K2 and zinc, and <I tell them to up the doses if they have any symptoms, I have had quite a few patients with covid, I probably had a handful that got to the emergency department, and being sent home. I have not had a sigle patient admitted to hospital."
Dr. Campbell: "In a population of 2000 people, given the very high prevalence of covid in Israel, I would suspect probably at least 3/4 of your patients have been exposed to the virus, probably 90% have been exposed, you would have expected 1 or 2% to be hospitalised.
Dr. Cohen: "As a first line of defense, we should be dealing with people's immune system in the safest way possible. We know that 25mg of zinc is extremely safe...vitamin D, I tell them 4000 units, people who are overweight may need even 10,000 units, vitamin K2, 200 mcg/day. vitamin D receptors in virtually every cell, it just may have a purpose... immunomodulator, directing the immune system to work in a better way
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9h-XQm2qEY
Ultraviolet radiation and vitamin D[edit]
An inverse association between exposure to the sun and upper respiratory tract infections was first proposed in 1926 by Smiley, who theorized that seasonality of infection was caused by “disordered vitamine metabolism in the human...directly due to a lack of solar radiation during the dark months of winter.”[6] Studies of Dutch[7] and Russian[8] subjects have also indicated a correlation of ultraviolet light exposure and relative absence of infection. However, the seasonality of infections such as influenza may also be explicable by other factors. For example, low absolute humidity favours the survival of the influenza virus.[9] A review by authors from the University of Maryland School of Pharmacy suggested that while low-dose vitamin D supplementation was unlikely to be harmful, "sensible sun exposure" was "an inexpensive and enjoyable way" to ensure healthy levels of vitamin D.[10]
In the fall, winter, and spring, people do not get D from the sun. Even in the summer, you see few old folks at the beach. They will not get sufficient D from the sun or from food. Saying "low-dose vitamin D supplementation was unlikely to be harmful" is equivalent to saying "eating broccoli and apples are odd habits unlikely to be harmful."
The University of Maryland School of Pharmacy is unlikely to have any interest in public health. Their absurd piece of advice, was intended to discourage vitamin D supplements.
Evidence[edit]
Evidence both for and against an association of vitamin D and respiratory infections has been reported. Early studies of vitamin D and mice came to different conclusions, with one group reporting a link and the other no link between deficiency and infection.[10] More recent studies of humans have also had divergent results. People with the lowest blood vitamin D levels reported having significantly more recent colds or cases of the flu chronic respiratory disorders, especially those who had pre-existing respiratory ailments[11] Children who took vitamin D3 supplements daily in winter were 42% less likely to get infected with seasonal flu than those who were given a placebo.[12] Mongolian schoolchildren who drank vitamin D fortified milk during winter reported having fewer colds than those who received non-fortified milk.[13] Another study found no effect of vitamin D supplementation on the incidence or severity of upper respiratory tract infections. Authors of one of the positive studies also stressed that their results would need to be confirmed in clinical trials before vitamin D could be recommended to prevent infections.[14]
The Institute of Medicine released a comprehensive, peer-reviewed report on calcium and vitamin D in 2011. The conclusion of the report was that the existing studies did not provide strong or consistent evidence for a link between vitamin D deficiency and respiratory tract infections. The authors stated that data from randomised controlled trials would be needed, showing a dose response to vitamin D supplementation, before recommendations could be considered.[15]
Traditional medicine is normally adversarial to the idea of patients choosing, on their own, novel or ancient methods to maintain better health; that's normal. Good cooks do get annoyed seeing a guest cooking on their stove. I have heard a house cleaner, returning from vacation in their homeland, being quite critical of their friend, whom they had sent to clean a someone's house. It's just normal human behaviour.
Pharmaceutical companies are omnipresent in the realm of politics and health, and have been able to achieve regulatory capture, by offering wealth to regulators when they leave government, or even before.
NIH explains that vitamin D might be good against Covid, then presents a study saying that vitamin D does not help at all: "Vitamin D is critical for bone and mineral metabolism. Because the vitamin D receptor is expressed on immune cells such as B cells, T cells, and antigen-presenting cells, and because these cells can synthesize the active vitamin D metabolite, vitamin D also has the potential to modulate innate and adaptive immune responses.
In a double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial that was conducted at two sites in Brazil, 240 hospitalized patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 received either a single dose of 200,000 international units of vitamin D3 or placebo.10 ... No significant differences were observed between the arms in the percentages of patients who were admitted to the intensive care unit, who required mechanical ventilation, or who died during hospitalization." https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/therapies/supplements/vitamin-d/
A 2017 individual-participant meta-analysis of 25 randomized controlled trials (11,321 total participants) concluded "Vitamin D supplementation was safe and it protected against acute respiratory tract infection overall. Patients who were very vitamin D deficient and those not receiving bolus doses experienced the most benefit." Doses used in the constituent studies that used daily dosing ranged from 300-4000 IU/day (7.5-100 µg/day).[1]
That result is not surprising at all, since it was given in bolus form. Martineau explained the reason for that in his 2017 study. See that under Vitamin D Deficiency, 3rd paragraph.
Vitamin D supplementation[edit]
It has been noted that large doses of vitamin D can lead to hypercalcemia and that "single megadoses" of vitamin D, while not especially harmful, may be associated with an increased risk of bone fractures.[10] The authors of this review suggested that supplementation should be offered only to those with verified deficiencies or to promote muscular and skeletal health in elderly patients.[10] Benefits have not been shown in children with asthma.[18]
Doctors favour delivery of D once a year--the patients will drink it up in front of the nurse. Or they can be sent to buy a vial at the pharmacy. Doctors see pharmacies as safe venues, while they fear that we may fall under bad influences at the health food store.
Here are the details of the study referred to in note .[10]
1600 women living in old age homes were divided into the cholecalciferol (vitamin D) group, which was given a 500,000 IU vial, and the placebo group.
74% of the vitamin D group and 68% of the placebo group had at least one fall, while 155 of the D group suffered at lest one fracture, versus only 125 of the placebo group. There was a 17% increase in fractures in the D group. Does that mean that vitamin D harms your sense of equilibrium and makes your bones weaker? Unlikely; it's most likely a minor coincidence. Also, once-per-year vitamin D is a wasted intervention.
We do not even know whether the women did drink up the vial. No conclusion can be reached from such a minor difference.
Note that delivery of vitamin D once a year, in bolus form, has elsewhere been shown to be ineffective and is not recommended by the Endocrine Society. It is absurd to claim causality
When a causal relationship is not desired, even a twenty-fold increase in illness, such as we observe with Bell's palsy after vaccination, is ignored.