Because it is a steroid.
-
By using this site you agree to the terms, rules, and privacy policy.
-
Charlie's Restoration Giveaway #2 (Entire Home EMF Mitigation & Protection Along With Personal Protection) - Click Here To Enter
-
Dear Carnivore Dieters, A Muscle Meat Only Diet is Extremely Healing Because it is a Low "vitamin A" Diet. This is Why it Works so Well...
Rest the rest of this post by clicking here
-
The Forum is transitioning to a subscription-based membership model - Click Here To Read
Click Here if you want to upgrade your account
If you were able to post but cannot do so now, send an email to admin at raypeatforum dot com and include your username and we will fix that right up for you.
Optimal vitamin D intake may be at least 2,000 IU daily
- Thread starter haidut
- Start date
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2016
- Messages
- 1,656
Fair point, I guess it could be the case that the Vitamin D is just masking the problem After all people who take large doses of cortisol feel great for a short time because it numbs the pain but after a long enough time period it slowly makes things a lot worse.
Although equally it could be the case that such high dose of vitamin D is lowering cortisol too much and that is what is causing the lethargy and pain. I remember when i one time took lots of substances that were anti estrogen and anti cortisol and i had pain all over my body, my feet, my teeth joints I also could not wake up for the life of me in the morning. I'm pretty convinced that was from lowering cortisol too much at the end of the day the body does need some cortisol to function.
Last edited:
Rheumatoid arthritis is simply copper toxicity. So instead of people using high dose vitamin D to suppress their symptoms with a steroid, all they needed to do what cut out the copper in their life and take the Big 5 essential minerals with Nicotinic acid which would have fixed the root of the problem, not suppress it. All @haidut is doing for his people is suppressing their symptoms, this is the allopathic Rockefeller science that is in the process of dying and a new paradigm has emerged releasing people from suppression hell.
Low Toxin Lifestyle - Fibromyalgia & Rheumatoid Arthritis is Copper Toxicity, It is Not Caused by Estrogen
Dr. Purser found in his practice that Fibromyalgia is simply copper toxicity. He also found the way to test for copper toxicity which you can learn in the video below. The standard blood test will not show copper toxicity very well. When I have more time I will watch it again and post the three...
Runenight201
Member
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2018
- Messages
- 1,942
"Vitamin D is a toxin"
Yet your body endogenously produces it, and the people who don't have enough of it have all sorts of health problems and die faster.
"Every cell that needs Vitamin D makes it without sun in a process no one understands"
Sounds like a straight bull ***t. "I can't scientifically show something so I'm going to say it's too complicated for us to get"
The one argument that I could see valid is that supplementing D is not a root cause solution. Ie, you want to be boosting your D levels by the way nature originally intended, which is by being out in the sun, and supplementing it is actually going to have nefarious effects because it shuts down your body's own ability to synthesize it, kind of like how men who take testosterone end up shutting down their body's own ability to make Testosterone.
I'd like to see some scientific literature backing this claim up though, as a simple assertion isn't going to cut it.
Yet your body endogenously produces it, and the people who don't have enough of it have all sorts of health problems and die faster.
"Every cell that needs Vitamin D makes it without sun in a process no one understands"
Sounds like a straight bull ***t. "I can't scientifically show something so I'm going to say it's too complicated for us to get"
The one argument that I could see valid is that supplementing D is not a root cause solution. Ie, you want to be boosting your D levels by the way nature originally intended, which is by being out in the sun, and supplementing it is actually going to have nefarious effects because it shuts down your body's own ability to synthesize it, kind of like how men who take testosterone end up shutting down their body's own ability to make Testosterone.
I'd like to see some scientific literature backing this claim up though, as a simple assertion isn't going to cut it.
I am talking about vitamin D supplementation.
Yup I know many cases where Aswhaganda/ginseng gave people PFS/PSSD.
Runenight201
Member
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2018
- Messages
- 1,942
For sure, more precision with your language would generate less controversy behind the statement "Vitamin D is a toxin". It'd be much more precise to say, supplementing Vitamin D is problematic, or Vitamin D supplements are toxic.
Because Vitamin D endogenously produced in your body is necessary for vital health.
Anyways, can you post the argument here that isn't an X thread for all of us in this space to get a proper summary of what it is? X is not a very friendly website in my experience for looking at information.
I thought it was fairly clear that this was a thread about vitamin D supplementation but thank you for allowing me to clarify.
OP
Couple of things as a response to that tweet.
1) This is a study with breast cancer cells (MCF-7 cell line). Those cells, and many other tumor cell types, overexpress several pathways such as ALDH-1, GSH, cholesterol esterification, etc thought to play a role in allowing the tumor to defend itself against toxic mediators produced by the immune system as a means of getting the tumor cells to commit apoptosis. Elevated aldehyde levels are probably one such attack pathway. The ALDH-1 expression in such tumor cells is often 10-15 times higher than in healthy cells. In fact, the higher the ALDH-1 expression the poorer the prognosis for the cancer patient who has one of those tumor types. So, this study is about vitamin D lowering a pathologically high levels of ALDH-1, and not about vitamin D reducing ALDH-1 levels below baseline in healthy cells (or humans). It also shows that having ALDH-1 as high as possible is not always good, at least in cancer.
"...Based on the well-established role of CSCs in chemoresistance, having predictive markers for their identification and quantification is of paramount importance, particularly for prognostic purposes. Aldehyde dehydrogenase-1 (ALDH-1) is considered a signature of breast CSCs. This is because cells expressing ALDH-1 possess “stemness” features and undifferentiated phenotype with high tumorigenic and self-renewal potentials. Increased expression was also correlated with pro-gression of tumor grade, chemoresistance, and poor prognosis [8]"
2) The study used calcitriol for the in-vitro experiments and cholecalciferol for the in-vivo experiments. Elevated calcitirol is bad and Ray has said this many times. Taking the D3 form (cholecalciferol) has been shown to lower calcitriol levels by increasing its degradation and excretion. There is no study, to my knowledge, which examined the effects of only D3 on baseline ALDH levels. I suspect the effects of D3 would be very different than the effects of calcitriol if such a study was to be performed.
3) The in-vivo portion used cholceclaiferol (D3), so the only conclusion we can make about the in-vivo result is that D3 has anti-cancer effects (as it also did in that panceartic cancer patient I linked to above), but that does not at all map over to the effects of calcitrol in the in-vitro experiment. In fact, the in-vivo effects of D3 and calcitriol are often antagonistic - calcitriol can raise PTH and causes hypercalcemia, while D3 lowers PTH; calcitriol activates serotonin synthesis while D3 inhibits it; calcitriol activates the inflammatory COX and LOX pathways, while D3 inhibits them; calcitriol has pro-cortiol and even pro-estrogen effects while D3 is antagonistic on both pathways, etc, etc.
So, I do see the argument for avoiding inhibition of aldehyde dehydrogenase, but context is everything - e.g. having testosterone levels 10-15 times the normal range would be a medical emergency and something to consider lowering, despite testosterone being life-saving (at least for males) when in the normal range.
Vitamin D is a fraud, just like most of the other stuff promoted for health by the "wellness-industrial complex" (As New York Times put it).
Optimal vitamin D intake is zero, because it's a biological signal produced in the skin in response to the sun. It doesn't belong into the gut.
The name "vitamin D" is as deceptive as the name "vitamin A". That's because neither are vitamins. It's a secosteroid and not a vitamin.
No one needs to take a secosteroid to be healthy.
In the body, vitamin D fullfills important roles, it's essential for health. Taking cholecalciferol orally is not good, because it acts on the intestine to increase calcium absorption, compared to the body producing it from sun exposure. So if one needs higher vitamin D levels, sun or tanning beds are better. In response to the sun, the body produces sulfated vitamin D bound to cholesterol (if I remember correctly), not the form that's in supplements.
There is an interesting hypothesis that oral vitamin D caused the allergy epidemic.
aacijournal.biomedcentral.com
Low vitamin D levels, more often than not, are just a signal for disease, not the cause of it. The lowest vitamin D levels are measured in Africa, with massive sun exposure. Minerals like zinc and magnesium and protein already normalize low vitamin D levels in many or maybe even most cases.
Supplementing vitamin D is playing russian roulette with our bodies, no one has any idea what the consequences are.
In Eastern Germany, newborns received a dose of 150.000 IU or so after birth. A dangerously high dose. 60-70 years later, statistics showed a massive increase in heart attacks.
Given the many health benefits of the sun, the mass promotion of vitamin D had devastating consequences for society.
Mass delusion.
There is a growing consensus that vitamin D is useless and can even cause disease, especially when combined with calcium.
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Now, researchers are starting to see through the fraud:
Thomas Rosemann, Head of the Institute of Family Medicine at the University of Zurich, is not surprised. "The study shows once again that vitamin D has no effect on bone fractures, cardiovascular disease or the immune system in older people." This fits in with a whole series of studies that have shown very similar results. "They were also unable to prove any positive effects for vitamin D."
The demystification of vitamin D, which has a long history of success behind it and has only made positive headlines for decades.
"I have the impression that every decade has its vitamin," says Thomas Rosemann. "We had the vitamin C decade, then the antioxidants with A, C and E were praised to the skies". Until negative effects became apparent and certain vitamins even led to more frequent illnesses in some cases. "And now we are in the age of vitamin D."
This too could soon come to an end, as the image of the super vitamin is visibly crumbling.
www.srf.ch
Optimal vitamin D intake is zero, because it's a biological signal produced in the skin in response to the sun. It doesn't belong into the gut.
The name "vitamin D" is as deceptive as the name "vitamin A". That's because neither are vitamins. It's a secosteroid and not a vitamin.
No one needs to take a secosteroid to be healthy.
In the body, vitamin D fullfills important roles, it's essential for health. Taking cholecalciferol orally is not good, because it acts on the intestine to increase calcium absorption, compared to the body producing it from sun exposure. So if one needs higher vitamin D levels, sun or tanning beds are better. In response to the sun, the body produces sulfated vitamin D bound to cholesterol (if I remember correctly), not the form that's in supplements.
There is an interesting hypothesis that oral vitamin D caused the allergy epidemic.
Introduction of oral vitamin D supplementation and the rise of the allergy pandemic - Allergy, Asthma & Clinical Immunology
The history of the allergy pandemic is well documented, enabling us to put the vitamin D hypothesis into its historical context. The purpose of this study is to compare the prevalence of rickets, vitamin D supply, and allergy prevalence at 50-year intervals by means of a retrospective analysis...
aacijournal.biomedcentral.com
Low vitamin D levels, more often than not, are just a signal for disease, not the cause of it. The lowest vitamin D levels are measured in Africa, with massive sun exposure. Minerals like zinc and magnesium and protein already normalize low vitamin D levels in many or maybe even most cases.
Supplementing vitamin D is playing russian roulette with our bodies, no one has any idea what the consequences are.
In Eastern Germany, newborns received a dose of 150.000 IU or so after birth. A dangerously high dose. 60-70 years later, statistics showed a massive increase in heart attacks.
Given the many health benefits of the sun, the mass promotion of vitamin D had devastating consequences for society.
Mass delusion.
There is a growing consensus that vitamin D is useless and can even cause disease, especially when combined with calcium.
Effect of Vitamin D Supplementation, Omega-3 Fatty Acid Supplementation, or a Strength-Training Exercise Program on Clinical Outcomes in Older Adults: The DO-HEALTH Randomized Clinical Trial - PubMed
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01745263.
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Now, researchers are starting to see through the fraud:
Thomas Rosemann, Head of the Institute of Family Medicine at the University of Zurich, is not surprised. "The study shows once again that vitamin D has no effect on bone fractures, cardiovascular disease or the immune system in older people." This fits in with a whole series of studies that have shown very similar results. "They were also unable to prove any positive effects for vitamin D."
The demystification of vitamin D, which has a long history of success behind it and has only made positive headlines for decades.
"I have the impression that every decade has its vitamin," says Thomas Rosemann. "We had the vitamin C decade, then the antioxidants with A, C and E were praised to the skies". Until negative effects became apparent and certain vitamins even led to more frequent illnesses in some cases. "And now we are in the age of vitamin D."
This too could soon come to an end, as the image of the super vitamin is visibly crumbling.
Vitamin D in der Kritik - Präventive Einnahme bringt bei Gesunden nichts
Die meisten Menschen brauchen keine Vitamin D Präparate, zeigen Studien. Trotz Kritik bleiben Nachfrage und Kosten hoch.
Last edited:
You are stuck on bad science Georgi which is harming the people. I know you have a good heart and would not perpetuate this fraud and slow genocide of the people if your eyes were opened. I pray for the scales to come off your eyes, in Jesus name.
OP
Well, I simply responded to the study Dr. Smith used to make a point. IMO, the study he referenced does not really support his point, which I actually agree with. Namely, that inhibiting baseline ALDH is bad. I agree with that statement. That study, and the one I linked to (I think by the same authors) said that ALDH is massively elevated in breast (and other) cancers and this elevation is not good and in fact predicts death from said cancer. Vitamin D apparently lowers such excessive ALDH levels, but even then it is only calcitriol that was shown to do that. No data on cholecalciferol. If Dr. Smith can provide some evidence that vitamin D (especially cholecalciferol) can lower baseline ALDH levels, then I am all ears. Again, I do agree that inhibiting baseline ALDH is probably bad, but what I have found so far seems to suggest that vitamin D actually increases ALDH in normal cells, which is different from its effects on elevated ALDH in tumor cells.
"...VD activates NRF2 (nuclear factor erythroid 2 (NF-E2)-related factor 2) signals along with upregulation of ALDH2 expression. Knockdown of NRF2 eliminates the protective effects of VD treatment. ALDH2 knockdown not only partially affects this protection, but also mildly reduces NRF2 expression. ALDH2 overexpression enhances ERK phosphorylation and upregulated NRF2 transcription via a newly identified TRE in the exon 1 of NRF2.
Conclusion:
This study provides evidence that VD protects against alcohol-induced cell injury within an NRF2-ALDH2 feedback loop. NRF2 induced by VD could transcriptionally upregulate ALDH2 expression to help metabolize alcohol. TRE-driven transcriptional upregulation of NRF2 through ALDH2-ERK/MEK signals would further exert the anti-oxidant effects. The study explores a novel potential protection of VD in alcohol-induced liver cell injury, and contributes to alcohol-related liver disease nutritional therapies."
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2016
- Messages
- 1,656
Well said.
Runenight201
Member
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2018
- Messages
- 1,942
Vitamin D is a fraud, just like most of the other stuff promoted for health by the "wellness-industrial complex" (As New York Times put it).
Optimal vitamin D intake is zero, because it's a biological signal produced in the skin in response to the sun. It doesn't belong into the gut.
The name "vitamin D" is as deceptive as the name "vitamin A". That's because neither are vitamins. It's a secosteroid and not a vitamin.
No one needs to take a secosteroid to be healthy.
In the body, vitamin D fullfills important roles, it's essential for health. Taking cholecalciferol orally is not good, because it acts on the intestine to increase calcium absorption, compared to the body producing it from sun exposure. So if one needs higher vitamin D levels, sun or tanning beds are better. In response to the sun, the body produces sulfated vitamin D bound to cholesterol (if I remember correctly), not the form that's in supplements.
There is an interesting hypothesis that oral vitamin D caused the allergy epidemic.
Introduction of oral vitamin D supplementation and the rise of the allergy pandemic - Allergy, Asthma & Clinical Immunology
The history of the allergy pandemic is well documented, enabling us to put the vitamin D hypothesis into its historical context. The purpose of this study is to compare the prevalence of rickets, vitamin D supply, and allergy prevalence at 50-year intervals by means of a retrospective analysis...
Low vitamin D levels, more often than not, are just a signal for disease, not the cause of it. The lowest vitamin D levels are measured in Africa, with massive sun exposure. Minerals like zinc and magnesium and protein already normalize low vitamin D levels in many or maybe even most cases.
Supplementing vitamin D is playing russian roulette with our bodies, no one has any idea what the consequences are.
In Eastern Germany, newborns received a dose of 150.000 IU or so after birth. A dangerously high dose. 60-70 years later, statistics showed a massive increase in heart attacks.
Given the many health benefits of the sun, the mass promotion of vitamin D had devastating consequences for society.
Mass delusion.
There is a growing consensus that vitamin D is useless and can even cause disease, especially when combined with calcium.
Effect of Vitamin D Supplementation, Omega-3 Fatty Acid Supplementation, or a Strength-Training Exercise Program on Clinical Outcomes in Older Adults: The DO-HEALTH Randomized Clinical Trial - PubMed
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01745263.
Now, researchers are starting to see through the fraud:
Thomas Rosemann, Head of the Institute of Family Medicine at the University of Zurich, is not surprised. "The study shows once again that vitamin D has no effect on bone fractures, cardiovascular disease or the immune system in older people." This fits in with a whole series of studies that have shown very similar results. "They were also unable to prove any positive effects for vitamin D."
The demystification of vitamin D, which has a long history of success behind it and has only made positive headlines for decades.
"I have the impression that every decade has its vitamin," says Thomas Rosemann. "We had the vitamin C decade, then the antioxidants with A, C and E were praised to the skies". Until negative effects became apparent and certain vitamins even led to more frequent illnesses in some cases. "And now we are in the age of vitamin D."
This too could soon come to an end, as the image of the super vitamin is visibly crumbling.
Vitamin D in der Kritik - Präventive Einnahme bringt bei Gesunden nichts
Die meisten Menschen brauchen keine Vitamin D Präparate, zeigen Studien. Trotz Kritik bleiben Nachfrage und Kosten hoch.
Super interesting about Africans and Vitamin D levels. What would the reason for that be? Who did the study measuring their Vitamin D levels?
From my understanding, Vitamin D supplementation is promoted because we live a lifestyle that is out of the sun (indoor work), so it was introduced as a way to try and have our cake and eat it, ie still allow people to be indoors away from the sun while still getting the benefits.
Unfortunately he often uses the wrong arguments/studies to support his legitimate view.
The reason is that many Africans tend to have very poor health, their environment is extremely toxic, and they lack what is usually called "co-factors" for vitamin D-metabolism - protein, magnesium, zinc, etc.
Vitamin D goes down in a state of nutrient deficiencies and stress, because the inactive form of vitamin d (calciferol) is turned into the active form (calcitriol) to assist all body functions, including repair and immunity.
"Reagan M Mogire and colleagues describe the vitamin D status of 21 474 individuals living in 23 African countries. Severe vitamin D deficiency (<30 nmol/L 25[OH]D) was found in about 18% of these individuals, suggesting that Africa could be the continent with the highest frequency of severe vitamin D deficiency (table). This finding is in contrast with the widely held view that the extensive sunshine in Africa, the cradle of mankind, was indicative for the optimal vitamin D status of early humans."
"In a study conducted on 988 adolescent girls (12–18 years old), low blood zinc level was found to be a strong predictor of vitamin D deficiency (serum levels <20 ng) (Gonoodi et al., 2019). In a double-blind randomized trial, eight-week of zinc supplementation increased vitamin D levels in postmenopausal women (V á zquez-Lorente et al., 2021). In a similar line of study, a positive association between the serum levels of zinc and vitamin D has been documented among children and adolescents, and the odds of higher levels of vitamin D increased with higher levels of zinc (Shams et al., 2016)."
There's no free lunch. Everything has it's price. Manipulating isolated variables often has consequences downstream that can't be predicted.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2015
- Messages
- 819
Here in the Northern Canadian winter vitamin D3 supplementation makes a huge difference in my mood and motivation.
It makes a big difference when i take a high dose as soon as I feel a respiratory infection creep up. I have had way fewer since I have taken vit D in the winter and since I have started eating in a "pro metabolic" way, years ago.
@haidut took the time and provided a through analysis of one of the study Dr. Smith provided.
Proper analysis requires spending time, a precious commodity in our busy lives.
If others would like to prove their point, thorough analysis of one study at a time would be the way to go.
It takes time to this properly. Just posting studies and quoting other doctors can be meaningless.
By the way, if anyone knows how to get a retinyl ester test I'd appreciate it. it is the only thing that I found s far that may correlate with liver levels of vitamin A https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6692705/
It makes a big difference when i take a high dose as soon as I feel a respiratory infection creep up. I have had way fewer since I have taken vit D in the winter and since I have started eating in a "pro metabolic" way, years ago.
@haidut took the time and provided a through analysis of one of the study Dr. Smith provided.
Proper analysis requires spending time, a precious commodity in our busy lives.
If others would like to prove their point, thorough analysis of one study at a time would be the way to go.
It takes time to this properly. Just posting studies and quoting other doctors can be meaningless.
By the way, if anyone knows how to get a retinyl ester test I'd appreciate it. it is the only thing that I found s far that may correlate with liver levels of vitamin A https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6692705/
EMF Mitigation - Flush Niacin - Big 5 Minerals
Similar threads
