Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: gas_dr
You're wrong on that one; if it's the study I think you're referring to.

They were looking at antibody titer in those with vitamin D supplementation and those without.

Not only is that failing to test the claim (vitamin D blood levels above xyz nanogram/ml in the blood, have such and such vastly lower rate of hospitalization / death from coof)...

but it's kinda flawed since we have no way of doing contact tracing to see the amount of virus any one person has been exposed to, or when.

160 posted on 05/19/2021 10:29:55 PM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change with out notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies ]


To: grey_whiskers

I think you are correct in the flaws of the study. I agree with you, however I think it does lend credence to vitamin D is not the sure fire prevention some think it is. I appreciate your critical and analytic look at the literature. There is much room for reasonable debate.


164 posted on 05/19/2021 10:33:08 PM PDT by gas_dr (Conditions of Socratic debate: Intelligence, Candor, and Good Will. sir it myself. T)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson