Posted on 01/26/2008 10:56:49 PM PST by blam
Vitamin D Deficiency Study Raises New Questions About Disease And Supplements
ScienceDaily (Jan. 27, 2008) — Low blood levels of vitamin D have long been associated with disease, and the assumption has been that vitamin D supplements may protect against disease. However, this new research demonstrates that ingested vitamin D is immunosuppressive and that low blood levels of vitamin D may be actually a result of the disease process. Supplementation may make the disease worse.
In a new report Trevor Marshall, Ph.D., professor at Australia’s Murdoch University School of Biological Medicine and Biotechnology, explains how increased vitamin D intake affects much more than just nutrition or bone health. The paper explains how the Vitamin D Nuclear Receptor (VDR) acts in the repression or transcription of hundreds of genes, including genes associated with diseases ranging from cancers to multiple sclerosis.
"The VDR is at the heart of innate immunity, being responsible for expression of most of the antimicrobial peptides, which are the body’s ultimate response to infection," Marshall said.
"Molecular biology is now forcing us to re-think the idea that a low measured value of vitamin D means we simply must add more to our diet. Supplemental vitamin D has been used for decades, and yet the epidemics of chronic disease, such as heart disease and obesity, are just getting worse."
"Our disease model has shown us why low levels of vitamin D are observed in association with major and chronic illness," Marshall added. "Vitamin D is a secosteroid hormone, and the body regulates the production of all it needs. In fact, the use of supplements can be harmful, because they suppress the immune system so that the body cannot fight disease and infection effectively."
Marshall's research has demonstrated how ingested vitamin D can actually block VDR activation, the opposite effect to that of Sunshine. Instead of a positive effect on gene expression, Marshall reported that his own work, as well as the work of others, shows that quite nominal doses of ingested vitamin D can suppress the proper operation of the immune system. It is a different metabolite, a secosteroid hormone called 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D, which activates the VDR to regulate the expression of the genes. Under conditions that exist in infection or inflammation, the body automatically regulates its production of all the vitamin D metabolites, including 25-hydroxyvitamin D, the metabolite which is usually measured to indicate vitamin D status.
Vitamin D deficiency, long interpreted as a cause of disease, is more likely the result of the disease process, and increasing intake of vitamin D often makes the disease worse. "Dysregulation of vitamin D has been observed in many chronic diseases, including many thought to be autoimmune," said J.C. Waterhouse, Ph.D., lead author of a book chapter on vitamin D and chronic disease.
"We have found that vitamin D supplementation, even at levels many consider desirable, interferes with recovery in these patients."
"We need to discard the notion that vitamin D affects a disease state in a simple way," Marshall said. "Vitamin D affects the expression of over 1,000 genes, so we should not expect a simplistic cause and effect between vitamin D supplementation and disease. The comprehensive studies are just not showing that supplementary vitamin D makes people healthier."
Journal reference: Marshall TG. Vitamin D discovery outpaces FDA decision making. Bioessays. 2008 Jan 15;30(2):173-182 [Epub ahead of print] Online ISSN: 1521-1878 Print ISSN: 0265-9247 PMID: 18200565
Adapted from materials provided by Autoimmunity Research Foundation, via AlphaGalileo.
Bump!
Some benefit from Vitamin D supplements in our food chain, some are harmed, and some get by either way just fine.
Moreover the benefit may be great (life saving) or minor (fewer cases of sniffles), and the harm may be great (life threatening) or minor.
He makes a case of less Vitamin D for those who would be harmed (duh), and he makes a case that public policy (the FDA) should not be changed at this time to encourage more Vitamin D supplementation. First we should better understand how many people are in these various groups.
I don't see, yet anywhere, where he directly advocates reducing the current supplementation of Vitamin D, though he does present suggesting evidence that such might be the case.
He is advocating that the FDA not extend Vitamin D supplementation at the present time, and he is encouraging funding (surprise, surprise) of more studies.
Thanks for the ping.
The risk-reward tradeoffs for Vitamin D supplements, as they vary by diverse populations, may be less uniformly rewarding than we have thought.
Perhaps the fact that food supplementation (in milk) vitamin D2 rather than the good D3 is what should be considered.
Not sure therefore what about this . . . Am suspicious that some powers that be don’t want Vit D helpfulness to be widely accepted.
Seems to me that the doc at the hospital that kept his wing free of influenza etc. with 2000 units daily of Vit D has it right.
Yes, he did. and yet the epidemics of chronic disease, such as heart disease and obesity, are just getting worse.
His own words.
You may worship at his altar. I prefer to engage in critical thought.
I objected, stating he didn't do that.
You quoted him, "chronic disease, such as heart disease and obesity"
You're right and I was wrong - he did assert that obesity was a chronic disease.
You labeled my comments "worship." That's bull.
You said you prefer to engage in "critical thought," as if I wasn't. That's a plain old insult without basis.
Furthermore, dismissing my comments as "worship", and Marshall's entire work, out of hand, because he said obesity was a chronic disease, don't sound like critical though to me.
I won't waste other readers time with the list, but do a Google search for:
and you will immediately see a long list of articles directly stating that obesity is a chronic disease, from a variety of serious organizations. You might disagree, and perhaps for good reason. But blowing them all off, out of hand, for such an assertion, is bull, not critical thinking.She does a good job of explaining these new insights into how our immune systems work, why recent evidence suggests that many chronic diseases have a bacterial cause, and how the Marshall Protocol works.
Admittedly, beginning with the very title of her article, she does little to persuade those who dismiss all this as "Marshall worship."
That's tough.
If a critical causative agent in the mechanisms of a rather negative medical situation is the presence of unusually high amounts of a particular kind of bacteria, then I'd consider it fair to call that a "disease."
Since a minor amount of summer sun exposure generates 10,000 IU of Vitamin D in the skin, Dr. Marshall and his supporters need to explain clearly how much smaller amounts of Vitamin D in the diet can have a pathological effect. The assertion seems counter-intuitive. Is there a clear theory why cholecalciferol generated in the skin by sunlight has a different physiological effect than that ingested through the digestive tract?
Thanks much.
I hope all your prayer concerns are . . . as you wish and need them to be.
Blessings,
Pretty clearly, as others have noted above, what's perhaps a good treatment for some is unhealthy for most.
The post is by "paulscha". Search on the page for the string "posted 18 March 2005 12:50" to find it.
That post raises numerous damning questions.
So, how would you summarize your own current position vis a vis taking vitamin D supplements?
If I did have a chronic disease, I'd take a closer look at the Marshall Protocol, with a skeptical eye.
In the end analysis, we are each responsible for our own health, and we're each different.
My own conviction at present is to continue with the 1000 units of Vit D per day.
Maybe I’ll read more and reconsider but that’s where I am at the moment. I take a handful of nutrients as well.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.