RANT & RAVE & MAYBE MORE

Buddy Blank said...
Yes, Billy very interesting. I don't know, but imagine, if IV vitamin C was helpful we'd know about it no? Surely other doctors, in other countries, tried it.

Well, IMO, we do know about it. Perhaps not CV-19 specific, but the several studies now showing a huge help with sepsis, which is a ( the?) big player in CV-19 deaths. The CV-19/Vit C study ongoing in China will not be reported to us until Sept. So, the CV-19 specific studies will be a while in coming, as hundreds or thousands die daily. Personally, please, please, give me the vitamin C.

I'll have to take the authors word(or not) on this one, as the original study is in Chinese:
"Hemila and colleagues reported that various high-dose intravenous VC infusions (e.g., 200 mg/kg body weight/day, divided into 4 doses) shortened the intensive care unit (ICU) stay by 7.8% [11], accompanied by a significant reduction in the mortality rate [12]. Such an experience was reproduced among patients ill with severe influenza [13,14]. Indeed, dietary antioxidants (VC and sulforaphane) were shown to decrease oxidative stress induced acute inflammatory lung injury in patients receiving mechanical ventilation [15]. In addition, oral VC (e.g., 6 g daily) was able to reduce viral infection risk [16] or to improve symptoms [17]......................................................... 1 High-dose intravenous VC has also been successfully used in the treatment of 50 moderate to severe COVID-19 patients in China. The doses used varied between 10 g and 20 g per day, given over a period of 8–10 h. Additional VC bolus may be required among patients in critical conditions. The oxygenation index was improving in real time and all the patients eventually cured and were discharged [18]. In fact, high-dose VC has been clinically used for several decades and a recent NIH expert panel document states clearly that this regimen (1.5 g/kg body weight) is safe and without major adverse events [19].

Because the development of efficacious vaccines and antiviral drugs takes time, VC and other antioxidants are among currently available agents to mitigate COVID-19 associated ARDS. Given the fact that high-dose VC is safe, healthcare professionals should take a close look at this opportunity. Obviously, well-designed clinical studies are absolutely needed to develop standard protocols for bedside use." https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmc7167497/

Sepsis only, not CV-19 Sepsis specific:
"All three studies reported mortality rates between the experimental arm with the use of vitamin C and the control arm without vitamin C...............................Pooled analysis of all three studies revealed a marked reduction in mortality with the use of vitamin C (odds ratio (OR) = 0.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.07–0.40; p < 0.001; Fig. 1a).........................Conclusions

Despite varying degrees of statistical significance between the original studies, this meta-analysis reveals a positive correlation between incorporating vitamin C in the treatment of sepsis and favorable patient outcomes, including better survival and shorter duration of vasopressor use;............"

Post Edited (BillyBob@388) : 5/4/2020 3:59:19 PM (GMT-6)

Pratoman said...

PDL17 said...


These are very difficult times without any clear cut answers. I raised my children to be able to see two sides of an argument. I would say, learn enough about both sides to the extent that you could debate that position from either side. I owe that to wise mentors I could never repay. It seems to me that we have lost that ability and too easily hold positions without entertaining the thought of learning something new.

Paul

Paul, Your reasoning regarding the CV19 pandemic seems solid and a better approach than the shrill arguments from opposite sides of this issue. From my point of view, Halbert, too seems to have a well-reasoned approach as well. I'm not saying that the rest of you are wrong, but the logical side of me favors these two opinions best.

Tim G, and others, it isn't about opinions - it's about science. Opinions don't count.

Billybob.....how much vitamin D/vitamin C/zinc should an adult be taking each day? I take two of these every morning,

https:// https://www.citracal.com/products/maximum/

but thats just calcium and Vitamin D3.

Stephen S said...
Billybob.....how much vitamin D/vitamin C/zinc should an adult be taking each day? I take two of these every morning,

https:// https://www.citracal.com/products/maximum/

but thats just calcium and Vitamin D3.

Hey, Stephen! Wow, I sort of hate to give specific advise for someone else, after all, I might be wrong. But, I guess I can throw out some general stuff. But best to research it for yourself and then make the decision for yourself. I would tell you to ask your doctor, but not many doctors are into vitamin C or D or any other vitamin, so you would most likely be told to either don't take any or take a ridiculously small Vit D dose like 600 IU per day. In fact, there used to be a very famous and highly esteemed member here who got mad at the mods and stopped posting, but he used to insist that most people need zero, and he took zero. And he used to get really irritated with me when I would link to a study, even RCTs, favorable to vit D supplementation, and even accuse me of wanting to hurt people. I would assume there are at least a few folks here at HF that would agree with him on some of that, so you can see opinions are all over the place. IOW, since I could be wrong, I'd rather you become your own expert on "how much", as some folks might say "zero".

However, here are a few facts of science to help you decide. I'm not going to bother with "proof" links, right now, so just take my word for it, or not. First, did you know that 30 minutes of sunbathing in the south, most white folks bodies will produce their own vitamin D at 10,000 to 20,000 IU? Whether you believe the Bible or believe that mindless evolution "designed" you body or something in between, I often wonder why I would have been designed to make my own vitamin D in such "massive" quantities if our bodies did not REALLY need it? And if the oft recommended dose of 400-600 IU/day was dangerous to exceed? Makes me wonder.

But the safest way is to go by your own blood levels. Finally, at long last, I think most doctors these days would recommend a minimum blood level of 30, or at least shoot for 30 ng/ml, if not much higher. But some white folks carry around blood levels of 60-90 ng/ml simply by getting plenty of southern sun every day. (darker skinned folks require MORE, and normally run lower vitamin D levels than whites, and coincidentally I suppose have more PC and do worse with CV-19) So, if that is the "design" by nature, is 30 really enough? I don't know. You will have to decide.

Not long before I was diagnosed with PC, I started supplementing vit D3 2000 IU/day. I had my blood level checked after a couple of months, and it was a disappointing 30. Which tells me I was probably deficient most of my life except when working outdoors or hanging around the pool/beach. So I jumped it up to 10K/day, which got me up to 80. I felt that might be too high, so I dropped it down to 5K/day for a few years. But then I was talking to my niece more recently, who had stage 4 breast cancer in 2014(after a couple of failed treatments for stage 3). She told me that her doctor had her on 10,000/day. She had no sign of her cancer 6 years after last treatment, so I figure it has not hurt her, so I went back on 10,000/day. But how much should you take? I don't know.

As for vitamin C, consider that science says humans lost the ability to make their own vitamin C, unlike the other animals, due to a genetic defect that happened a long time ago. How much does a goat make, adjusted for human weight? about 13,000 mg/day. When sick or stressed, about 100K/day. (hence some studies giving 50k to 100K per day. How much for you? Well, I have had no IV C. The limit on regular tablets will be determined by the dose that causes you to run for the bathroom. I have been taking 2 to 4 gm per day(4000 mg) lately, but I have taken as much as 10 gm day for short periods.

Zinc, I'm not taking any at the moment. But I have taken 15-30 mg/day along with maybe 2 to 4 mg copper(zinc is known to deplete copper). So you might want to take zinc with copper if you decide to go that way. I think I would prefer to take a smaller dose with an Ionophore which helps get the zinc into the cells where the virus is. Hydroxychloroquine is an Ionophore. I have read that the supplement Quercetin is also, as is green tea. But I certainly don't know for sure. Also, I'm thinking you want to be a lot more careful to NOT get too much zinc/copper, which is not near as much worry with vitamin C. Or even D, though you can overdo D if you work at it. I offer these links just for general interest, I don't really know much about it:
https://nutritionalpharmacology.wordpress.com/2020/03/21/combating-covid-19-with-zinc-and-quercetin/


https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20200409/chloroquine-zinc-tested-to-block-covid-infection

https://healthnewsdisclosure.wordpress.com/2020/04/12/hydroxychloroquine-may-not-work-without-taking-zinc/

https://www.livestrong.com/article/511087-how-to-take-copper-with-zinc/

Post Edited (BillyBob@388) : 5/4/2020 8:34:00 PM (GMT-6)

Stephen S said...

BillyBob@388 said...


alot of stuff!!!!

BillyBob thanks for the new info to consider! Here I was thinking I was hot stuff taking two horsepills a day

HA! It was a lot of stuff. But I hesitated to just say to an individual: take 5000 IU vit D, 4000 mg of vit C unless sick then take more, and 30 mg zinc(plus copper), just because that is what I take. And eep in mind that it is calcium that makes up the largest part of those "horse pills", each of which gets you the calcium plus 500 IU vit D. A 5000 IU of vit D alone is a tiny pill.

Tim G said...
Buddy--Science-based opinion is an oxymoron? Where I disagree with you is that your interpretation of the known scientfic data about CV19 leads you to your opinion about how to act on those facts; others of us differ in our opinions about how to act on those same facts. If it is the case that opinions based on the same facts don't count, then your opinion doesn't count either. Black-and-white, either-or thinking is not the answer answer to the CV19 crisis.

My opinion doesn't count. Science does.

We know for a fact, from science, that social distancing is the only weapon we have, that works, against Covid-19.

And, that is black and white.

Funny.

Tim noting personal, but I'm not interested in a back and forth re: science, or how people interpret scientific data. I get your point but, scientific facts are scientific facts, unless disproven by new science (proven hypothesis). What I think about them is meaningless. If I walked out of the building window, on the thirteenth floor, because I didn't believe in gravity, I'd drop straight to the ground DOA. Social distancing works - that's black and white science. There's no interpretation possible there, no nuance. Whether someone agrees, disagrees, or shrugs, doesn't interest me, anymore than if I saw a man with a sign saying "the world is ending today at 5" on my street corner.

Lots of heat, humidity and sunshine down here in SoFL, that doesn't seem to help.

garyi said...
Lots of heat, humidity and sunshine down here in SoFL, that doesn't seem to help.

Perhaps the seasonality of colds and especially flu have nothing to do with heat and humidity. Perhaps it has more to do with the fact that average vitamin D levels are higher in the summer time than in the winter? Vastly higher for people who are outdoors much( working, exercising, working in the yard) in the south. Although, not as much higher as in the old days before dermatologists convinced most of us to avoid the sun(with sunscreen and wide brimmed hats and long sleeves) as much as possible. I read somewhere that in very sunny Australia, 85% of dermatologists were severely vitamin D deficient. Don't know if that is true.

So, maybe inhaling Lysol does work? 😀

Well dang. I couldn't decide whether to put this here, or in a new thread(all of these CV threads are pretty long), or to just ignore it. So looks like I decided on putting it here. Hopefully this 2020 study is not correct, and will be proven wrong by other studies. Or maybe I am misunderstanding the findings?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmc7126676/
"Influenza vaccination and respiratory virus interference among Department of Defense personnel during the 2017–2018 influenza season
Greg G. Wolff
Author information Article notes Copyright and License information Disclaimer
Armed Forces Health Surveillance Branch Air Force Satellite, 2510 5th Street, Bldg 840, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433, United States
Greg G. Wolff: lim.fa.su@3.fflow.yrogerg

Abstract
Purpose

Receiving influenza vaccination may increase the risk of other respiratory viruses, a phenomenon known as virus interference. Test-negative study designs are often utilized to calculate influenza vaccine effectiveness. The virus interference phenomenon goes against the basic assumption of the test-negative vaccine effectiveness study that vaccination does not change the risk of infection with other respiratory illness, thus potentially biasing vaccine effectiveness results in the positive direction. This study aimed to investigate virus interference by comparing respiratory virus status among Department of Defense personnel based on their influenza vaccination status. Furthermore, individual respiratory viruses and their association with influenza vaccination were examined.
Results

We compared vaccination status of 2880 people with non-influenza respiratory viruses to 3240 people with pan-negative results. Comparing vaccinated to non-vaccinated patients, the adjusted odds ratio for non-flu viruses was 0.97 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.86, 1.09; p = 0.60). Additionally, the vaccination status of 3349 cases of influenza were compared to three different control groups: all controls (N = 6120), non-influenza positive controls (N = 2880), and pan-negative controls (N = 3240). The adjusted ORs for the comparisons among the three control groups did not vary much (range: 0.46–0.51).
Conclusions

Receipt of influenza vaccination was not associated with virus interference among our population. Examining virus interference by specific respiratory viruses showed mixed results.

Vaccine derived virus interference was significantly associated with coronavirus and human metapneumovirus;

however, significant protection with vaccination was associated not only with most influenza viruses, but also parainfluenza, RSV, and non-influenza virus coinfections.........................".

Scroll down to table 5. If I am understanding this, it appears that for most pathogens, the flu shot caused no increased risk of infection. However, the odds ratio of getting corona virus is 1.36 times greater for the flu vaccinated vs non vaccinated, and 1.51 times higher for Human Metapneumovirus. If I am reading this right?