By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
SvennoJ on 20 June 2020
Edit Thread
JRPGfan said:

The repeated reminder to keep getting sun (if your able) (like 1hour a day if possible (more if darker skin tone)) and takeing vitamin D suppliments.
If you cannot, or have darker skin (so it takes much longer to make vitamin D), you should be on a suppliment for your own safety.

John Campbell:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qyMFsLFAE5o

98.9% of covid19 patients defined as vitamin D deficient (below 20ng/ml) died.
While only 4,1% of patients with high enough levels died.

Thats from Indonesia, where they looked at ~800 patients history at a hospital that had Covid19.
(ei. you got a bad case of covid and were hospitalised)

Basically you get hit hard with covid19, and you have a deficiency in Vitamin D, chances of you dieing are so much higher its unreal.


In the UK they did studies about Vitamin D levels (Annualised mean levels):
So the yearly avg was:
White ~45,8 nmol/L   (john campbell says this is too low as well) (he basically sees the entire UK as being deficient in general)
Asian ~20,5 nmol/L
Black  ~27,7 nmol/L

So your thinking, why would asians have lower levels than blacks? Well bacause the black people in the UK arnt afraid of sun bathing abit or being outsides in the sun. Asians in general have this thing about light fair skin, not wanting to tan, and also because "asians" here means muslims (in the uk), and the women are typically always covered up (ei. if only your face can get sun light, and not arms/legs ect, you make less Vitamin D).

This is (a large part of) why asian & black people make up a disproportional amount of infections for covid19,
and have higher deaths than whites in the UK.

That seems extreme.

Who is they? And where did he get this report of the 800 cases from? 99% vs 4% is such an extreme difference, how come google turns up nothing while searching for Indonesia, vitamin D deficiency and Covid19. There is a correlation but 99% with less than 50 nmol/L (20 ng/ml) dying?


https://www.thejakartapost.com/life/2020/05/23/does-vitamin-d-protect-against-coronavirus.html

It does have a big effect on respiratory diseases

The benefits of regular supplementation were greatest among participants who were severely vitamin D deficient to begin with, for whom the risk of respiratory infection went down by 70%. In others the risk decreased by 25%.

Some warnings against suddenly dosing up

Large one-off (or “bolus”) doses are often used as a quick way to achieve vitamin D repletion. But in the context of respiratory infections, there were no benefits if participants received high single doses. In fact, monthly or annual vitamin D supplementation has sometimes had unexpected side effects, such as increased risk of falls and fractures, where vitamin D was administered to protect against these outcomes. It’s possible intermittent administration of large doses may interfere with the synthesis and breakdown of the enzymes regulating vitamin D activity within the body.

Covid 19

We still have relatively little direct evidence about the role of vitamin D in COVID-19. And while early research is interesting, much of it may be circumstantial.

For example, one small study from the United States and another study from Asia found a strong correlation between low vitamin D status and severe infection with COVID-19. But neither study considered any confounders.

In addition to the elderly, COVID-19 generally has the greatest consequences for people with pre-existing conditions. Importantly, people with existing medical conditions are also often vitamin D deficient. Studies assessing ICU patients have reported high rates of deficiency even before COVID-19. So we would expect to see relatively high rates of vitamin D deficiency in seriously ill COVID-19 patients – whether vitamin D has a role or not.


And that's a key point there, elderly people are more likely to be vitamin D deficient, an old study in Indonesia

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19054885/

The prevalence of 25(OH)D deficiency among Indonesian elderly women in institutionalized care is about 35.1%. Most of deficient subjects went out-door only once a week (38.5%). Veil was the most sun protection worn by the subjects and most subjects had length of sun exposure 30-60 minutes a week. The mean daily intake of vitamin D was 0.6 IU, protein was 33.9 gr/day and calcium was 239.9 mg/day,and cut-off of serum 25(OH)D in Indonesian elderly women is (suspected) to be 75.9 nmol/L.


And South Asia in general

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.4161/derm.24054

Vitamin D deficiency is more common in South Asia and Southeast Asia than is appreciated. Most studies defined 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels [25(OH)D] levels of less than 50 nmol/L (20 ng/mL) as vitamin D deficiency. With this cut-off level, the prevalence of vitamin D deficiency was about 70% or higher in South Asia and varied from 6–70% in Southeast Asia. The determinants for the variation of vitamin D status are skin pigmentation, aging, the sun protection behaviors such as application of a sunscreen, religious, lifestyle and nutritional differences. Advanced age is a known risk factor for vitamin D deficiency.



I checked his source in the you tube link, daily mail... hmm.

Researchers warned the study was not definitive, however, because the patients with high vitamin D levels were healthier and younger.

The Indonesian study was not associated with experts from any university, unlike most Covid-19 research. All five researchers, led by Prabowo Raharusuna, were listed as 'independent'. No details of their scientific backgrounds were provided in the paper. The research — published in April — has yet to be peer-reviewed by fellow scientists, a process that often uncovers flaws in studies.

Their correlation graph is woefully out of date as well with Sweden and Brazil (with high levels of Vitamin D) sitting nice and low for infections per million people.


Bad study John Campbell....