Vaccines, Vit D and Variants

[LemonSwan]

I am obviously missing something here because I was just comparing Vit D deficiency of COVID patients (over 80% of hospitalisations) with efficacy of vaccines in reducing hospitalisations..

*Its hard to track down the exact figures as they are changing them all the time. But heres what I have:
Pfizer 52% (1st dose) going to 95% (2nd)
Oxford 70% going to 80-90%
Novavax 89% after two.
J&J single shot 66%

Now we have the SA variant which is messing up the efficacy.
Oxford 10%
Novavax 60%
Pfizer - 'Very modest difference' - SA variant not an issue.

If the virus keeps mutating (which it seems hell bent on doing) then would if have been more effective for everyone to just take vit D tablets and why has this not been pushed more by the Gov. Theres tonnes of papers on this and I haven't heard a peep about it from GOV/NHS - to the point where when I bring up taking Vit D I feel like a conspiracy theorist or a pseudoscientist.

It seems such an obvious solution that I am either being mad or have utterly missed the point. Some one please let me know

Yes it’s crazy that the recommendation for a baby is the same for a fully grown adult. Makes you wonder if they’ve updated the guidelines in the last 50 years....hmmm.

Also any sensible person will conclude that if 400IU is needed for a baby maybe an adult might need a slightly higher dose.

There's something here: www.healthline.com/nutrition/vitamin-d-side-effects
As I'm not monitoring how deficient or otherwise I am in Vit D, I've decided to limit myself to 1000iui or whatever it is. And am asking the DCs to take 400iui.
Anyone else?

Yes I’m doing 1000 IU for myself (and often I forgot to take every day) and 400IU for kids. Nowhere near anything that could be toxic.

I suspect the kids dose is low but mine are outdoors a lot over summer so I hope this is just enough.

@DianaT1969

@, EmbarrassingAdmissions - why mention the other drugs if they were given to all in the study? It isn't a differential. It negates an interesting study that should have been scaled up in the UK. The results were published in September. We've had plenty of time to scale it up. Do you know that PHE don't ask for, track or hold any data on vitamin D in Covid inpatients in the UK? That's how interested they are.

Again, this is not reading like an informed critique of SACN's interpretation.

The drugs are relevant because of SACN's discussion of whether the results are generalisable to UK populations.

The latest pre-print is not a randomised controlled trial as such but I am hampered by the lack of access to the full text (however, I've seen that it's observational, the populations are not necessarily comparable, and there were several other differences that might seem to be relevant).

You made an assertion about SACN - it seems that a panel of relevant experts has a different set of conclusions about Cordoba than you do.

As mentioned above, it will be interesting to see if the publication of the larger observational trial in the pre-print prompts an update from NICE or SACN.

I did check my levels last Nov after suffering from some strange virus! They were actually sufficient so I don’t go crazy. It really is a personalised approach. If you are really deficient you’ll need a bigger dose.

NICE don’t even approve cancer drugs if they’re too expensive.

By the time NICE approve or recommend anything it will be far too late for this pandemic.

The latest spanish preprint is not an observational trial, it's an interventional trial.

An interventional trial is specifically designed to evaluate the direct impacts of treatment or preventative measures on disease.

During an observational study, no intervention is implemented by the investigator.

Calcifediol was the difference in the intervention between the two groups.

Regarding the cost of giving Calcifidiocol to inpatients, what can it be? £100 or £200 per patient max? That has to be cheaper than a day in ICU.

I wonder if relatives will bring a class action against NICE and PHE when results are clearer on this.

As Dr Richard Quinton, a consultant endocrinologist at the Royal Victoria Infirmary in Newcastle said:
“Our view was that this treatment is so safe and the crisis is so enormous that we don’t have time to debate,”
Well done to him and that Trust for getting their death rate down compared to other trusts around the UK.

Also, thanks to MPs David Davis with Rupa Huq for lobbying so hard. They must feel extreme frustration with the Health Ministry, NICE and PHE.

Well I agree with Dr Quinton. Good for him. It’s safe but let’s wait years for all the peers reviews
and NICE recommendations. Meanwhile thousands are dying.

Wow what a great study! That is reassuring. I also saw David Davis on twitter talking about it.

I watched the Dr Campbell video too. He seems a very nice man.

The latest study has full text available. It wasnt a blind trial but it was random in the sense that they intervened for all patients in certain wards. They also intervened for those in the control group admitted to ICU when they moved there and analysed those separately. If I wasnt already taking supplements that trial would have convinced me to do so.

Vitamin D is not expensive.

There do need to be trials on the most appropriate dose and formulation and on safety. It isnt only death you need to consider but hypercalcaemia damaging your bones, kidneys and heart.

Don't you think if that had been the solution some clever scientist would have worked it out instead of a vaccine.

I have a phd in a physical science (caveat: not life sciences, but have a passing knowledge of funding), but remember how applying for grants is the greatest barrier to research.

Simply what pharmaceutical company is going to fund research into a previously known, non-patentable and readily available vitamin? Also from a cynical point of view a vaccine produces much more kudos than advising vitamin supplements. Our government has clearly priotised a high-tech solution that they can claim is world beating over non-pharmaceutical interventions. Also they have the mind set of throwing billions gambling on an array of vaccines, while underfunding vulnerable aspects of the virus (laptops, UC credit top ups, feed school meals) has been evident.

I think it is proper research into vitamin d will be far and few between. As a previous poster said and i suspect is true: had it have been a novel molecule, there would have been a lot more investigations. It would be patented and cost a fortune as a wonder drug.

My is point is that sadly we can only speculate and trust intinct on vitamin d and covid.

This is interesting stuff and I agree, alongside a vaccine, we should all be taking Vit D if only got the possibility ( I actually think it is more than that) of it helping against Covid.

I do have a question though. My doctor refused to check my Vit D level. He said they can only run the test on patients that seem to be deficient. Is there a reliable way to get tested for Vit D levels privately please? I would be interested to know what mine are.

It is relatively easy to dismiss something by saying "but there isn't the research to back it up".

Believe me you can say that to dismiss anything you want. And it'll be true because who can russel (sp?) up a full on double-blind randomised trial of at least 1000 suitable subjects monitored by qualified professionals on the exact topic they have a hypothesis? The people who control the money control what evidence there is.

I live in sweden and heard the state epidemiologist (Anders Tegnell) dismiss ALL studies into face masks as being flawed. On that basis he refuses to increase (or advise the government to increase) recommendations on face masks. But my place of work (school) has two covid cases and dh's (supermarket) one case and what has been done - nothing. Absolutely nothing. It's as if these people had a cold and just won't be in for a couple of days. Carry on as normal.

It makes me so angry that small easily implementable things that can prevent transmission or severity of the disease are ignored through "lack of evident".

I check my levels twice a year. I take ~3000 units a day as maintenance and have done so for a couple of years after doing six weeks at 6000 units a day. My most recent result was 137 nmol/L. I'm happy to hear that this may help protect me against covid.

Sweden's epidemiologist should be replaced then. On the good news thread I posted about a substance that can be used on masks to kill any variant of the virus.

I have paid for vitamin D test from here www.vitamindtest.org.uk/ There are others but this is as cheap as they come if you want reliable. My problem is getting the blood out, make sure hands are warm first.

@Yogatomorrow

Don't you think if that had been the solution some clever scientist would have worked it out instead of a vaccine.

I have a phd in a physical science (caveat: not life sciences, but have a passing knowledge of funding), but remember how applying for grants is the greatest barrier to research.

Simply what pharmaceutical company is going to fund research into a previously known, non-patentable and readily available vitamin? Also from a cynical point of view a vaccine produces much more kudos than advising vitamin supplements. Our government has clearly priotised a high-tech solution that they can claim is world beating over non-pharmaceutical interventions. Also they have the mind set of throwing billions gambling on an array of vaccines, while underfunding vulnerable aspects of the virus (laptops, UC credit top ups, feed school meals) has been evident.

I think it is proper research into vitamin d will be far and few between. As a previous poster said and i suspect is true: had it have been a novel molecule, there would have been a lot more investigations. It would be patented and cost a fortune as a wonder drug.

My is point is that sadly we can only speculate and trust intinct on vitamin d and covid.

I don't agree. The REACT studies in the UK are looking at many different drugs for the treatment of Covid. They haven't necessarily been looking at the newest or most expensive or innovative drugs, but an array of market approved drugs, some of which are very old, and very cheap ie: dexamethasone. The fact that they haven't looked at vitamin D may be a missed opportunity, but it has nothing to do with money making potential or kudos.

@alreadytaken thank you. Interested to see what mine are!

@TheGoodEnoughWife - I can't follow the link of the other poster. I used Thriva for a private vitamin D test. There are sometimes discount codes around for your first test with them. Another poster on here mentioned Black Country Labs.

I think it's one of the great scandals that GPs have been told not to test vitamin D. I read the instruction they received.
Knowing that vitamin D is important for our immune function, I see no benefit to the NHS in keeping the majority of the population deficient. People would be willing to buy it themselves - they just need clear public messaging on the required dose to raise levels out of deficiency.
To continue with this hard line of no GP testing during a pandemic, when overseas studies almost a year suggested a strong link between outcome and vitamin D, is unconscionable.
We should have had widescale testing and loading doses prescibed/advised. We got the opposite.

By the way, anyone starting vitamin D supplements as a result of this thread, should read up on taking K2 and magnesium with it. Holland & Barrett website product pages explain the reason. Unfortunately it isn't mentioned on the NH S website vitamin D page. (Although we can get K2 and magnesium through food instead).

Thank you @DianaT1969 I have already bought a test from that first link but will take a note of the ones you have suggested for checking later on.

I wanted to get one quick as assumed it may be skewed by starting to take Vit D but am now thinking that might not be the case?

DianaT1969
Thats exactly what I am saying!
People would be willing to buy it themselves - they just need clear public messaging
This could make a huge difference. Yes we are lacking in evidence, but to me it is simple that if 80% of people in ICU are severely Vit D deficient then fixing as many peoples Vit D deficiency seems like an obvious step. I am no doctor but it doesnt seem like something genius to suggest. It seems bloody obvious and if it doesnt work so be it, but at least we solved a relatively easy and cheap issue compared to fixing obesity, or diabetes or any other risk factor.

TheGoodEnoughWife
You may aswell start. Vit D builds up and is stored in summer months and then you deplete it in Winter. It takes quite a while to improve levels so you will be deficient anyway. I say that as I am a gardener early 30s pale skin and spend nearly all my working hours outside. I am still deficient in winter if I dont bump it up. I take Boots Max Strength 75ug (3000IU) a few times a week. So my thought track is if I have an issue - its likely endemic.

The reason 80% of hospitalised patients were vitamin D deficient is surely because nearly all of them were elderly people who didn't go out enough and get enough sunshine (the prime source of vitamin D)?

Thanks @LemonSwan

Meaning that younger people who get adequate sunshine would not need vitamin D as a precaution against severe covid symptoms.

I'm still taking it to be in the safe side though!

@JanuaryJonez

Meaning that younger people who get adequate sunshine would not need vitamin D as a precaution against severe covid symptoms.

I'm still taking it to be in the safe side though!

My teens are full time dance & music students who spend the majority of their time indoors in black box studios with no windows.