Why you should take Vit D3 to prevent and treat cancer including prostate and breast, lung, etc.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpifXPOmjis

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PYsX...eature=related
I learned the most from this one


Methods of Application of Vit D3
1. Orally
2. Topical D3 replacement therapy lotion
3. Injection

Vitmain D injection
Dr. Campbell recommends:
One time a year injection of Custom compounded
400,000 to 600,000 IU vitamin D3

Most people will be restored with one injection but there are a few who require a second injection and those people may need 5,000 IU daily to maintain a level 50 over the year.
Dr Campbell recommends the injection to almost all her patients.

In the USA there is no RDA for Vit D

1000 IU is inadequate to restore or to maintain a level 50
2,000 is required to sustain a D level of 50.

deficiency requires 5 to 10,000 IU per day.
Recheck D3 after 5 to 6 weeks
(400 IU is 1/10 of what is needed)

In India each nursing home patient gets a 600,000 IU injection per year routinely!

D levels of 46 to 50 is of best advantage for preventing cancer

Signs of Deficiency over a long period of time:

Proximal muscle weakness
(They can not get out of a chair unless they push themselves and this is caused by deficiency in vit D)
Osteoporosis
Bone pain
Depression
Brain fog
Insomnia
weak fingernails
weak pelvic muscles

The Right Test � use bioidentical vit D3 as the body can process it better
25 hydroxy vit D3 level
1, 25 hydroxy vit D3 level ( don�t use this test as it measures the 1 25 molecule and it has a short half life and you may think you have adequate levels but it does not last )

If Vitamin D stores are adequate the need for high dosages of calcium are not needed. High dosages of supplemental calcium can cause problems, kidney stones. Get most of your calcium from green veggies and the amount you will need to supplement will be much less.

You need the minerals calcium protein magnesium, iodine, strontium, boron, plus exercise with Vit D3 to prevent osteoporois.

She does not recommend any prescription osteoporosis medication.

__________________
"The nurse should be cheerful, orderly, punctual, patient, full of faith, - receptive to Truth and Love" Mary Baker Eddy
Visit www.HealthSalon.org

Bump to the top

Vitamin D Prevents Cancer: Is It True?

How Vitamin D Reduces the Incidence of Cancer:

Dr. Mercola mentioned vitamin D helping lymphoma in the video Arrow posted above, done in 2006, but it's nice to see the well known Mayo Clinic admitting it's rewards.
*********************

Mayo Clinic finds higher vitamin D levels associated with improved lymphoma survival


A presentation at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology held December 5-8 this year in New Orleans reveals the finding of researchers from the Mayo Clinic and the University of Iowa of an association between higher levels of vitamin D and greater survival in individuals being treated for lymphoma.

In a study funded by the National Cancer Institute, researchers participating in the University of Iowa/Mayo Clinic Lymphoma Specialized Program of Research Excellence (SPORE) measured serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels in 374 patients with newly diagnosed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. The team chose to study lymphoma due to the higher incidence of the disease in northern latitudes, a finding that may be related to decreased exposure to sunlight which results in lower levels of vitamin D. The study is the first to evaluate lymphoma outcome in relation to vitamin D levels.

Half of the patients were found to have deficient serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels of less than 25 nanograms per milliliter. This group had a 1.5 times greater adjusted risk of disease progression and twice the rate of dying over the course of the study compared to those with optimal levels.

Vitamin D has been found to regulate numerous genes involved in prostate, breast, colon and other cancers. A deficiency of the vitamin may be involved in the genesis of some cancers as well as influencing the outcome of the disease. "The exact roles that vitamin D might play in the initiation or progression of cancer is unknown, but we do know that the vitamin plays a role in regulation of cell growth and death, among other processes important in limiting cancer," explained lead investigator, Matthew Drake, MD, PhD, who is an endocrinologist at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. "It is fairly easy to maintain vitamin D levels through inexpensive daily supplements or 15 minutes in the sun three times a week in the summer, so that levels can be stored inside body fat."

"These are some of the strongest findings yet between vitamin D and cancer outcome," Dr Drake concluded. "While these findings are very provocative, they are preliminary and need to be validated in other studies. However, they raise the issue of whether vitamin D supplementation might aid in treatment for this malignancy, and thus should stimulate much more research."

~Trouble is that no one can make any money out of it and the prospect of reducing cancer or heart disease incidence by 70% or more is going to cost big pharma and the careers and incomes of many health professionals.

That is why they report these studies but always add a disclaimer like this one "the study was only observational, definitive links between Vitamin D deficiency and heart disease could not be assigned — but the findings create an impetus for further study,"
Vitamin D Deficiency Linked To Cardiovascular Disease & DeathResearchers found that patients with very low levels of Vitamin D were
77 percent more likely to die,
45 percent more likely to develop coronary artery disease, and
78 percent were more likely to have a stroke than patients with normal levels. Patients with very low levels of Vitamin D were also
twice as likely to develop heart failure than those with normal Vitamin D levels.

Basically they are looking for reasons for delay, Anything to suggest that the longer we wait the better. We may have suspected for the last 30yrs these things, we can see the research accumulate over those years but God forbid anyone actually applies this information to actually prevent or reduce the incidence or delay the incidence of these conditions.
Of course they grudgingly admit that up to 10,000iu/daily D3 is safe because they know there is no evidence to support claims that such amounts could be harmful.
They also know that Vitamin D3 is dirt cheap Code WAB666 $5 discount.
But they are NOT going to suggest that keeping 25(OH)D above 55ng/ml 137.5nmol/l is a good idea because they know what will happen to chronic disease incidence if they do. and they know what that will do for their career prospects.
There are none so blind as those whose income mortgage and future prospects depends on them not seeing the Bl**ding obvious.

We should always put safety first.
When we introduced high fructose corn syrup into the diet we didn't know what impact this had on Vitamin D
Most people are unaware of the impact of a high fibre diet on vitamin D status

You need to have a basic understanding of how UVB generates vitamin D3 but UVA processes that newly made vitamin D3 into suprasterols the body doesn't use.

So people sit on the beach without sunscreen for 20minutes, make loads of vitamin D3, then apply a sunscreen that converts UVB to UVA and spend the rest of the day laying in the sun processing the D3 into suprasterols that are useless. Even spending your morning coffee break in the sunshine will be negated by spending the rest of the day under UV fluorescent strips or sitting by a sunny window. I wonder much how the rash of conservatory's and people spending several hours under UVA has contributed to the ever lower vitamin D3 levels?

However the point of this rant is that all these 25(OH)D lowering scenario's weren't the result of years of study or peer reviewed research. No one has deliberately set out to lower our 25(OH)D levels.
When I was a kid I went to a school that REQUIRED boys wore shorts until they were 13 so even through the winter it was shorts for school every day of the year. I can still remember my first pair of long trousers. Didn't I feel grown up. Boys legs nowadays rarely see sunlight.

Just as we didn't need peer reviewed research to determine the effect on vitamin D status of wearing short or long trousers we don't require peer reviewed research to undo that effect.

Common sense should be enough to us to recognise 25(OH)D levels are reducing and disease incidence is increasing, Vitamin D3 supplementing is CHEAP, SAFE and effective in restoring the 25(OH)D levels I would have enjoyed as a child. (POP as is called in the UK (soda) was a very rare treat in my youth and it would have been made with sugar before the days of HFCS)

This is a win win situation. We know for certain that people with higher 25(OH)D levels live longer and enjoy less disease. We need to be getting on with ensuring ALL pregnant women take effective amounts of it.

As Ted says, there's no harm in taking D3 at reasonable levels and it's available cheaply in most places.

Ted's link is good, I've personally tried to avoid shopping online for my vitamins, I just get prices from this discount vitamins page and then haggle with the local store owners/suppliers to get similar prices and keep my money tied to local business as much as possible.

My personal philosophy is start soon, don't wait, proactive is way better than reactive on health!