Interesting study on longer term consequences of COVID-19

@eladar said
Considering if people had good vitamin D levels, at least one half, but more likely 3/4 of the covid deaths could have been avoided.

Do you know your actual vitamin D levels?

Why don't we listen to the experts and what the science says rather than just your layperson opinion, shall we?

YouTube
it shows that, excluding those few people that are SEVERELY vit D deficient, which you would unlikely to be, OVERALL, i.e. taking into account ALL studies thus including the studies that showed NO statistical significant association between vit D and covid rather than cherry pick only the few studies that indicated a possible association between vit D and covid with tiny sample sizes thus not being statistically significant, there is certainly NO overall evidence for, and in fact the evidence is mainly against, of a causal link and any such causal link would probably be VERY weak at best. So your above "3/4" figure is ignorant BS and shown by the studies to likely to be completely false.

Also see;
YouTube
for explaining when NOT to take vit D.
Your propagation of ignorant incorrect health messages can actually HARM people if they are taken seriously.

So, as usual, the truth is far more complex, and at odds with in your case, than the typical simplistic layperson opinions not based on expertise.

I have a lot to do with hospital pharmacists, and in the UK they are all telling me that vitamin D3 is the way to go.

If you body is under an kind of stress or illness it burns vitamin C (a bit like a car using more fuel as it goes uphill) so ramping up vitamin C won't harm you either.

Participants
76 consecutive patients hospitalized with COVID-19 infection, clinical picture of acute respiratory infection, confirmed by a radiographic pattern of viral pneumonia and by a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR with CURB65 severity scale (recommending hospital admission in case of total score > 1).

Procedures
All hospitalized patients received as best available therapy the same standard care, (per hospital protocol), of a combination of hydroxychloroquine (400 mg every 12 h on the first day, and 200 mg every 12 h for the following 5 days), azithromycin (500 mg orally for 5 days. Eligible patients were allocated at a 2 calcifediol:1 no calcifediol ratio through electronic randomization on the day of admission to take oral calcifediol (0.532 mg), or not. Patients in the calcifediol treatment group continued with oral calcifediol (0.266 mg) on day 3 and 7, and then weekly until discharge or ICU admission. Outcomes of effectiveness included rate of ICU admission and deaths.

Results
Of 50 patients treated with calcifediol, one required admission to the ICU (2😵, while of 26 untreated patients, 13 required admission (50 😵 p value X2 Fischer test p < 0.001. Univariate Risk Estimate Odds Ratio for ICU in patients with Calcifediol treatment versus without Calcifediol treatment: 0.02 (95 %CI 0.002−0.17). Multivariate Risk Estimate Odds Ratio for ICU in patients with Calcifediol treatment vs Without Calcifediol treatment ICU (adjusting by Hypertension and T2DM): 0.03 (95 %CI: 0.003-0.25). Of the patients treated with calcifediol, none died, and all were discharged, without complications. The 13 patients not treated with calcifediol, who were not admitted to the ICU, were discharged. Of the 13 patients admitted to the ICU, two died and the remaining 11 were discharged.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7456194/


This was not an observational study, it was an experimental study.

400 mg vitamin d would be equivalent to 16000 IU of vitamin D, the best form for quick absorption.


Why this is not being done everywhere is beyond me, other than there needs to be a need for the vaccine.

One other thing, anyone who simply says not vitamin d deficient or has enough vitamin d is being deceptive or is simply ignorant.

The levels one should be at for fighting covid needs to be at least 50 ng, not the lower threshold, then claim that the lower threshold levels show that vitamind d does not help.

But hey, it is good enough for humy.

@eladar said

76 consecutive patients hospitalized

Stop right there; 76 is far too a small sample size to statistically conclude much!

+ Other studies with much larger sample sizes have indicate NO link. You are just cherry picking one of the studies that you think supports your layperson opinion while ignoring all other studies that contradict it. That isn't a rational way to argue for your opinion and that isn't the way good science works because good science takes into account ALL the evidence, not JUST cherry picked evidence. Until if or when you show us willingness to take into account ALL the evidence and NOT ignore any relevant study, you will not convince any rational science expert here on this forum and you will never be taken seriously. What you need to do about that is first stop cherry picking and then change your beliefs so that they then reflect ALL the evidence as a whole then come back to us with that change and ONLY THEN will we respect your layperson opinion.

@humy said
Stop right there; 76 is far too a small sample size to statistically conclude much!

+ Other studies with much larger sample sizes have indicate NO link. You are just cherry picking one of the studies that you think supports your layperson opinion while ignoring all other studies that contradict it. That isn't a rational way to argue for your opinion and that isn't the way goo ...[text shortened]... a whole then come back to us with that change and ONLY THEN will we respect your layperson opinion.

Stop right there?

Why stop right there? There is no reason why this should not be replicated in every hospital. The sample size was too small, therefore it cannot be true.

Just what big pharm and big government want you to believe.

Those other studies, did they use the same level of vitamin D treatment? If so, show me those studies.

Put up or shut up.

@eladar said

The sample size was too small, therefore it cannot be true.

Please don't resort to such straw mans. I never implied that and you know it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
"...
The straw man fallacy occurs in the following pattern of argument:

Person 1 asserts proposition X.
Person 2 argues against a superficially similar proposition Y, falsely, as if an argument against Y were an argument against X.

This reasoning is a fallacy of relevance: it fails to address the proposition in question by misrepresenting the opposing position.
..."

@humy said
Please don't resort to such straw mans. I never implied that and you know it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
"...
The straw man fallacy occurs in the following pattern of argument:

Person 1 asserts proposition X.
Person 2 argues against a superficially similar proposition Y, falsely, as if an argument against Y were an argument against X.

This reasonin ...[text shortened]... ce: it fails to address the proposition in question by misrepresenting the opposing position.
..."

Put up or shut up.

@eladar said
Put up

"Put up" with what?

@ponderable said
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.01.15.21249885v1

In a nutshell: People having been discharged from hospital have a much higher chance to be readmitted to hospital and an equally increased chance to to die months after being released.

These cases are not counted as COVID-19 death.

Just for reminders, this was the study to be discussed. It shows that the immune system suffers from fighting with COVID, and that there is more damage to the body than superficially visible.

@ponderable said
Just for reminders, this was the study to be discussed. It shows that the immune system suffers from fighting with COVID, and that there is more damage to the body than superficially visible.

Does it? Or does it show that covid does damage to people who already have weak immune systems? Who says it is covid? It may simply be a result of the autoimmune response which triggers an epigenitic stituation.

But hey, if you want to be what you want to see, then there is really no arguing.

@humy said
"Put up" with what?

Put up the study that used the same level of vitamin D used in the Spanish study that shows that vitamin D has positive effect on Covid.

@eladar said
Put up the study that

I don't have to "put up" with any study because, unlike you, I happily accept ALL studies, not just a cherry picked study. Of course, not all studies are equal and the one's you give have small sample sizes and thus should be given much less weight than the one's I gave.
Why don't you "put up" with the studies which contradict your vid D theory? Answer; you don't want truth and you just cherry picked studies that support what you want to believe while ignoring those that contradict what you want to believe. Sorry! That's not how science works.

that shows that vitamin D has positive effect on Covid.

No study, including your quoted, has ever PROVEN that vitamin D has positive effect on Covid. Many studies have proven that there must be either a very weak link at best or NO causal link between vit D and covid, the links for which I have already posted.

@humy said
I don't have to "put up" with any study because, unlike you, I happily accept ALL studies, not just a cherry picked study. Of course, not all studies are equal and the one's you give have small sample sizes and thus should be given much less weight than the one's I gave.
Why don't you "put up" with the studies which contradict your vid D theory? Answer; you don't want truth and ...[text shortened]... k link at best or NO causal link between vit D and covid, the links for which I have already posted.

Happily accept all studies? Including ones that do not give enough vitamin D to do any good.

That is your problem.

By the way, no study ever proves anything. Congrats on cherry picking which studies to apply this basic concept.

@eladar said
Happily accept all studies? Including ones that do not give enough vitamin D to do any good.

How would you know that the studies that contradict your theory contradict your theory because they "do not give enough vitamin D to do any good"? How much is "enough vitamin D" to do that "any good"? Is that scientifically determined and, if so, how was that measured? You are talking BS.

no study ever proves anything

false. And even if that was true then that means no study has ever proven your theory nor proven me wrong; You cannot have it both ways.