COVID-19 - READ THE RULES BEFORE REPLYING

[Quackers101]

4 minutes ago, tikker said:

It makes no sense to block the people you describe.

I edited the sentence and forgot to change it, so what I meant was "it shouldn't be those who already had the virus etc".

sorry just messed up the sentence

4 minutes ago, tikker said:

Vaccines are hugely more important than masks. Masks don't solve the issue and only buy a little time.

sure being vaccinated overall, but when it comes to be indoors, masks is more important for spread and numbers. even if being vaccinated reduce some of the spread?

[tikker]

8 minutes ago, Quackers101 said:

I edited the sentence and forgot to change it, so what I meant was "it shouldn't be those who already had the virus etc".

sorry just messed up the sentence

sure being vaccinated overall, but when it comes to be indoors, masks is more important for spread and numbers. even if being vaccinated reduce some of the spread?

It's true, but we're at the point where number of infected people doesn't really matter anymore. That'll be uncontrollable and will more or less do what it does. The numbers that are now important are the number of people that end up in the hospital. That is something that benefits the most from vaccines and not as much from masks.

[Quackers101]

While this is kind of around covid and social media platforms.

What is there about "fact checkers" on a social media platform, where they could ban/hide experts that deals with covid from their platform, or the creator of said vaccine or method or research. Is there a way we could deal with this on social media, and would there need to be a standard also done in a way that doesn't get exploited? In the public opinion, political, or any other reasons, and to improve online discussion? (maybe this would be better as own thread)

Edited February 7, 2022 by Quackers101

[dalekphalm]

9 minutes ago, Quackers101 said:

While this is kind of around covid and social media platforms.

What is there about "fact checkers" on a social media platform, where they could ban/hide experts that deals with covid from their platform, or the creator of said vaccine or method or research. Is there a way we could deal with this on social media, and would there need to be a standard also done in a way that doesn't get exploited? In the public opinion, political, or any other reasons, and to improve online discussion? (maybe this would be better as own thread)

There really isn't a practical solution to your problem.

 

If you tried to legislate it, people would claim political bias (hell they already do).

 

Fact checkers are not perfect - so you try and find ones that are the least biased, and cite all their sources.

[12345678]

Got the third dose, I specified in their documents to compile that until 10 days ago I had contacts with someone positive, but no one did care about that

 

At first I was feeling to faint because I'm sensible to that sort of things, after around an half of hour all ok, after a while my right shoulder started to hurt as the first and second dose;

In the evening I start feeling weak, chills and some sort of headache, the shoulder still hurts if I move it

 

The first two doses were pfizer, this time around was moderna

 

[MultiGamerClub]

Have 3 doses. Pzifer, moderna, pfizer.

Yet, covid is only growing ever closer.

[Mister Woof]

Still sems so strange to me how something that is just public health became a political stance.

[Mr_Scary]

On 2/2/2022 at 3:52 PM, WkdPaul said:

 

Get vaccinated people, it's free and it's not worth the gamble.

That's how I feel about getting it, It's not worth the gamble.

[Mr_Scary]

1 hour ago, Mister Woof said:

Still sems so strange to me how something that is just public health became a political stance.

1. People want to control people. 

2. People do not want to be controlled.

[Mister Woof]

[Quackers101]

49 minutes ago, Mr_Scary said:

1. People want to control people. 

2. People do not want to be controlled.

following that, and if one can see some truth to it?

then the vaccine makes it no different than anything else, so no matter what you are going to do, you are "controlled" to do so.
now I'm just going to ask some aliens to free me from earth, to not be some sheep taking a bottle of milk and DRINK IT?!?! omg, that is some milk bruh.

[cloneman]

No one is even talking about Vitamin D, which Fauci takes 6000IU of daily, but why bother recommending it for anyone else as part of public health measures. Only 14x less chance of severe CoVID illness.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-study-offers-strongest-proof-yet-of-vitamin-ds-power-to-fight-covid/
 

[Quackers101]

30 minutes ago, cloneman said:

No one is even talking about Vitamin D, which Fauci takes 6000IU of daily, but why bother recommending it for anyone else as part of public health measures. Only 14x less chance of severe CoVID illness.

a bit old news. then you had the UK with their vitamin D program. It's just that it all depends, and sometimes it can help and sometimes it is not much of a difference. but like said, sometimes it can be nice to just have an extra dose that is unlikely harmful and provide more benefits. Also to hear with your doctor or from blood test history. Like the UK, less sunny days and less vitamin D intake. same goes for other minerals and vitamins. That and not all of these Vitamin D studies was in good faith, sadly

[cloneman]

UK called for what, 600UI? That's pathetically low. It's difficult to OD on vitamin D. Most of the bad faith vitamin D studies were done by big pharma to show that it doesn't work. (i.e. giving it to people already in hospital, rather than as prevention)

[Donut417]

1 hour ago, cloneman said:

No one is even talking about Vitamin D, which Fauci takes 6000IU of daily, but why bother recommending it for anyone else as part of public health measures. Only 14x less chance of severe CoVID illness.

Because big Pharma is making more money with treatments and vaccinations. That would be my guess. Though that was an interesting article. One of the big things the article did bring up is Vitamins are not a substitute for vaccination, but rather a way to boost your immune system. Ultimately health officials were hopeful that the vaccine would have stopped covid in its tracks. Much like how the Small Pox vaccine eradicated it from the face of the earth. However that ship has come and gone. 

 

At the end of the day this is a topic you bring up with your primary healthcare provider. Because you have to make sure you're not taking too much of any supplement. You dont know what potential side effects it could cause. Same thing applies to any mediation as well.

[Andreas Lilja]

So pharma corps are nefarious because they rely on the sick for profit? Are doctors in it has well since they make big $? 

[Donut417]

4 minutes ago, Andreas Lilja said:

So pharma corps are nefarious because they rely on the sick for profit? Are doctors in it has well since they make big $? 

I think some do get kick backs for pushing certain drugs. But Big Pharma at least in the US, relies on commercials to sell drugs direct to consumers. "Do you have these symptoms? It could be cause by (Insert made up diseases here), this drug will help manage the symptoms. Ask your doctor about X drug. *List massive amounts of side effects including death*. 

[Spotty]

Thread cleaned. I have removed a few of the recent posts relating to the Canadian Convoy protests. Please keep in mind the forums rules on politics. While the convoy protests may have started out related to vaccine mandates it has become a highly politicised controversial topic. Not to go in to great detail, but the recent discussion in this thread about not related to COVID-19 in any way and most of the comments removed were just both sides of the protest calling each other nazis. Regardless of what your opinion on the protests are it is not the type of discussion appropriate for here. Just because there's some link between the convoy protests to COVID-19 does not exempt it from our rules on politics or give you a free pass to insult people based on their political opinions.

 

Reminder to stick to COVID-19 related discussion. This means things directly related to COVID-19, not the political issues surrounding it.

Quote

No political content, regardless of your views.

• If something spans politics and tech, the discussion must remain clearly within tech and must not descend into politics.
• This covers all parts of the site, including status updates and the off topic subforum.

[cloneman]

On 2/11/2022 at 11:02 PM, Donut417 said:

Because big Pharma is making more money with treatments and vaccinations. That would be my guess. Though that was an interesting article. One of the big things the article did bring up is Vitamins are not a substitute for vaccination, but rather a way to boost your immune system. Ultimately health officials were hopeful that the vaccine would have stopped covid in its tracks. Much like how the Small Pox vaccine eradicated it from the face of the earth. However that ship has come and gone. 

 

At the end of the day this is a topic you bring up with your primary healthcare provider. Because you have to make sure you're not taking too much of any supplement. You dont know what potential side effects it could cause. Same thing applies to any mediation as well.

If you discuss Vitamin D with your primary healthcare provider, you're likely to get inaccurate information about it that's not grounded in the most recent studies. 1000IU is not nearly enough, and Vitamin K2 needs to be part of the conversation as well, which most people haven't even heard of.

The whole "ask your doctor" thing should be meme rather than good advice, in many situations. There's a larger and larger proportion of health stuff that people should be doing on a DIY basis - although it takes a while to figure out how to do this safely ... and the gaslighting from the media and old-school PCPs makes it hard.

Most people think getting a 5-10  minutes of sun per day without sunscreen is dangerous and you'll get skin caner.

[tikker]

3 hours ago, cloneman said:

The whole "ask your doctor" thing should be meme rather than good advice, in many situations. There's a larger and larger proportion of health stuff that people should be doing on a DIY basis - although it takes a while to figure out how to do this safely ... and the gaslighting from the media and old-school PCPs makes it hard.

This is terrible advice. Yes doctors may stick to older methods for reasons, be it that they are more proven or otherwise. That doesn't immediately equate bad or meme advice. You do not want people doing stuff that falls under "it takes a while to figure out how to do this safely" themselves in a DIY situation. It is that while that doctors spend studying to get the necessary knowledge and expertise to treat you safely. People can think they are smart and, for example, wrongly conclude that if 1 pill per day is good then 2 or 3 must be even better.

3 hours ago, cloneman said:

If you discuss Vitamin D with your primary healthcare provider, you're likely to get inaccurate information about it that's not grounded in the most recent studies. 1000IU is not nearly enough, and Vitamin K2 needs to be part of the conversation as well, which most people haven't even heard of.

Vitamin D supplementation is still actively debated. Recent studies clearly state that vitamin D's effects are still unclear and that it is likely only effective if you have a deficiency, which is typically glossed over when this argument is made. A big reason why vitamin D supplements can make sense is because it's generally safe and a deficiency is common.

Quote

Amrein et al. 2020

Vitamin D is clearly not a panacea, and is most likely efficient only in deficiency. Given its rare side effects and its relatively wide safety margin, it may be an important, inexpensive, and safe adjuvant therapy for many diseases, but future large and well-designed studies should evaluate this further. A worldwide public health intervention that includes vitamin D supplementation in certain risk groups, and systematic vitamin D food fortification to avoid severe vitamin D deficiency, would appear to be important.
...

Vitamin D deficiency is highly prevalent, but the literature to support vitamin D supplementation is unsatisfactory to date. Unless major funding sources are used for vitamin D research, it appears sensible to focus on vitamin D-deficient populations with a high event rate. Vitamin D is clearly not a panacea, but may be an important, inexpensive, and safe adjuvant therapy for many diseases and stages of life, including pregnancy, childhood, and old age. Public health efforts to prevent severe vitamin D deficiency should therefore be further promoted.

 

Quote

Bouillon et al. 2021
In conclusion, supplementation of vitamin D-replete individuals does not provide demonstrable health benefits. This conclusion does not contradict older guidelines that severe vitamin D deficiency should be prevented or corrected.

There is evidence that raising the serum vitamin D level through high doses of vitamin D (in the hospital mind you) can be beneficial in COVID-19 treatment [Lakkireddy et al. 2021]. It can thus clearly help, and taking supplements may not be a bad idea, but it should not be applied as a blanket recommendation of "just take it".

3 hours ago, cloneman said:

Most people think getting a 5-10  minutes of sun per day without sunscreen is dangerous and you'll get skin caner.

This is why (science) communcation is so difficult. By suggesting DIY medication and saying "ask your doctor" is a meme you undermine the health care system. Do that enough and you will get something similar to your example here, where people will start popping pills left and right without considering what it is doing, because they think it's good for them. That is even ignoring the racial and personal variations that may require adaptations of treatment to their specification.

[Quackers101]

@WkdPaul ^{talked about there was a moderation thing going on a little while ago, not about an change in canada's covid rules}

3 hours ago, tikker said:

People can think they are smart and, for example, wrongly conclude that if 1 pill per day is good then 2 or 3 must be even better.

Vitamin D supplementation is still actively debated. Recent studies clearly state that vitamin D's effects are still unclear and that it is likely only effective if you have a deficiency, which is typically glossed over when this argument is made. A big reason why vitamin D supplements can make sense is because it's generally safe and a deficiency is common.

It can thus clearly help, and taking supplements may not be a bad idea, but it should not be applied as a blanket recommendation of "just take it".

You are right that things are a bit unclear and one shouldn't wildly take various drugs that can impact or clash with other things, or drugs you already take.

But in general it doesn't or at large shouldn't be harmful for 1 dose a day with extra vitamin D, even if their food is already containing some extra vitamin D as suppliments for the general public. Like you say though, there could be some people that has a harder time or might become a little worse from it, but should often be by big doses too. The body can regulate vitamin D quite well (unless when it can't), but it was said to take too much can backfire with how it deals with inflammation like in the lungs, unlike when it can help when you are too low on Vitamin D.

 

But for now, just eat right and get the nutrition you need, then see about suppliments or take blood tests as in going to the doctor.

rant pages from (ncbi.nlm.nih.gov) and others.

Spoiler

Quote

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/why-are-vitamin-d-and-other-supplements-necessary-when-breastfeeding#Vitamin-D
Vitamin D is created when sunlight hits the skin, but short days, cool climates, and spending most of the time indoors means that as many as 40% of Europeans have a deficiency, which may be severe in 13% of cases.

pregnancy
... which is why the recommendation that all pregnant women should take a supplement of 10 [micrograms (mcg)] or 400 [international units (IU)] of vitamin D per day throughout pregnancy is sensible and cost effective.”

While the American Association of Pediatrics suggested that all children receive supplements of 200 IU of vitamin D a day in 2003 and raised this to 400 IU a day in 2008, uptake has been low.

However, questions remain about whether 400 IU a day is enough. Both of those studies included dosages of at least 6,000 IU (150 mcg) a day.

so like said, it such a big difference in what people say about it or how much is "enough".
Also going with differences in skin color, could mean higher deficientcy

Quote

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/labs/pmc/articles/PMC7352522/
(>19 years age), between 2005-2016

Out of the US population estimated average
29% of the US population is vitamin D deficient (<20 ng/mL) and an additional 41% are vitamin D insufficient (<30 ng/mL)

It has been hypothesized that vitamin D supplementation reduces the risk,

Grant et al. recommended raising 25(OH)D concentration above 40 ng/mL, which requires 5000–10,000 IU/day of vitamin D3 per day

Our data show that the percent of the population with intake below the EAR of 400 IU (10 μg) was 95% (food only) and 65% (food + supplement)

The Endocrine Society recommends 1500–2000 IU to maintain a minimum of serum 25(OH)D concentration of 30 ng/mL. For adults aged 19 years and older, higher doses (up to 10,000 IU/day), may be necessary to correct, treat, and prevent vitamin D deficiency

 

 

3 hours ago, tikker said:

This is why (science) communcation is so difficult. 

 

where people will start popping pills left and right without considering what it is doing, because they think it's good for them. That is even ignoring the racial and personal variations that may require adaptations of treatment to their specification.

racially some might have more benefit from it, but if there are other problems to consider, that is unsure of.

Like you say, taking random pills isn't good either, and suddenly one mixes up and finds a deadly dosage or combination.
also it is unsure of, if they will treat vitamin D differently going forward, that and these pills are not miracles but can be good to have, one shouldn't solely rely on the pills if the body can't do everything else. So be in shape and get the needed food for good health.

 

Like with mentioned vitamin D versions to be against infections like covid (experimental vitamin?).

Edited February 17, 2022 by Quackers101

[tikker]

1 hour ago, Quackers101 said:

Like with mentioned vitamin D versions to be against infections like covid (experimental vitamin?).

Vitamin D is a known immunomodulator (i.e. affects how the immune system responds), so it makes sense to consider using it during treatment of COVID-19, for example.

4 minutes ago, katerine66 said:

If you take into account all the rules of this conversation, there is not much left to say about Covid 19. But I will only say one thing: I believe in the virus and I was vaccinated. But I don't encourage anyone to do the same. It should be everyone's choice. 

I would say encouragement is fine. You are protecting the people around you as much as protecting yourself and the vaccines have proven themselves to be safe. At the end of the day both present and past events show that vaccinations help tremendously and they are practically the only way to get a grip on the situation in a decent amount of time. The effect your choice has on the safety of others compared to the "cost" of doing it makes something like this not completely a "my choice" thing. Views on this differe, of course, as this has been debated often in this thread.

[cloneman]

22 hours ago, tikker said:

This is terrible advice. Yes doctors may stick to older methods for reasons, be it that they are more proven or otherwise. That doesn't immediately equate bad or meme advice. You do not want people doing stuff that falls under "it takes a while to figure out how to do this safely" themselves in a DIY situation. It is that while that doctors spend studying to get the necessary knowledge and expertise to treat you safely. People can think they are smart and, for example, wrongly conclude that if 1 pill per day is good then 2 or 3 must be even better.

Vitamin D supplementation is still actively debated. Recent studies clearly state that vitamin D's effects are still unclear and that it is likely only effective if you have a deficiency, which is typically glossed over when this argument is made. A big reason why vitamin D supplements can make sense is because it's generally safe and a deficiency is common.

 

There is evidence that raising the serum vitamin D level through high doses of vitamin D (in the hospital mind you) can be beneficial in COVID-19 treatment [Lakkireddy et al. 2021]. It can thus clearly help, and taking supplements may not be a bad idea, but it should not be applied as a blanket recommendation of "just take it".

This is why (science) communcation is so difficult. By suggesting DIY medication and saying "ask your doctor" is a meme you undermine the health care system. Do that enough and you will get something similar to your example here, where people will start popping pills left and right without considering what it is doing, because they think it's good for them. That is even ignoring the racial and personal variations that may require adaptations of treatment to their specification.

 

Sorry man. I disagree with everything you said. There is no "hotly debated" discourse on vitamin D. There's media hitpieces that make it seem useless, when it's the exact opposite. Even very intelligent docs got fooled. Hello Telomeres and 5% of

 

The Israel Data just came in. People with insufficient vitamin D were 14x more likely to have severe disease. They also controlled for a bunch of other factors  that previously caused critics to question their study.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-study-offers-strongest-proof-yet-of-vitamin-ds-power-to-fight-covid/

General non-Covid information: https://www.foundmyfitness.com/topics/vitamin-d

It's not a stretch to think Vitamin D supplementation with 0,1 or 2 Doses of Vaccine might be many, many times more effective than 2 or 3 Doses with inadequate vitamin D.
 

There is basically no downside to supplementing Vitamin D, "safe and effective" multiplied by 1000. If you do it by brief tanning rather than taking pills, its "safe and effective" times a million. It's very, very hard to OD on vitamin D, some people even take 10,000 per day for years, although the recommended max is 4000 - and again, Fauci takes 6000.

There's nothing you could say to change my mind, I've been up and down this path for years now, even before CoVID.

As for "DIY Doctors" Vitamin D is just the tip of the iceberg. I could go on and on and on about this. Some examples:

 

- Vitamin K2, absent from many preventative doctors, despite studies

- Cardiologists that don't prescribe CoQ10, despite studies.
- Ear, Nose and Throat doctors that have no idea how to treat Vertigo.

- Gastroenterologists who have no idea how to treat chronic acid reflux
- Quercetin (Completely absent from health debates)

- Sleeping pills prescribed with no consideration for other lifestyle interventions.

The vast majority of supplements and alternative practices have a risk factor that is exponentially less than drugs and vaccines. The only risk comes in if you :
-spend money on things that don't work
- delay more mainstream treatments in favor of non-working alternative treatments for urgent health situations.

Sure, there's some garbage alternative medicine out there. Big Media has done a great job of convincing people that it's all crap and trust your doctor at all costs, which is terrible advice.

If your GP thinks that Vitamin D doesn't do much, and "the studies are in progress" run away as fast as possible.

Maybe people in some countries have decent doctors that help them. I can tell you... there are healthcare deserts in rich countries where the docs & hospitals are doing more harm than good.
 

[tikker]

Just now, cloneman said:

Sorry man. I disagree with everything you said. There is no "hotly debated" discourse on vitamin D. There's media hitpieces that make it seem useless, when it's the exact opposite. Even very intelligent docs got fooled.

 

I never said "hotly debated". I said simply debated, which all the scientific peer-reviewed literature investigating it shows.

 

1 minute ago, cloneman said:

The Israel Data just came in. People with insufficient vitamin D were 14x more likely to have severe disease. They also controlled for a bunch of other factors  that previously caused critics to question their study.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-study-offers-strongest-proof-yet-of-vitamin-ds-power-to-fight-covid/

We're saying the same thing here. The current knowledge indicates that Vitamin D supplementation helps when you have a deficiency. I never denied this, nor do the sources I reference. I followed up in another reply that vitamin D is known to affect the immune response, so it's a natural thing to investigate use of. What the first two sources I reference say is that vitamin D replete people, i.e. those that do not have a notable deficiency, probably don't benefit from it. The Dror et al. 2022 study you cite shows the other side of the coin: vitamin D deficient people, where it seems to indeed help significantly. That's great. My third source corrobrorates that and also says doctors can safely include vitamin D supplementation in the treatment protocols.

3 minutes ago, cloneman said:

It's not a stretch to think Vitamin D supplementation with 1 or 2 Doses of Vaccine might be many, many times more effective than 2 or 3 Doses with inadequate vitamin D.

You cannot subsitute vitamins for a vaccine. Your article explicitely warns for that as well:

Quote

The study is based on research conducted during Israel’s first two waves of the virus, before vaccines were widely available, and doctors emphasized that vitamin supplements were not a substitute for vaccines, but rather a way to keep immunity levels from falling.

 

15 minutes ago, cloneman said:

There is basically no downside to supplementing Vitamin D, "safe and effective" multiplied by 1000. If you do it by brief tanning rather than taking pills, its "safe and effective" times a million.

Which is because have studied vitamin D as additional treatment for a long time that we know that it is a quite safe substance to ingest up to ~60,000 IU per day, while above that risk of harm seems to develop [McCullough and Amend 2016].

Quote

In the 1930's and 1940's, vitamin D was reported to be an effective treatment for a number of diseases, including asthma, psoriasis, rheumatoid arthritis, rickets and tuberculosis. High doses were used, 60,000 to 300,000 IU a day for asthma, and 200,000 to 600,000 IU a day for rheumatoid arthritis. Toxicity from hypercalcemia occurred after prolonged oral dosing with these supraphysiologic doses.
...
We now know that vitamin D is made in the skin in amounts ranging up to 25,000 IU a day with exposure to UVB radiation. There is little data on the safety and blood levels of 25OHD and calcium after prolonged daily intake of amounts of vitamin D in this range.
...
No one developed hypercalcemia or any adverse events. The major finding of this case series is prolonged daily dosing of vitamin D3 with doses of 10,000 to 60,000 IU was safely tolerated.

To reiterate: I'm not denying vitamin D supplements can be good to take. What I disagreed with was the blanket statement of people needing to do more "on a DIY basis" as that can end badly if done with the wrong substance and potentially conflict with medication you already take.
 

14 minutes ago, cloneman said:

There's nothing you could say to change my mind, I've been up and down this path for years now, even before CoVID.

That's not a great stance when you pose that people should change their mind about what doctors say and start doing things DIY. It's all about changing your mind in science. Just look how the pandemic evolved. We were constantly changing our minds once new data became available. The nice thing about science is that once we claim something, we go seek to disprove that claim (as you generally can't prove truth), and if we do so convincingly we switch points of view. That is how all studies go and how the vitamin D studies will have gone.

[chocolatekarma]

To people who don't want to wear masks or get vaccinated, I have this to say.  You're part of a society, wherever it is you may live, and there are many benefits to living in a society.  Society allows us to have a career/job, gives you easy access to food and housing, and generally makes your life easier in every possible way. 

 

What's the alternative?  Moving out to the woods, building a cabin, and foraging for your own food. 

 

So because we all benefit from society, when it needs something back from us, like wearing a mask and being vaccinated, or simply just following basic societal laws, it's our obligation to do so.  Life is about give and take, not just what we personally want or prefer.

 

That is all.