Date:   3/7/2012 2:50:49 AM ( 13 y ago)
Hits:   6,310
URL:   https://www.curezone.org/forums/fm.asp?i=1916044

2 readers agree with this message.  Hide votes     What is this?

I read the whole article about why there's so much confusion about vitamin D. It was very very convincing to me that D was bad.

HOWEVER --

Afterward I kept researching, and discovered that most of the "citations" in the article are just referring to non-peer review articles that Marshall himself wrote. The only things i've found in support of his ideas are his own sites, or those of his close affiliates. He has a PhD in Electrical Engineering, not anything medical. The models he speaks of are his own. Go ahead and read the few PubMed studies that he references that are not his own... you will see that they don't support what he's saying at all.

My conclusion is this -- while D3 is not really a vitamin, that's beside the point. It's something that we make naturally as humans, and we don't have nearly as much of it as we use to. (clothes, sunscreen, offices...)

Also, while it CAN suppress parts of the immune system, it does it in a SMART way. This means that it turns OFF the parts of the immune system that would attack itself (auto-immune, allergies, inflammation) because it's at the same time activating our primary immune functions, so these emergency measures are no longer needed at the present time.

Marshall's whole theory goes out the window when you see that deaths, cancers and diseases are REDUCED when D3 is added. He would have you believe that the studies only show high D levels in healthy people, and low D levels in the sick.

On the side of caution though, I do believe that we need to keep our D3 levels under 80 or we can risk negative consequences.
 

<< Return to the standard message view

fetched in 0.02 sec, referred by http://www.curezone.org/forums/fmp.asp?i=1916044