[p2p-research] How effective is the flu shot? (vitamin D)

[Paul D. Fernhout]

Glad we've found something we can agree on in this area. :-)

You've probably seen this site that I stumbled across yesterday?
http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/ 
http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/newsletter/vitamin-d-and-h1n1-swine-flu.shtml
http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/newsletter/h1n1-flu-and-vitamin-d.shtml
"""
Two systems exist in your body to fight infections, the innate or immediate 
system and the acquired or adaptive immune system that makes antibodies. 
Recent evidence indicates seasonal impairments of the antimicrobial peptide 
(AMPs) systems are crucial to impaired innate immunity, impairments caused 
by seasonal fluctuations in 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] levels. The 
evidence that vitamin D has profound effects on innate immunity is rapidly 
growing.
   Unlike adaptive immunity, innate immunity is that branch of host defense 
that is "hard-wired" to respond rapidly to microorganisms using genetically 
encoded effectors that are ready for activation by an antigen before the 
body has ever encountered that antigen. Of the effectors, the best studied 
are the antimicrobial peptides (AMPs). Both epithelial tissues and 
phagocytic blood cells produce AMPs; they exhibit rapid and broad-spectrum 
antimicrobial activity against bacteria, fungi, and viruses. In general, 
they act by rapidly and irreversibly damaging the lipoprotein membranes of 
microbial targets, including enveloped viruses, like influenza.
"""

Although at that last link the MD running it recommends both a lot of 
Vitamin D and a flu shot. :-) Something for everyone there. :-)

Although, apparently, even in the Vitamin D world there is controversy. :-)
There are others who disagree somewhat with the Vitamin D for health idea 
like Trevor Marshall.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trevor_Marshall#Criticism_of_the_Marshall_Protocol
"""
Marshall has proposed that chronic diseases can be treated by activating the 
innate immune response by regular doses of an angiotensin II receptor 
antagonist (being used as a Vitamin D Receptor agonist).[1][2] Patients also 
take pulsed low doses of bacteriostatic antibiotics and avoid consumption of 
Vitamin D. ... Dr. John Cannell of the Vitamin D Council spoke out against 
the Marshall Protocol in the April 2008 edition of his Vitamin D 
newsletter[45], stating that "No one in the vitamin D field takes [Marshall] 
seriously."
"""

I can wonder if there is some complexity in there about levels or other 
immune dysfunction; for example, if you have an autoimmune disorder but the 
wrong level of Vitamin D might make it worse somehow? I know in the Lyme 
disease community (one aspect of Lyme may be the bacteria cloaking 
themselves in your bodies own proteins) or some other communities related to 
diseases with autoimmune disorders, there is talk about not overstimulating 
your immune system in some situations (the immune system seems something 
that has to be kept in balance).

Related, from the Vitamin D council site, on balance through excess: :-)
   http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/newsletter/h1n1-flu-and-vitamin-d.shtml
"""
My best guess [on pandemic nasty flu protection] is that 5,000 IU/day and a 
25(OH)D of > 50 ng/mL will be at least partially protective. Remember, at 50 
ng/mL, you are assured that you are not suffering from substrate starvation, 
that is, your body has enough Vitamin D for its needs and some left over to 
store. At a level of 30 ng/mL, most people are still suffering from Vitamin 
D substrate starvation.
   As I have written before, 25(OH)D levels are like water from a mountain 
spring. The topmost pool is the calcium economy. When that pool is full, 
excess 25(OH)D flows down to hundreds of pools below, cancer, heart disease, 
infection, etc. In a lethal pandemic, you want Vitamin D to do two things, 
increase production of natural antibiotics (AMPs) and quell excessive immune 
responses. Are these two pools at the same level? Is the AMP pool above the 
cytokine dampening pool? If so, people with 25(OH)D levels of 30 ng/mL may 
have enough D to strengthen their innate immunity but not enough to prevent 
the cytokine storm that kills in a lethal pandemic. Thus, people taking only 
1,000–2,000 IU/day, with levels around 30 ng/mL, may risk death from a 
cytokine storm their body is unable to prevent. While only a theory, it 
would explain why the people with the allegedly highest 25(OH)D levels in 
both Mexico and 1918 (young adults) were the most likely to die. That is why 
I caution people that, if you are going to take Vitamin D, take enough, take 
5,000 IU/day, which is usually enough to get your 25(OH)D levels into the 
mid range of the reference range (30–100 ng/mL), which would be 50–70 ng/mL.
"""

So perhaps not enough Vitamin D could be worse than being too low on it in 
some cases of a very bad flu? I don't know. So much to know. Such a complex 
system, the human body.

--Paul Fernhout
http://www.pdfernhout.net/

Ryan Lanham wrote:
> Hi Paul:
> 
> While I think the vaccine is much safer than Vitamin D, I actually am a huge
> Vit-D advocate and I believe the emerging science suggests it is a
> prophylactic against flu.  I think you stretch Greg's position a little
> far.  I think he is overly combative.  But in the US context (which you well
> know) to overcome the absurd folks, you need to be blunt.  Rhetoric has
> become ugly.
> 
> For what it is worth, I totally agree that 6000-8000 IU of liqui-form Vit D3
> a day is a good defense from flu for most adults.  Nearly all of the world's
> people who do not live out of doors are D deficient by recent studies...some
> of which you have noted.  I agree.
> 
> I have been taking large quantities of D3 for well over 2 years along with
> fish oil and a number of other heart/diabetic supplements.  I am a great
> believer--and by the way, I would say this position is less standard than
> the anti-vaccine one--but it is more science based IMHO.
> 
> Ryan
> 
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 8:36 PM, Paul D. Fernhout <
> pdfernhout at kurtz-fernhout.com> wrote:
> 
>> Ryan-
>>
>> Greg Laden suggests essentially that anyone who believes vitamins help
>> prevent flu is a "moron":
>>
> 
> 
>> Guess he has not read this:
>> "Vitamin D deficiency linked to more colds and flu"
>>
>> http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/60-second-science/post.cfm?id=vitamin-d-deficiency-linked-to-more-2009-02-23
>> "Is sunshine more than just a home remedy for a cold? New research suggests
>> it may be: In a study that will be published tomorrow, people with low
>> levels of vitamin D — also known as the "sunshine vitamin" — were more
>> likely to catch cold and flu than folks with adequate amounts. The effect of
>> the vitamin was strongest in people with asthma and other lung diseases who
>> are predisposed to respiratory infections."
>>
>>
>