Kaiser Health News broke the story about Dr Holick and the payments he has received from drug makers, the indoor tanning industry and Quest diagnostics by pushing Vitamin D and Vitamin D testing on cancer patients, for bone health, etc.
"Enthusiasm for vitamin D among medical experts has dimmed in recent years, as rigorous clinical trials have failed to confirm the benefits suggested by early, preliminary studies. A string of trials found no evidence that vitamin D reduces the risk of cancer, heart disease or falls in the elderly."
Agreed! My oncologist really pushed the vitamin D and then looked at me funny when I said it gave me heartburn. I'm trying to get mine the old fashioned way; By going outside as much as possible and eating leafy greens. Call me crazy.
The problem with many commercial websites (like Life Extensions) is that they provide links that make them look scientific. They deceive by providing only one side of the story. All observational, retrospective studies are subject to error. Only an RCT can actually PROVE a thing. That's why when we get the results of a phase 3 trial (large RCT) we throw out all we thought we knew based on earlier studies.
Well, in the case of Thalidomide, the actual international history was a LOT more complicated than just "double blind" studies. It was all over the map. See:
In the USA, an even larger tragedy was averted by the efforts of the FDA's Frances Oldham Kelsey, who in 1962 was subsequently awarded the President's Award for Distinguished Federal Civilian Service by John F. Kennedy for her professional efforts and service to the public in resisting efforts to approve Thalidomide without more rigorous scientific studies in humans, after already noting problems being reported elsewhere in the world.
I happen to be one of those “few” people who for several years has had below 20 ng/ml level of Vitamin D. I also have G9 PCA. Prior to my PCA diagnosis I never saw a Dr. with any kind of frequency to determine if I had low Vit D levels. I will continue to supplement with D3 to maintain necessary Vit D levels within my body. Did my extremely low levels of Vit D have any effect on my PCA? Who knows? Studies as cited above would make me believe probably not. Maybe it was/is coincidence? I will continue to supplement to maintain my minimum Vit D levels.
although i don't pay any attention to your hero, and often don't buy into internet site info per se, i know what i feel. in fact, that is my bottom line, listening to my body. 3 years ago, i was referred to an endocrinologist, who used the data my hematologist collected from extensive testing, in addition to more test results, and Rx-ed 10,000 IU vit D3 once a week, for one month. it changed my life. i now take 5,000/d. Exercise routine is better than ever, even with 2 kinds of chemos, for 2 diff. kinds of cancer.
find out what works for you and screw anyone telling you they know the ultimate truth about anything. that's God's domain, and trust me, God don't post anything online.
Don't ya just love the bombastic morons that have the egomania to declare there is no debate anymore? As long as there are only a few million unanswered questions about human physiology, metabolism, endocrinology, pathology, etc etc THERE WILL BE DEBATE.
Your ad hominems are showing. That is what people resort to when they don' have any real arguments. There is a way that debates are SETTLED in medical science- it is through randomized clinical trials. Such trials have been conducted and Vitamin D is not the culprit in cancer, heart disease or falls in the elderly. The earth is not flat, and any debate about it is just ignorant or shows willful disregard of facts. It's time to move on.
Sorry folks, Dr. Holick's personal corruption has no bearing on the issue of causality. His personal qualities driving his behavior may cause us to continue searching for evidence, assuming we make decisions using evidence-based medical standards, but they can never prove nor disprove anything about the supplements we take.
This study serves as an example of research seeking to expand our knowledge of Vitamin D and prostate cancer:
Biomed Pharmacother. 2018 Sep;105:558-565. doi: 10.1016/j.biopha.2018.05.090. Epub 2018 Jun 7.
Metal- and redox homeostasis in prostate cancer with vitamin D3 supplementation.
Süle K1, Szentmihályi K2, Szabó G3, Kleiner D4, Varga I5, Egresi A6, May Z7, Nyirády P8, Mohai M Jr9, Blázovics A10.
Author information
Abstract
Vitamin D3 supplementation has a beneficial effect on cancerous patients, although it can influence the redox- and metal homeostasis. The aim of our investigation was to demonstrate the effect of vitamin D3 consumption on the redox- and metal homeostasis in prostate cancer, because of the recommended daily dose increased from 200 IU to 2000 IU in recent years in Hungary. Forty-three volunteers were involved in the study. The grouping was applied according to the clinical routine laboratory parameters (vitamin D3) and the tumor markers (PSA, fPFA). Patients were divided into 5 groups: (A) patient control (N = 8), (B) patient control with vitamin D3 treatment (N = 9), (C) high-risk prostate cancer group (N = 6), (D) high-risk prostate cancer group with vitamin D3 treatment (N = 8) and (E) vitamin D3 treated cancerous group with androgen deprivation therapy (N = 11). The element concentrations were determined with ICP-OES. Among the redox parameters, free radical scavenging capacity and H-donating ability were determined with luminometry and spectrometry. Vitamin D3 treatment caused differences in the metal- and redox homeostasis in either patient control and cancerous groups. The concentration of Fe, Cr, and Pb significantly increased in the erythrocytes of prostate cancer patients. According to the higher scavenging capacity by vitamin D3 treatment, it seems that vitamin D3 helps to equilibrate the redox homeostasis that could affect the outcome of cancer positively. However, the tendency in the metal element status does not give a clear explanation of cancer's outcome, but the accumulation of Pb by vitamin D3 supplementation needs to be taken into more serious consideration in set terms of occupational diseases.
Such studies serve an important purpose: justifying hypothesis formulation can be a next step for a more rigorous, costly design. A sad fact is that funding is a too frequent barrier to RCTs that could answer “every” question but require much more resources.
I have had a bottle of vitamin D on my counter for over a year. I agree with tall Allen and the RCT. It’s most likely a waste of time. Drink a glass of fortified milk occasionally and show your face to the sun.
How do we explain away all the consistent population studies of increase of pc in the north than the south that more sun. One study can be flawed compared to these repeated population studies. At the very least 20 min. of sun or 1000 mg of d3 or both and hope for the best. Best luck. Rocco
Many clinical studies are by association. Smokers and cancer the biggest. It might be just lifstyle and smoking. More association without science. Will research the science behind t activation and d3 on pc. It might lend science to the population studies on sunlite. Keep up the good work T. A helping many on this site. Best wishes. Rocco
Note that it also suggests a benefit to ROS (H2O2), which anti-oxidants would negate.
There are some randomized clinical trials that will never happen because it is either too expensive, too hard to recruit for, or too unethical. We often look to the Bradford Hill criteria in such cases.
Dont agree. I had very low Vit D and full osteoporosis with rib fractures before I was diagnosed with prostate cancer. Started D, calcium + bisphosphonates to stop bone loss. Helped during ADT as well to prevent further bone loss. D is essential for PC patients to keep bones healthy. As you get older, you cant get it from the sun anymore.
Low Vit D was the cause of my osteoporosis with fractures + other health issues long before I started any treatments for osteoporosis. The osteoporosis was in progress for 10 years. I was not diagnosed yet or under treatment for prostate cancer, so I did not take any drugs to lower testosterone in those 10 years. Endocrinology did scores of tests to find out why I had such severe osteoporosis in my 40's as a young man who lifted weights and exercised, and had normal testosterone levels. The only thing he found was very low Vit D, and that was it.
I would even take it a step further to say that very low Vit D opened the floodgates to all my health problems in those 10 years, possibly my prostate cancer. In those 10 years, I was sick a lot, tired, and had frequent bouts with a stubborn bronchitis that would not go away which showed up on x-rays and scans with nodules and fluid. After going on high dose D, bronchitis cleared up in about 5 months and my lungs became clear on the scans. I also had less fatigue and felt better. After that horrible 10 year experience that ruined my life, I will always keep taking Vit D to prevent it from happening again.
Thanks for the update. It is pretty sad. The only thing I don't get is why the monthly dose of 100000 iu . I thought the body needed vitamins daily and we do get it daily from the sun. This makes me question that.
Vitamin D is stored in the liver and in body fat. It's the water-soluble vitamins (like the B vitamins or Vitamin C) that have to be taken daily. The researchers wanted to provide a high enough dose to raise serum levels by at least 20 ng/ml - they accomplished that. It had no effect.
When I read the scurrilous attack on Holick in the NY Times on Sunday, I figured that TA would be all over it to support his animosity to any kind of supplement.
You should all take a look at Holick's research history before trashing the man.
I somewhat agree with Patrick. The clinical validity of the use of Vit D aside, I dont think the payments made to him/his research warrants this kind of backlash. It's a gray area. But it is present in EVERY field and across all the branches of the medical industry in varying degrees. I have been to several medical vendor sponsored events where it's labeled as "marketing". Given the specifics of this case, I see little ethical difference between the two. It's all around us. This has little to do with the question of Vit D usage.
The difference is that the pharmaceutical industry is heavily regulated whereas supplements are not. Holick misrepresented the research on Vitamin D. The FDA insists on Phase 3 clinical trials before approving a drug. i'm not saying that an unscrupulous drug company can't cook the books, but at least the FDA stands as a bulwark to catch such fraud.
My philosophy concerning vitamins, supplements and their numerous claims: caveat emptor
Wonder if Hippocrates did any double blind testing of Willow Bark before recommending for headaches, or ancient Mariners recommending loading up their vessels with lemons before embarking on long voyages to prevent scurvy, or observational anecdotal reports of those who contracted Rickets were often those of children deficient in vitamin D.
Every year we find numerous instances of what was previously gospel in the medical world has been subsequently been overturned by findings.
Who knows, one day someone will find in spite of hundreds of billions of dollars or perhaps even trillions of dollars invested in research and treatments, very few victims of cancer are actually cured of the disease,,,,yes lives are extended long enough so that victims expire from competing morbidities,,,,and therefore are deemed that they had been cured of a cancer,,,which most likely they had not,,,,it’s just the stroke, diabetes or being run over by the proverbial bus got them first.
We must not forget that cancers are usually a disease of advanced age where competing morbidities are the norm.
With relatively few exceptions to date, I submit that this so far is not the case. However not to be too much a Cassandra, I believe with the decoding of the human genome and understanding of cells and cancers at the molecular level, I firmly believe that this will change the medical world in the not distant future just as Dr. Salk and Dr.
Fleming did with their findings in prevention of Polio and bacterial disorders and diseases.
I hope we've come a long way since Hippocrates. I had to laugh because the study of citrus and scurvy WAS one of the first randomized clinical trials. It was performed by James Lind in 1747. Fortunately, the confirmed large-scale randomized clinical trial has become established as the final word in medical studies. Such studies have never been overturned to my knowledge, while observational studies frequently have been.
I have been cured of my prostate cancer. It is just plain silly to opine I have a disease that there is no evidence of (neither biomarkers nor symptoms).
Mapping the human genome isn't enough - that's been done. What's necessary for personalized medicine is to map the genome of every tumor - a daunting task.
Content on HealthUnlocked does not replace the relationship between you and doctors or other healthcare professionals nor the advice you receive from them.
Never delay seeking advice or dialling emergency services because of something that you have read on HealthUnlocked.
