Just providing a link to a interview with a doctor, please don't get out the pitch forks and flaming torches.
Back when I was diagnosed, MO ran Vit D blood level and the results showed a low level. He encouraged me to supplement the Vit D. prostatecancer911.com/the-r...
It’s my understanding that the vit. D suppliments are to protect you from osteoporosis caused by the ADT.
Maybe so but vit K is something you need to check on if you don't already take it.
"This meta-analysis indicates that Vitamin K ANTAGONISTS use may be associated with a DECREASED risk of prostate cancer, especially in long-term users."
"The present study does NOT suggest that vitamin K intake influences the occurrence of total and advanced prostate cancer in the general US population."
Since there is even a suggestion that it may be harmful, I think it should be avoided pending better more studies.
If I google vitamin K2 and prostate cancer I get plenty of positive articles like this one:
That's exactly why one should not rely on Dr Google as a source of info. Jersey Shore online may be a good way to keep up with what's going on with Snookie and Pauli, but you should look to peer-reviewed journals for better quality information.
Well, some serious people are seriously researching vitK2:
I'm glad they are. Until we get the results of their research, we have to assume it is unsafe to supplement to supraphysiologic levels.
Summa Health Systems in Akron Ohio just released positive results of a phase I/II study using Apatone (vitamin C and vitamin K3) in men who have failed local treatment, having two successive rises in PSA post treatment. Sample size was seventeen (not uncommon in a phase I/II study).
The Apatone in this study was made with 5,000mg of vitamin C plus 50 mg of vitamin K3. All subjects received treatment for 12 weeks (no controls, also common in phase I/II studies). PSA levels, PSA velocity (PSAV) and PSA doubling time (PSADT) were calculated before and during treatment at six week intervals. Once the initial 12 weeks of the study ended, 15 of the 17 subjects elected to continue taking Apatone for an additional 6 to 12 months.
After the initial 12 weeks of the trial, PSAV decreased and PSADT increased in 13 of the 17 subjects.
PSADT alone has been shown to be a useless indicator. It has to be compared to a placebo in a randomized study.
The thing is that there is no Vitamin K3 to purchase online!
I increased my daily vitamin C from 1000 mg to 2000 mg daily with vitamin K2 100 mcg daily hope that I will not get kidney stones from this high dose vitamin C
Oral vitamin C is an antioxidant, and should be avoided when one has cancer. Antioxidants interfere with apoptosis and the way the immune system kills cancer. There is a theory that high dose Vitamin C, given as an infusion (not oral), may act as a pro-oxidant, and assist your body in destroying cancer. But this remains to be shown in clinical trials.
Should I stop taking it?
Or just switch to daily recommended dosage?
Some people here suggest Liposomal vitamin C 1000 mg daily.
Appreciate hearing from anyone here with APC.
I take 1000 iu Ester C twice daily. Others take considerably more. I wouldn't stop taking it on the advice of someone who thinks all supplements are harmful and worthless. Just my thoughts.
Vitamin C is good for cardiovascular health specially for APC mostly are above 50 years old.
But TA mentioned "Antioxidants interfere with apoptosis and the way the immune system kills cancer" and "and should be avoided when one has cancer"
Is there anyone here that agree with TA?
Anyone got his APC worsen after prolong taking of high dose oral vitamin C?
Before my diagnosis, I was sick with a cold for probably four months per year. After researching and taking dozens of supplements, I haven't had a sniffle in over three years and I'm pretty sure it wasn't the ADT that caused the dramatic and positive improvement in my health.
And I'm actually following the directions on the bottle.
Facts are not opinions subject to agreement. They are either true or they're not. Of course APC worsens after taking prolonged high dose vitamin C - have you seen any medical evidence that it has cured men?
TA how about the cardiovascular health benifits of VC? Any advice regarding daily dosage?
I have no knowledge about its cardiac benefits - did you ask your cardiologist? I get my Vitamin C from oranges, kale, broccoli, and strawberries. I eat a colorful and varied diet. I give my body lots to choose from, and let my body figure out what it needs. I don't try to outsmart my body - I've studied enough biochemistry to respect the fact that my body will always outsmart me.
You just turned on a light inside my head with that statement.
I wouldn't take anything based on endorsements from anyone who thinks actual medical evidence is worthless.
I don't recall saying that but I do place a lot of faith in observational studies, where an RCT isn't available due to lack of funding or interest.
What "others do" doesn't constitute evidence. Popular voodoo remedies may harm you.
Michael F. Holick isn't just "a doctor" - he is the pre-eminent expert on vitamin D, IMO.
No pitchfork from me.
* Dr. Hollick was paid by one the largest companies that perform the lab test for Vitamin D levels and also by one of the companies that sell Vitamin D supplements to help them sell more products (that’s why companies pay people).
* He managed to get the Endocrine Society to adopt the position that normal Vitamin D levels should be between 30-100 ng/ml in 2011 despite there not being any evidence to support this range.
* This new guideline automatically made about 60-80% of the US population Vitamin D “deficient” and Hollick promoted widespread testing and supplementation (still with no evidence that this made people healthier).
* Hollick promoted the narrative that there was a Vitamin D deficiency “epidemic” (after creating it by changing the normal values) and he promoted his 2010 Vitamin D book which made wild and unsubstantiated claims about Vitamin D.
* The industry and Hollick cashed in. Vitamin D sales last year were around $1 billion dollars and Vitamin D tests for Medicare patients alone were $365 million dollars. The total cost of tests for Vitamin D for all populations was likely in the many billions of dollars plus the cost of unnecessary doctors’ visits. These numbers are about 10 times higher than a decade before and Hollick was paid by both the lab company and the pill makers for these results.
* Hollick also received payments from the indoor tanning industry and he started to promote tanning as a way of boosting Vitamin D while telling people to wear heavy sunscreen if they go outside. He was asked to resign from the dermatology division at Boston University by his chairwoman for this obvious shameful act. He immediately cried persecution, as con-men typically do.
* Meanwhile, the real doctors over at the National Academy of Health released a report telling doctors that there was no Vitamin D deficiency epidemic and that all the extra testing and supplementation wasn’t based on science and was unwarranted (unless bone health was the concern). But, as usual, doctors ignored science-based guidelines and went instead with the recommendations of Dr. Oz, Oprah Winfrey, Gwyneth Paltrow, and other shameless merchants.
* Thousands of studies meanwhile have been done linking low Vitamin D levels to hundreds of different medical disorders, but these studies have failed to show that adding back Vitamin D changes the course of this diseases (except for osteoporosis, osteomalacia, and rickets – which we already knew). Vitamin D checks have become the panacea for primary care doctors, who conveniently blame almost any problem a patient might have on Vitamin D deficiency.
source: Howard Herrell, MD, FACOG -> howardisms.com/evidence-bas...
Both MO's who deal with me said take daily for bone health. (( Just FYI stage 2 breast cancer survivor. Not big on the vitamin D in the past years either!))
No pitchforks or razzes! Those of us in the know bless you for your post.
A couple of medical laughable stories. 1] How did our average body temperature get to be 98.6 degrees? Ans] A group of researchers, took 100 people off the streets of NYC, believed to be in Harlem, at the turn of the century, Circa 1902, most likely the Knickerbocker Hospital. They measured their temperature's with their crude devices, and the average of these 100 peoples temperatures was 98.6. Now that was real science!. I guess I am not average at 97.4.
2] How did the minimum daily amount[MDA], for Vitamin D get to be 400 IU's? This was the amount determined by researchers at about the same time as the vast temperature studies above, Circa 1900, to be the minimum necessary, to prevent Rickets. So for 120 years we read on your milk cartons---> contains 400 IU's of Vitamin D.
We have come a long way since 1900, yet our labels have not changed, but Men like DR. Holick, have advanced us beyond the stone age understanding of Vitamin D.
There are more so called averages that make no sense. Vitamin C MDR seems extremely low. The goal for good BP was 120/80 for a very long time but now there's a push to lower it- pushed by Big Pharma in an effort to sell more BP meds that are rapidly being removed from the market because of terrible side effects. Normal pulse is another "normal" that should have some updated research. 60-100 is considered normal. If my normal pulse was 100 I'd be in the ER till someone fixed it- 100 is NOT normal. I wouldn't even consider 80 normal. Asking an MD or even a DO about Vitamins and supplements is a waste of time imo. They weren't taught anything about them so they parrot what they're told- if you have a normal diet you don't need them. Is that why we have so many 300 lb people in this country these days? We've had a huge increase in disabled people since I was a kid. There has also been a big increase in black people taking care of old white people. As the Chinese would say sumtings wong.
And you can add the lowering of Cholesterol Standard Measurements, to sell more Statins. The over Diagnosis of Electrical upsets in the heart, declaring A-fib, when the issue is nothing more than low Magnesium, where 600 mgs a day would clear up for 20 cents a day. The use of Warfarin, and other Blood Thinners, when control of Blood Fibrin, is all that is necessary, instead of preventing you from eating Spinach. I can go on, But one or two here, may have too much to rail against.
Thank you for posting this - it gives me an opportunity to inform members about his charlatanry. Holick isn't just any doctor. He's made lots of money hawking a supplement that doesn't work on desperate cancer patients. Read this article entitled "The Man Who Sold America On Vitamin D — And Profited In The Process"
One has to be careful about the information one believes. Some members have obviously drunk the Kool-Aid (laced with Vitamin D).
Now that two large randomized clinical trials (amd a Mandelian randomization study) have proven that Vitamin D has NO Benefit for PC cancer patients, one would think Holick would be humbled - apparently not. For anyone interested in the real story, read this:
Hi Tall A,
If high levels of vitamin D prevented Pca, you might bet that there would be a number of people who find many others had discovered the same thing, and they'd talk about online, and maybe someone would do a survey or a trial to find out more, ie, scientific rigour is used to find the truth.
There are so many floating ideas about consuming large amounts of say baking soda, linseeds, cooked tomatoes, cannabis, apricot kernels, potions from Indian tribes, and many are sure they prevent Pca but often these beliefs are busted one after the other, until the bust is forgotten, then belief springs back up like a weed.
In many indigenous tribes who live in hot areas of the world, clothing is minimal and sun exposure is maximal so adequate vitamin D levels exist. But in many hot areas as well as cold areas around the world many just do not get enough sunshine and in India and throughout middle east as someone mentions below, women must remain hidden from view at all times due to religious practice that was determined hundreds of years ago by completely ignorant religious leaders and enforcers, who went so far to have women dressed in black burqas lest they incite lustful thoughts, etc, etc, etc.
Ricketts was not uncommon in north Euro countries, and religion also interfered with allowing sunlight to delight our skins for long enough to get a benefit. I have known many ppl in my sunny Australia who for one reason or other never bared their skin to sunlight, they hide away in houses, often riddled with depressions, allergies, and many bad habits, or they spend all day in offices and have no time for the Sun, or any exercise, and to them Nature just does not exist.
Now if us pale skin folk did get enough sun to lift vitamin D levels as Our Dear Dr Hollick suggests, maybe they'd get melanoma or sarcomas, and ladies would complain of skin damage and getting wrinkles and looking old, but at least they would never have to worry about Pca. Men's skin would also suffer though.
I have areas of skin that is older than shaded areas despite using sun creams to prevent skin cancers. Over last 15 years I have had a number of pre-cancer spots frozen off with liquid N2 done by a skin specialist, and I know many who have far more spots frozen off even though sun exposure was less. I have regular annual skin check, one reason being that my father died of a melanoma in 1973 when there was no cure for such a thing. The only time I ain't getting enough sun is in mid winter for 6 months where I am covered head to toe, even while out on bicycle for 13 hours a week. But in milder climates where daily winter max is often 18C, there is more than enough sun exposure to not need any supplements. This was especially the case when I worked outside doing building work, and where I avoided being trapped in some office dealing with bullshit all day. But I have taken vit D supplements to make sure in winter in my cold Canberra city environment from May to September.
The state of Queensland in Australia is known as the skin cancer capitol of the world; I used to see ppl stretched out sun baking on the beach for hours and think, "lazy and silly ppl",
I think Pca is just a genetic mutation that is kind of programmed to occur no matter what we do or stop doing to avoid it. One sure way to prevent it is to marry early, have your kids before turning 30, then have your PG damn well removed and docs should be able to spare all nerves so there is no ED and no incontinence, and you'd have a care free life. There would be no bad effects from ADT for years, and no procession of failing treatments that get more expensive and give worse side effects over time. Try telling a 30yo to have his PG taken out. They glare at you, thinking you a very uncool horrid person.
I never get that chance because at the moment I never talk to any men under 30. A couple of female nurses maybe, waitresses, but contact with young ppl is very rare. They don't want any advice about how to not make mistakes we would not have made and did not make at their age.
I am with you Patrick...have your kids then ablate the prostate gland one way or another. Get it before it gets you!
Interesting idea to remove the prostate as the ultimate preventive measure but of course the insurance companies wouldn't go for it, or would they?
I asked a Director Of Radiation & Oncology at an expensive private hospital I was forced to attend..... " how come you don't offer pre-emptive RP to guys at 50+ well before Pca spoils the party?" and his response was that men just ain't interested.
Insurance companies get rich when their premiums are based on maximum shit happening. If less shit happens, premiums must be less, per man, so they get poor, something they really hate, so they'd never agree with preventative medical procedures.
But Medicare in Australia is funded by tax payers and doctors paid a wage at public hospitals which keeps our costs per person and for every person very low compared to USA. So the govt should favour prevention more than it does already, starting with ensuring ALL men are asked to get fully examined, for free, when Psa hits 3.0, not 5.5, like now, and fund pre-emptive RP where Psa exceeds 1.0.
The number of men with Psa < 1.0 at 40 and who have Pca is extremely low, so docs can say when the pre-emptive is "overkill solution"
As a species, we do the right thing so often when its too late.
But Pca is not like lung cancer. Nobody should have their lungs removed even when all their relatives got lung cancer. Ya just don't really need a PG when ya done with breeding, and the missus runs away when ya point Percy at her late at night.
My lovely daughter is always asking about my vitamin D levels. She means well and is always trying to find a way to cure me or make me live longer. And yes, I'm open to ideas that might give me more time. My wife and I love her to death, she cares so much.
A "charlatan" with his name on 426 study papers.
"As a graduate student, he identified the major circulating form of vitamin D, 25-hydroxyvitamin D3, which is the vitamin D metabolite that is measured by physicians worldwide to determine a patient's vitamin D status. He also identified the active form of vitamin D, 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3, as well as other metabolites including 24,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3, 1,24,25-trihydroxyvitamin D3 and 25,26-dihydroxyvitamin D3.
"As a fellow, he participated in the first chemical synthesis of 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 and 1α-hydroxyvitamin D3 to treat renal osteodystrophy, hypoparathyroidism, vitamin D dependent rickets type I, and osteoporosis. Furthermore, he elucidated the pathophysiology of hereditary vitamin D-dependent rickets which involves defective vitamin D metabolism, and the pathophysiological mechanisms of X-linked hypophosphatemic rickets."
The most dangerous ones are the ones who mix a bit of science in with their preposterous ramblings.
Also from Wikipedia:
"Holick has been involved in several medical controversies. While at Boston University, he was asked to leave the Division of Dermatology because of his promoting the medical benefits of sun exposure. He accepted research funding for this work from a non-profit tanning bed company, considered by many to be an important potential bias. Barbara Gilchrest, then head of the department at Boston University, called Holick's book 'shlock science' and Holick 'a poster boy for the tanning industry'.
"Holick received nearly $163,000 from 2013 to 2017 from pharmaceutical companies, according to Medicare’s Open Payments database, which tracks payments from drug and device manufacturers. The companies paying him included Sanofi-Aventis, which markets vitamin D supplements; Shire, which makes drugs for hormonal disorders that are given with vitamin D; Amgen, which makes an osteoporosis treatment; and Roche Diagnostics and Quidel Corp., which both make vitamin D tests.
"Holick has also been criticized by pediatricians specializing in child abuse because of his testimony in criminal trials supporting Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome as a potential cause of non-traumatic fractures in infancy (rather than abuse), which has not been substantiated by the medical literature.
"In January 2018, Robert Marvin Ray, one of the parents whom Holick worked with over child abuse suspicions, was arrested and charged with child abuse."
I just got my D Level test. It’s 98.6. I have always had high vitamin D level. My psa continues to rise with a DT of about 6-7 months. It’s at .51 after RP&SRT 6 years since I started. I also have been taking MPC and POMI-T and lately started on IP6. All failed to stop my psa from rising. Just my own experience
I have been taking Vitamin D3 for the past two decades on advise from a doctor. My serum D 20. After taking 1000 IU D3 it went to 80 and stayed there. I don't claim it cures PCa but it has not hurt me and I have done very well since with every treatment I have received.
Thanks Bill. Surprisingly many people living in India where the sunshine 12 hrs in the summer, and at least 6 in winter are D deficient. It comes out of the way of modern dressing, and avoidance of getting into the sun, because it is hot.
The VITAL study (https://www.vitalstudy.org/) determined that Vitamin D did not prevent cancer or heart disease. But the findings did indicate a reduced risk of cancer death.
Vitamin D supplementation
•Did not reduce risk of cancer
•Did not reduce risk of major cardiovascular events (heart attack, stroke, or cardiovascular death considered together)
•Appeared to reduce risk of cancer-related death "
This is observational, since it was not the purpose of the study but, it does point to a possible lower mortality for cancer patients who take 2,000iu daily.
This study brings to mind the wasteful SELECT study, where supplements were used without regard to baseline status.
There are two things to consider before jumping to conclusions:
1] This U.S. population had a decent baseline 25-D average of 31 ng/mL [77 nmol/L]. Some still subscribe to the view that the 25-D risk is U-shaped. i.e. risk would be lowered in those starting at the low end, but increased for those at the high end. The fact that the intervention did not affect risk for the group as a whole, leaves open the possibility that risk reductions were balanced by risk increases. Unlike the influential Nordic studies, only 12.7% were deficient (<20 ng/mL; 50 nmol/L)
2] Throwing 2,000 IUs at the group, on the basis that it is a significant dose, ignores the fact that the dose may have had little effect on baseline levels for some men. I suppose it was too costly to aim for a target 25-D level. [In my case, I need 7,000 IUs to keep my 25-D above 50 ng/mL. I know a man in Totonto who used 5,000 IU daily for almost 2 years before he tested, & was shocked to find that he was barely at the 30 ng/mL level. Life Extension was equally shocked by similar results in members buying the 5,000 IU product & also buying the LabCorp 25-D test. They responded by adding a 7,000 IU product, but more importantly, adding oil to the cholecalciferol. Not many people realize that cholecalciferol is more bioavailable if taken with the fattiest meal of the day.] A subgroup was tested after a year & there was a significant increase in the average level - from 29.8 to 41.8 ng/mL. Implying that 2,000 IUs are needed to achieve an extra 12 points. I doubt that for most in this largely D-sufficient population, that there would be much PCa benefit in getting an extra 12 ng/mL.
The SELECT study was one of the best RCTs ever done. For the first time, it showed that antioxidants can CAUSE cancer.
Excess Vitamin D is stored in the liver and in fat. One's body determines what constitutes an "excess." Trying to get serum levels above one's homeostatic concentration is difficult. In the VIDA RCT in NZ, they gave participants a 200,000 iu loading dose and 100,000 iu all in one dose monthly. In both trials, serum levels increased by at least 20 ng/dl over baseline. Cancer rates were NOT serum-level dependent - the men with higher serum levels fared no better than men with lower serum levels.
I have my 5000 IU vitamin D containing extra virgin olive oil (natureWise vitamin D3) Do I need taking oily food with it?
I got a good advice to increase the daily dose to 10000 IU, but I am taking 7000 IU daily and my last 2 tests showed 56 ng/dL and 58 ng/dL of vitamin D.
While 25-D levels are safe at least up to 100 ng/mL, I don't think that you would gain much by going above 56-58. Some do say that higher levels are needed if there is cancer, but studies don't look at supra-high levels - there aren't enough men that are even above 50 ng/mL.
Taking vitamin D with a fatty meal is good advice for those who are stuck in the low 30s. You might see higher levels if you did that.
it was not observational, it was an RCT. It found that there was no difference in deaths from any kind of cancer.
From the New Yorker on "shlock science" of Dr. Holick:
"But Holick’s career has also been dogged by controversy. He came under fire for recommending the use of tanning beds based on research he’d done partly with funding from a foundation established by the Indoor Tanning Association, a relationship that I reported on in the Wall Street Journal. He also published a book called 'The UV Advantage,' in which he urged people to soak up unfiltered sun two or three times a week. 'Do not be afraid,' Holick wrote. 'You are not going to die just because you go out in the sun.'
"Soon after Holick’s book came out, Barbara Gilchrest, then the head of the dermatology department at Boston University, called Holick to her office to discuss it. The pair had previously collaborated on research, but now Gilchrest gave Holick two options: he could curb his sunshine proselytization or he could resign as a professor of dermatology, one of several positions he held at the medical school. Holick resigned. Gilchrest later publicly denounced his book as 'shlock science.'
"'He just went off the deep end and was a poster boy for the tanning industry,' she told me. Holick 'ate up' the controversy, she said. 'He loves being the provocative bad-boy character.'"
I had taken Vitamin D3 (5000) and Vitamin K2 for several years and my Serum Vitamin D hovered around 60 ng/dl. A month or so before my June PSA test I added an additional 5000 IU withou Adding Vitamin K. My June Vitamin D level jumped to 297ng/dl which is 3 times the top of the Vitamin D range and well into toxicity. My PSA clocked in at 128 ng/dl. I suspended oral Vitamin D and increased daily K2. So much for PCA preventative Effect of Vitamin D in my case.
And to possibly expand the discussion a bit and also make sure this sunny topic doesn't go dark, there is this:
Is Sunscreen The New Margarine?
Be Well - cujoe
Sunlight stimulates the immune system, quite independent of Vitamin D.
We have to be very suspicious of epidemiological studies.
Thanks Bill. My MDA MO and my MDA team agreed I should supplement with Vit D...said no problem...so despite the risk/waste pointed by others here..I'll take the risk assuming they (my MDA team) could be correct and will continue to supplement with it.
BTW, I watched my brother recently pass away much, much too quickly from this horrible disease and he didn't supplement at all with Vit D or much of anything else...depended on prescribed conventional meds, advice, and treatments which didn't serve him too well. So I'll supplement the conventional especially if my team suggests it is okay for me to do so.
I just came across this, which would affect me:
My thrupence-worth ( - for those interested, & with the energy to learn more):
F. Parent article, from Nov 2014:
fearlessparent.org/suppleme... - with a v. useful list of refs, . . . . . and the comments section in this open article, prob. NOT worth bovvering with so much !
[[ The viewpoint in the above & refs, I know from a reliable source, has been REMOVED from Wiki-p. much to my surprise ! ! ! This may be of interest to those who willingly give donations to this 'noble' cause ! I have to wonder why it was not left up for open, honest scientific critique ! ]].
Perhaps we can STOP referring to cholecalciferol ("D3") and ergocalciferol ( "D2") as "vitamin D" . . . . as really the KNOWN biochemistry seems to have ALREADY established these as precursors to the prohormone (calcidiol) with becomes the activate hormone (calcitriol). These are precursor metabolites in a very complex HORMONAL system, says the acknowledged scientific view !
I'd better go & lie down now !
2 Feb 2019
Check this one: Although it is about low risk / low G score/ and PSA < 10 ng patients.
Pathology of biopsies also showed shrinkage of PCA cells with 4000 IU vitamin D
See this link: cancernetwork.com/integrati...
large doses of Vitamin D has any benefit in the incidence or progression of prostate cancer. At least with...
healthy adults age 50 and older with no history of cancer or heart disease who took part in the VITAL research...
Partner with us
Start a Community