Reduce All Cancer Incidence by 77% with Vitamin D? - Seminar

I had blood testing for different vitamins
Found my vitamin D was a bit low, now taking now taking 2000UI of vitamin ,
I guess it cannot hurt

 

A good indicator of quackery is when one "remedy" is claimed to cure multiple ills.

And the old saw that "... if a little is good, a lot is better..." is often disastrous advice, as many substances that are needed for health, are lethal in excess. Simple examples would be salt and fat. Both are dietary essentials, and both will destroy your health if taken in more than very small amounts.

 

correlation is not causation. correlation in a group of 18 people is not causation in the general public. that is extremely misleading and irresponsible for them to make such claims, and they ought to be ashamed of themselves.

 

I don't think anyone would argue that vitamins aren't good for you - getting your daily recommended allowance surely has all sorts of health benefits, but that comes from the number of vitamins and what they each do for you. I know I take a daily multivitamin, and whenever i happen to run out and not take it for a few days/a week i start to feel worse - more tired, more easily distracted, etc.

To argue that one specific vitamin can do so much from such a small sample size is pretty irresponsible. Now, if they could present hard science describing the process by which Vitamin D stops cancer, i'd be willing to listen... but from what i can tell they don't really understand the process.

 

Since Vitamin D is often aquired from sun exposure, are the people in sunnier climates statistically less likely to get those diseases vitamin D cures?

 

"GrassrootsHealth is a 501c3 nonprofit
organization. Your donations are
tax deductible."

I'll bet anyone that they have some back door connections to makers of vitamins.

"Since Vitamin D is often aquired from sun exposure, are the people in sunnier climates statistically less likely to get those diseases vitamin D cures? "
Probably...And also more likely to get skin cancer as well. Should be pretty easy to run the statistics on that.

 

but you need sun screen to help avoid skin cancer

 

Since they removed PABA from sunscreen I seem to burn through it faster than without. As an experiment, this year for the first in many I am not using sunscreen and haven't burned once and have been on or near water more than most summers. Oh, and my tan is a 'natural' color instead of a weird color. We darker people are not immune to skin cancer, but I personally think we are less likely.

 

The people charging the $55 are the smart ones here.

 

Steve Gibson did a really good podcast on vitamin D a few weeks ago. Here is his research
GRC|Vitamin D Research

For those who don't know Steve Gibson is a computer security expert and has a podcast about computer security on www.twit.tv called Security Now. When he is interested in a subject he really does his research very thoroughly.

I just started taking a multi vitamin and D3 not because of Steve but because I just know I'm not getting enough vitamins plus I dont go out side much to get my D3.

 

Apparently its true that D protects from cancer.
My friend who has recovered from a recent battle with breast cancer tipped me off to these studies.
This ought to be a big boon to topless sunbathing.


'Sunshine vitamin' may ward off breast cancer- msnbc.com
"High levels of vitamin D translated to a 50 percent lower risk of breast cancer, one study found. Even modestly higher levels resulted in 10 percent less risk, which would translate to 20,000 fewer cases a year if it were true of all American women.A second study, by Canadian researchers, found that women who spent time outdoors or got a lot of vitamin D from their diets or supplements — especially as teens — were 25 percent to 45 percent less likely to develop breast cancer than women with less of the nutrient."

 

The only problem with this idea is that the main groups of dinosaurs died out over a span of millions of years and not suddenly over a few years like is commonly thought. The sun would have returned within a decade of the impact.

 

(emphasis mine)

there is ZERO PROOF OF CAUSE. this is what i have a big problem with.

play up the degrees of the individuals involved all you like, the simple fact is that the scientific evidence (that these people should clearly be trained to analyze, particularly the PhDs) does not say what they're claiming.

 

It's so nice to have rational scientific minds to help the rest of us think. Thanks, galaxee.

 

Did you read this link?
'Sunshine vitamin' may ward off breast cancer- msnbc.com

 

no, i read the actual study.