HealingWell
Search Close Search
☰

vit D yes or no?

Support Forums
>
Lyme Disease
✚ New Topic ✚ Reply
❬ ❬ Previous Thread |Next Thread ❭ ❭
Posted 1/16/2011 6:53 AM (GMT 0)
Razzle just mentioned Singleton's book which is loaded with great stuff .
Was it there that I read if you have sarcadosis that vitamin D is not kosher??

I'm asking now because the other issue of people getting sarcadosis from long term lyme.

Is this another thing we all should be testing for before we mess with the vitamin D thing?
Posted 1/16/2011 8:02 AM (GMT 0)
Regardless of whether one wants to follow the Marshall Protocol or not, one should have their Vitamin D levels (both 25 and 1,25) checked at least once / year.

Here's my take on Marshall Protocol:

The setting in which the Marshall Protocol shines is normal or high 25 Vit. D and high 1,25 Vit. D. If the 1,25 Vit. D. is normal or low, I do not advocate the Marshall Protocol.

This is my own opinion formed based on what reading about the Marshall Protocol I have done. Granted, I'm not an "expert" but it does not make sense to me to restrict Vitamin D if one is deficient or low in 1,25 Vit. D (the active form).

Feel free to disagree with me - that's fine. We're all entitled to our opinions, right?

So yes, we should be testing our levels of Vitamin D before we attempt anything as radical as the Marshall Protocol, and also before taking LDN. I suspect Vitamin D, which acts more like a hormone and less like a vitamin in the body, may play some role in how the LDN works...I don't know enough about this stuff to really say for certain.

Take care,
Posted 1/17/2011 4:57 AM (GMT 0)
Here's my two cents. I have never been an advocate of calcium supplementation. Now the focus seems to be off of calcium and on Vitamin D. It's my understanding that when women started swallowing any kind of calcium they could get their hands on, the rate of heart attacks rose dramatically. So will it be the same with Vitamin D??? I don't think we should all rush out and buy Vitamin D and start swallowing until there's more of a track record. I also question the validity of the Vitamin D tests. Everybody I know that's taken the test has been "low" and for that reason I have to scratch my head and wonder. I may be wrong and you're welcome to disagree with me, too. My opinion has nothing to do with sarcoidosis, the Marshall Protocol, or anything else. As far as I'm concerned it's common sense. Segregating nutrients in high doses and/or for long periods of time will eventually cause an imbalance even when you're not ill. All personal opinion, of course...!!!!
Posted 1/17/2011 2:48 PM (GMT 0)
Actually Mamyou, I think we usually do need a reminder to be cautious from time to time - especially since most of us are quite ill.

Thank you for that reminder!
Posted 1/17/2011 7:01 PM (GMT 0)
getting back t my question..
should we be getting tested for sarcadosis?

is it a result of lyme?

for some insane reason I can never get it straight what this Marshal protocol even is and
can never tell if it is for or against vitamin D.

Even when Razzle explained it , I'm all hazed out behind this.

And just for a little side note. I live in a tiny town 20 minutes north of mexican border.
we have a little clinic here and the doctor has every woman I know on vitamin D.

I read somewhere that you can not get vitamin D from the sun unless you break into a little sweat.
Posted 1/17/2011 7:57 PM (GMT 0)
I do know that you can absorb Vitamin D from the sun without having to break a sweat, Bucci.

Actually, healthy people only need about 20 minutes a day of good bright sunlight to get enough Vitamin D each day.

The only way to know for sure if you need to supplement with vitamin D & if so, how much is safe for you to take is to be tested by your doc.
✚ New Topic ✚ Reply