
Effect of High-Dose Vitamin D3 Supplementation on Colorectal Cancer - howard941
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/2730112
======
OldSchoolJohnny
If you care about avoiding cancer, in addition to Vit D you should be aware of
this interesting study finding cancer fighting foods using machine learning:
[https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-45349-y](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-45349-y)

Figure 4 shows the foods and you can download the data from there as well for
your own analysis.

~~~
x2f10
The figure's largest circle is tea. What kind? Any kind?

~~~
ThatMightBePaul
Most people don't realize that most varieties of tea come from the same plant
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camellia_sinensis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camellia_sinensis)

Your question is still a good one, but hoping the above context makes the "so
tea as a blanket category just... works?" less absurd.

~~~
pkaye
We don't know if the processing steps for green tea vs black tea removes or
adds to the beneficial quantities.

~~~
hinkley
Accidentally took a workshop on this at a tea festival a number of years back.

Turns out the “fermenting” of tea is mostly self contained. Autolysis, I think
might be the word?

If you recall that caffeine is an insecticide this makes sense. The caffeine
is stored as a time bomb waiting for some insect to chew. Mastication mixes
the caffeine crystals and the enzymes already present in the leaf, which then
render it soluble and bang, dead insect. To process tea you just need to
activate the enzymes the right amount at the right temperatures, and then dry
the leaves before they can rot.

If you get a proper oolong loose leaf, and let it steep long enough, you will
find what looks like whole leaves in your cup. Not unlike those little
dinosaur sponges they sell to kids. Just add water.

------
frenchyatwork
My entirely vague understanding was that the Orthomolecular Medicine folk were
semi-quacks (the same ones who brought us Vitamin C Megatherapy). I'm not
terribly familiar with the field though, is there any real reason to be
suspect of this research? It looks like it might be cherry-picking studies.

~~~
eledumb
Gee I really don't consider Linus Pauling to be a semi-quack, and considering
he's the guy who coined the phrase....
[http://orthomolecular.org/hof/2004/lpauling.html](http://orthomolecular.org/hof/2004/lpauling.html)

I know the pharma industry has been trying to destroy his reputation regarding
his vitamin C (l-ascorbic acid) L-lysine protocol as a way to prevent and
revers heart disease. But so far it seem that everything Dr. Pauling proposed
has been panning out. Frankly I'd blindly trust Dr. Pauling over basically
anyone else, especial if the anyone else has a financial stake in their
position, which is everyone, except Dr. Pauling.

It's too bad he was prevented from traveling due to his protesting the Vietnam
War, because if he hadn't be prevented from traveling he would have stayed
ahead of Watson and Crick and Dr. Pauling would have "discovered" the double-
helix, and won his 3rd solo Nobel Prize.

~~~
beagle3
Well, Linus Pauling did some things right and some things very wrong. He,
_personally_ , is responsible for delaying research into quasi-crystals, by
personally attacking Shechtman ("There are no quasi crystals, only quasi
scientists") and applying all his might to discredit Shechtman in particular
and quasi crystal research in general. Shortly after he died, quasi-crystals
became an accepted field, and Shechtman later got a Nobel for that.

With respect to his mega vit-C protocols - they have been shown to have some
beneficial effect, especially with respect to cold and the flu, but not his
general claims AFAIK despite various attempts by people with favorable
attitudes.

He was not a god; He was a smart, successful, but also imperfect human being.

------
iandanforth
"The rate of diarrhea was 12% in the low-dose group, but only 1% in the high-
dose group."

That alone seems like a good reason to administer high-dose Vitamin D!

------
vharuck
>In the analysis of the entire 25,000-person group, the risk of cancer was not
significantly reduced. However, evidently higher vitamin D levels take time to
have an effect, because when the data from the first one or two years were
omitted, there was a 25% significant reduction in the all-cancer mortality
rate.

The original article [0] mentions the "exclude early years" analysis was post
hoc. This wasn't a formal result, but it is a good idea for a new experiment.
Same with the first study mentioned. It would be cool if the hazard decrease
showed up in a larger study, but a confidence interval of 0% to 90% isn't much
to rely on.

[0]
[https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1809944?url_ver=...](https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1809944?url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=ori%3Arid%3Acrossref.org&rfr_dat=cr_pub%3Dpubmed)

~~~
danesparza
The body produces Vitamin D when exposed to sunlight.

This article indicates that specifically _supplements_ do not significantly
reduce cancer rates: [https://www.cancer.gov/news-events/cancer-currents-
blog/2018...](https://www.cancer.gov/news-events/cancer-currents-
blog/2018/vitamin-d-supplement-cancer-prevention)

~~~
corprew
Although it should be noted in that article:

"Over the follow-up period, there were 341 deaths from cancer: 154 among
participants who took vitamin D (1.1%) and 187 among those who took the
placebo (1.4%). Although this difference was not statistically significant,
the difference in cancer deaths between the groups started to widen over time,
the researchers reported.

The researchers plan to follow the participants for another 2 to 5 years, to
see if a statistically significant difference in cancer deaths emerges.
Laboratory studies have suggested that high blood levels of vitamin D may
decrease the aggressiveness of cancer cells and the likelihood of metastasis,
explained Dr. Manson. If so, longer follow-up will be needed to assess its
effects on the risk of death from cancer, she added. Other studies have
suggested that regular use of vitamin D supplements may reduce the risk of
dying from cancer, she said."

So they're still continuing to follow that up long term to see if it has a
longer term effect.

------
LinuxBender
Related to this, you may find many of the youtube videos by Dr. Eric Berg
interesting. He covers many topics related to this, including many of the
things to avoid and to include to minimize risk of cancer and numerous other
poorly understood chronic issues.

I have been super-dosing vit D, K2-MK7 and magnesium chelate to reverse
calcification of the arteries. It is slowly working. My BP is slowly coming
down.

~~~
sergiosgc
If you're looking into reducing BP, the strongest correlation is with body
mass. If you have the margin to lose weight, that should be the primary
approach. The correlation is roughly 1mmHg per Kg in systolic BP. Diastolic BP
drops less per Kg, but is also affected.

There is also a strong correlation with height, but I don't advise losing
height :-)

~~~
joefourier
If I'm already at a healthy but low BMI, should I increase my body mass so
that in case of high blood pressure, I have weight to lose?

~~~
BluffFace
You could look into building muscle mass. I would avoid eating junk food and
drinking beer until you get a belly, for instance.

A bit of both would probably be okay, though.

------
GiorgioG
This doesn't seem all that surprising. Search the web for the Coimbra Protocol
(for autoimmune diseases.) For now it seems like mainstream medicine (in the
US at least) treats this as quackery, but there are thousands of people all
over the world doing this.

~~~
pivo
As a data point, I underwent cancer treatment a few years ago in the US at
Massachusetts Eye and Ear and there high-ish dose vitamin D (can't remember
the actual dosage) was encouraged, though it wasn't part of the treatment they
provided. The doctors and other staff all seemed to take it vitamin D as a
preventative measure as well.

------
airstrike
The article seems to start from the premise that a high daily intake of
Vitamin D helps cancer patients fight cancer (based on the linked studies),
and from that it concludes that all of us should also increase our daily
intake of vitamin D.

But I do not have cancer.

The studies do not explain the effects of high doses of vitamin D on an
otherwise healthy person, let alone one that gets enough UVB exposure to
produce sufficient vitamin D (essentially anyone near the equator) and already
"[reduces their] risk for cancer by not smoking and by avoiding alcohol,
maintaining a healthy weight, exercising regularly, and eating an excellent
diet with fruits, vegetables, whole grains".

~~~
libria
> But I do not have cancer.

From my limited understanding, cancer comes from an unlucky combination of
particular kinds of cell damages. Based on that, I'd say we all have some
level of cancer-inclination that is non-zero and increasing in susceptibility.
I wouldn't consider cancer a boolean.

But that's a great point. What impact does this have on those factors that
lead to cancer?

~~~
airstrike
Thanks for the reply

> I wouldn't consider cancer a boolean.

I consider having cancer a boolean and the propensity to develop cancer a
probability. The studies linked in the article don't suggest a high dose of
Vitamin D reduces that probability at all. They only tested whether it helps
those for which has_cancer is set to True

~~~
whalabi
Correct, the study wasn't about prevention

------
vixen99
Looking at the paper, I count 45 doctors and editors from across the world,
who you've associated with what you regard as a 3rd rate website. It may be
such but it behoves you to show that it is, by providing at least some
credible evidence aside from the meaningless throwaway '3rd rate'.

------
mike_ivanov
Something to keep in mind -
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypervitaminosis_D](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypervitaminosis_D)

------
supernova87a
Why are we posting selected shorts from a 3rd rate medical-related website?
Orthomolecular.org?

Care to visit their list of "orthomolecular" doctors?
[http://orthomolecular.org/resources/pract.shtml](http://orthomolecular.org/resources/pract.shtml)

This is one step away from homeopathy. Get this shit off HN please.

~~~
rectang
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthomolecular_medicine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthomolecular_medicine)

> _Orthomolecular medicine,[1][2] a form of alternative medicine, aims to
> maintain human health through nutritional supplementation._

Seconded. If this is what HN becomes, I want no part of it.

------
hpoe
Just something to note the company Ortho Molecular is a company that sells
high end vitamin supplements, probiotics and other similar things.

Not that it undermines the findings, or makes it less true just something to
keep in mind.

~~~
odyssey7
It's always important to know about authors' conflicts of interest. However,
in this case the results align with a lot of others related to vitamin D's
effects on cancer and the immune system in general. (I believe it's possible
for the raw number of studies supporting a position to also be a misleading
figure, but in this case I don't sense that's what's going on.)

Fun fact, vitamin D was a treatment for tuberculosis before antibiotics.
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29804293](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29804293)

------
beefman
Instead of flagging this, why not replace it with the original article?

[https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-
abstract/27301...](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-
abstract/2730112)

~~~
sctb
Thanks, we've updated the link from
[http://www.orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/v15n12.shtml](http://www.orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/v15n12.shtml)
and turned off the flags.

------
hourislate
Recently came across an interesting book about cancer.

How to Starve Cancer by Jane McLelland

This woman claims to have reversed her cancer by using a combination of off
label drugs and supplements to starve the cancer.

~~~
joefourier
It's hard to establish much causation from a single sample - her cancer could
have gone into remission due to other causes, and without clinical trials, her
story is simply survival bias at work.

