"COVID-19 Mortality Risk Correlates Inversely with Vitamin D3 Status, and a Mortality Rate Close to Zero Could Theoretically Be Achieved at 50 ng/mL 25(OH)D3"
"Despite ongoing vaccinations, we recommend raising serum 25(OH)D levels to above 50 ng/mL to prevent or mitigate new outbreaks due to escape mutations or decreasing antibody activity."
Occasionally, despite catastrophic Regime interference, an Academy-scientist ends up as a real-scientists and does some science.
As per the other study, to get 50ng/mL takes around 9000 IU. For preference my no-sun regime is 10,000. Previously, dieticians have been completely incompetent and/or straight-up evil, as per usual. "According to the Institute of Medicine, 4000 IU is the safe upper level of daily vitamin D intake."
Luckily this study will cause exactly nothing to happen, because vaccines are expensive patented medicines andthus profitable, and vitamin D is a cheap commodity with no associated monopoly kickbacks whatsoever.
You can't even put vitamin D in the water supply, because it's a fat-soluble nonpolar molecule.
Reminder: taking enough vitmain D/sunlight that your immune system works properly causes minor cosmetic side-effects if not also taken with expensive quantities of DHA/EPA. In a sense, 4000 is near the "safe" upper dose if looking good is more important to you than being inherently immune to colds &c.
I am confused. Take 4,000 IUs, or 9,000 IUs?
In your case, that's the problem: how much sun do you get? How much D is that sun worth?
In the winter, take 9000+. In the summer, it depends on how much you're outside, when, and wearing what.
Post a Comment