Krillin, I read the paper, but you can not be taking this serious?
I will explain:
- they shuffeled calcium into these people
- calcium leads to higher PTH
- higher PTH leads to higher CYP27B1
- higher CYP27B1 leads to faster conversion of 25D to 1,25D
- so, in fact, the 25D they gave these people was simply converted into 1,25D at a higher rate
Another simple observation why this is misleading and just dead wrong is that they never even measured PTH nor CYP27B1, so their are missing an enormously big piece of the puzzle.
Intentionally? I don't know, I guess it is because this paper is from 1997... things have changed in the last 10 years.
So, 25OHD does NOT activate the VDR or have you some more papers I can explain to you?
Sincerely, Frans
These are two of the most embarrassingly stupid posts I've seen in some time. You'd do Marshall a favor by shutting up now and letting a smarter person defend him.
Calcium lowers PTH. And you're also ignoring this information provided in the abstract.
I'm back.
I see you guys have been bashing away at Amy and me, we (I) have been called stupid, a yehova's wittness, ludicrous has passed, some bs was delivered on my doorstep, etc., etc., so I guess the moderators here will give me some leeway while answering.
So, Krillin, let's talk about this. Calcium lowers PTH?
You are absolutely right. You deserve a point for that one.
I must say it sounded ludicrous, since it leads to 2 pathways to take care of excess calcium shutting down. PTH and VDR.
But hey, this is a paper by mr Holick, a world renowned expert on vitamin D, he can not be wrong, can he?
So I sat down, opened pubmed and looked at what I was missing.
Well, you won't like what I found, which must be the understatement of the century, actually...
Please bear with me, you scored your point, now it's my turn again.
The whole thing hinges on activation of the PTH receptor, right? Well, it turns out there is another molecule that can turn that receptor on. It is called PTHrP, parathyroid hormone related peptide.
You can check a lot of the knowledge about it here:
-
http://www.ncbi.nlm....m.cgi?id=168470Now, the fun is, that this molecule is actually UPregulated by Calcium via the CASR.
- you can check this at, eg: PMIDs: 10942719, 11108243, 15336602, 16019433
So, where does that leave us?
Well, to reiterate:
- they shuffeled calcium into these people
- calcium leads to higher PTHrP
- higher PTHrP leads to higher CYP27B1 by activating the PTH receptor
- higher CYP27B1 leads to faster conversion of 25D to 1,25D
- so, in fact, the 25D they gave these people was simply converted into 1,25D at a higher rate, which probably accounts for their results
Funny how they were not measuring the right things, right? It makes this research worthless.
got it now ?
So, when working through this article we are discussing which is of mr. Holick's, I found that other so-called vitamin D 'experts' are still quoting this article as being proof that 25OHD activates the VDR, rather strange, since I think have proven this 'landmark paper' absolutely and totally wothless now...
To see who is referring to this worthless article, see:
-
http://jcem.endojour...full/82/12/4111and scroll all the way down.
I even found a paper in that list by mr Vieth (another so-called vit. D 'expert') stating:
"Although intestinal calcium absorption was not assessed in this trial, this effect of vitamin D is unequivocal"... where he refers to mr Holick's paper. This paper, by the way, is from 2006 !! See:
-
http://jcem.endojour...t/full/91/2/405Still with me guys ?
Makes one wonder how it is possible that mr Vieth never stumbled across this information on PTHrP, right?
Reeks of criminal negligence if you ask me. Of both Vieth and Holick.
One thing is sure: they have been cutting some corners, not doing their homework, which sounds bizarre, since we are talking about a serious thing like cancer, right?
But it gets even more bizarre.
One might argue that they possibly didn't know about this pathway via PTHrP, still rather negligent and telling about your vitamin D 'experts', but hey, they are only human.
The main problem I have with that concept is that mr Holick published a paper in 1994, 3 years before the worthless paper we are discussing here.
This paper was about PTHrP... Yes, about PTHrP... he knew about it, but still didn't think it prudent to test it...
(see PMID: 08058749)
I don't know how you would call this, but in The Netherlands this goes even further than unethical, we would call it downright criminal.
Got it now ?
Someone here said you are critical thinkers. Boy I hope he/she is right, even though, until now, you have only been critical about other's thoughts and insights.
You guys have a lot of questions to ask yourself, like:
- did Holick suddenly develop a severe case of amnesia in 1997 that still hasn't ended a decade later ?
- why didn't Vieth, or the other so-called vitamin D 'experts' stumble upon this information, when someone as stupid as I am did ?
- you should be asking yourself what else these so-called 'experts have been missing during their countless research, since the knowledge about PTHrP upregulating 1,25D was already known in 1997 ! Eleven years ago. see PMID: 9062504; what else have they been missing during that decade ? Funny how someone as stupid as I am can find more knowledge in a weekend than they have in a decade, isn't it? makes one wonder...
- you should ask yourself what all this tells you about the level of competence of the so-called 'experts', is this what you call 'critical thinking'?
- you should ask yourself if you really want to follow someone like Holick's lead, I sure won't
- you should start looking into the sponsors that paid for these persons' research; I have been on the MP for 2 years now and it has not cost me a dime, all insured and Marshall's work does not cost me a penny, rather telling, right?
- you should start asking yourself why all those hundreds of scientists keep calling 1,25D the active metabolite
- you should start thinking if there may, perhaps, be a reason, why 25OHD is synthesized to 1,25D; did mother nature pull a prank on us? or no, better still, she must also be a disciple of Marshall's little cult, right? Well, as mother nature, she definitely gets in the sun a lot, so yes, she probably wears sunglasses like us on the MP
- you should ask yourself I you really want to stay on believing people who behave as I have just tried to reiterate to you... or will you start believing those guys that are telling us that at least 1,25D is a critical thing to measure, not just 25OHD
- you should ask yourself if you should keep on holding on to research that has only been measuring 25OHD; not calcium, not PTHrP, not CYP27B1, not 1,25D to mention a few examples
- the ones posting here should really think if they should keep on pushing vit. D like they have, they have clearly not been doing their homework as the 'critical thinkers' they portend to be
- you should ask yourself if that black box the 'experts' are shuffeling full with vitamin D is perhaps a little more complicated than these 'experts' want to make you think; especially since that black box is your own body...
- pro-d, you said: I go by clinical data; I understand, black boxes are scary things, aren't they?
- you also said Marshall uses his Dr title in a dubious way, well, guess what, he has been appointed Adjunct professor at Australia’s Murdoch University School of Biological Medicine and Biotechnology, so maybe he does know what he is talking about, or no, probably they are also just members of Marshall's cult...
- see:
http://wwwcoms.murdo...ywords=marshallI sincerely hope you guys see the light and if it gets too bright, I know somewhere you can buy sunglasses...
Just some thoughts,
Sincerely, Frans
PS Neogenic, you seem ok, you might want to check out the following paper:
-
http://www.pnas.org/...full/104/8/2927You might want to start with the discussion chapter.
What they are basically saying is that the Pretri dish as golden standard for finding and identifying bacteria in and on humans is hopelessly outdated; also something that has been around for a century or so that is being challenged by molecular medicine...