Regarding Mg, the time tested epsom salts are primarily magnesium sulfate, and is well absorbed.
Not sure if this was discussed earlier but vit D needs vit A in a precise ratio, best achieved by conversion of carotenoids. Taking active vit A will upset the balance according to Dr Cannell on his vitamindcouncil.org website. Don't have the reference, just remember reading it.
Also since vit D is generated from the sun on skin, there are supposedly other forms of D formed, making the UV a better method. Also sunshine supplies IR heat, raising body temp and penetrating the body and tending to destroy bacteria etc. IR saunas are very effective at raising body temp and sweating out heavy metals etc, another source of food for some bacteria apparently. And of course exercise and circulation is very important to generate things like glutathione and get oxygen to tissues, stimulate nerves and neurogenesis etc. (Power Up your Brain book).
Not to mention acidity- a measure of voltage basically. Need to have the minerals to increase the ph. Some say this is important in killing the pathogens and others not.
First Off:
I am a 30+ lyme vet, got it before lyme was even known yet --saw 30 years hindsight, of mistaken friends dying or seriously ill from "mono", "hodgkins", "leukemias", "resp distress" -- that is cause I dont just have lyme. Sheep tick europe -- q fever more likely, never tested for bart (classic signs of very specific like the white blanched spots), babs, and a borderline + for ehrlichia but zero treatment given for by west coast dunce MS recruiter. Present husband 10 days after first SPIT exposure, came down with nightsweats & drooling in sleep; several mos. later, rashes infrequent, (upper/trunk) and soles/palms SEVERELY peeled, red eyes. (Ehrlichia). Now, 1 year mark, hospitalized serious with myocarditis, encephalitis, atypical pneumonia 1 lung pushed up (just like my xray), hepatitis, classical Q fever signs. NY where I am from, NYC, is a BIG place and if what I have spreads the way Ive seen (all above dx's within 30 days or less of first sharing DISHES (saliva contamination) -- then Q Fever is being overlooked by umpteen docs "rare" which is bull manure.
This discussion, about Vit. D as relates to Marshall protocol, is questionable. I have milk every day (have to, or nauseous) -- and yet Vit D Deficient. Q Fever (also RMSF) converts Vit D which your liver needs, into some yucky hormonal compound, which prevents you from using it, and liver suffers. All the talk about lead poisoning/mercury in lymies, isnt because lyme is "using it up", nor "magnesium" ditto. Think: basic bacteria, 90% of them ALL turn free sugar (glucose c6h12o6) into two half molecules, of c3h603, LACTIC ACID, and lactic acidity (high acid ph) is what LEECHES metals from lymies and others with BACTERIAL infections. (all the TBI's). The more sugar you eat, the more it has a party. DENTAL fillings are where that metal is getting into you, and high lactic acid state, is why. Measure your pH with litmus paper, saliva will do. Notice the high acidity. High acidity in turn, helps all of them to flourish. Magnesium, calcium, any acid-neutralizing mineral in your body, also falls prey to this acid state of the body/blood/fluids. Dentists are avoiding talking about it, tho they all wont use metals in any childs mouth anymore. It is no coincidence, that lymies et al have metal poisoning; it is due to our acid states.
EVEN tho the hospital was faxed a letter, explaining symptoms of husband, contagion obvious, history of mis-dx's of fatal friends etc, time frame of catching, positive ehrlichia most likely rampant with 2 kids same (pregnant with), and unknown TBI's likely (fell thru time between lyme discovered, aggressively treated, but before co-infections even realized existed) -- the idiots didnt test him nor preventatively treat him a: "TBI's arent normally contagious"...b: (after heard of Q fever 2 wks later: Q fever is only in africa (!!!!!)". (midwest state beginning with an O).
Lets use some logic here: ehrlichia transmittable by dog licking...are humans animals too? (kissing, dishes, glasses, etc)....tularemia by touching an infected animal (human!)...bartonella - same, consider we're all animals in that "not from person to person, from animal to person" they are forgetting infected HUMANS fit that scenario!
In families, definitely. From mom to kid, surely. From partner to partner, most definitely. From friend via dishes YES YES YES. get real, article writers! Ive watched it for 30 years now, there is not a doubt, and its both ehrlichia and Q, but also BART and babs...quinine relieves it, but doesnt cure it...artemesias also relieve it, WHILE on the herb...sun helps it....tho Im photophobic...salt & C definitely with the chest pain, C probably gets eaten up by the acid as well....
Hope I can finally get some proper treatment before we're all dead. 1995 was last "lyme" treatment before leaving NY, and the rest of our country is lyme brain-dead medically speaking.
Vit. A (abhor orange veggies, but love cherries, parsley raw) makes me feel wonderful --deficiency/processing also affecting the liver/by liver --totally nightblind....complete loss of appetite tho, so eating remedies are not for me. (more forgetful than a retarded elephant).
Why did I notice, when looking at the Igenex site, that "ricketssia species other than microti " are NOT ALLOWED TO BE TOLD TO NYS' residents>???????"
Do they already know Q Fever is a huge epidemic there? Who restricted that???? Especially when Igenex' tests differentiate/go more specific to ID the exact TYPE of ricketssia????
Also had spotted torso/face rash week prior or two, to the bullseye rash coming out at site of sheep tick (during sheep farm vacation w/relatives)--- could be a fifth called Mediterranean Spotted Fever (rickettsia) thats also at play, not much known about. Never addressed by the lyme docs, ignored that spotted rash fact, but RSMF not likely for Europe and comes back neg. appropriately. (Seems docs will only test the most outlandish non-likely things for me...parvovirus? and one out here midwest, saw the hemolytic anemia, thickening skin reminiscent of scleroderma, vit d def, and history of positive Ehrlichia PCR, YET...tried to take me back to the stone age, insisting all my lyme history (5x wb positive, rash, tick bite, 100% symptoms) -- were now somehow "scleroderma"...AND...my cousins wife just died of the dooming diagnosis, more likely Ehrlichia carried to her as I lived in cousins house during onset of illness. (dishwasher present).
ANY vitamin D deficient lymies, ought to be checked for the 5 above, by DNA methods...
Oh, afterthought....one after another of TBI's "pop out" after treating lyme, for this reason:
It used to be thought firmly, "a person can only have one infection of bacteria, at a time", because....
they would only see ONE antibody, and end the quest at that point.
ONLY after treating the one youre fighting, does your immune system reset, to attack number 2. And so on.
Immune systems, are like burglar or motion alarms....the FIRST of any multiple bacteria inserted by a tick, mosquito, etc -- is the one your body fights. It is NOT designed to see more than one. Its also a huge strain on the system. So, when you relieve the body of the lyme fight, it has a chance to notice the next invader....treat it, and the next crops out. This is how it goes - it is not an accident, and all MD's who believe negative = word of god not there, are foolishly ignorant.
European case studies on ricketssias, have noticed patients having 3 or more at once of ricketssial species. Since all these TBI's, virtually, are "cell wall deficient" ie not a virus, not a walled bacteria like the norm, but an intermediate oddity with no cell wall of it's very own, moving into YOUR cells instead....they hide at all times from blood tests/antibody fight tests, EXCEPT when they are reproducing and migrating to new cells for the offspring -- blood tests cant spot unless WHOLE blood is used and they happen to live in the white/red/platelets etc -- antibody tests seem to be invented by those profiting off the wrong results given to patients -- and much wrong band-aid style treatment and "old" condition names (all of which are incurable, how lucrative is that?) -- DNA tests MUST be invented to include European strains, as even canada recognizes strains not native here, being brought in by migrating BIRDS -- if anything, the strains "not native" here, are simply not being looked for, because of CDC misinformation.
Example: son TWICE in O Midwest state, contracted lyme bullseye + ehrlichia stretchmarks, rash, etc from MOSQUITO bites -- dx'd at two different HOSPITALS -- not reported. I reported personally to CDC with dates, locations, doc names, etc -- still "O state has no lyme" as the official report! This both in 2000, and 2010. (Is lyme a hated enemy to the medical community here?) Referral, to a hospital which treated me decade ago for lyme, referred for the positive ehrlichia w/o treatment, was REFUSED, because "I'd been seen for lyme 10 years ago" -- lyme is not ehrlichia! Amazing outright REFUSAL (dx was another state, for the Ehrlichia) -- to admit lyme has coinfections.
The guy in West Coast, who saw the Ehrlichia PCR, was running an MS/Cystic Fibrosis clinic, and tried to "rename" my lyme to the two of them -- CF is genetic!! Who does he think he was getting over on? Where are all the advisories to the MS patients, that Europe discovered it gets better with antibiotics?? (its lyme et al) BBC published that 12 years ago - the NY Times apparently "forgot" to let us know...and whats with the Nicholson mycoplasma discovery being hushed from last year? Corruption at its very worst.
Docs: forget your phobia over "oh no, we misdiagnosed" -- the LAB COMPANIES are at fault for peddling antibody tests that DO NOT WORK -- if they told YOU, negative, and it was a lie, and the test is garbage, the fault rests on THEM, not your following their info. Docs need to stop letting these "other condition" victims with TBI's, die, and fix that, its beyond unethical, its murder.
The lyme et al =MS, published by BBC so long ago, was followed by Bowen test confirming that in USA -- lyme was most likely the "plague" of middle ages (no rashes known in plague" -- its preserved in the "ring around the rosie" rhyme -- (ashes ashes, we all fall down, carry the pocket full of posies as an amulet to ward off plague ) -- we ALL have some degree of antibody to it, because those who lived THRU the plague, recovered, and at that time, Europe was NEVER exposed to it before -- same reaction today with some populaces ACUTE from initial lyme, and euro's "vaguely/chronically" more slowly ill --
Did anyone else notice, how within a month or 2 of Bowen results "yes, lyme causes alzheimers and MS" -- docs petitioned congress for a "no sue me" bill, fearing malpractice suits (over the MS people etc being told wrong prognosis/no knowledge abx would cure etc) --
Like I said, docs, THE PHARMACOLOGIC companies are at fault, that ever peddled and still do, those garbage antibody tests, and that cannot be your fault, for following their guidance in the tests. THEY need to take the brunt, and patients with those 2 ailments (and more, scleroderma) need to be cured. EVERYONE has the right to live, and it outweighs your own pocketbooks and legal phobias! For shame, that docs care more for their rich lifestyle, than to help others, which is what doctoring is supposed to be all about!
Hope someone else is helped by the above info, I have learned a ton during this downhill rollercoaster ride of TBI's and have read up for 20+ years now, with 3 docs in my own family and was to be my own career, except lyme struck.
I have milk every day (have to, or nauseous) -- and yet Vit D Deficient.
Indeed most milk is fortified with Vitamin D2 and we know that this speeds up the rate at which vitamin d is removed from the body.
Also most people require in the region of 1000iu/daily for each 25lbs they weigh and to get even sufficient vitamin D to meet your daily needs requires at least 40 cups of milk daily.
Laying naked in the midday sun without getting sunburnt produces 10,000iu of vitamin d3 in the skin.
Why on earth would skin produce that much vitamin d3 if it was dangerous. How would outdoor living pale skinned humans have survived the evolutionary process if every day they were producing such high amounts of vitamin D it was stored in their bodies?
Hello all,
First time here but I have had arthritis in my hands since 16. Not until 2005 was I so bad that they declared me 100% disabled. In my forties I was walking with knees that were bone on bone. I was never approved for Humira, Embrel, and they have all the side effects of heart attacks, strokes etc I read the protocol and I have a physician that has had success with other patients. I have not been in the sun for 10 yrs due to other meds so my vitamin D is already very low. My BP is usually 115/54 so lowering does not scaere me. We as patients have to fight for the right for our mediucations. I cannot get the BP lowering meds because insurance will not pay. So call your insuraance companies get the meds you need and side affects are with ever drug out there. Read yours, look it up and see what are the possible side affects. I am on all narcontic drugs to take care of my pain so I can walk to my car, or kitch and the bathroom I most always wet myself befor I get there. So I want no narcotics that I have had for 12 years and will ruin my liver, I want the new treatment and all who have inflammatory diseases, may it be Gout, Celiac, RA also should go on a Gluten Free Diet, shown to decrase inflammation. Thans for reafing, I hope it helps and starts us all to fight for the meds we need. Be well
Under the Marshall hypothesis, infectious bacteria (and perhaps other microbes) attack the VDR with additional inactivators (such as Capnine) that have high affinity for the VDR, and relatively high local concentration (due to their close proximity). These inactivators fit in the lock with high affinity, but don�t turn the key. They are able to best calcitriol in thermal mass-action competition for docking.
What is meant by the term "thermal mass-action competition for docking"?
Thanks.
Hello phosphorolizer,
I apologize for not responding sooner. 1.5 years is a long time in college. Better late than never? I hope so. But more importantly, I hope you went on to find the relevant science you needed to do your paper, and your other studies.
To answer your question, when I wrote "thermal mass-action competition for docking", I was searching for a concise way of referring to the well-known "Law of Mass Action". I was not trying to embellish the law with any new significance of my own. I was just referring to the fact that different ligands have different affinities for the VDR's ligand binding site, and different concentrations. The result is a seeming competition for available VDR binding sites.
As they are jostled about by random thermal collisions, some ligands that enter the site will stay there longer than others. Intuitively, we might say that the ones with higher affinities are the most attracted in, as well as the hardest to knock out, and therefore stay longest.
Length of stay is important, but so is concentration. Intuitively again, the higher the concentration of a substance, the more molecules there are per unit volume. So the probability of being in the neighborhood of a VDR increases, and we would expect to find a greater proportion of high-concentration molecules occupying VDR binding sites, than of lower-concentration molecules.
I don't feel I am really an expert on this topic. What I wrote above is more or less hand-waving, to give you an idea of what I had in mind when I wrote that phrase you asked about.
Your college chemistry classes and textbooks will probably already have given you a more precise idea of the Law of Mass Action, than I am prepared to give. But you could also find nice explanations of it online, such as in the Wikipedia article at:
While I'm writing, I would like to add that in the elapsed months knowledge about VDR inactivation has expanded. I recently read of alternate mechanisms discovered that microbial pathogens use to compromise the immune system, by attacking or inactivating the normal operations of activated VDRs.
Only last January, for instance, scientists announced the discovery of how the Leprosy bacteria blocks the immune-response result downstream of VDR activation. See for instance:
Dr. Marshall's recent conference presentations often feature graphs showing how various microbial pathogens "downregulate" VDR activity, in order to compromise the immune system, and help them (the pathogens) survive. So the theory now goes beyond mere blockage of the VDR binding site by antagonistic substances like Capnine. Various pathogens have various ways of attacking the VDR's actions, but we now have more instances showing a common thread of attacking (to speak concisely) the VDR system.
Perhaps for the benefit of other Nat Met Talk posters who speak glowingly of MMS, and other anti-bacterial techniques, I would like to bring to mind the similarities between the common goals of the MP and other approaches. For instance, MMS is supposed to kill bacteria, and thus improve the immune system. The MP is thought to improve the immune system, and then kill bacteria, but in the process, removes pathogenic dysregulation of the VDR pathway, and therefore improves the immune system.
The two techniques therefore have similar aims. But what I find most useful about the MP is the extensive theory and molecular modeling which explains "why" killing the bacteria improves the immune system. I find the MP theory provides an explanation for how MMS can fulfill it's claim to improve the immune system. I don't know what Jim Humble's source of information is. Please don't read more into that statement than it says. I'm just saying, I simply do not know.
The MP uses the entire natural immune system to recognize and kill bacteria, not just dioxyclor (which I have read is one component of the innate immune response). In the MP, you not only get dioxychlor, but antimicrobial peptides such as Cathelicidin (a.k.a. CAMP), and a number of other "natural" defenses.
Be that multiplicity for better or for worse, I do like the extensive theory found in the MP science. I've seen MMS people claim that their supplement kills just the "bad" pathogens, and leaves all the "good" microbes alone. But I wonder how much basis there is behind that claim. And, no, I admit that I haven't studied that out extensively. One can only do so much in one's "spare" time. I happen to favor studying the MP. And I hope non-MP'ers will benefit from MP science. I also hope they will bring forth their scientific findings for the benefit of MP'ers.
Too often we see these (and similar) anti-chronic-disease systems seemingly pitted against each other. Seldom do we get the benefit of putting together the information that each can bring.
I wonder how your paper turned out, phosphorolizer, and what you were able to share.
The Marshall Protocol worked for me. Plain and simple.
I had chronic Lyme for 20 years, and it was the only thing that helped at the time.
I may be only one of a handful of people for whom it has worked, but there are plenty other success stories.
The fact is, every week, more and more research comes out on Vitamin D, and not all of it suggests that's it's the panacea everyone thought it was.
It's unfortunate so people are willing to discard it as a possibility without having tried it, read the success stories, done actual research, or have had patients on it. The body is too complex for someone without expertise in the area to say it's implausible based on some Google and Medline searches.
I have no stake in the protocol - I just want people to have access to different methodologies and technologies and to be able to heal.
Unfortunately the attitude of many people who have tried the Marshall Protocol is that when their experience doesn't fit the expectations of Marshell they get kicked off the site. So looking at the site is not giving a true picture of the overall results.
If you are conducting any sort of trial ALL the RESULTS have to be available for scrutiny.
Not just those that fit your preconcieved ideas.
There has to be independent scrutiny of the results.
The fact remains Traditionally living populations in East Africa have a mean serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentration of 115 nmol/l.]Traditionally living populations in East Africa have a mean serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentration of 115 nmol/l. and these levels naturally rise with pregnancy, lactation and ageing.
When the Marshal protocol reflects how Human DNA evolved to respond to Vitamin D3 perhaps I'll reconsider my views.
Thanks for the reply, though I'm afraid we are getting in danger of talking past each other, instead of talking with each other.
Independent scrutiny is a desirable goal, and I personally would like to see a lot more thoughtful consideration given to the MP science than outright dismissal.
When I started stuyding the MP a few years ago, the MP website was much more open than it is now. Indeed, it seems as though one of the initial goals of the website method of collaboration being pioneered by Marshall, was whole-world transparency. Since then, a number of people have been banned off the site, and many of the webpages that I used to be able to access are now closed to me, since I am not a full-fledged member of the study group, and since the MPKB (knowledge base) has been established. But even before the bans, I know that a large part of the website was closed to outsiders. Perhaps out of concerns of privacy, and perhaps out of misquotations which have appeared in opponent's literature. I don't really know the story behind any of the bans, but I got the idea there is some danger to patients that could result if certain attitudes were not kept in check. That's just my own impression, but even so, it's something that any real manager of therapies would have to deal with.
Ideally, as you said, it would be great if "all" information and results were fully open to scrutiny. Not only in the MP study group's website, but in all the vitamin D research around the world. Ideally researchers would not have to dismiss "outliers" from their papers, as is typically done, nor push their own interests. I would ask you to continue to give the MP study site some slack considering they are a volunteer organization operating on a shoe-string budget, offering their services without charge.
I have preconceived notions, and most people do. But I would like to see some independent scrutiny of the MP science by organizations that really take up the challenge to investigate the science. I would like to see some independent unbiased group run computer simulations on Benicar as a VDR agonist, enabling VDR heterodimerization and transcriptional activation.
I would like to see some group really dig through the literature, and / or conduct their own study of the possibility that intracellular bacteria attack the VDR system. I know some recent studies have come out that hint at this kind of thing, but I think there is room for independent study and verification of the idea. A lot could be done with the computer, or the word-processor, before even going into wet lab work.
What I see happening is too much assumption that the standard Vitamin D test is unassailable, and therefore, that conclusions based upon it must be correct, and therefore, the Marshall Protocol being dismissed out of hand. The Calcidiol-only Vitamin D test's foundation is something that truly deserves independent scrutiny. It was supposedly set up to measure Vitamin D nutrition or sufficiency, but measures neither vitamin D3 nor the active form, Calcitriol. Instead it measures an intermediary between the two, and by dubious arguments is presumed to represent Vitamin D sufficiency. The foundation of those arguments is what has recently shifted, and I think Vitamin D researchers would overturn a lot of confusion if they would just go back and re-evaluate the merits of the testing method. But what I typically see is less a thoughtful re-examination and more a blind insistance to plunge forward with the cry of "insufficiency!" Yet the method takes no notice of the influence of intracellular microbes on the Vitamin-D feedback system which is key to the production of Calcidiol, which is measured. The method presupposes no such influence, but thinks only in terms of available Vitamin D precursors.
I have no quarrel with true facts. I don't know enough to question your figure of 115 nmol/liter for African tribes. Nor do I know how to ask you for your train of thought as to what that proves, and how it proves it. You may certainly give those insights, if you like.
I don't expect you to swallow my preconceived notions, just because I said them. I respect your healthy sense of scrutiny.
However, I might ask in what way the MP does not take into account the supposed evolution of human DNA with respect to D3? If you have something to say to enlighten me, please go ahead. The only argument I am aware of, is that supposedly our ancestors lived naked in sunshine for millions of years, presumably manufacturing lots of Vitamin D3 in the skin. Therefore, an inference is drawn that where our systems are today is teh result of evolution under those conditions. And sometimes people try to infer that such evolution must have rendered vitamin D3 our perfect solution to what we suppose Vitamin D does.
Usually when I hear that argument, I am immediately reminded by the same presuppositions that bacterial pathogens which coexist with us, must also be supposed to have been evolving over the same period of time in the same locations, and could therefore have developed resistance to being killed by our Vitamin D driven immune systems.
So for me, the usual evolution argument for Vitamin D3 is interesting, but doesn't necessarily lead to the conclusion that Vitamin D is the perfect answer to all vitamin-D related diseases.
And the reason I strive to make these points is not because my preconceived notions "must" be true, but to invite and entice, if possible, other independent researchers (in addition to Marshall et al), to truly scrutinize the science, scientifically. I do not like to see such promising new evidence and new theories dismissed out of hand for non-scientific reasons.
Scientific thoughtful scrutiny is welcomed, and encouraged, when it can be taken in stride, and discussed carefully. I've been a little chagrined at myself for not including references in my quotes of Dr. Cannell. We can often get into trouble by not including references. So I hope to give those references at some future post soon.
Yes, "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure" as the old proverb goes. However, in regard to meandering toward
prevention, a little additional information will help show that the Marshall Protocol offers more than just recovery (or
cure) to the sick. It's science offers insights that are valuable even in the fine art of prevention.
Occam's Razor encourages us not to unnecessarily multiply assumptions. "Everything should be kept as simple as possible",
says a quote I've heard attributed to Einstein, "but not simpler." Unfortunately, the simple assumptions of the Vitamin D
test are "too simple". We look to the Vitamin D experts to come forth with corrections to their former policies and testing
recommendations, now that they have better information in hand.
Hmm, compelling, you are. Not ready to dispense with my vitamin D3, but I will look closer. Since I'm still a believer in vitamin D, if I am to also believe the Marshal Protocol, I must believe there are some other co-factors missing if the protocol does truly work. Additionally, they do after all, have limited success treating cancer with radiation.
Big words with a simple meaning
Linear Mode
