Coronavirus discussion thread

136 watchers

MarkyMarkMark (3M) Feb 2021 12:48pm, 9 Feb 2021 14,275 posts	0 MarkyMarkMark (3M) but a symptom. However, we do need Vitamin D for various reasons else we wouldn't manufactur it in our bodies. So too little of it is a bad thing. Although probably not directly linked to susceptibility to Covid, any more than being ginger is.
MarkyMarkMark (3M) Feb 2021 12:51pm, 9 Feb 2021 14,276 posts	0 MarkyMarkMark (3M) Larkim, that's a rather unsupported statement by the NHS website in the middle of a perfectly sensible section on the need for vitamin D! The last paragraph of the statement actually says "There have been some reports about vitamin D reducing the risk of coronavirus (COVID-19). But there is currently not enough evidence to support taking vitamin D to prevent or treat coronavirus." I think they're not helping either way.
larkim Feb 2021 12:58pm, 9 Feb 2021 13,471 posts	0 larkim i think that's what I meant 3M - ignoring the evidence or absence of evidence about the impact of VitD on covid, Vit D supplementation is recommended anyway as a protective factor against a number of other issues. On the false positives thing. Even if false positive PCR tests are substantial, what impact does that have? Doesn't it just tell us that we have a disease which is even more deadly than we otherwise expect?
The_Saint Feb 2021 1:08pm, 9 Feb 2021 6,724 posts	0 The_Saint Nobody is saying Vitamin D is not important, what some people are saying is that it is unsubstantiated to act as if it is a wonder prevention or cure for Covid. The way that I have heard some commentators talk it would not be unreasonable for some people to think that the link is as well established and directly causal as Scurvy and vitamin C deficiency.
Ultracat Feb 2021 1:15pm, 9 Feb 2021 13,448 posts	0 Ultracat I am a participant in a VitaMind study. Requested not to take any additional Vit. D. I don’t know if I am getting Vitamin D or not but I hope I am. I need to report on health, any changes, and complete cognitive tests every few months.
Fopp Feb 2021 1:17pm, 9 Feb 2021 69 posts	0 Fopp Larks - False positives would do the opposite, if you increase the number of cases falsely and keep the deaths the same then it dilutes it surely? My concern is that if it is an issue and the disease dies back in the summer, if we're testing 500,000 people still and there's even a 0.1% net false positive taking into account false negatives too, then we could be saying 5,000 cases a day is too much to open this that and the other. For no good reason. Hence I think they should use the death rate as the metric. On the false negatives, anyone that does actually get a false negative and develops symptoms is probably going to get retested, or at least more likely to so I don't see it as as much of an issue.
icemaiden Feb 2021 1:21pm, 9 Feb 2021 5,106 posts	0 icemaiden Hospitalisations will be the metric.
The_Saint Feb 2021 1:21pm, 9 Feb 2021 6,725 posts	0 The_Saint I took a standard daily multivitamin and multimineral tablet for many years until I started seeing a lot of evidence that not only was this useless unless I had a specific deficiency but potentially harmful. It is seductive reasoning to think being topped up just in case is a good idea but that again does not seem to be substantiated.
MarkyMarkMark (3M) Feb 2021 1:24pm, 9 Feb 2021 14,280 posts	0 MarkyMarkMark (3M) Just that, Saint. A good balanced diet (being married to a trained cook is a good start ) and a reasonable amount of outside activity and exercise is enough for most people, most of the time. Unless I received specific medical advice relating to me specifically I wouldn't be considering supplements.
larkim Feb 2021 1:29pm, 9 Feb 2021 13,472 posts	0 larkim No Fopp - if (say) there were 1,000,000 positive tests and 100,000 deaths, it would have a 10% fatality rate. If there were 500,000 false positives in that test outcome, but still 100,000 deaths the fatality rate would be double. You're saying there are false positives. And I'm saying if there are, then that makes things worse, not better.