Horowitz: Why won’t our government even inform people about importance of vitamin D?

Imagine if rather than running out to buy worthless Chinese face diapers or toilet paper last March, there had been a mad rush to stock up on vitamin D. What would our hospitalization rate have been after the initial wave, and after the early science was clear about the efficacy of vitamin D, had government mailed out free vitamin D to every American (especially in nursing homes)? For a fraction of the cost of a shutdown, waning vaccines, remdesivir, and endless welfare, government could have offered free blood tests of everyone's vitamin D, C, and zinc levels and advised a plan to bulk up those levels?

Well, we have a new study that demonstrates a good number of hospitalizations could have been avoided. Government agencies that are censoring information on vitamin D can no longer say the same thing about the vaccines, given how Israel is now showing that the vaccine wears off and the country is preparing for the worst run on hospitals ever, despite nearly every adult having been vaccinated. And unlike the vaccines and everything else our government promoted and mandated, vitamin D comes with no risk, numerous other vital benefits, and empowers rather than controls people.

There is a misnomer that those promoting vitamin D for COVID somehow believe that all people have to do after getting the virus is to take vitamin D and they will suddenly get better (although there is evidence it works in the active form). That is obviously an easy straw man for those who oppose preventives and early treatment to knock down. In reality, while vitamin D is definitely important post-infection, it takes several months to bulk up one's level if it is deficient. A new study recently published in the International Journal of Clinical Practice demonstrates that had Fauci and Co. simply told Americans, especially the vulnerable, to take high doses of Vitamin D (like he does), most of the hospitalizations could have been avoided.

The meta-analysis of 23 published studies containing 11,901 participants found the following:

• One who is vitamin D deficient was 3.3 times more likely to get infected with SARS-CoV-2 than one who is not deficient.
• The serum vitamin D concentration, on average, was 20.3 ng/mL among all COVID19 patients but was 16.0 ng/mL among those with severe cases. It's recommended that one's levels be at least over 40.
• "The chance of developing severe COVID-19 is about five times higher in patients with vitamin D deficiency."
• A total of 84% of COVID patients in the study were either deficient or insufficient in vitamin D.

In other words, whether your vitamin D level is 15, 30, or 50 will make all the difference in terms of getting a mild, moderate, or severe case of the virus, or perhaps getting it at all. How is it that, to this very day, there is no effort to inform people about such a painless, cheap, and effective fix?

Anecdotally, an ICU doctor in Missouri told me she is the only doctor in her hospital who checks vitamin D levels of COVID patients and indeed she also finds that almost all of those in the ICU have levels below 20.

Dr. Ryan Cole, a Mayo Clinic-trained pathologist who has given lectures to Idaho lawmakers on the intersection of vitamin D and this virus, believes it's almost as if vitamin D was created for this virus. Here is the science behind those numbers:

"Though D is called a vitamin, it is actually a pro hormone responsible for up to 5% of gene activity and protein production in the human body," said Cole, the owner of the largest independent laboratory in Idaho. "Every nucleus in every cell of our body, including our infection-fighting white blood cells, has a D receptor which activates or inactivates countless genes and their signals. D activates our innate immune response (our first line of defense against pathogens), including our neutrophils, macrophages, and natural killer cells, causing them to make peptides with antiviral activity. D also inhibits the production of pro-inflammatory cytokines (those responsible for hyper immune reactions in COVID). When D is deficient, pathways may be turned on, but in the absence of the pro hormone D signal, can't be easily turned off. D is consumed during an infection, so if one goes into an illness without reserves, they are more susceptible to poor outcomes."

In other words, people who are D deficient can mount an immune response to the virus, but lack the immune regulation to ramp down the response when necessary, which causes the uncontrolled cytokine attack on the lungs that we've seen all too often among those in hospitals.

Cole believes that most Americans need much more supplementation than the medical establishment is willing to admit. He believes that with adequate vitamin D, often supplemented by magnesium for those who have absorption issues, it's very difficult to have a cytokine storm, which is the main complication from this virus. Indeed, a Mayo Clinic study found that intubation was rare among those with vitamin D levels over 30. Overall, there have been nearly 100 studies linking low vitamin D levels to worse outcomes for patients with COVID. And again, this is just one supplement. When you add other supplements plus other preventives and early treatment to the equation, a proactive approach to boosting one's immune system is a game-changer against this and many other ailments.

Therefore, inquiring minds should want to know, why won't our government publicize this information and even actively works to discourage or censor these ideas? They claim all these other drugs don't have enough data behind them (which was never an impediment to them promoting remdesivir), but what about vitamin D? Is that not safe either? Dr. Fauci himself told Dr. Kari Hjelt in an email obtained through FOIA that he takes 6,000 IUs of vitamin D a day. Given that the medical establishment has told us the daily value is just 800 IUs, I doubt most people take anywhere near 6,000 IUs. Given the lopsidedly positive data behind COVID outcomes with high vitamin D level, why wouldn't Fauci divulge this secret in every public interview?

"Well, shut up and get the vaccine," will likely be the response. But the latest trends with the virus have demonstrated that even if one is pro-universal vaccination, there is still a need to boost the immune system. Fauci has already said that everyone will need a booster, and the FDA just approved it for the immunocompromised. But these are the people who needed an effective vaccine the most. What is the endgame if the first shot wears off and they are given the same shot again against an ever-mutating virus? Where is the backup plan?

Israel, which has nearly every adult vaccinated and is now giving a third dose to those over 50, is expecting more critical care cases in the hospital than ever before. According to the Times of Israel, the Israeli Health Ministry is bracing for 2,400 critical care cases, double the number they had during the winter peak. But for whom? Those under 12?

We've come full circle when people are being barred from living a functional life unless they show proof of having been vaccinated. But we already know from the CDC that the vaccine does not stop transmission, a vaccinated person carries the same viral load, and now evidently even the personal protection wears off. Yet, given the data on vitamin D levels, if we are going to suspend the Constitution anyway, wouldn't it be more scientific to ask for proof of vitamin D levels and require people to bump their levels over 35 or so? That in itself would do more to stop transmission than this vaccine, based on the preponderance of scientific literature on both the vaccines and vitamin D.

It's become clear that even in the best-case scenario, if the vaccines are not downright causing viral immune escape, they are certainly not more beneficial than a partial solution. That safe and cheap alternatives have not been endorsed is shocking, and that vitamin D is included in that orchestrated information blackout is most revealing of all.