[Variola]

Anyway, why didn't the vitamin D kill my aunt's chickenpox virus?

Indeed. Why in the more prosperous parts of Africa is HIV still endemic? i.e in a part of the world with good nutrition and plenty of sunlight?

Vit D does not kill viruses by itself, and there is nothing so far, after trawling to support any hypothesis that it would.

[iko]

Anyway, why didn't the vitamin D kill my aunt's chickenpox virus?

In biology, we should always talk about percentage of risk, incidence, statistical data.
No total immunity.  No 100% protection.

What provides the putative help for the vitamin?

...Earlier, I wrote that autism was linked to vitamin D deficiency in pregnant mothers, and that women's cancers were dramatically reduced by regular sunlight exposure. Now, research indicates that the risk of placental infection is impressively lowered by increasing vitamin D levels.[1]

This research did not surprise me. Immunity is enhanced by high vitamin D levels through the increased production of an antimicrobial peptide called cathelicidin, which keeps both bacterial and viral infections at bay. This is the exact reason that flu occurs almost exclusively in winter months in both hemispheres; blood levels of vitamin D are much lower in winter months (see my earlier posts)

In this research, placental cells were exposed to E. coli bacteria and then treated with vitamin D. The treatment reduced the risk of infection by about 50%.

Remember that there is also a dramatic reduction in the risk of breast and ovarian cancer among women with high sunlight exposure and high vitamin D levels; now we can add one more advantage of vitamin D to the list of benefits for female reproductive tissue.
...

from: Vit.D & solar power...    http://drsorenson.blogspot.com/2009/01/vitamin-d-reduces-risk-of-placental.html

Antimicrobial peptides and the skin immune defense system.

Schauber J, Gallo RL.
Department of Dermatology and Allergology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany.

Our skin is constantly challenged by microbes but is rarely infected. Cutaneous production of antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) is a primary system for protection, and expression of some AMPs further increases in response to microbial invasion. Cathelicidins are unique AMPs that protect the skin through 2 distinct pathways: (1) direct antimicrobial activity and (2) initiation of a host response resulting in cytokine release, inflammation, angiogenesis, and reepithelialization. Cathelicidin dysfunction emerges as a central factor in the pathogenesis of several cutaneous diseases, including atopic dermatitis, in which cathelicidin is suppressed; rosacea, in which cathelicidin peptides are abnormally processed to forms that induce inflammation; and psoriasis, in which cathelicidin peptide converts self-DNA to a potent stimulus in an autoinflammatory cascade. Recent work identified vitamin D3 as a major factor involved in the regulation of cathelicidin. Therapies targeting control of cathelicidin and other AMPs might provide new approaches in the management of infectious and inflammatory skin diseases.

J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2008 Aug;122(2):261-6.

[Variola]

Remember that there is also a dramatic reduction in the risk of breast and ovarian cancer among women with high sunlight exposure and high vitamin D levels; now we can add one more advantage of vitamin D to the list of benefits for female reproductive tissue.

And a greater risk of skin cancer..

[iko]

And a greater risk of skin cancer..

The challenge resulting from positive and negative effects of sunlight:
how much solar UV exposure is appropriate to balance between risks of vitamin D deficiency and skin cancer?

Reichrath J.
Klinik für Dermatologie, Venerologie und Allergologie, Universitätsklinikum des Saarlandes, 66421 Homburg/Saar, Germany. hajrei@uniklinik-saarland.de

There is no doubt that solar ultraviolet (UV) exposure is the most important environmental risk factor for the development of non-melanoma skin cancer. Therefore, sun protection is of particular importance to prevent these malignancies, especially in risk groups. However, 90% of all requisite vitamin D has to be formed in the skin through the action of the sun-a serious problem, for a connection between vitamin D deficiency and a broad variety of independent diseases including various types of cancer, bone diseases, autoimmune diseases, hypertension and cardiovascular disease has now been clearly indicated in a large number of epidemiologic and laboratory studies. An important link that improved our understanding of these new findings was the discovery that the biologically active vitamin D metabolite 1,25(OH)(2)D is not exclusively produced in the kidney, but in many other tissues such as prostate, colon, skin and osteoblasts. Extra-renally produced 1,25(OH)(2)D is now considered to be an autocrine or paracrine hormone, regulating various cellular functions including cell growth. We and others have shown that strict sun protection causes vitamin D deficiency in risk groups. In the light of new scientific findings that convincingly demonstrate an association of vitamin D deficiency with a variety of severe diseases including various cancers, the detection and treatment of vitamin D deficiency in sun-deprived risk groups is of high importance. It has to be emphasized that in groups that are at high risk of developing vitamin D deficiency (e.g., nursing home residents or patients under immunosuppressive therapy), vitamin D status has to be monitored. Vitamin D deficiency should be treated, e.g., by giving vitamin D orally. Dermatologists and other clinicians have to recognize that there is convincing evidence that the protective effect of less intense solar UV radiation outweighs its mutagenic effects.
Although further work is necessary to define an adequate vitamin D status and adequate guidelines for solar UV exposure, it is at present mandatory that public health campaigns and recommendations of dermatologists on sun protection consider these facts.
Well-balanced recommendations on sun protection have to ensure an adequate vitamin D status, thereby protecting people against adverse effects of strict sun protection without significantly increasing the risk of developing UV-induced skin cancer.

Prog Biophys Mol Biol. 2006 Sep;92(1):9-16.

[Variola]

Iko if you are going to cite papers, please read them first. Simply posting extract from journals, no matter how well researched is not enough ( for me anyhow)

Recommendations to limit sun exposure to prevent skin cancer further complicate the ongoing debate about the health benefits of vitamin D3

From:Antimicrobial peptides and the skin immune defense system.

While the benefits of a good level of Vit D is in doubt, its capacity to 'kill' viruses, what type of viruses, if it kills bacterium, and how efficient it maybe is still in a lot of doubt.

It could be argued that a good diet and moderate exercise to ensure a full supply of the range of vitamins and trace elements is going to benefit anyones immunes system!
Having high or repleat levels of Vit D and being deficianet in others will affect any hypothesis that Vit D is the key to immne health.
 

[iko]

...
Having high or repleat levels of Vit D and being deficianet in others will affect any hypothesis that Vit D is the key to immne health.  

No key role or major discovery..."a new weapon to kill the enemies".   [] [] []
I thought we were discussing about a possible contribution, help to our immune defense.
Just that.
"Could vitamin D kill viruses?" is the title/question in this thread.
Sunlight is free, vitamin D3 very cheap, and many people and patients show a deficiency/insufficiency condition.
This is what vitamindcouncil.com is all about.
I enjoy citation cut&paste: good reading (perfect English!), nice pieces of concentrated peer-reviewed science.
Short bits of knowledge to share with others...in seconds.  For a nice and peaceful discussion.

ikoD

Iko if you are going to cite papers, please read them first. Simply posting extract from journals, no matter how well researched is not enough ( for me anyhow)

BTW I read Jorg Reichrath's 2006 article, it's relatively short and concise.
This review is even better and more recent!

Exp Dermatol. 2007 Jul;16(7):618-25.
Vitamin D and the skin: an ancient friend, revisited.
Reichrath J.
Klinik für Dermatologie, Venerologie und Allergologie, Universitätsklinikum des Saarlandes, Homburg/Saar, Germany. hajrei@uniklinik-saarland.de

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17576242?ordinalpos=17&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

[Yomi]

no Viruses of some kind have abnormal structures of their body. proteins may be a a good killer of viruses than vitamins i think..

[Bored chemist]

While talking about the hypothetical influence of low ante-natal levels of vitamin D on the rates of autism surely you ought to menation that the stuff is a known teratogen.

Also, I'm puzzled- standards of ntrition have ben improving over the years- in particular people's consumption of fatty foods and, presumably, fat soluble vitamins has increased- so why is the rate of incidence of autism increasing?

[iko]

While talking about the hypothetical influence of low ante-natal levels of vitamin D on the rates of autism surely you ought to menation that the stuff is a known teratogen.

Also, I'm puzzled- standards of ntrition have ben improving over the years- in particular people's consumption of fatty foods and, presumably, fat soluble vitamins has increased- so why is the rate of incidence of autism increasing?

Most of the hormone/vitamin-D comes from sunlight exposure, not from the diet.
This is rather peculiar for a cofactor...making the whole issue more complex.

http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/health/autism/

If you go out in the sun for about 10 minutes your skin produces maybe 20,000 IU; the average pill has about 200-400 IU in it, dietary sources are much lower. Skin self limits, but pills don't. But I think the studies seem to say you can take up to about ~20,000 IU without any known long term harm at all. I think about 100,000 IU/day would put you in hospital... eventually.

Only a few food sources (mainly oily fish) give only a few hundred IU per portion, and most foods give none at all. There's only about a dozen common foods that have any significant vitamin D in at all. Eggs, 20 IU, you would have to eat 5 eggs a day to get up to your daily requirement.

Hi wolfekeeper,

I agree with you.
Vitamin D is not a 'real' vitamin, a cofactor that you get from your diet.
It is a steroid hormone, produced by our skin through sunlight exposure.
Difficult to measure (nanograms per mL in the circulating blood), it's coming late as a wonderful agent, able to control the function of over 200 genes.
Recent research results are quite promising, and its anti-infective properties (through antibiotic peptides production) have been defined only 4-5 years ago.
The old cod liver oil given to TB patients in the last century is finally scientifically proven as a treatment support!

[kathforscience]

Also, I'm puzzled- standards of ntrition have ben improving over the years- in particular people's consumption of fatty foods and, presumably, fat soluble vitamins has increased- so why is the rate of incidence of autism increasing?

It could be that we are getting better at recognising autism, not that more people are developing autism. The official numbers go up but the same number of people are affected.

[Variola]

It could be that we are getting better at recognising autism, not that more people are developing autism. The official numbers go up but the same number of people are affected.

Definately, also if you follow the mercury linked hypothesis that sparked the scare over MMR jabs, the level of mercury pollution is higher than was previously thought, so that might account for the seeming rise in cases. Plus some disorders are first diagnosed as Autism because they show similar phenotype, but are in fact subsequently rediagnosed as something else.

[Bored chemist]

I thought that a man with a patent on a new vaccine started the MMR scare ratrher than any concern about mercury.

I accept that the number of diagnosed cases might be due to different diagnosis but doesn't that make it rather hard to pin down anything as the cause for it?

Also (as I pointed out a few posts back) the fact that sunlight is a major contributor to vitamin D productioon will make things complicarted.

But I'd still like you all to explain how come the virus  survived for decades in my sun loving aunt in South Africa. She must have been awash with the stuff- it it kills viruses why didn't it work? If it's because the skin shuts down production at levels too low to kill the viruses then what happenefd to evolution?
An individual with a mutation that led to higher levels of vitamin D (for a given amount of sunshine) ought to be less susceptible to viral disease. That's a very strong evolutionary pressure. Something must have held vitamin D production in check. Perhaps it's because at levels where it's toxic to viruses it's also toxic to people. For example, perhaps the documented teratogenicity was more important than some minor effect on viral disease.

[Variola]

I thought that a man with a patent on a new vaccine started the MMR scare ratrher than any concern about mercury.

Well that could have been the 'real' reason! But the supposed concern was that MMR contained Thimerosal as a preservative, which happened to have a slgtly higher mercury content than the single vaccines which contained a different preservative. But since everyone is exposed to small amounts of mercury in the environment and food, assessing the actualy lever of exposure of any individual is impossible.
They recommend that pregnant women limit their intake of deep sea fish like tuna and marlin now due to pollution levels found inside the fish.

But I'd still like you all to explain how come the virus  survived for decades in my sun loving aunt in South Africa. She must have been awash with the stuff- it it kills viruses why didn't it work? If it's because the skin shuts down production at levels too low to kill the viruses then what happenefd to evolution?

I can't because I don't think that any link between the level of vit D and the ability to fight infwction is anywhere near as linear or simple as people would like it to be.

[Kevan Gelling]

Thanks for the comments.  I was particularly interested with information from Iko about a similar hypothesis has already been published in a scientific journal (although Iko's posting has since disappeared).

The question was highly speculative; I sent it to the Naked Scientists by email and they choose to post it on the forum.  Interestingly, they said that the topic would be covered in a future programme, although they didn't say whether it would be a programme about vitamin D (yes please) or viruses or something else.

My question really concerned the link between viruses and major diseases.  I suggested vitamin D only as a means to identify which diseases are caused by viruses.  There may be a better way^#. 

^#DeRisi Labs have created a "ViroChip" that can identify previously unknown viruses and have used it to find a virus in prostate cancer tumors (incidentally.prostate cancer and vitamin D have been linked - Vitamin D pill for prostate cancer)

[iko]

Thanks for the comments.  I was particularly interested with information from Iko about a similar hypothesis has already been published in a scientific journal (although Iko's posting has since disappeared).

Hide & seek!
If you are really interested, you may find it easily enough: just search for "vitamin d" right in this forum!  []
Enjoy.

ikoD

[iko]

New "hints" for this topic:
TBbacteria are not viruses -I know- but intracellular germs, difficult to eradicate.
Obviously "further studies" are needed...

Vitamin D as Adjunctive Therapy in Refractory Pulmonary Tuberculosis: A Case Report.

Yamshchikov AV, Oladele A, Leonard MK Jr, Blumberg HM, Ziegler TR, Tangpricha V.
From the Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Emory University-School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA; Central Dekalb County Health Center TB Control Program, Dekalb County Board of Health, Georgia Department of Human Resources, Decatur, GA; and Division of Endocrinology, Metabolism, and Lipids, Department of Medicine, Emory University-School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA.

Vitamin D regulates calcium homeostasis in the body and may play a major role in regulating immune responses to tuberculosis (TB). Pilot studies suggest that vitamin D supplementation may improve outcomes in pulmonary TB (PTB), but clinical evidence using vitamin D in TB treatment is limited. We present a case of vitamin D deficiency in a woman with refractory drug-susceptible PTB. Antituberculous therapy and the correction of vitamin D deficiency resulted in clinical and microbiologic improvement at month 13 of her treatment. The basis for vitamin D/TB interactions and a brief literature review are discussed. Data from controlled trials are needed to evaluate the efficacy of vitamin D as adjunctive TB therapy.

South Med J. 2009 May 7. [Epub ahead of print]

[Kevan Gelling]

golddina, www.vitaminsdeficiency.org is a vitamin shop and uses a lot of unsubstantiated hyperbole (in order to sells it vitamins, I presume).  You should take its declarations with a pinch of salt.

[wolfekeeper]

While talking about the hypothetical influence of low ante-natal levels of vitamin D on the rates of autism surely you ought to menation that the stuff is a known teratogen.

What is this garbage? Vitamin D isn't a teratogen.

Vitamin *A* is a significant teratogen, and you could fairly easily reach toxicity from vitamin A in cod liver oil etc. Vitamin D just isn't.

Do you really not know the difference between vitamin A and D?

[Bored chemist]

While talking about the hypothetical influence of low ante-natal levels of vitamin D on the rates of autism surely you ought to menation that the stuff is a known teratogen.

What is this garbage? Vitamin D isn't a teratogen.

Vitamin *A* is a significant teratogen, and you could fairly easily reach toxicity from vitamin A in cod liver oil etc. Vitamin D just isn't.

Do you really not know the difference between vitamin A and D?

I know the difference. I also know a similarity.

"Excess maternal; vitamin D intake or extreme sensitivity to the vitamin has been shown to cause some congenital birth defects. "
from here.
http://www.prn2.usm.my/mainsite/bulletin/sun/1996/sun44.html

Similarly
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=KZcOqBM-wVMC&pg=PA667&lpg=PA667&dq=%22vitamin+d%22+%22birth+defects%22&source=bl&ots=mAX7YwnZ5C&sig=ME9HI4vGAy-35Y2-CLI66j4oL6I&hl=en&ei=fR5BSuWQD8ihjAeyiYCiCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7

says the same sort of thing.

You might want to reappraise your assertion that this is garbage.

[wolfekeeper]

That's at a dose of 10,000 IU per KILOGRAM (of the mother, so over 500,000 IU)!!!!

The normal RDA is about 200 IU per person!

These are stupendous doses, 2500 pills- about 20 whole bottles of vitamin pills!!!

By comparison, vitamin A, the normal RDA is about 5000 IU, whereas toxicity can start at about 15,000 IU.

From your second link: "However, Forbes (1979) replied editorially to this report that the animal experiments were not germane to the human situation due to the exaggerated doses required to produce the lesions"