Tags : :
Alright, so I've started enough supplement posts today, though I hope that they will be of some use.
Anyway, this one is another question to those with experience.
Vitamin D levels seem to get out of wack when one has a chronic infection.
There seem to be three different views on this.
1. Marshall Protocol - Which seems to believe that Vitamin D supplements and Sun Exposure are both very bad for those with chronic infection or disease. The idea (very simply put) is to avoid Vitamin D in any form for years in order to reboot the immune system and destroy pathogens.
I feel odd about this due to the fact that Marshall followers seem to think it will cure everything and almost seem angry when you claim it may not be best in every situation.
2. Vitamin D Council - That vitamin D deficiency is the cause of all these problems, or a factor and that everyone should get plenty of Sun Exposure and supplementation.
I feel strange about this one because it is being pushed so heavily by everyone and everything. News, websites, doctors....etc.....something seems a little odd about it.
3. In the Middle - That sometimes Vitamin D is necessary, and sometimes it needs to be avoided. This, like everything, seems likely it would most obviously make sense.
Regardless, it doesn't make things easy. I'm trying to pay attention to long term stories and the experiences that people have had.
I know I feel better if I take it at a low dose - much more energy, libido...etc....though after a while of using it, I feel a bit anxious. This goes away if I take Magnesium with it (and apparently those with side-effect are often low in Magnesium).
Anyway, the point being I can't decided on this one - Good or Bad? Obviously more research needs to be done but does anyone here use it? How does it effect them? Know anyone who got better and was using Vitamin D when things turned around?
Thanks for any info...