Just had a lecture on Vit D - I'm so confused

Discussion in 'Fibromyalgia Main Forum' started by jfrustrated, Dec 6, 2005.

  1. jfrustrated

    jfrustrated New Member

    Early this year I was diagnosed with adrenal fatigue and low thyroid and have had cfs for years. I have been taking vit D3 for about 3 months now, along with T3 and hydrocortosine. I have not noticed any improvement and am waiting for blood tests to see what is happening,

    This morning I had a phone call from someone else with cfs, who gave me the pep talk about the Marshall Protocol and how the D3 is bad for me and that I should get my vitamin D and hormone D levels tested and if I was on the MP my adrenal and thyroid would gradually fix themselves up. He believes that he is improving after 6 months on the MP and has the best of intentions but the phone call has left me even more confused.

    When I got on the message board this afternoon I found the topic of D3 and the idea that it supports thyoid function.

    How can it be that one group of people with cfs appear to be benefiting from D3 and others are avoiding it like the plague and also appear to be benefiting? And what about those who have such negative reactions to both approaches that they are unable to complain?

    What is the easiest way for me to find out which, if either at all, group I belong in? My body has been messed around so much over the years that I feel like a lab. rat just used to test the latest fads.

    I think this question is turning into a 'vent'. It is so difficult to know what to do.

    Thank you for reading this attempt to let off some stress and steam.

  2. tansy

    tansy New Member

    The MP remains experimental, and whilst it seems to be helping a small number (relatively speaking) with these DDs, many with ME/CFS are having a difficult time with it; they end up more ill and symptomatic. Though claims are being made that the MP is a cure; it's far too early to do so, and the drop out rate due to difficutlies with it too high. The patient is often blamed of course for not following the protocol to the letter even though in many cases their problems arose because they stuck to the rules.

    I read the claims made by promoters of the MP, and the information on vitamin D, and feedback from patients. In the end it became clear to me that I personally needed more vit D.

    Despite the dire warnings by those who advocate the MP and the need for vit D avoidance; vit D3 has helped - it has not made me worse. Lower than ideal vit D levels can skew the D25-D125 ratios so often used as the basis for recommending the MP, taking vit D3 and/or getting sufficient Vit D from sunlight, raise D25 and have been documented a normalising the ratios.

    My thryoid problems fixed themselves too as a result of going back to basics earlier this year, vit D3 played a role in that. Improvements in thryoid hormone related symptoms are reported in a wide range of treatment protocols. Thryoid hormone and insulin resistance often improve simultaneously.

    It is worrying that patients with low D levels; and with ratios that do not confirm the hypothesis behind vit D and light deprivation, are still being told to avoid all sources. The human body needs sunlight and vit D. Many have become worse through lowering the D25 levels; vit D is essential for the immune and endocrine systems as well as our bones. Vit D deficiency can also make our muscles weaker.

    According to all the non MP literature on vitamin D it's the D25 levels that count, so you could get those tested; D125 tests are considered unreliable and inconsistant

    I chose a "therapeutic probe" because there were already clues that my vit D levels were not optimum; the winter of 2004-5 was the deciding time for me when avoiding heat and strong light during the summer months led to more low vitamin D related symptoms.

    Scaremongering is something I really dislike; it causes unecessary distress. Over the decades I have seen this many times, it's more to do with the need to believe a particular hypothesis and/or protocol than accuracy, science, or even common sense.

    So far, despite numerous claims over the one cure for these DDs has been discovered, no single Tx has stood the test of time as universally successful. Protocols are evolving as more is learned and this is being reflected in their increased effectiveness. The same applies to most other chronic illnesses: that's why integrative medicine can be more successful than reductionist specialities; it treats the patient's individual health issues not just the diagnostic label.

    Most of us take breaks from supps, alternatives and meds; it's a good way of judging if or how they work.

    Tansy[This Message was Edited on 12/07/2005]