Author Topic: Vitamin D may not be the reason for lower death rates from sunshine.  (Read 613 times)

Bob Knows

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1437
  • Human bodies are natural, comfortable, and green.
    • View Profile
    • Greenbare Photos
Science demonstrates that Natural Sunshine is what reduces many health problems and results in longer lives.  Sun blocker prevents the health effects of sunshine.  And, taking artificial Vitamin D has no beneficial effects. 

For a long time science has known that people with low Vitamin D levels have higher death rates from a list of causes.   But a recent study with 25,000 subjects taking Vitamin D supplements had no beneficial effects.   Vitamin D may only be a "marker" or side issue for the beneficial effects of sunshine. 


Outside article.
https://www.outsideonline.com/2380751/sunscreen-sun-exposure-skin-cancer-science


New England Journal of Medicine. study.
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1809944
Human bodies are natural, comfortable, and green.
To see more of Bob you can view his personal photo page
http://www.photos.bradkemp.com/greenbare.html

BlueTrain

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 944
    • View Profile
Re: Vitamin D may not be the reason for lower death rates from sunshine.
« Reply #1 on: January 14, 2019, 09:11:42 PM »
Maybe that's why Eskimos don't live as long as others.

ric

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
    • View Profile
Re: Vitamin D may not be the reason for lower death rates from sunshine.
« Reply #2 on: January 15, 2019, 10:12:21 AM »
theres also more reseach now being done into the effect of circadian rythms on various different bits of the body.

all to do with the varying light intensities and frequencies during the day.

tinted glasses block most of these effects through the eyes, but even clear lenses have an effect especially contacts .

jbeegoode

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3590
    • View Profile
Re: Vitamin D may not be the reason for lower death rates from sunshine.
« Reply #3 on: January 15, 2019, 09:17:12 PM »
I like this one. rogue rebellious health nut that I can be, but it makes sense.

The body makes Vitamin D, by taking the good cholesterol and sunshine. D is "associated" with all of these good things. That's natural. Eating supplements doesn't make the vitamin D happen. We are a complete system and production and use of natural goodness is built in. We don't eat massive amounts of Vitamin D in nature, we don't get it, or process it that way. I gave my body good cholesterol from an naturally balanced organic free-range source, I didn't cook out the balance and goodness. I then added sunshine all over. My Vitamin D dropped within range.

I haven't used sunscreen for years and years, but in extreme circumstances. I don't need it. I take precautions. I really enjoyed the cancer statistics. It shows the scare tactics being employed in that industry and medical field.

I went through this looking for what reasoning is used to qualify the selected daily needs for Vitamin D, if anyone i interested:
https://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/VitaminD-HealthProfessional/
It has information, but is much to do with the current scares and fallacies and their false conclusions.

There are various reasons for the numbers. They are based on needs to take care of serious maladies like rickets. There is also a toxicity potential for D supplements. If Vitamin D is manufactured in the body naturally, the body balances what is needed. I give my body what it needs and it takes care of itself; The body self regulates; I don't need a doctor doing guessing games.

One raw egg in my smoothie each morning and as much play naked in the sunshine as I can enjoy, during the peak hours (don't over do it and burn). I can't help but think that good body movement adds to this. The sweat and particularly the sauna help exercise the skin and its functions, like making and processing in conjunction with the rest of the bodies systems.
Jbee

Barefoot all over, all over.

ric

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
    • View Profile
Re: Vitamin D may not be the reason for lower death rates from sunshine.
« Reply #4 on: January 16, 2019, 10:43:35 AM »
often forgotten is most of the gov recommended daily doses for vitamins are guesses at the levels to avoid disease/s developing  not a recommendation of levels for optimum health or to cure something existing.


nobody seems to do much research into whether processed artificial supplements are used by the body in the same way as the naturally occuring substance.   bear in mind naturally occuring vitamins etc often have other compounds with them that may act as catalysts to enable or enhance the action .   also the processed supplements arnt pure and often have fillers and bulking agents not to mention flavourings and sweeteners which may not be benificial.

BlueTrain

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 944
    • View Profile
Re: Vitamin D may not be the reason for lower death rates from sunshine.
« Reply #5 on: January 16, 2019, 12:09:54 PM »
I think that many of these things are fads. Somebody says something and it catches  on and before you know it, it's officially recommended. After all, the government is composed of ordinary people just like you and me, although a lot of them have been furloughed at the moment. They're probably the ones who do the good things that government does.

Health and nutrition is a complicated thing and there is always an attraction for simple solutions. Vitamin supplements, copper bracelets and so on. Your body is not a well-oiled machine that extracts X amount of nutrition and necessary elements from what you eat and drink. That's not to say that what you eat makes no difference. It most certainly does. But even the desired end result is subject to the same fads. What is considered overweight has changed over the years. All I can say is what Dick Van Dyke says: keep moving (Easier said than done sometimes). That and do what your mother says.

jbeegoode

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3590
    • View Profile
Re: Vitamin D may not be the reason for lower death rates from sunshine.
« Reply #6 on: January 16, 2019, 07:41:56 PM »
Dick Van Dyke said that, too? That was Ken Kesey's advice. Dick trippin'? ;D

That is an interesting point about being a well oiled machine. The body is adaptable, it makes allowances for times of famine and abundance. It shuts down when needed, and has armies of host and first aid. It is a host working with billions of little critters and the environment, to the point that it melds to no boundaries, only oneness, just a part of. The critters are the body. It is not simple, but complex systems, beyond what science has discovered. It is an ecology. A definition as a machine just doesn't cut it.

So, I look to what is natural and preventative. I fast, I sweat, I tend toward natural foods, models of natural stress, spirituality. Nude is natural. It triggers all sorts of physical adaptations and exercises a bodies systems. It keeps things "movin'."

After a long cold winter, when you get naked in the sun, hasn't that winter taught you the difference and the value of naked and the sun? Don't ya just know?
Jbee

Barefoot all over, all over.

BlueTrain

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 944
    • View Profile
Re: Vitamin D may not be the reason for lower death rates from sunshine.
« Reply #7 on: January 16, 2019, 08:32:13 PM »
When it's the middle of August, we all wish it were cooler and when it's the middle of January, we all wish it were warmer. That's natural. This morning when I got up, it was just about 20° F outside, now about 40°. Tonight the temperature will drop again faster than the value of our stock portfolios. I still go out walking, though hardly nude, about 2 or 3 miles round trip over the creek and through the woods. It's much nicer now; the mud is frozen and there are no insects. Still, I sweat year-round. Even nude, I sweat. I guess sweat is natural, too. It may not be natural to live where it snows, though.

MartinM

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 88
    • View Profile
Re: Vitamin D may not be the reason for lower death rates from sunshine.
« Reply #8 on: January 18, 2019, 02:39:29 PM »
I am not sure if I read an early version of this report, but this is the basic philosophy I have been following for the last ten years or so since diagnosed with an auto-immune disease and foot problems, both now being shown to be related to inflammation:
Plenty of sunshine, avoiding burning, building a good tan and avoiding sun cream as far as possible, mixed diet with plenty of vegetables and fruit, limiting red meat, avoiding processed foods, plenty of exercise, going barefoot and, when possible, naked. That’s probably a bit further than they recommend!
« Last Edit: January 18, 2019, 02:41:02 PM by MartinM »
Tread lightly upon the earth!

John P

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 728
    • View Profile
    • My naturist page
Re: Vitamin D may not be the reason for lower death rates from sunshine.
« Reply #9 on: January 18, 2019, 04:19:23 PM »
Here you go, the diet of the future. It looks OK to me.
https://www.bbc.com/news/health-46865204

If you eat meat every day then this is the first biggie. For red meat you're looking at a burger a week or a large steak a month and that's your lot.

You can still have a couple of portions of fish and the same of chicken a week, but plants are where the rest of your protein will need to come from. The researchers are recommending nuts and a good helping of legumes every day instead.

There's also a major push on all fruit and veg, which should make up half of every plate of food we eat.

jbeegoode

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3590
    • View Profile
Re: Vitamin D may not be the reason for lower death rates from sunshine.
« Reply #10 on: January 18, 2019, 06:59:27 PM »
I eat like this, mostly live and living foods, sushi, no chicken or meat unless it is wild. Cooking generally burns up the nutritional values, something that I taste. I love the environmental impact toy at the bottom.

So, how much environmental offset do I get for eating naked?

This diet, makes a place for small farmers, it can be a local market supporting it, It can be organic and get rid of all of those pesticides, etc. It is healthier than eating all the starch and grains produced by big production methods, which are not environmentally sound. We need to do this, to live on this planet. The big agriculture plan is a lie. We don't want GMO's, if we do this healthy bio-diverse eating...naked. :D
Jbee
Barefoot all over, all over.

John P

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 728
    • View Profile
    • My naturist page
Re: Vitamin D may not be the reason for lower death rates from sunshine.
« Reply #11 on: January 19, 2019, 05:53:02 PM »
Here's another one, not totally contradicting the previous one. But it's interesting that there's no agreement on how good or bad a high-carbohydrate diet is for us! You'd think that would be pretty basic, but the mantra "Eat your veggies" seems pretty constant.

http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20190116-a-high-carb-diet-may-explain-why-okinawans-live-so-long

Bob Knows

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1437
  • Human bodies are natural, comfortable, and green.
    • View Profile
    • Greenbare Photos
Re: Vitamin D may not be the reason for lower death rates from sunshine.
« Reply #12 on: January 19, 2019, 06:25:27 PM »
Cooking generally burns up the nutritional values,
Jbee

The science disagrees with that.   Some biological evidence shows that our bodies have evolved to eat cooked food over about 2 million  years. We have lost a significant portion of our digestive system that we don't need because our food is "pre-digested" by fire. Compared to other species we have a very small digestive system as a percentage of body mass.

Eating raw food results in absorbing only about 70% of the food value, and the rest passes through without being absorbed.  In some studies the raw food group lost weight while the cooked food group gained weight on the same diet.     There is a really good book about this topic called "*Catching Fire: How cooking made us human*." 

Our bodies are VERY GOOD at telling us what is nutritional and healthy.  Most of us choose to eat what is now called "fast food" because our bodies tell us that is that they need and want to be healthy.  A lot of the fake "health food" is pretty much over priced garbage, in my opinion.  Listen to your body.
Human bodies are natural, comfortable, and green.
To see more of Bob you can view his personal photo page
http://www.photos.bradkemp.com/greenbare.html

Safebare

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 140
    • View Profile
Re: Vitamin D may not be the reason for lower death rates from sunshine.
« Reply #13 on: January 19, 2019, 08:24:23 PM »
It is amazing how science evolves.  There is a cultural aspect to science as much as factual.  Data is a wonderful thing.  It is often misleading and interpretations can span the spectrum.  I work with data and understand it's flexibility.
Anyway, my mantra is to consume food, in as pure a state as I can find it.  If its not food, avoid it at all costs.  Artificial sweeteners, manufactured supplements, overly processed foods, pesticides and other poisons are anti-food, not food.  All diets have a shelf life.  Probably even mine.
Healthy eating is one small part of healthy living.  What works for me, is just that (mine).  It probably isn't the best thing for you, so I hesitate to condemn anyone for putting thought into their habits, whether diet, exercise, career, family, etc.  If it works for them, it is just fine with me.  Kinda like religion.  I'll let you see mine, even if you wont show me yours, but don't condemn, or shame me for it.
Be safe, be healthy, be free, but more importantly, be YOU!
Safebare

BlueTrain

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 944
    • View Profile
Re: Vitamin D may not be the reason for lower death rates from sunshine.
« Reply #14 on: January 19, 2019, 08:39:51 PM »
There are a few other ways to look at it. Take animals, for instance.

Animals, both wild and domestic, that eat only plant matter, are round and sometimes fat. Think of what cattle look like. But animals which only eat meat tend to be lean. This analogy does not extend to fish or whales, of course. Just don't read too much into that. Cooking doesn't make any difference on this point.

Humans, on the other hand, have evolved to eat almost anything that other animals eat and at the same time, many foods have been domesticated (evolved, you might say) to be suitable for humans. It's a big world, too, and the variations are almost endless. There are still many things that humans cannot digest, even if you're surrounded by it (like grass) nor can most other animals. Culture also plays a part. Also, few, if any, animals that we eat are normally meat-eaters, curiously. But it's also worth mentioning that we do not all have the same nutritional requirements. Few people do manual labor like they used to, so we generally do not require high calorie diets like some people used to. And of course, some people do no work whatsoever.

However, nutrition-wise, the basic problem is simply getting enough to eat in the first place. That part is easily assumed away but it remains a problem for people in some places. Getting enough of the right vitamins is an issue on a higher level, beyond getting enough calories. That has sometimes been a problem in this country, too, which we forget. Personally, I don't think there's anything wrong with fast food, but I also worked my way through college working in both a sub shop and a hamburger place. I know where the food comes from and there's nothing wrong with it.

In responding to a post made as I was writing this one, let me say something about processed food. Some very traditional foods are processed more than you might think. And some very basic food stuffs did not occur naturally. They're part of what has been developed in the last five or ten thousand years, during which time humans have scarcely changed. It is true, however, that great advances have been made in New World foods since Europeans got here, foods that had not been consumed in the rest of the world. Even more recently, some cultural prejudices had to be overcome before certain foods were considered suitable for humans. In parts of Europe, for example, corn (maize, that is, 'Indian corn') was considered fit only for cattle.