Convergence of outcome between HIV-positivity and D deficiency

“Vitamin D deficiency was associated with pulmonary tuberculosis, incident oral thrush, wasting and weight loss of more than 10% among adults with HIV receiving antiretroviral therapy, recent data suggest.”

The above ailments are all AIDS-defining illnesses.

Sudfeld: “If randomized controlled trials determine that vitamin D supplementation is safe and effective in reducing mortality, pulmonary TB or other morbidities, we may have an additional, low-cost adjunct treatment to add to our toolkit for improving survival and/or quality of live for people with HIV starting ART.”

I would hedge that there would be quite a number of people who wouldn’t need anti-retrovirals when taking vitamin D. But they may need some other interventions pertinent to their health risks.

“Sixty adults experienced wasting, and those with a vitamin D deficiency had an HR of 3.1 for wasting compared with those who were vitamin D sufficient. Lastly, adults with vitamin D deficiency were 2.1 times more likely to experience weight loss of 10% or more compared with those who had vitamin D sufficiency.”

My support of counter hypotheses to HIV/AIDS theory is showing signs of bearing fruit. Read my book.

Denting the cholesterol hypothesis

A BMJ piece from yesterday, that is pertinent to one large chapter of my book, shows that ‘cholesterol denialism’ seems to be edging into the mainstream.

“…The findings argue against the “saturated fat bad, omega 6 PUFA good” dogma and suggest that the American Heart Association guidelines on omega-6 PUFAs may be misguided. They also “underscore the need to properly align dietary advice and recommendations with the scientific evidence base.”

Another marvellous line in this article, in regards to science as whole, is: 

“We are also asking researchers to tell us about any other documented examples of missing data, to build a picture of the full extent of the problem which is undermining evidence based medicine worldwide.”

Missing data is not always the problem. There’s plenty of glaring data that is simply ignored.

“This means doctors cannot be certain that the drugs they are prescribing daily are properly evaluated for safety and efficacy.”