• Welcome to Phoenix Rising!

    Created in 2008, Phoenix Rising is the largest and oldest forum dedicated to furthering the understanding of and finding treatments for complex chronic illnesses such as chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), fibromyalgia (FM), long COVID, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS), and allied diseases.

    To register, simply click the Register button at the top right.

How many people have had their 1,25 Vitamin D tested? Debunking the Marshall Protocol

Beyond

Juice Me Up, Scotty!!!
Messages
1,122
Location
Murcia, Spain
I am calling all the brainy ones for this. When you have time, please come and comment. Read the papers I provide, bring others, use fancy words.

Let´s clear this controversy here and now. I have very low 25-hydroxy Vitamin D. 16 pg/ml. I do not know my 1,25 Vitamin D status. According to the Marshall crowd it would be high. According to all the others, it would be low. I don´t want to just jump to supplementing with vitamin D despite of many abstracts and pdf´s that I have read showing it is über good. It could be harmful. Studies are very misleading and you really need to contrast and digest the information.

So it would be very helpful if anyone have had this test done that it is posted so we can try to shed some light on this. I don´t even care about the 25- Vit D test results as for all I know we are all "defficient" in that one.

A study supporting that autoimmune people have higher 1,25-D blood concentrations:
http://www.cfids-cab.org/rc/Blaney.pdf

However, elevated levels of serum 1,25-D were found in 85% of patients examined. Technically, high levels of 1,25-D downregulate, via the pregnane X receptor (PXR) nuclear receptor, the amount of vitamin D converted into 25-D, resulting in low levels of 25-D in patients with autoimmune disease.
 
Last edited:

Beyond

Juice Me Up, Scotty!!!
Messages
1,122
Location
Murcia, Spain
I will do the counterargumenting myself, for the sake of truth (and our health!)

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/a...y-i-dont-recommend-the-marshall-protocol.aspx

In the comments:

There has recently been a new paper published called.

25-Hydroxyvitamin D(3) is an agonistic vitamin D receptor ligand.

I've just got hold of a copy of the full text, but just by reading the abstract those accustomed to reading medical literature will be aware this paper contradicts the Marshall Protocol.

Trevor Marshall was to some extent right when he suggested that Vitamin D in the form of caclidiol binds with the Vitamin D Receptor

(Marshall concluded that this blocked the active metabolite 1.25 from working) however this new paper says" Molecular dynamics simulations show the identical binding mode for both 25-hydroxyvitamin D(3) and 1alpha,25-dihydroxyvitamin D(3) with the larger volume of the ligand-binding pocket for 25-hydroxyvitamin D(3)."

They go on to say 25OHD3 and 1α,25(OH)2D3 are most likely acting in concert.

This is a really great paper and it fully justifies Dr Mercola's stance on Vitamin D3 and the need for higher circulating levels.
 

Dufresne

almost there...
Messages
1,039
Location
Laurentians, Quebec
It might be a good idea to test your D 1,25 levels. Dr De Meirleir tests for these hormones. Rich Van Konynenburg believed there was probably something to the Marshall Protocol for some conditions, that it made some sense. I don't think the tests are giving us inaccurate results.

I had low D 25 and high D 1,25., qualifying for the MP. However I'm not interested in the MP at this time. Benicar is not the type of drug one wants to be taking with low cardiac output and problems with vasoconstriction. I'm not keen on the protocol but that doesn't mean Marshall's work is BS. He's a target because he's a blowhard, but that doesn't mean his work is without value. No one knows why vitamin D 1,25 is high in some people. All I know is I'm not going to be adding any supplemental vitamin D into my diet while it's high in me.
 

Beyond

Juice Me Up, Scotty!!!
Messages
1,122
Location
Murcia, Spain
Thanks for posting your test results, Dufresne.

I do believe too that he discovered something, that his protocol have some merit in some areas:
http://gut.bmj.com/content/53/8/1129.abstract

However in my second comment I posted about how it has been discovered that the "inactive" form of vitamin D is in fact active. So supplementation with vitamin D3 *might* make sense in cases of high 1,25-D.

I am also "on the hunt" of anyone in this community with low 25-D and LOW 1,25-D.
 

Sushi

Moderation Resource Albuquerque
Messages
19,934
Location
Albuquerque
@Beyond

I have also regularly tested both forms of Vit D. When I began injecting GcMAF, I had been supplementing D at fairly high levels and my first tests (before starting GcMAF) were high for both forms. I stopped supplementing when I started GcMAF and within a month, both forms were normal.

They have remained normal while on GcMAF.

Best,
Sushi
 

Ema

Senior Member
Messages
4,729
Location
Midwest USA
I don't think we know enough to say one way or another at this point what the optimal levels of either 25-OH D or 1,25 D should be.

It seems clear enough to me that 25-OH D (the storage form) is typically supposed to be higher than the active form, 1,25D. And this seems to be reversed in those with chronic inflammatory diseases due to an issue with the VDR. And this certainly has a detrimental effect on the immune system.

I don't think avoidance of all Vit D is the answer and I also have concerns over Benicar especially in terms of those with already low BP (due to adrenal insufficiency or otherwise).

My problem is with the current trend to megadose Vitamin D3 without any testing or knowledge of what is going on with the active form. It's true that the level of the active form doesn't usually vary. In healthy people, there would be very little value to testing the active form because it shouldn't change very much. That is why typically the storage form is tested. But in our population, it does seem to be variable depending on the level of 25-OHD and there is value to testing yet it hardly ever gets done.

When one megadoses Vit D3, as recommended by Mercola, the 1,25 D gets higher and higher and the ratio gets further unbalanced in my experience. I am not convinced that this doesn't have detrimental effects on our immune system.

I think it is smarter at this time until we better understand how all this works to moderate our Vit D3 levels to that which keeps our 1,25 D level in the "normal" range as well. This doesn't mean "reduce Vit D to zero and avoid the sun". For me, this works out to a 25-OH D level of less than 60 (far from the 80-100 that is commonly recommended today). I've read several studies which indicate that this is a completely sufficient level of 25-OH D to avoid the problems associated with low Vit D.

I personally reach this level by supplementing about 2000 IU/day of D3 (though I would encourage everyone to test their own levels to find out what works for them). This is also a far cry from the 5-10000 IU/day that is commonly recommended. And I can't help but note that Mercola has a financial interest in promoting megadosing of Vit D. This doesn't make him wrong but I don't know how it wouldn't influence his perspective.

It's also worth noting that testing both 25-OHD and 1,25D are tricky and require special handling/freezing that not every facility may be able to do correctly. This makes interpretation of the results even more difficult if one is not sure that the results are even accurate.

Finally, only someone that had never suffered from a chronic bacterial infection like Lyme would ever make the following statement:

If infectious agents do underlie disease, which is certainly possible but remains to be proven, antibiotics are not the answer. There are many natural choices for anti-infectives that are much safer and have fewer side effects than antibiotics.

If the natural products are actually doing any killing of bacteria, then they are anti-biotics and carry similar risks of antibiotics. Scaring people off antibiotics when they actually do need them does as much damage, in my opinion, as does the Marshall Protocol.

Ema
 

August59

Daughters High School Graduation
Messages
1,617
Location
Upstate SC, USA
I am calling all the brainy ones for this. When you have time, please come and comment. Read the papers I provide, bring others, use fancy words.

Let´s clear this controversy here and now. I have very low 25-hydroxy Vitamin D. 16 pg/ml. I do not know my 1,25 Vitamin D status. According to the Marshall crowd it would be high. According to all the others, it would be low. I don´t want to just jump to supplementing with vitamin D despite of many abstracts and pdf´s that I have read showing it is über good. It could be harmful. Studies are very misleading and you really need to contrast and digest the information.

So it would be very helpful if anyone have had this test done that it is posted so we can try to shed some light on this. I don´t even care about the 25- Vit D test results as for all I know we are all "defficient" in that one.

A study supporting that autoimmune people have higher 1,25-D blood concentrations:
http://www.cfids-cab.org/rc/Blaney.pdf

One of them is very hard to get an accurate reading because it changes very rapidly as in you can get one reading and 10 minutes later it is completely different.

I'll go back to my lab test to se what I can find out.

ETA: I've had my Vit. D tested 6 times and it was always the Vitamin D, 25-Hydroxy test. It was 25.7 the first time and I only got it up to 42 (still considered low by physicians) at its highest test. I have never had the Vitamin D, 1,25 Dihydroxy test performed on me.

It can be done through PrivateMDlabs.com for 89.99 and if it is first time there is a 15% discount. This is also a LabCorp test.
 
Last edited:

snowathlete

Senior Member
Messages
5,374
Location
UK
don't remember my results off the top of my head (posted elsewhere on forum) but I think my inactive was a tiny bit low, but my active was mid range/normal. high vit d also not good for you so always worth testing for both to get full picture before supplementing.
 

Allyson

Senior Member
Messages
1,684
Location
Australia, Melbourne
don't remember my results off the top of my head (posted elsewhere on forum) but I think my inactive was a tiny bit low, but my active was mid range/normal. high vit d also not good for you so always worth testing for both to get full picture before supplementing.


HI what are1.25 vit d levels please? I have had my vitamin D levels tested and they have been consistently low

so I supplement

I have heard low VIt D levels are often seein MS and Inicdence of MS increases the further you get from the equator is all I can add at he moment

I will get more specific vit d levels done if that seems advisable
 

Allyson

Senior Member
Messages
1,684
Location
Australia, Melbourne
for the record I have heard the Marsha; protocol is dangerous - to the point of being lethal from someone who knows about it though I have never looked into it myself
 

alex3619

Senior Member
Messages
13,810
Location
Logan, Queensland, Australia
I have not specifically investigated this other than superficially. I know, anecdotally, that some benefit from the MP, some don't, and some get worse. We need to know about subgroups and we don't.

High 1,25 D is claimed to be from inflammation, but that inflammation does not have to be from pathogens. So our 25 D gets converted by the kidneys to 1,25 D. Under these conditions adding vit D will just raise something already too high.

It always pays to get 1,25 D checked.
 

Daffodil

Senior Member
Messages
5,873
I think I was told long ago that low 25-D a high 1,25-D just means inflammation of some kind. I don't think there is reason to supplement if 1,25-D is high....
 

Beyond

Juice Me Up, Scotty!!!
Messages
1,122
Location
Murcia, Spain
I found a study of crohn´s and ulcerative colitis. Only 42% of CD and 7% of UC colitis patients had low 25-D and high 1,25-D. It seems only a subset of people with "chronic" and autoimmune/inflammatory conditions get the high 1,25-D.

OK so if I wanted to try to guess my 1,25-D status without testing, would it be helpful to look at calcium or other blood test results?

I agree with Ema and I will say more, I see clearly that both Mercola and the Marshall crowd are not having the pursuit of the sheer truth in this matter as the primary objective. Mercola is a public alternative health figure and seems to be like just most of them, an avid spokesman that is for rent. Marshall has ego reasons to ignore the questions raised by his protocol not curing everyone (uh oh it might be that not all of us have L-form loads as a root cause of autoimmunity? but that would mean accepting he was wrong), plus he could have financial interest having into account the money the nurses and docs in the MP make.
 
Last edited:

snowathlete

Senior Member
Messages
5,374
Location
UK
I found a study of crohn´s and ulcerative colitis. Only 42% of CD and 7% of UC colitis patients had low 25-D and high 1,25-D. It seems only a subset of people with "chronic" and autoimmune/inflammatory conditions get the high 1,25-D.

OK so if I wanted to try to guess my 1,25-D status without testing, would it be helpful to look at calcium or other blood test results?

I agree with Ema and I will say more, I see clearly that both Mercola and the Marshall crowd are not having the pursuit of the sheer truth in this matter as the primary objective. Mercola is a public alternative health figure and seems to be like just most of them, an avid spokesman that is for rent. Marshall has ego reasons to ignore the questions raised by his protocol not curing everyone (uh oh it might be that not all of us have L-form loads as a root cause of autoimmunity? but that would mean accepting he was wrong), plus he could have financial interest having into account the money the nurses and docs in the MP make.

That's interesting. I have UC (newly diagnosed). Have you got a link to the paper?

I don't know much about the Marshall prototocol. And I tend too steer clear of Mercola (though my mother is forever sending me pages of his :rolleyes:). They aren't the only doctors out there who have these views about Vit D though.

KDM did a short video earlier this year talking about the Vit D levels for those who want to go find it. One of the things he points out is that too much is also not good for you, so it really is important to test your active form as well as the inactive. At least then you have all the information to make an fully informed decision. If both were low for instance then most would probably agree that it's worth supplementing. But say your active form was in fact high, then even if your inactive form was low, then most would probably agree that supplementing would not be wise.
 

Allyson

Senior Member
Messages
1,684
Location
Australia, Melbourne
I have not specifically investigated this other than superficially. I know, anecdotally, that some benefit from the MP, some don't, and some get worse. We need to know about subgroups and we don't.

High 1,25 D is claimed to be from inflammation, but that inflammation does not have to be from pathogens. So our 25 D gets converted by the kidneys to 1,25 D. Under these conditions adding vit D will just raise something already too high.

It always pays to get 1,25 D checked.


thanks Alex....more for me to study..... did not know there were so many diff types of Vit D


ALly
 

heapsreal

iherb 10% discount code OPA989,
Messages
10,076
Location
australia (brisbane)
it seems to be another theory that cures all. l form bacteria.
Im sure it helps some but i think its more to do with antibiotics then the rest of the protocol.
The abx used are very similar to whats used for mycoplasma and chlamydia pneumonia, both those infections were once considered the cause of the cfs mess as they were hard to test for, sort of undetectable infections....
Again its a sub group thing and we need accurate testing for these pathogens to rule them out or not. or maybe its just the crappy immune system letting these things go wild...