Does vitamin D (& C) help with Covid-19?

Does vitamin D (& C) help with Covid-19?

Publication date: 2020 March 29

If you want to do something for your grandparents, parents, children and yourself: read, understand, act!





Vitamin D basics

Supplementary Considerations

If the above summary is sufficient for you, here is a condensed version of my findings on how the vitamin D(25) level can be brought to the indigenous population level of 50 ng/ml, which helps me stay healthy. If you want more information, please read on under "Explanation". Please take care of a healthy vitamin D level of your loved ones soon. And your own too. No, 25 mcg of D3 per day is internationally not considered sufficient (because only 1,000 I.U.). And 20.000 I.U. "XYZ" (most prescribed product, unfortunately without K2) once a week is much better than nothing, but on the one hand not really enough (~57%), on the other hand without K2 already too much and dangerous.


🗣 Mouthguard 😷 should - and must in future! Cloths are great, but the you have to wash. It's faster and cheaper that way. It's not perfect, but better than nothing. And, of course, you're protecting the others, not Yourself. But if everyone does, we'll protect each other! 😘 and stay healthy! 🍀

Dear friends near and far,

Update 1.4 (unfortunately not an April Fool's joke): "Some of these answers would unsettle the population" said Thomas de Maizière, when an international match in Hannover had to be cancelled in 2015 due to the danger of terrorism. You have to assume something similar if you can "read" statistical figures very well (I have an almost autistic talent for this). After all, 2.4 million dead by August - is it possible to communicate that? But exactly such a number causes the politicians to take action as hard as possible to prevent the imminent catastrophe - before which there is hardly anything to see now. A fatal balancing act, because a few hundred deaths at present are immediately compared by the doubters with the 25,000 flu deaths of 2017/18 and then follows an ignorant and gloomy: "Well, where is your excess mortality, you can't see anything? That's because these eternal grumblers (Wodarg unfortunately have no idea about statistics and an exponential spread.

Who remembers? A fortnight ago we had many thousands of "cases" and a death rate of only 0.2%, hardly more than with a normal influenza (wave of flu). In the meantime, the death rate has reached the 1% mark (that was 1.2% on 31.3.20, 1.4.20), and we cannot explain this with overloading our intensive care units. In addition, the average age of the "cases" is about 50+x years, in Bergamo it was over 80, i.e.: there was far too little testing. The consequence: a lethality rate that seems absurdly high (allegedly 5,300 cases, but almost 1000 deaths: 20%). If one generates a statistical curve from the known data (1st death on 22.2, 350 deaths in the week of 26.3, a total of almost 1,000 deaths up to that point), which covers all the key points, then, and this is the consequence, a total of well over 30,000 Bergamo masks must have been infected, most of which were symptom-free or only mildly ill and have since healed. This results in a lethality rate of 3.4% (see Bergamo statistics). The lethality rate in the now Corona-free small town of (3 of 89 infected) was also 3.4%. We hear the same figures from Wuhan. Only that was very early (was completely closed immediately after the first death on 21.2.) and the intensive care units were probably not yet "overloaded" at this time. Cynically one has to assume that due to the overloaded ICUs in Bergamo mainly people died who would have survived with artificial respiration but then would have died 3-6 months later - the 3.4% lethality is probably closer to reality than the 1% we currently see in our country because our risk groups, especially the elderly, are not yet infected. But how quickly this will happen is shown by the cases in Würzbug etc.

We must expect that an infection of 100 people with Covid-19 will result in an average of 3 deaths. 1-2 may be "short term premature" deaths, but 1-2 will affect people who would have to live longer, middle-aged, perhaps even very young. Covid-19 has aggravating properties compared to influenza: Half of those infected have no symptoms at all and unknowingly spread the virus for days. For those who fall ill later, the incubation period is very long, one can be infectious for a week without noticing any symptoms. And Covid-19 is much more infectious than influenza, spreads much, much faster. In addition, the closely related viruses SARS and MERS do not have the same seasonality as influenza viruses, and one should not expect a weakening in summer.

A so-called herd immunity, which prevents further diseases, is well over 90% for highly infectious diseases like measles, rather 95%. Drosten estimates 70% for sars-CoV-2. In the worst case (3.4% lethality, 70% infections over a period of 10 weeks, 82 million people) 82 x 0.7 x 0.034 = ~2 million people would die in a quarter of a year. Instead of 225,000 per quarter as normal, this almost tenfold increase (and even more at peak times) cannot go unnoticed under any circumstances. Not only hospitals, but also crematoria, funeral parlors, cemeteries, pallbearers, all parts of the system would be so overloaded that it would be impossible to keep it under cover. And if the whole country was on fire in such a way, a riot could hardly be prevented. Rapid herd immunity is therefore not an alternative to a lockdown, because without a lockdown our society would be infested within 10 weeks - with the above-mentioned consequences, i.e. millions of deaths.

So lockdown until we're all inoculated? That's what the politicians and virologists and epidemiologists are hoping for. But if they were to say so, they would also have to say that realistically it will take until June/July before tests with the vaccine can begin, and that vaccination of at least the risk groups (all >70, all with pre-existing conditions) can be started in mid-September at the earliest. That is likely to be more than 15 million people, and that we are taking. So lockdown until the end of October. By then hundreds of thousands of freelancers, small entrepreneurs, self-employed people and some companies will have long since gone bankrupt, there will be millions of unemployed. Scary? Scary? Is this "truth" to be expected of the population? I don't think so.

Some doubters could develop a "lick-me attitude" according to the motto: "It probably won't affect me, it's only the old people, and before I gnaw at the famine and can no longer feed my children, please unlock herd immunity and the country again". Against the others, the affected people, a good quarter after all, who have to beg to be allowed to stay alive. It is understandable that this idea must be absolutely repugnant to any politician. It is therefore more than understandable that both scenarios - millions of deaths without a lockdown or an effective lockdown, but unfortunately until October with all the economic consequences, in the hope of some kind of miracle - would rather be kept from us. So do not believe any expert who claims that the figures are completely unclear and that much more testing is needed before anything can be said - that is just playing for time. The figures from Wuhan, Bergamo and Vó so far give a very clear indication of how we will end up with a lockdown, and that's terrible enough. Without lockdown - dramatically. But with lockdown - too.

In Vó, as described above, let us test the 86 people for vitamin D and compare them with their symptoms, which have already been recorded. If the results are encouraging: Provide all risk groups with vitamin D(+K2). If we succeed in reducing mortality significantly below 1%, we may be able to end the lockdown earlier. If not, we will still save some lives. I am happy to donate the 89 D. tests for Vó.

Corona drives me around like most of us (see Bergamo statistics). But also me especially, because I had just finished my second "health book" when Corona came. The first one about sugar (at Braumüller, Vienna) was not a bestseller, but it saved a very good friend from diabetes-II. After alarmingly high blood sugar levels of over 300 mg/dl he is now "clean" with <80 mg/dl! The new book (now on ice, of course) should describe why I have been in absolutely top health for 20 months. Since then not a single cold, otherwise 1-3 per year. No more headaches or hangovers, both of which I used to have so regularly (smoking, alcohol, weather, work) that 100 aspirin per year were lost. But since August 2018 not a single painkiller anymore! Exception: 6 of them during the influenza A, which caught me at the end of January 2020. But that was over after eight days, of which I was on my feet for four days and even on a business trip (with a proper distance to all contacts of course). And after 12 days I already did some heavy sports again. Jutta Ditfurth has fought a full 6 weeks with such a flu - also at the beginning of this year.

But my "secret" is none at all, there are many people who, like me, "drum" for more vitamin D. That's where I would like to join in, because far too few people really know about vitamin D, and many family doctors* don't really know either. Because the D-test costs extra (30€), the health insurance does not pay for it. Which means that only a few people do it - otherwise the family doctor would see that her patients with low vitamin D levels are more often ill. They cannot, because the tests are not done, because they cost money. Some things are so easy to understand - so please don't scold your doctors, ok? And what this has to do with Corona, I'll explain below. If you want to know who I am and what I have done in my life so far, click here.

A thought experiment: You are a doctor and have asked 793 flu patients* about certain eating habits, here about fish portions per week. You enter the result in a table, divided into groups. 161 patients* eat one portion of fish, 306 eat two and 326 even three portions per week. The first two groups are on average almost the same age, 66 and 65 years old, but the third group is 10 years younger.

- from the group "one portion of fish" 36.6%, more than every third person, develop severe pneumonia during the course of influenza and have to spend an average of 24 days in intensive care. stay.
- those with two portions are better off, only 18.3%, less than one in five, gets the severe pneumonia and the group spends an average of only 12 days in intensive care.
- the 3-portion fish eaters are better off: only 2.5%, every 40th person has to endure pneumonia, and they also only stay in the ward for 6 days. The mortality risk is similarly unevenly distributed, in the 3-portion group it would be zero.

And this is what the chart would look like






Average age

66 years

65 years old

55 years





Days Intensive Care Unit




And although statistics is not your favourite subject, you can see two things crystal clear: the younger ones are better off, sure, but most of all: eating fish seems to help a lot. So what would you suggest? You can't rejuvenate people, can you? Eating fish is better two portions than one, better three than two, maybe even four, if it is proven that even six or eight portions per week do not harm in the long run! Do you agree with that


And now comes the Corona reality. On February 6th said Prof. Chrstian Wendtner, chief physician in Schwabing and infectiologist on Bavarian radio Corona is by no means more dangerous than influenza. ( But only seven weeks later in the ZEIT interview: "We also intubate and ventilate young people. In many patients [...] huge areas of the lungs are infected. "This is already a very massive event here." In many cases there is an exuberant reaction of the immune system, a cytokine storm. "In simple terms, inflammatory cells shoot into the lungs. This severely limits the function of the alveoli and the gas exchange cannot function. In most patients who come into intensive care, we see this kind of reaction at some point."
"Especially in prematurely ill and old people whose immune system is weakened, sars-CoV-2 can literally destroy the lungs. On the one hand, the enslaved epithelial cells perish over time, on the other hand, the body's own immune cells apparently attack the inflamed lung", says Corona researcher Hilgenfeld in the SPIEGEL

Such an uncontrolled attack triggers a "cytokine storm" and usually leads to sepsis or even septic shock, commonly known as blood poisoning, and is very, very fatal. "For example, if it is said that someone died of pneumonia, it is usually followed by sepsis." (SPIEGEL on Sepsis) Chinese scientists have examined this in 191 corona patients: of the 54 who died, all suffered from sepsis, 38 from septic shock (FOCUS).

Again Professor Wendtner on the cytokine storm: ZEIT: How do you try to interrupt this cascade?
The idea is to dampen the immune reaction with a drug. []

But what does all this have to do with the fish and the flu? Nothing at all for the moment. Corona and flu viruses are of course very different. But both can cause pneumonia, which can lead to sepsis. And in both cases it happens much more often in old people and those with previous illnesses. Yes, it is much more common with corona viruses, but we have "known" the flu viruses for much longer. And sepsis remains sepsis.

In an Iranian study between March 2015 and March 2016, the data of 793 patients admitted to the ICU after surgery were examined. However, this was not about pneumonia, but only about sepsis, and not about fish, but about vitamin D - of which we know that older people usually have much less than younger ones, especially in winter and even more so in areas with high levels of particulate matter (Wuhan/Lombardy) - in very many cases too little, much too little. And thus obviously an increased risk of sepsis:

From the above-mentioned Iranian sepsis study "The Relationship of Serum Vitamin D Level With the Outcome in Surgical Intensive Care Unit Patients" from 2017/2018

vitamin D level

Vit D < 20 ng/ml

Vit D 20-30 ng/ml

Vit D > 30 ng/ml

Average age

66,2 +/- 14,6

65,3 +/- 14,3

53,7 +/- 17,3





Days ICU:




Now you see what was meant by the fish above: Vitamin D! One portion of fish in the table is then less than 20 ng/ml, two portions: 20-30 ng/ml, three portions means more than 30 ng/ml. I find the data convincing, even if the authors try to belittle them themselves: "But after adjustment of different cofactors (calcium, phosphorus, [...]) there was not a significant relation between sepsis and vitamin D levels which shows the possibility of being a cofactor, not a biomarker, for mortality in critical ill patients. A somewhat strange statement, since it is known that the factors mentioned are related to the vitamin D level, e.g. the calcium level depends directly on the D level (and K2 ;-), and not vice versa. And thus D could actually be the main factor.

An English study comes to very similar results (translated and abridged):

81 patients, mean age 62 years. Patients with D-values of <30 ng/ml were more likely to have severe sepsis (61% vs. 24%; p = 0.006) and dysfunction of two or more organ systems (50% vs. 18%) compared to patients with D-values of >30 ng /ml. All four patients who died during the index hospital stay had 25 D levels of <30 ng/ml.

The small number of patients does not allow for reasonable statistical significance, clearly. Furthermore, it would have been interesting to split the results of the <30 group again at <15 ng/mL and the group >30 at ~37 ng/mL, because the imbalance of the groups was very high at 20:40:40 and the results could show the correlation much more significantly.

However, a real prospective study carried out at the Boston Teaching Hospital points in the same direction. There, 3 x 10 ICU patients were examined for D-level immediately after enrolment and then treated with placebo, 200,000 IU and 400,000 IU respectively. Statistical significance cannot be expected in only 30 subjects, and some initial values differed: the placebo group (1) had the highest D-level at the beginning (then the lowest after 5 days), group 3 with 400,000 IU initial dose had the highest BMI. After all, the age average was relatively balanced. In the result one can emphasize above all: Days in the ICU: 12 / 4 / 3. Resumption in the ICU within 30 days: 20% / 0% / 0%. 30 days mortality: 30% / 30% / 20%. None of this is significant, but the trend is unmistakable.

Incidentally, this also refutes the claim that high-dose supplementation (which I have circulated) immediately leads to hypercalcemia and possibly to cardiac arrest; 400,000 IU are far beyond my imagination and the mortality in this group should have been the highest - but it was the lowest. However, I would also have expected that one would not be satisfied with a single, brute depot dose, but rather to apply doses several times over the entire period of stay, initially 3 x 30,000 I.U. per day for a few days, then 10-20,000 I.U. until a level of 50 ng/ml is reached (and of course with K2 for hypercalcemia). I would think that this is better tolerated, but I am just a layman ;-)

As far as the 30-day mortality is concerned, the same can happen in covid-19 patients, in particular in multimorbid patients. However, the situation is different in that the massive cytokine storm must be weathered, which seems to affect younger patients without previous diseases who, once the sepsis is over, have a good chance of living longer. This is not about 100% truths, it is about opportunities that we should not ignore in times of need.

Vitamin D leads to a level of 50-60 ng/ml in doses of 5,000 I.U. / day and is considered completely safe even in doses of up to 40,000 I.U. per day for 3-6 months (but ONLY in combination with Vitmain K2 alltrans). Vitamin D regulates the immune system and seems to be able to prevent over-stimulation (cytokine storm); the medical mechanisms for this are also elucidated: "[Vitamin D] reduces the Th1-mediated secretion of proinflammatory cytokines such as TNFα"

People in Europe have on average only 18 ng/ml vitamin D(25) in their blood, in January, February often only 10-12, and only in summer it becomes more than 20. Some scientists suspect a connection between the low D-level at the beginning of the year and the accumulation of flu, in the southern hemisphere it is exactly mirror-like, flu in August/September. Indigenous tribes living traditionally in East Africa, the "cradle of mankind", such as the Masai and the Hadza, have a mean serum concentration of 46 ng/ml: "Traditionally living populations in East Africa have a mean serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentration of 115 nmol/l.". ( Chimpanzees in their natural habitat 48 ng/ml. But in the zoo in Europe only half of that, 24 ng/ml, similar to us, a Belgian zoology professor of the University of Ghent wrote me this, after my zoo here did not know what to do. And Geert Jannssen allowed me to quote him...

Old people only produce 25% of vitamin D in the sun, a quarter of what young people do. They often have less than 10 ng/ml. According to the Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), only 20% of geriatric patients (multimorbid, i.e. with pre-existing conditions) are above 20 ng/ml, 80% but below 20 ng/ml, 45% even below 10 ng/ml, while 80% of healthy senior citizens are >20 ng/ml (source). And what this can mean in case of emergency is shown by the sepsis statistics above, this could perhaps also explain part of the different corona age lethality.

Since pneumonia, cytokine storm and sepsis are a huge problem in corona, it would be urgently necessary to examine corona patients for vitamin D deficiency and, if a clear connection is found, as in the sepsis statistics above, to try to increase the vitamin D level depending on the disease status and, if necessary, to reduce the vitamin D level. However, higher doses of vitamin D (> 1000 I.U./day) should definitely be combined with the administration of vitamin K2 in order to avoid hypercalcemia.

Possibly, the oxygen radicals produced during the inflammatory reaction can be captured and rendered harmless with an antioxidant, the good old vitamin C, which is also harmless in high quantities. In buffered form (sodium ascorbate, calcium ascorbate), daily doses of 1 gram/hour or 9-12g/day are well tolerated and safe - Nobel Prize winner Pauling took 18g/day for many years - without being ill - and was ridiculed for it, but also turned 93 years old.

Update: I got the information about high-dose D and C treatment from a website that I did not want to mention publicly until now, because although the connections are explained excellently and there are many links to scientific studies, it is still a commercial website that sells D and C products. But since the Chinese have been testing high-dose vitamin C since February 14th and New York hospitals are apparently also doing so (see NYP report of March 24th below), I want to link to the American website (German text) (please scroll down to: Cytokine storm)

An article just appeared in the NY Post that corona patients in New York hospitals would be treated intravenously with "massive doses" of vitamin C (1500 milligrams) if they came to intensive care, 3-4 times a day (i.e. up to 6 grams intravenously). Pulmonologist Weber: "Identical amounts of the powerful antioxidant are then readministered three or four times a day [...] The patients who received vitamin C did significantly better than those who did not get vitamin C. It helps a tremendous amount, but it is not highlighted because it's not a sexy drug. […]". Weber, 34, said vitamin C levels in coronavirus patients drop dramatically when they suffer sepsis, an inflammatory response that occurs when their bodies overreact to the infection."

Back to the D: In intensive care units, vitamin D of my knowledge is not measured or supplemented by default. If one would measure it once for all reported corona patients, one could quickly determine if there is a correlation with the severity of the course of Covid-19.

I have sent this proposal including the above sepsis statistics to SPIEGEL (directly to responsible editors, whose email addresses I have), FOCUS (ditto via business partner), Mr. Drosten (Charité, contact form on his webpage) and Prof. Wendtner (via haematology) and also to Hirschhausen. So far (29.3., sent 3-4 days ago) except for mail confirmations, no reaction. I do not claim that Covid-19 could be cured with it. But I think before we look for long time for drugs that can help (Cloroquine, Remdesivir etc.), why don't we see if vitamin D can? When there is overwhelming scientific evidence that it can? Like the sepsis statistics above?

And perhaps we will try to treat acute corona patients in the same way as the Canadian doctor Schwalfenberg does with his flu patients: "We treat flu patients with the "vitamin D hammer" - 10,000 IU three times a day for two to three days. The results are dramatic [...] We urgently need studies on this form of intervention." (Note: as already mentioned several times but by no means without K2 due to the danger of hypercalcemia).

A D-test costs 30 euros. I would donate ~3.000 Euro for 99 D-tests at any time, if any clinic asks me for it. 99 tests crosswise, from easy (33) to difficult (33) and very difficult (33) - if there is no pattern to be seen, I will apologize for the excitement and never speak publicly again.

29 March 2020, Lorenz Borsche, Heidelberg It is important for me to emphasize in

I am not claiming that vitamin D Covid-19 ...could heal. Only the body itself can do that.
It's about protecting the body from any en infection in the best possible way and perhaps reduce mortality. Vitamin D in higher doses must be combined with vitamin K2 (mk7 alltrans). However, magnesium, calcium, selenium and zinc belong to it: For vitamin D to be effective, it must be converted into the hormone form. This requires special enzymes which can only work properly if there is sufficient magnesium. Without a sufficient supply of magnesium, vitamin D can even cause a general magnesium deficiency. Vitamin D promotes the absorption of calcium. However, if too little calcium is supplied through food, the body cannot absorb any. The vitamin D level then remains elevated and calcium can be released from the bones. A lack of both minerals can result in the defective regulation of the vitamin D system. Calcium and magnesium should be supplied in a ratio of 1:1 to 2:1. Under no circumstances should K2 mk7 alltrans be avoided. More about this e.g. here.
From emails to my friends about vitamin D:

Unfortunately the official recommendations of the BfR on vitamin D are still only 20 ng/ml (50 nmol/L) in Germany and 30 ng/ml (75 nmol) in the USA. This is much too low compared to the level that e.g. indigenous people (Massai/Hadza) in East Africa have (46 ng/ml), i.e. where we originally came from many thousands of years ago, just like free-living chimpanzees (48 ng/ml), our next cousins.

Without K2
, however, higher doses of vitamin D unfortunately lead to increased osteoporosis and hypercalcemia, resulting in heart attacks and strokes or kidney stones, as one would expect. can read. They've known that since at least the '80s. But studies are still being conducted in which high doses of vitamin D are administered WITHOUT supplementing the corresponding vitamin K2. And with predictably equally bad results:

I came across this more or less accidentally: a study in 2013-17, in which senior citizens were dosed with D for 3 years: 400, 4000, or 10 000 IU vitamin D3 daily for 55-70 year olds who had a level of 30 to 125 nmol/L D(2) (= 12-50 ng/ml):

But apparently no K2 was fed to it (this would probably have been mentioned in the detailed study) and, what did they find? Yes exactly, the osteoporosis has increased! After all, they also found out that monthly or quarterly depot doses were more dangerous than daily ones, and that additional calcium naturally led to hypercalcemia.

Harhar. That's real bad science! Unbelievable.

So it is from such studies that the wrong recommendations come from! Like e.g. this one of the BfR (same link as above): You should, if at all, take only in winter and please not more than 800 IU daily. And the common family doctor does not know any better than it is written in his gold standard recommendations of the medical associations: 20 ng/ml is enough, under 20 is considered undersupplied, but only under 10 ng/ml is it worthy of treatment. Ask your family doctors, that's exactly what they will say and warn you against more (apart from the laudable exceptions, I know of two in HD who recommend much higher doses and also pay attention to vitamin K2). There you are internationally further: vitamin D deficiency (<20 ng/mL); vitamin D insufficiency (20-30 ng/mL); vitamin D sufficiency (>30 ng/mL) is in the above sepsis study!

i have written to everyone i like about their vitamin d intake, here is one, today a proud 82 - doesn't it have a fantastic value?
My vitamin D value in December 2019 was 40, as my family doctor's office told me today.
Unfortunately, this will probably be 40 nmol/L (=16 ng/ml), even if he had been in the sun a lot, which is only useful from April-October. In my best times with hours of sunbathing (roof terrace!) in spring and summer I did not manage more than 32 mg/nl - during the laboratory test in JULY. And the D-memory only lasts for 2-3 months, the low point is reached in January/February (by the way, this fits the flu season ;-).

The conversion factor between nanomol/litre and nanogram/millilitre is 2.5:1 (40 nmol/L /2.5 = 16 ng/ml) - he should look at his laboratory result, bottle of champagne, that it is nmol/L, thus only 16 ng/ml and thus too little!
I can now continue with (product name 1000 I.E. ( 3x per week 1 tablet)
As for 3 x 1000 I.U. (or IU) per week: that is ridiculously little, that is not 450 I.U./day. That makes quite an improvement of 3-4 ng/ml, that is: he had 12 and now he has 16 ng/ml. That is too little, even the DGE says, and they are well below international recommendations.

I myself take 5,000 per day (important: absolutely only with K2 mk7 alltrans) and thus reach my 50-60 nl/ml (at 70 kg), which is the quasi natural Masai/Hadza/Chimpanzee jungle value (see above in text).
my xxxx is in my opinion a high-risk group, he is only forty-two but has ulcerative disease
and he takes 1 x 20 mg per week, is that enough?
Haha, 20 mg a week... That must be mcg, i.e. microgram or mü (millionth), not milligram (thousandth), and secondly: 1 mü = 40 I.U., 20 mü = 800 I.U. - per week, dear God, that's not even enough for one day! And it's certainly not 20 mg, that would be 800,000 I.U. or 115,000 I.U./day, nobody does that, not even the very crazy ones (exception: MS and D utilization disorder). So 20 mcg = 800 I.U. / 7 = 115 I.U. / day. Instead of 5.000. You might as well flush it down the toilet and bow three times to the east, that helps just as much.

It's really bad, people swallow something and then think, oh, I've certainly done enough now. No, you haven't. And "thousand" sounds like a lot, but it's a flyspeck, pure psychology (1000 is a so-called "anchor number", psychologists would say). That is unfortunately the same as with iodised salt: "But I take iodised salt, there is no need for more". Yes, of course. If you ate a whole small breakfast egg-salt barrel, that would be 6-8g, every day, you would have enough additional iodine to compensate for the iodine deficiency even stated by the DGE: Germans have 100 mcg/day on average instead of the 150-300 mcg recommended by the WHO. But 80,000 thyroid operations per year, well, why? But even I can't even manage to empty the little glass jar in a whole week. And since I already have a few small lumps in my thyroid gland - probably due to years of undersupply - I now take 5x200 mcg/week.

When it comes to so-called "food supplements", the official authorities, doctors, BfR, DGE or even Stiftung Warentest are often very cautious, they are afraid that some snake oil sellers will take money out of the pockets of people with senseless promises of salvation. Sometimes a harmless example: selenium. When a few years ago my nails started to break more and more often, I googled it and started taking selenium. After three months, everything was fine again. Then I read: "Food supplements with selenium: Doesn't help much - harms when in doubt" . And this is from Stiftung Warentest! ( Which is not in the glaring headline, but in the article: Does not help against - heart attack. Hey, that wasn't my concern at all, but nail breakage - and that's what it helps against. And it also helps vitamin D with protein synthesis, just like magnesium by the way... We all have selenium deficiency, not drastically, but a little bit, because: Our soils are low in selenium, so there's not enough in cereals and bread. The smart Finns dope their fertilizer with selenium, why do you think? Public health is important to them. Just like the Swiss do with iodized salt: they started using it as early as 1922, but it wasn't allowed here until the 1980s! And the Swiss also make much more pure...

You often have to use your common sense and check official recommendations for validity (i.e. google other opinions), because some of them are simply based on bad science, like the Osteo study mentioned above. And then they stay forever, like the nonsense of the ferrous spinach. It was a comma error, but it has lasted at least 50 years, has been quoted again and again, and has caused trouble for many children and mothers. But worse are deficiencies such as selenium, iodine, etc., where it is claimed that we are all well provided for, but this is not true.

Unfortunately, the same is true of vitamin D, almost everyone has far too little, hardly anyone knows. And the diseases that affect us are so different, it is impossible to attribute them all to vitamin D deficiency? Well, yes. Vitamin D is such a central vitamin, is directly or indirectly involved in the formation of 2000 proteins, so it is very likely that a deficiency can have completely different effects. But only one "basic disease" is recognised and only in the case of very severe deficiency: rickets. This is why children used to choke down cod liver oil (12,000 I.U./100g: 1 tablespoon = 10-12ml = ~10g = 1200 I.U.). Fish oil also has a lot of vitamin D (per 100g: smoked eel 3,600 I.U., herring 1,000, salmon 640), which is why the indigenous peoples of northern Europe used to have no shortage of it, despite little sunshine.

For my health book I have examined all sorts of disease statistics: a connection with the annual sun exposure is so clear for everyone who has anything to do with "inflammatory reaction" that it is impossible to overlook. Here is at least one such graphic:

You can see: in the far north and south it is orange to dark red (high incidence) in the middle it is light yellow (low incidence) and the numbers differ partly by a factor of 5! If this is true for many different inflammatory diseases, what the hell is it different from a lot or little vitamin D from a lot or little sun? I'm sorry I'm going out of my skin like this, but maybe it would help to shake your friends up if you pass on the text - which you will do anyway.

This is what I look like
Just to make this clear: I've been in perfect health for 2 years, not a single aspirin since then (previously >100/year), never again headaches, no colds. End of January an officially confirmed "Influenza A". Jutta Ditfurth said she had fought with it for 6 weeks - with me it took only 8 days, of which I was 4 on my feet. And after 12 days I did intensive sport again. For me there is no other explanation than my top vitamin D level. Well, and the other "powders" I take, because although our turbo vegetables look great and crunchy, they unfortunately only contain 10% of the nutrients we would actually need... at least that's what the pharmacist Uwe Gröber says, who together with some professors has already written many books about micronutrients. So I take all B vitamins, selenium, magnesium, zinc... but never more than the "official 100% daily requirement, except for vitamin C, where this is completely harmless, and of course D, where the official German figures (800 I.U./day) are absolutely nonsensical in my opinion and the international values are now much higher...
...and this is how I feel

And with the next flu, I will increase it to 30.000
I.U./day, as the Canadian doctor Schwalfenberg recommends


"A colleague and I have [...] introduced vitamin D to most of our patients in doses reaching vitamin D levels of 40 ng/ml, and we see very few patients with flu or flu-like symptoms. We treat patients with flu with the "vitamin D hammer" - 10,000 IU 3 times a day for 2 to 3 days. The results are dramatic, with full recovery of symptoms in 48 to 72 hours. [...] We urgently need studies on this form of intervention. The cost of vitamin D is about one cent per 1000 IU, so this treatment costs less than a dollar."

Of course I did not get an answer to my mails to SPIEGEL, FOCUS, Hirschausen, Drosten (mimimi ;-). There is not much more I can do at the moment except to set up this website...
Oh yes: I am currently working on a Bergamo statistic, which will be published here soon. As it looks like there are not 5.000 but at least 30.000 people infected, otherwise you won't get the far more than 600 dead in 6 weeks. And if I'm right, they are largely "through" there, have achieved herd immunity, so to speak. My statistics show no more significant new infections for next week, but the "lag" of 13 days between infection and death unfortunately means that many will still die. But the peak of the deaths is passed and in the middle/end of April the spook is over - if I am right. Unfortunately, I can see from this how it could come to us, and I can only say that:
All those who play down are unscrupulous. And without a lockdown, the price will be extremely high.
Bergamo will have an annual excess mortality rate of at least 20-30%, which can be as high as 50%. With the Hong Kong flu in 1967/68, we had only 4% - and that was considered the worst after the Spanish flu.
PS: Depending on how well you are supplied with D, you can also safely take 2 x 10,000 IU per day for 1-2 weeks, I initially took 4 x 2,500 / day for 6 months, then I went from 30 ng/ml to over 100 ng/ml, which is safe (up to 140 ng/ml everything is "safe" as long as K2 is included), but was too much for me. Now I am with 1 x 5.0000/day on a little over >60 ng/ml, so I am on the safe side and if Corona catches me, I am as well prepared as possible - the influenza A, which I survived quite easily, unlike others, shows me that. Because after all I belong to the risk group with 65 and as an ex-smoker, but with 40 "packyears" (cigarettes).

Because I am always asked about "dosage": For people over 60: Per week and per 10 kg of body weight: 5,000 I.E (with K2!), i.e. I take 7 x 5,000 at 70 kg - one portion every day (for me: drops). With 50 kg I would only take a 5.000 IU portion Mo-Fr, with 90 kg I would take 2 portions each. If you are younger, you can also take less, e.g. deduct 20% for under-50.

I will not recommend any products here. The only thing that is important is the following: per 5,000 I.U. 200 mcg K2 (mk7 alltrans) should be included. Vitamin D needs fat or oil, so I prefer drops with oil as base, in which the vitamin D is dissolved. And I always prefer production in Germany. But the K2 in addition comes almost always from Japan, because it is obtained from fermented soya (Natto).

I also find the oil droplets, which are completely tasteless, very practical. I drip them into the lukewarm milk coffee, on sandwiches or fried eggs. If necessary on the back of the hand and then lick it off, never directly into the mouth, you can't see how much. As far as I know, with 7 cents/day (300 drops a 5.000 I.E. approx. 23€) this is a very inexpensive form. And vegan is also available. But no matter what you take: if it's more than the underground 800 I.E., then K2 should be there, too.
And the bottle says: all 5 Days a drop. Is that right?
So: the manufacturers are only allowed to sell 1,000 as a daily dose, because of the DGE, the BfR etc.pp. Higher recommendations are forbidden, because otherwise it could not be sold as a food supplement, but would be a medicine, just like the 100,000 depot syringes, which doctors use when you are really undersupplied, these are of course "medicines with approval, only in the Apo and on prescription etc.. But since the people at the manufacturers know that many informed people are not satisfied with 800 or 1000 I.U. per day, and nobody wants to swallow 5 capsules per day, they sell the 5,000 capsules as a "weekly dose".

Theoretically you can also take less in summer and get more sun, but then only without sun protection, already 30s sun protection reliably prevents the formation of Vit-D. But that would have two disadvantages: you risk skin cancer (I had, had to have an operation) and: since nobody really takes enough e.g. sauerkraut and thus vitamin K2 these days, with extensive sunbathing you have a great D-level, but too little K2. Then, thanks to the D, a lot of calcium is absorbed from the diet, but is not built into the bones because K2 is missing, but on the contrary is still released => hypercalcinosis => plaque => heart attack/stroke. This was the result of the 7,000 + calcium experiment against the osteoprose prevailing at that time directly after the WKII in Germany and also the American study from 2013-2017 above: More osteoporosis and (this is only in the post-WKII study) also more heart attacks/strokes due to plaque formation... So always pay attention to K2 mk7 alltrans!

By the way, according to the (bad) osteoporosis study above, monthly doses (depot) are much worse than daily ones - I had to grin, because I already knew that, but I thought it was nice that at least that was the result ;-) So please daily or two-day portions, if only because of the K2, for which we don't have a month-long depot!

One thing is clear to me: if I still had older relatives who belonged to the risk group, I would make sure that they are as well prepared as I and everyone around me are anyway. And if one of my loved ones gets hit, I will push to increase the dose, and C against the free radicals, as described above, if it gets worse. But this is something that everyone has to decide for themselves and their loved ones, as long as the medical profession does not want to know anything about the connection, as can be seen in the above sepsis study. Sounds a little like a conspiracy theory, doesn't it? No, that's just ignorance. It's common enough, not just in medicine. Financial crisis? Practically no business school teacher could've predicted it. Or the whole cholesterol and egg thing that leads to heart attacks. That's what we were told for thirty years, and now we know it was bullshit.

So use your head, inform yourself and decide for yourself!

Best regards, and stay healthy, Lorenz