Vitamin D, the Vital Vitamin

On the untapped possibility of causal prevention of (corona) infection waves and severe (COVID-19) courses

Have you ever heard that vitamin D is considered useless or potentially harmful to your health, to the extent that it might even promote the development of cancer? Read on. The perspective on vitamin D, particularly in the context of COVID-19, serves as an example of whether a genuine health policy can be implemented or not. It revolves around strengthening the immune system or preventing it from weakening.

---

Please note before reading

While this article was available exclusively to my dedicated paid subscribers for a limited time of 14 days, I am committed to ensuring that the essential information remains accessible to all. The results of my research are intended to be freely available to everyone, as my goal is to make a positive contribution and prevent the dooming end of human culture as we know it through the open sharing of knowledge.

So this is the information I have been providing freely also during the above mentioned 14 days; it is what everyone needs to know. Read up on the essentials before we dive into the article, that covers the whole context of the anti-Vitamin D war in more detail:

I recommend aiming for a blood level of vitamin D (prohormone) of up to 125 nmol/l (50 ng/ml), which has been shown to be beneficial for the brain and immune system, and effective in fighting respiratory infections such as COVID-19 (more on this in the article below).

Given the widespread prevalence of vitamin D deficiency, it is important for almost everyone to address this issue, as vitamin D deficiency is both a cultural, lifestyle and natural problem, the latter especially during the winter months when the UV-B portion of sunlight required for skin synthesis of vitamin D is reduced at certain latitudes.

However, because overdosing is possible (as with any nutrient), it's important to tailor vitamin D supplementation to individual needs based on current blood levels, and I recommend consulting a healthcare professional before starting supplementation.

To increase from a level of 25 nmol/L to 125 nmol/L, approximately 5000 IU might be required (approximately 50 IU per nmol/L increase). 

On August 16, 2012, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) proposed a maximum daily intake of vitamin D of 4,000 IU per day for adults, including pregnant and breastfeeding women, and adolescents; 2,000 IU per day for children 1-10 years of age; and 1,000 IU per day for infants up to 1 year of age (see: https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2813).

While these recommended doses are generally safe, higher doses should be carefully considered and monitored by a health care professional. I can tell you how we handle supplementation in my family: We have found that adult members of my family need to take up to about 6,000 IU of vitamin D3 daily to reach 125 nmol/L (50 ng/mL) from mid-fall to mid-spring. Even in the summer, on days without midday sun exposure, we take this amount of vitamin D3.

---

Vitamin D, the Vital Vitamin (full text)

Prof. Lauterbach sent a letter to German health insurance companies on October 14, 2002, stating that people should be vaccinated against coronavirus because it is "one of the most effective means against the SARS-CoV-2 virus". However, anyone at all familiar with the well-documented causative agent of this type of seasonal respiratory illness (and who cares that everyone gets through the fall and winter just fine) must strongly disagree with this statement.

In fact, the minister even contradicted himself, because before he was sworn into office on September 8, 2020, he tweeted: "[…]Vitamin D deficiency is also a risk factor for other infectious diseases and weakens immune function. The risk of cancer also increases in some cases [Upcoming article, subscribe to be notified]. It is therefore not surprising that studies show that vitamin D deficiency causes a higher risk of infection and a more severe course." This reference pertains to one of the many studies confirming this connection.

You don't need to be a medical doctor or an expert in immunology to understand these facts. Medical colleagues should be expected to know them, but everyone should be aware of these simple and crucial connections to take responsibility for their health. Many doctors overlook this, failing to make recommendations in the best interest of their patients. Educating yourself on the subject is a small investment in your health and that of your loved ones – or even your patients. It can prevent unnecessary serious illnesses and deaths by addressing the root cause of these illnesses.

The causal solution to the vitamin D deficiency problem is highly effective compared to the global injection program with genetic material encoding the coronavirus spike protein, which I refer to as "spiking." My proposal is not only safe and practical but also cost-effective. Perhaps that's why vitamin D is often ignored, or why industry studies are designed to divert attention from its critical role in maintaining population health and curing the sick.

1. Two Factors in Vitamin D Health Protection

1.1 Factor One: Protecting Others and the Right Dose

The most apparent clue to the primary cause of pandemic respiratory infections is their seasonality. This seasonality was linked to the sun's position as early as 1981 by the English epidemiologist Robert Edgar Hope-Simpson in his article “The role of the season in the epidemiology of influenza.” However, at that time, it wasn't understood how this could affect infection incidence. [1] In December 2006, a team led by the renowned Harvard University, in reference to Hope-Simpson's prior work, found that the epidemic spread of viral respiratory infections and the severity of their courses could be attributed to seasonal vitamin D deficiency. [2] Finally, in 2010, it was shown that an adequate supply of vitamin D is crucial for our immune system to develop an efficient response against viruses. [3]

For this reason, seasonal respiratory infections should no longer be called "colds" but rather "darkening diseases" to emphasize their causality. They result from a lack of sunlight and the resulting lack of vitamin D synthesis. The darkening of the earth can also be cultural, with people covering themselves completely, using sunscreen, avoiding the sun, or spending most of their time indoors. This explains why "[t]he prevalence [proportion of people with vitamin D deficiency] of the deficiency in Israel is similar to the prevalence found in less sunny regions", as has been known since 2011 [4], or that "Vitamin D deficiency prevails in epidemic proportions all over the Indian subcontinent, with a prevalence of 70%–100% in the general population", as a 2014 study showed. [5] The same holds for Ecuador, a country directly on the equator (in 2015 "deficiency and insufficiency were present in 21.6% and 67.8% of older adults" [6]) and Brazil [7], revealing global vitamin D deficiency as a widespread problem.

This is also true for Germany, especially among vulnerable groups. Their vitamin D levels are usually well below the national average, which is already insufficient. Deficiency makes them particularly vulnerable regardless of age or pre-existing conditions. In the fall, vitamin D levels decline, already insufficient for a well-functioning immune system during summer. In January and February, they reach yearly lows. [8] The result is the fall-winter wave of infections Karl Lauterbach warned about. Increased UV-B content in spring sunlight leads to higher vitamin D levels, reducing infectiousness and making the winter wave "mysteriously" disappear. However, the connection is obvious: people with "summery" vitamin D level in winter are up to three times less likely to be infected with coronaviruses than people with vitamin D blood levels that are unfortunately typical for the winter months - because they can eliminate the virus more quickly. A causal relationship has thus been established: Sufficient vitamin D supplementation (target: vitamin prohormone) D level of 125 nmol/l, i.e. 50 ng/ml) leads to approximately three times faster clearance of the corona virus and would optimally inhibit the spread of the virus in winter. [10]

It is probably no coincidence that this value is close to our evolutionary-biological optimum and is about 2.5 times higher than what is required for healthy bones (50 nmol/l). [11] However, the above-mentioned average vitamin D level of the German population is only about 30 nmol/l in the winter months, which is more than 4 times (!) below the value of an optimally functioning immune system. [12] Older people and those with pre-existing conditions often have an even greater deficit. "Vitamin D deficiency is the most common nutritional deficiency and likely the most common medical condition in the world," wrote vitamin D expert Michael F. Holick of Boston University School of Medicine in 2012. [13] According to Holick, "[t]he major cause of vitamin D deficiency has been the lack of appreciation that the body requires 5- to 10-fold higher intakes than is currently recommended by health agencies.” So the problem is well known, and yet it remains unsolved, rendering it one of the biggest failures of our public health policies that COVID is now exposing. Often people are reluctant to admit mistakes, which is perhaps why no one in charge wants to admit it. It is also a fact that there is a lot of money to be made from the COVID measures, which is certainly not possible with vitamin D supplementation.

A healthy vitamin D level provides the best protection for others, as a well-functioning immune system can efficiently interrupt infection chains. To achieve this, an adult needs an average intake of about 4,000 IU of vitamin D3, possibly a little more in some cases. The amount of 4,000 IU per day is completely safe for an adult, and according to an assessment by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) in 2012, this includes adolescents from the age of 11. [14] If this amount is consumed daily over the long term, there is no risk to health, according to the EFSA. Children from 1 to 10 years of age can still safely consume 2,000 IU daily to build up the best protection. [15] The undounded overdose scare scenarios that are also part of the medical curriculum (see below) therefore have no scientific basis. These unsubstantiated claims are promoting a serious vitamin D hormone deficiency in society.

A completely safe remedy for the winter vitamin D deficiency would offer much better protection against third parties than the mRNA injection program (spiking) propagated by "experts" courted by the media, which offers virtually no protection against third parties. This was even stated by the Standing Committee on Vaccination (STIKO), as reported in the German Medical Journal of August 15, 2002, under the title STIKO (German Vaccination Authority) is not concerned with avoiding infections [16].

Accordingly, the booster dose (Comirnaty® or Spikevax®) should be administered at "regular intervals of 6 months". The STIKO once again emphasized that the aim of the vaccination is "not to prevent infections with SARS-CoV-2, but to reduce the risk of severe progression or death".

The discussion will now delve into whether an immune system, which has been "spiked" by mRNA injection but remains severely deficient in vitamin D, can provide the same level of protection against severe illness or death as an immune system that has not been “spiked” but is adequately supplied with vitamin D. We will also transition from the insufficient protection of others and the cause of winter infection waves to the population's vitamin D deficiency, a matter that has regrettably been disregarded by health policies. This brings us to the second point: the equally inadequate self-protection.

1.2 Factor Two: Self-Protection and Cytokine Storm

The cause of the severe to fatal course of COVID-19, which is caused by the so-called cytokine storm, is also linked to sometimes significant vitamin D deficiency [17]. The cytokine storm is a phenomenon known from the severe and sometimes fatal progression of seasonal influenza, which is exacerbated by vitamin D deficiency. It involves an excessive release of pro-inflammatory messengers (cytokines), which can lead to lung damage, among other complications. Chinese scientists had already noted in 2016, more than three years before the emergence of COVID, that "Complications or ultimately death arising from these infections are often associated with hyperinduction of proinflammatory cytokine production, which is also known as ‘cytokine storm'"[18] The first cases of COVID-19 reported in Wuhan, as documented in The Lancet in February 2020, also recognized this link, which is typical of respiratory diseases. It relates to the level of pro-inflammatory cytokines circulating in the bloodstream as a result of infection, on one hand, and the dysregulated immune system and disease severity on the other. An article published in August 2020, titled ‘Understanding the cytokine storm during COVID-19: Contribution of preexisting chronic inflammation’, highlighted that "the cytokine storm in COVID-19 results from inflammation, rather than from the virus itself." [20] In simpler terms, it's not the virus that causes fatality, but rather the patient's own immune system overreacting.

The cytokine storm, which represents a life-threatening overreaction of the immune system to viruses that are typically harmless to most people, was first linked to a severe vitamin D deficiency as early as 2005. To be more specific, it is associated with a deficiency in the active vitamin D hormone [21]. This causal relationship also extends to coronavirus infections. According to research by Belgian scientists published in November 2000, if the vitamin D level falls below 50 nmol/l, the risk of dying from COVID-19 increases about fourfold. [22] This increased risk is independent of a patient's age or pre-existing health conditions, strongly suggesting that it is linked to the vitamin D deficiency. Another study conducted during the initial two waves of infection in Israel found that at levels below 50 nmol/l, the risk of a severe disease course is fourteen times higher than at levels above 100 nmol/l [23]. This demonstrates that maintaining vitamin D levels above 100 nmol/l offers substantial protection. Furthermore, research conducted at the University Hospital of Heidelberg in September found that at levels below 30 nmol/l (compared to levels above), the risk of a fatal disease course increased by approximately eighteen times. Soon after, scientists from the German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) published an in-depth analysis of this data titled ‘Vitamin D Insufficiency May Account for Almost Nine of Ten COVID-19 Deaths: Time to Act’. [25] Unfortunately, no significant action was taken; instead, there has been an ongoing campaign discouraging people from getting adequate vitamin D. In my conversations with vitamin D experts such as Dr. Volker Schmiedel or Prof. Jörg Spitz, , which are available on YouTube, we have delved into these correlations. [26] In my view, actively discouraging people from taking vitamin D supplements undermines the simple and effective self-help approach that the population can use to maintain their health. After all, you wouldn't advise car owners against regularly topping off their gearbox oil.

The urgent appeal from DKFZ to take action could have potentially saved numerous lives if it had been implemented, especially considering that this call was not unexpected. Just a few months earlier, an intervention study conducted in Cordoba, Spain, had already established a clear causal relationship between vitamin D deficiency or insufficient levels of vitamin D prohormone and the risk of mortality from COVID-19. [27] Among coronavirus-positive patients hospitalized for pulmonary symptoms, the timely administration of vitamin D prohormone (the causal intervention) reduced the risk of severe illness by a factor of 25. All COVID-19 patients in the intervention group survived. In contrast, 8 percent of the patients in the control group, who did not receive vitamin D prohormone, succumbed to COVID-19 or vitamin D deficiency, a condition that could have been easily rectified. It's important to note that the vitamin D prohormone is produced from vitamin D in the liver through a process that spans several days and is then measured as the actual vitamin D level. Therefore, it is always accurate to refer to the vitamin D level as the vitamin D prohormone level. Had vitamin D been administered as a single dose instead of the prohormone, a critical distinction in this advanced situation, the life-saving success would likely not have been achieved.

This is corroborated by a Brazilian study, along with several similar studies, which tragically cost many lives due to the disregard of the Cordoba study findings. COVID-19 patients hospitalized for treatment were not administered multiple doses of the vitamin D prohormone; instead, they received only a single dose of the precursor vitamin D. [This approach represented and still represents a perilous error during this critical phase of the illness because it is widely recognized among experts that vitamin D converts to vitamin D prohormone too slowly. Consequently, vitamin D prohormone levels do not rise rapidly enough to produce an effect. [29]

This is what a doctor wrote to me almost exactly two years after the publication of the life-saving results of the Cordoba study:

Dear Mr. Nehls,

I have been closely following your research on vitamin D with great interest. As an intensive care and emergency physician, I became aware of this gravely overlooked subject through your work. During my medical training, my exposure to vitamin D was limited to, at best, discussions about vitamin D toxicity. Recently, I successfully treated my first patient with a respiratory infection using calcifediol [vitamin D prohormone], following the findings of Castillo et al. from August 2020 (the "Cordoba study" mentioned earlier). This discovery has opened up entirely new possibilities for me, at least in my current practice.

Thus, more than two years ago, the Cordoba study conclusively demonstrated that a deficiency of the vitamin D prohormone or an insufficient supply of the immune-regulating vitamin D hormone is the underlying cause of severe to fatal outcomes. This study revealed the inadequacy of the pandemic measures implemented worldwide at that time, which primarily focused on detecting positive tests and potential infections but did not prioritize the containment of infections through a well-functioning immune system (keyword "herd health", which will be discussed in more detail later) or addressing the primary cause of potentially severe outcomes. Instead, the risk of serious infection was accepted, as evidenced by the quarantine of individuals with positive tests without assessing their vitamin D prohormone levels and leaving them to face the consequences.

The Cordoba study, which demonstrated that correcting insufficient vitamin D prohormone levels can prevent the progression of severe and fatal diseases, faced skepticism following the global launch of the mRNA injection program shortly thereafter. The credibility of the study was immediately challenged, possibly for economic reasons, [30] leading independent scientists from the prestigious Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) at Harvard University in Boston to scrutinize the Cordoba study data. Their analysis left no doubt that therapeutic intervention with vitamin D prohormone had indeed saved the lives of their patients. [31] In their mathematical analysis of the Cordoba Calcifediol [Vitamin D prohormone] study from November 2020, the MIT researchers confirmed that the administration of Vitamin D prohormone (Calcifediol) was the crucial factor in the significant reduction of intensive care admissions compared to the control group. They wrote: “We conclude that it is not plausible that the decreased ICU admissions in the treatment group were due to imperfect blinding, uneven distribution of prognostic risk factors, or a combination of the two.” “ In short, we can be confident that if assignment the treatment group had no effect, we would not have observed these results simply due to chance.” They convincingly demonstrated that the positive outcomes, including reduced disease progression and survival of all participants in the intervention group, could be attributed to the administration of vitamin D prohormone. The statistical probability, indicated by the p-value of 0.00000077, was significantly higher than in all prior clinical studies concerning the purported benefits of the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine, which encodes the potentially harmful spike protein.

In simpler terms, you would need to replicate the Cordoba clinical trial over a million times to achieve the same favorable outcome purely by chance.

In my book Herd Health, I therefore rejected further such studies on ethical grounds. In my opinion, they constitute the crime of failing to render aid. After all, in order to conduct them, some patients would have to be denied the life-saving vitamin D prohormone just to create a control group. Nevertheless, other studies with a similar design were conducted and confirmed the success of the Cordoba study and thus the causality of vitamin D deficiency for serious and fatal outcomes. These were a large study from southern Spain published in May 2021 [32] and another large study from Spain [33] published in June 2021. A US study published in September 2021 also showed that the administration of vitamin D hormone saves the lives of patients hospitalized with COVID-19: no patient in the intervention group died, but 12 percent of patients in the control group paid for the vitamin D deficiency with their lives. [34]

2. State of Knowledge

2.1 The Law of the Minimum

It is well known that a plant that lacks an essential nutrient is more likely to be attacked by pests than a plant that receives everything it needs to live. It is also more likely to die than a plant that lacks nothing. It also becomes a danger to the plants around it, as its infection contributes to an increased spread of pests. What applies here to plants can be fully transferred to humans. What every farmer knows, every doctor should know, especially since leading scientists, such as the President of the European Society of Endocrinology, Andrea Giustina, and his colleague Anna Maria Formenti, will be speaking on the 20th of March 2020. On March 20, 2020, shortly after the coronavirus pandemic claimed the first lives here in Europe, leading scientists like Andrea Giustina and his colleague Anna Maria Formenti drew attention to the acute danger to life posed by vitamin D deficiency by linking the high COVID-19 mortality rate in Italy to vitamin D deficiency [35]. This was confirmed shortly thereafter, in April 2020, by an international team of researchers. [36]

In their scientific article, they explicitly pointed out that "the degree of protection [against severe COVID-19 courses] generally increases as [vitamin D-prohormone] concentration increases" because this is associated with the best immune defense (or a deficiency causes its malfunction). They went on to write: "it is recommended that people at risk of influenza and/or COVID-19 consider taking 10,000 IU/d of vitamin D₃ for a few weeks to rapidly raise [vitamin D-prohormone] concentrations, followed by 5000 IU/d. The goal should be to raise [vitamin D-prohormone] concentrations above 40–60 ng/mL (100–150 nmol/L)." Additionally, the scientific journal Frontiers in Public Health published in September 2020, just before the first full corona winter with lockdowns, which would have been completely unnecessary if the population had adequate vitamin D supplementation [37]: "In fact, the risk groups for severe COVID-19 match the risk groups for vitamin D deficiency exactly, and there is biological plausibility: vitamin D is known to modulate the immune system, helping prevent both [1.] an under-reaction that allows upper respiratory infections to be contracted, and [2.] the over-reaction referred to in COVID-19 as the ‘cytokine storm’[…]”

2.2 Public Knowledge

As has been mentioned several times, all of this went unnoticed by health policymakers, even though it could have saved countless lives. In defense of Karl Lauterbach, and his predecessor Jens Spahn, it could be argued that they were not aware of this information. However, as early as June 17, 2020, a corresponding motion entitled Reduction of severe forms of infection with the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus - elimination of vitamin D deficiency in the population, strengthening of the immune system was submitted to the German Bundestag for a vote. [38] In this motion, the federal government of Germany was asked to provide scientifically plausible reasons:

1. to inform the population in Germany comprehensively about the health consequences of an insufficient or suboptimal vitamin D supply with regard to acute respiratory diseases and other diseases and also to point out possible dosage errors; to work towards exempting twice-yearly measurements from co-payment by health insurance funds

2. to take measures to improve the vitamin D supply of the population as a whole, in particular to review the fortification of foods with vitamin D on the German market;

3. urge the medical profession to regularly screen and treat hospitalized patients with severe respiratory infections, as well as geriatric, and palliative patients in residential care facilities, for vitamin D deficiency;

4. encourage more medical research into vitamin D deficiency and disease risks.

Implementing these requirements could have saved countless people from severe to fatal COVID-19 infections, which should be the responsibility of the Ministry of Health. Not only that, but it would have prevented all the measures that have caused enormous collateral damage to the population. Was the rejection of the motion for printed matter 19/20118 by the German parliamentary groups of CDU/CSU, SPD, FDP, DIE LINKE, and BÜNDNIS 90/DIE GRÜNEN, against the votes of the AfD parliamentary group, purely for party-political reasons? Were there other reasons why such massive damage was and is being done to the German people? It almost seems as if the virus wave triggered by vitamin D deficiency and the increased number of infections and severe cases associated with it were used to finally carry out an expensive and above all highly risky experimental mRNA injection program on the population.

It is my hope that I am wrong in this assumption. Perhaps independent courts, if they still exist, will investigate this in the future and find out the true background of this policy. Such an investigation should also help us to deal with and heal the rift in society, because after all, the "vaccination" pressure was built up with the invalid argument of self-protection, and anyone who did not want to be a guinea pig for their political agenda was socially ostracized.

In October 2021, three German scientists published the results of a meta-analysis. This is a study of the highest possible clinical relevance. They found that the risk of dying from COVID-19 is statistically reduced to zero at a vitamin D level of around 125 nmol/l [39]. Statistically means that at this vitamin D level there is only a very high probability that a cytokine storm will not occur, because no human being has an absolute risk of dying of zero. But a statistical risk of zero of dying from corona is more than politics or the current mRNA injection program can offer us, not to mention that a healthy vitamin D level would also significantly reduce the risk of many other diseases that cause a lot of suffering, costs and ultimately many deaths.

First, Do No Harm

If immunological herd health means that there are virtually no serious cases with fatal consequences to be expected, then vaccination, if it is still considered necessary, must be absolutely harmless. Otherwise, vaccinated people would suffer more damage to their health than a viral respiratory infection could ever do to a healthy immune system. However, mRNA injections do not meet this high safety standard; on the contrary, the mRNA injection program is life-threatening. This finding is particularly serious when one considers that it would be completely unnecessary if a causal prevention strategy (i.e., correcting serious vitamin D deficiencies) were in place.

A recently published study by two researchers from the renowned Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) provides impressive evidence of this catastrophic development: according to this study, the risk of dying from vaccination was significantly higher than from a corona infection in virtually all age groups under 60 years. [40] In the 50-59 age group it was about twice as high, in the 40-49 age group about five times as high, in the 30-39 age group about seven times as high, in the 18-29 age group about eight times as high, and in the under-18 age group even about 51 times as high. This does not take into account the fact that vaccinations are, depending on country, given up to every six months and that new coronavirus variants are becoming increasingly harmless. A low level of protection of 0.13% was found only in the 80+ age group.

The high risk of vaccine deaths shown in this study is consistent with data from the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), which showed a more than 75-fold increase in reports of vaccine deaths in 2021 as a result of the mRNA injection program compared with the average of all vaccinations worldwide over the previous thirty years (21,382 versus 282 reports). [41]

Red: reported deaths after vaccination. Caption of the picture: Cumulative per year, all vaccines worldwide.

This trend continues through 2022. Assuming that perhaps less than one percent of all serious vaccine adverse events are actually reported in VAERS, [42] there could have been several million mRNA injection victims worldwide by 2021.

3.1 Is this Even a Vaccination?

According to a study published in the prestigious Lancet on February 4, 2022, entitled Risk of infection, hospitalization and death up to 9 months after a second dose of COVID-19 vaccine: a retrospective cohort study of the total population in Sweden [43], the protection against severe disease provided by the "vaccination" program declines rapidly and is virtually undetectable after about six to eight months. I am not aware of any active vaccination that loses its effect so quickly. Our immune system usually maintains its heightened defenses for years, if not a lifetime. This raises the question of what the short-term effect might have been, especially since the effect turns negative from the eighth month onward, and vaccinated people are more likely to have a more severe course of disease than unvaccinated people (see graph, red oval).

Upper left corner: Vaccination coverage in percent. The text below the graphic: Time in months after the second vaccination

The suspicion arises that the immune system is temporarily weakened by the "vaccinations" to such an extent that it is initially unable to unleash a cytokine storm. This would also explain why there is a lack of immune surveillance after the injections, e.g. an increase in herpes zoster or shingles. [44] Accordingly, Dr. Marco Cavaleri, Head of the Department of Biological Health Threats and Vaccine Strategy at the European M--> Ich tue mich schwer, das Zitat in dem Text zu finden. Vielleicht findest Du es?edicines Agency (EMA), pointed out that we should be careful "not to overload the immune system with more and more vaccinations"[45].

Alternatively, if we allow natural infections to occur while maintaining adequate vitamin D levels to ensure they are less severe, natural immunity would be far superior to the immunity we are trying to achieve with mRNA injections. This is the conclusion of an Italian meta-study published on September 25 in the Journal of Clinical Medicine: "Vaccine-induced immunity was shown to decay faster than natural immunity. In general, the severity of the symptoms of reinfection [after surviving a primary infection without prior "vaccination"] is significantly lower than in the primary infection, with a lower degree of hospitalizations (0.06%) and an extremely low mortality. Conclusions: this extensive narrative review regarding a vast number of articles highlighted the valuable protection induced by the natural immunity after COVID-19, which seems comparable or superior to the one induced by anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Consequently, vaccination of the unvaccinated COVID-19-recovered subjects may not be indicated." [46] This result does not even include the protection provided by a better functioning immune system due to a side effect free vitamin D program.

3.2 A Question of Ethics and Cost

A comparison of the two strategies, as I did in my book Herd Health (not translated yet - I'll keep you posted on this substack if it ever gets translated), was overdue. I used a wealth of clinical studies on vitamin D and COVID-19 vaccines. If you compare the effects and side effects of a COVID-19 prevention strategy through herd immunity via vaccination with that of immunological herd health via adequate vitamin D supply (this comparison is also found in Herd Health), the result is as obvious as it is frightening: the vaccination program was doomed from the start, because neither a drug nor a vaccination can prevent a disease caused by a deficiency of an essential active ingredient. A nationwide supply of micronutrients, on the other hand, would have worked, and would have been inexpensive and free of side effects.

In a speech by Karl Lauterbach on the GKV Financial Stabilization Act to the German Bundestag on 20 October 2022 in Berlin, he pointed out the problem of excess profits in the pharmaceutical sector:

"In Germany, it is possible - and this is not possible in any other country in Europe - to bring drugs onto the market that have no proven or only a very small additional benefit compared to already available drugs, but still cost significantly more - in some cases 50 percent or even 100 percent more." [47]

In my letter to Mr. Lauterbach, on which this article is based, I point this out: The annual dose of vitamin D to achieve a prohormone level of 100 to 150 nmol/l costs only a fraction of what a single of the mRNA injections currently administered every six months costs us. The goal of stabilizing SHI finances would therefore be easy to achieve, as the example of COVID-19 shows, by pursuing causal prevention. Not to mention the cost of masks and what the division of society, the lockdown measures and the partial abolition and restriction of our human rights, such as our freedom, will cost us. Karl Lauterbach's letter on health insurance alone, which I showed at the beginning, cost at least 50 million euros as part of the multi-billion euro vaccination campaign. [48] Against this background, rising health insurance contributions are only to be expected.

The Key to a Genuine Health Policy

If the goal is really to "prevent severe cases, break chains of infection, and thus mitigate the consequences of a possible wave of infection," as Lauterbach writes in his letter, then the permanent panic mode should give way to a rational causal approach based on immunological facts and appropriate measures. Anyone who denies the crucial importance of vitamin D and the vitamin D prohormone formed from it, as described here - while at the same time urging people not to have their vitamin D blood levels measured and not to take supplements if they have a deficiency - is, in my scientifically based opinion, doing a great disservice to a health policy worthy of the name. It effectively denies people a simple, natural, and safe path to health.

/ Bibliography

[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2134066/
[2] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2870528/
[3] https://www.nature.com/articles/ni.1851
[4] https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2362.2010.02403.x
[5] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3942730/
[6] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4537767/
[7] https://www.thieme-connect.com/products/ejournals/abstract/10.1055/s-0041-1728682
[8] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4499202/
[9] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7498100/
[10] https://pmj.bmj.com/content/98/1156/87.long
[11] https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00394-012-0421-6
[12] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4499202/
[13] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/224822421_Vitamin_D_Extraskeletal_Health
[14] https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/2813
[15] https://www.hipp-fachkreise.de/forschung-studien/kinderernaehrung/efsa-erhoeht-tageshoechstmenge-fuer-vitamin-d/
[16] https://www.aerztezeitung.de/Medizin/STIKO-will-zweite-COVID-19-Booster-Impfung-ab-60-empfehlen-und-fuer-alle-mit-Grunderkrankungen-431520.html
[17] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7527296/
[18] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4711683/
[19] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7159299/
[20] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7431332/
[21] https://ashpublications.org/blood/article/106/13/4351/133290/1-25-dihydroxyvitamin-D3-is-a-potent-suppressor-of
[22] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7717135/
[23] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8812897/
[24] https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/12/9/2757
[25] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7761047/

[26] Video sources:

and also:

[27] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7456194/
[28] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7890452/
[29] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9231174/
[30] https://www.dw.com/de/corona-und-vitamine-was-hilft-wirklich-bei-einer-covid-19-infektion/a-55584821
[31] https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.11.08.20222638v2
[32] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8224356/
[33] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8344647/
[34] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8425676/
[35] https://www.bmj.com/content/368/bmj.m810/rr-36
[36] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7231123/
[37] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7513835/
[38] https://dip.bundestag.de /vorgang/…/263715
[39] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8541492/
[40] www.vixra.org/pdf/2202.0084v1.pdf
[41] https://openvaers.com/covid-data (Daten bis Ende 31.12.2021)
[42] https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n149/rr-30
[43] https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(22)00089-7/fulltext
[44] https://openvaers.com/covid-data/shingles
[45] https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/11/21/6272/htm
[46] https://www.zdf.de/nachrichten/politik/corona-booster-impfungen-warnung-ema-100.html
[47] https://www.bundesregierung.de/breg-de/service/bulletin/rede-des-bundesministers-fuer-gesundheit-dr-karl-lauterbach–2137014
[48] https://www.nzz.ch/international/lauterbach-empfiehlt-impfen-fuer-senioren-und-korrigiert-sich-dann-ld.1709325
[49] https://www.michael-nehls.de/herdengesundheit.htm
[50] https://twitter.com/Karl_Lauterbach/status/1261557202571145216?s=20