Gell-Mann Amnesia

Nobel Prize-winning physicist Murray Gell-Mann, who discovered the quark, noticed that when he read a news article about his area of expertise, he found the information to be erroneous. He then wondered whether the other articles he read in the same publication that were beyond his area of expertise were also false. In essence, we turn the page and forget the lies we just read and find credibility in the rest of what we read. Murray's friend and famous author, Michael Chrichton, coined the term Gell-Mann Amnesia to explain the phenomenon. If one news item is wrong, why believe the others are true? As we will see with The New England Journal of Medicine’s dismissal of the importance of vitamin D, why should we believe anything they print?

Vitamin D is No Longer Important?

By now, we have all heard of the importance of adequate vitamin D blood levels. My wife recently had a comprehensive check-up with blood work. Her practitioner did not test her vitamin D level because she said it is no longer covered by health insurance and has proven to be an ineffective supplement. I was perplexed at hearing this, especially since adequate vitamin D levels are linked to numerous health benefits and proved to be a strong protector against severe COVID-19 infection. I looked into the situation and uncovered a possible explanation for the sudden reversal of fortune for vitamin D. This post will cover the importance of vitamin D and the possible reason why its importance is being overlooked.

The Traditional Role of Vitamin D

The benefits of vitamin D are well-documented. Without vitamin D, only 10–15% of dietary calcium is absorbed. 1 One study found that 77% of Americans are deficient in vitamin D. 2 Emerging research supports the role of vitamin D in fighting cancer, heart disease, fractures and falls, autoimmune diseases, influenza, type-2 diabetes, depression, and cavities. The most at-risk populations for deficiency are darker-skinned people, older adults, people with fat malabsorption, people with limited sun exposure, and people with gastric bypass. 3 You can read some of my posts about vitamin D here if you want more information. 

Vitamin D Status

Vitamin D deficiency is defined as a level of less than 20 ng/mL. 4 From 20 to 30 ng/mL is considered insufficient, and equal or greater than 30 ng/mL is considered adequate. 5 In years past, levels of 50 ng/mL or greater were recommended. However, one study showed that the lowest mortality or risk of death from all different causes and the lowest rates of cardiovascular disease were observed at vitamin D levels between 20 ng/mL and 36 ng/mL, so the level previously recommended is controversial, and practitioners are starting to recommend lower readings. 6 Accordingly, we may assume that "insufficient" vitamin D status above 20ng/mL and below 30ng/mL may be reconsidered as adequate by some practitioners. However, 20ng/mL would still be considered deficient. 

Vitamin D and COVID-19

9 out of 10 COVID-19 deaths may be due to vitamin D deficiency. 7 This study showed vitamin D can stop 93% of ICU cases of Covid. Another study used traditional measures for insufficient vitamin D status, which is defined as being below 30ng/mL. The researchers concluded that individuals with a level below 30ng/mL of Vitamin D are 80% more likely to acquire COVID-19 infection than those who have a normal level of Vitamin D. The results of this study are in keeping with the fact that a vitamin D level above 30 ng/mL strengthens our immune systems. Amazingly, this study was kept from the public. 

The VITAL Study

Imagine a defective freezer in Antarctica at minus 15 degrees with no refrigerant in the system. It would still keep its contents frozen due to the low ambient temperature. Now, imagine filling the system with refrigerant. There would be no noticeable effect because the ambient temperature is already low. Concluding that adding refrigerant confers no benefit would be misleading. The VITAL study duplicated this scenario with vitamin D supplementation because the subjects already had adequate vitamin D levels.

The VITAL study, which examined vitamin D supplementation and was completed in 2022, used a cohort with an average vitamin D status of 30.7, which is accepted to be an adequate level. They concluded that taking vitamin D supplements confers no benefit, which was echoed by the New England Journal of Medicine, a highly respected publication that receives millions from pharmaceutical companies. 8 

However, since the candidates already had an adequate level of vitamin D, it is no surprise that supplementing with vitamin D conferred no measurable benefit since they started with adequate levels and did not need any supplementation. In other words, the researchers were gilding the Lilly.

Poor Study Designs Are Common

This study of hydroxychloroquine use for COVID-19 patients is a good example of a deceptive study design. You may remember that good results were being reported for its use early in the pandemic. The Emergency Use Authorization of the vaccines was dependent on the fact that there were no viable treatments for COVID-19. Unfortunately, in a highly publicized study, the researchers used very high doses and concluded that they were ineffective at saving the lives of those with COVID-19. Although hydroxychloroquine is generally safe, high doses cause irregular heartbeats that can be fatal. Some in the medical community took note and questioned the higher dose of hydroxychloroquine, accusing the researchers of deliberately using doses that were harmful to make it seem that hydroxychloroquine is ineffective for treating COVID-19. 9,10 

Ivermectin was similarly dismissed, although there is plenty of evidence that it is effective against COVID-19. It was labeled as a horse pill, even though it is routinely used for people. Lastly, the article pictured below is another example. The bottom line, although direct proof is lacking, is that conventional treatments were downplayed to sell new treatments for COVID-19. 

Truthful Disinformation

An act was passed by Congress in December 2020 that prohibited "deceptive acts or practices" associated with the treatment, cure, prevention, mitigation, or diagnosis of COVID-19. Promoting adequate vitamin D is not deceptive since it has always been associated with stronger immunity. One practitioner is being sued for almost one billion dollars for recommending vitamin D and zinc for COVID, even though the two studies I mentioned before indicate that vitamin D is extremely helpful against COVID-19. 11  Calling human medication horse pills, designing studies to hide the possible benefits of interventions, inflating the results in medical journals, and suing people who call all of this out is wrong. The makers of the COVID-19 vaccines touted them as safe and effective, but the law prohibits using such language for agents approved under the Emergency Use Authorization. Additionally, as of the publication of this post, we are now on the ninth COVID-19 vaccine shot, even though the manufacturers claimed two would be enough. Apparently, they are not subject to the same law I just described.

Conclusion

The benefits of having vitamin D levels above 30 ng/mL are well documented. It is a proven life extender, even when as low as 20 ng/mL. The push to invalidate viable low-cost treatments during COVID is more than likely a causative agent in the recent hype downplaying the benefits of vitamin D in order to increase vaccine uptake and more expensive treatments. The poorly designed VITAL study is a convenient selling point for the medical system. Journalists are more than happy to help promote studies like VITAL, as is the New England Journal of Medicine. Should we believe them? If we do, we may be suffering not only from vitamin D deficiency but also from Gell-Mann amnesia.