7 posts Page 1 of 1
Hello Sunny, here's the Professor's response:

Trevor Marshall has a fascinating theory. It is always important to carefully consider all theories and hypotheses particularly when dealing with an incurable disease, in such a complex organism as the human body. I find that a useful cross-check when people develop theories about illness and its management is to look at population data. For instance, as I have noted before, the proposition stemming from laboratory studies that milk protein mimics myelin and therefore that cow's milk ingestion is likely to increase the risk of MS can be checked by looking at population data. It is clear from large population studies that populations where milk is drunk widely have a much higher incidence of MS. This is reassuring in terms of confirming that the theory probably holds water. Similarly, the theory that gluten contributes to MS is not likely to be true given that populations that consume large amounts of gluten do not appear to have higher incidences of MS.

In the case of vitamin D, there is persuasive evidence from laboratory studies including animal and human laboratory research that sun exposure and higher vitamin D levels have a protective effect against MS. This is strongly supported by population data about sun exposure, skin cancer incidence and MS incidence where there is consistent evidence of the association between increased sun exposure, higher skin cancer incidence and lower MS incidence. More importantly, Munger et al in 2006 examined stored blood of over 7 million army recruits from 1992-2004 and compared the vitamin D levels with their risk of developing MS later in life. They found 257 new cases of MS developed in the group. There was a significant decrease in risk with increasing vitamin D levels. So vitamin D levels earlier in life predicted later development of MS. Munger et al in another study also used data from the very large Nurses Health Study to show that those nurses who supplemented with even small doses of vitamin D nearly halved their risk of MS. This is the strongest evidence that Marshall's theories are probably incorrect. His view that supplementation would be likely to worsen the disease is strongly contradicted by this large scale population study.

In an illness like MS, it is not surprising to find a multitude of theories about causation, and relieving and aggravating factors, some of them directly contradictory. It is important to note that the vast majority of medical opinion supports a protective role for sunlight and vitamin D in MS. Further, there is good laboratory evidence that the mechanism of such protection is highly plausible biologically, that is direct immunosuppressive effects of sunlight and vitamin D, and a neuroprotective effect of vitamin D. The book Taking Control of Multiple Sclerosis outlines the evidence in greater detail.

Hope this helps, George.
Trevor Marshall is a fraud, Hollick Hollis and Veith are scientists and Dr's. Marshall is a copier salesman. Do not let this influence your choice. Make no mistake 14,000 iu a day reduces relapse. There is no doubt MS is a D deficiency. The sooner the better, EAE was completely taken away with D in 1987. this is the real deal, not a copy salesman trying to make a buck. http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/
Like i said Marshall is a fraud period type his name in and you will find numerous court cases involving him. He is a copier salesman with an engineering degree not a scientist or Dr of any kind. e-mail the real experts and see what they have to say. That does not explain the EAE studies in 1987 does it. He does not know what the F he's talking about.
I think it is a very difficult issue. No one is alike, and some will benefit with something, and some won't.
Everybody is different.
I think we almost don't know how the body precisely works; far too complicated.

I"ll follow the Jellinek/Swank diet, and the BB diet; I only use gluten (sourdough spelt). I used D supplementation
but my illness became worse. Then I stopped D supplementation and things are going good again. Maybe
coincidence, but trial and error is the only and best thing we can do. Too soon to tell, but maybe the diet is working.
5 months on the diet, so not that long, but my itching and numbness feet (for more than 8 years) are diminishing.

All the best,
Feedback on the protocol from Dr. Mercolla:
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/artic ... tocol.aspx
Thanks for this article, Copeching. I specially like this quote from Mercola:
"And it is my firm belief that medication should rarely if ever be the first avenue of treatment for anything. Most healing can be achieved by supporting your body’s own ability to heal itself by strengthening your immune system".
I have never used medicines in my life, and never will (only when really necessary). The only thing I want to say is: everybody reacts differently and you have to find out what works the best in your case. Trial and error; without medicines (i.m.o.)
But the "big lines" - like the diet - are key.
My experience with D vitamins was a bad one; I stopped and felt better. Maybe just because the diet is working ? Coincidence ? Who knows. Maybe I"ll take D vitamin in the future. I'll see. Just my "interest" in the Marshall protocol.
Thanks (including prof. Jellinek) for all the information.

Angelique Corthals said, in her scientific paper about the course of multiple sclerosis and fats/cholesterol: "It also sheds light on the vitamin D link. Vitamin D helps to lower LDL cholesterol, so it makes sense that vitamin D deficiency increases the likelihood of the disease—especially in the context of a high-fat/high-carbohydrates diet".
So, after 3 weeks, I started vitamin D3 (5000 IU) again. It was just a very short experiment myself, to stop D 3 for a while.
By the way: I also started (Neptune) krill oil today (better than fish oil ?).

Good New Year everybody. And good health !

7 posts Page 1 of 1

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests