Read the latest research on this blog

Vit D & Illnesses
Home ] Up ] Stage 1 ] Stage 2 ] Stage 3 ] Stage 4 ] Stage 5 ] [ Vit D & Illnesses ] Vitamin A Pulse ]


This is a page attempting to evaluate if there is clear evidence of a 1,25D problem with those who supplied information to The answer is no there is no clear data or pattern: the intentional creation of a general vitamin D deficiency (43% have 1,25D levels below the reference chart) renders any interpretation suspect. > 90% appear to be Vitamin D deficient (below the optimal range when assays error risk is included).


  • Vitamin 25D and 1,25D changes by age and not in the same proportions.
    • The "D-Ratio" would need to be age based.
  • The numbers below are likely biased with under/number reporting of those with a D-Ratio under 1.25.
  • The numbers are really not comparable unless done by the same laboratory
    • 1,25D and 25D from the different labs on the same sample may differ in D-Ratios due to differences in methodologies for calculating 1,25D and 25D.
    • D-Ratio and the normal ranges for a D-Ratio, must be obtained from the specific lab. They alone can calculated the real probability (from samples of the normal population). They are invalid otherwise.


  • Examine all reported lab results on where MarshallProtocol was recommended.
    • Tabulate the reported values where the values were available (obs:123)
    • Plotted the values and then show the normal ranges reported elsewhere
    • Note: Many people intentionally placed themselves into vitamin D deficiency prior to testing. There is no literature on how 1,25D and 25D changes in this case. There is no "normal population" to compare the results to.
    • Reference:
      From "Vitamin D status: effects on parathyroid hormone and 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D in postmenopausal women" Am J Clin Nutr 2000;71:157781.


  • There is a group (28%)  where 1,25D exceeds 140 pmol/L  or 53 pg/ml that follows the pattern seen with sarcoidosis outlier patients.
    • Cause of this group may be the infections involved.
  • The other 72% are scattered all over the place, with a lot having very low 1,25D not seen in the sarcoidosis charts or reference charts (43% are "off the scale" with too low 1,25D)
  • There is no general pattern of a high ratio compare to the normal population.
  • Vitamin D: Average: 67 nmol/L MATCHES GENERAL POPULATION
  • Active Vitamin D (1,25D): Average:112 pmol/L MATCHES GENERAL POPULATION

The distribution is shown below, very linear across the majority of values with ~8% not.

Less linear, with significant numbers showing Vitamin D deficiencies.

The bottom of the optimal range for Vitamin D is 78. The suggested minimum for CFIDS patients is 108.

Approximately 90% of the people reporting on appear to be Vitamin D deficient.


Vitamin D Prospective Studies

Original 2001 WebSite as PDF for download

Looking for something, look in the Contents or do a Site Search