Share this page!

Kevin Bass, MS Profile picture
Twitter logo
12 Jan, 6 tweets, 3 min read
Despite dozens of trials and ~30,000 subjects, assoc. between D3 supplementation and all-cause mortality not statistically sign.; baseline status made no difference; follow-up made no difference.

Evidence pretty bad.

Are we reading same paper @AlexJLeaf?

Screenshots attached. ImageImageImageImage
Let's take a look at the U.S. Preventive Task Force 193-page evidence synthesis, published in September of last year. Here are their conclusions.

uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/documen… Image
This is consistent with their review from 2014. uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/recomme… Image
Also consistent with USPTF's 2018 recommendations on supplementation for bone fractures. uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/recomme…. Image
Where do the claims about the necessity of "treating a deficiency" come from? Much less with large doses?

There does not seem to be any strong evidence. Just wisps of suggestion.
Vitamin D supplementation provides either a small, hitherto undetected benefit or it provides no benefit.

Why should we make recommendations to supplement with vitamin D given such weak evidence?

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Kevin Bass, MS

Kevin Bass, MS Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @kevinnbass

Kevin Bass, MS Profile picture
12 Jan
If I sold detox kits for hundreds of dollars but otherwise did top-notch pseudoscience debunking and scicomm would I be forgiven?

Asking for a friend
OK now that I've made the joke

What about a supplement company that sold (optional) accompanying placebos that you could then use in a crossover manner to determine whether or not you actually improved from the supplement?

So I could both grift and anti-grift at the same time.
Like, the company would send you either placebo or active compound at random in identically labeled bottles. You would take what the company would send, then it would send you the other one. You would be given a self-report sheet that you could submit...
Read 5 tweets
Kevin Bass, MS Profile picture
10 Jan
Ten minutes into @joerogan with Mark Gordon and Andrew Marr. Quackish. PCR tests don’t work, masks don’t work, nothing works. Except hydroxychloroquine, etc. Mechanistic speculation at its worst. These things have been tested but guests tell fairytales. Very harmful to listeners.
OMG. Apparently quercetin cures cognitive decline, Indians are protected from COVID because they eat turmeric and zinc, calcium causes atherosclerosis & cholesterol heals it, vitamin D protects against statin sides, and there is dietary cholesterol in plants. I am at 16 min.🤷‍♂️
GMOs cause inflammation, carbohydrates and insulin are the cause of weight gain, carbohydrates cause hypoglycemia and cognitive impairment, vitamin D protects against COVID because epidemiology. 26 min.🤷‍♂️
Read 5 tweets
Kevin Bass, MS Profile picture
10 Jan
Whoa. In the prestigious European Journal of Integrative Medicine no less.

Good to see Rhonda Patrick never failing to consistently and widely disseminate low-quality science to her hundreds of thousands of naive followers.

A menace to good science literacy and public health.
A breakdown of some of the problems in the study.

👇
PROBLEM 1. JOURNAL

If this was a well-conducted, rigorous trial, it would be published in a journal likely to give it wide circulation. Why? Because the findings in this trial would change patient care.
Read 21 tweets
Kevin Bass, MS Profile picture
27 Dec 20
I will do a brief thread on this paper which @POhukainen and @DrNadolsky I think recommended to me. It's about statins and is considered a "definitive" paper. In this thread I will simply go over the main points & those that are most provocative.

thelancet.com/journals/lance…

👇

1/n Image
Lowering LDL cholesterol by 77 mg/dL with an effective statin regimen for 5 years would typically prevent major vascular events from occurring in one-in-ten with pre-existing disease and in one-in-twenty at increased risk without an event. These benefits increase over time.

2/n Image
The same treatment would cause:

myopathy in 1-in-2000;
diabetes in between 1-in-100 and 1-in-200; and
hemorrhagic stroke in 1-in-1000 to 1-in-2000.

3/n Image
Read 37 tweets
Kevin Bass, MS Profile picture
23 Dec 20
New study:

High- vs. normal-protein diet for six months.

✔️Both diets produced similar weight loss.

😱But the high-protein diet produced dramatically better outcomes for blood glucose, insulin sensitivity, inflammation, & lean body mass.

sciencedirect.com/science/articl…

Thread 👇
Here is the main table:

Similar weight loss, but the high-protein diet group saw an INCREASE in lean body mass while the normal-protein group saw a decrease.

HbA1c improvements were better. So was beta-cell function, blood glucose, hsCRP, and cytokines.
Basically, the high-protein diet did better at all the things.

True, there were only 12 completers in each group (and similar dropouts), but these results are consistent with previous literature showing similar effects from high-protein diets.
Read 12 tweets
Kevin Bass, MS Profile picture
21 Dec 20
Worth noting that unlike the famous Quackwatch, the @quacklist has an impartial, systematic ruleset, notifications, appeals procedure, crowdsourcing, etc. In principle, the ideas and procedures used by the @quacklist can be easily transferred to other platforms, law, etc.

1/4
Also, the view of science in the @quacklist is very commonsensical, practical, clinically oriented, & simple, making it less subjective and an effective tool for teaching evidence-based health to the public.

2/4
The whole point of the @quacklist has been to divorce its conclusions from expert opinion and base it entirely upon a systematic understanding of how clinical evidence works.

This makes it new and completely different from what has come before, as far as I know.

3/4
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Like this author's thread?

Get emails when @kevinnbass has new unrolls!

Check out other threads from @kevinnbass!

Read all threads by @kevinnbass