Abstract: This article reports the results of an ecological study of cancer incidence rates by state in the US for the period 2016-2020. The goals of this study were to determine the extent to which solar UVB doses still reduced cancer risk compared to findings reported in 2006 for cancer mortality rates for the periods 1950–1969 and 1970-1794 as well as cancer incidence rates for the period 1998–2002 and to determine which factors were recently associated with cancer risk. The cancer data for non-Hispanic white (European American) men and women were obtained from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Indices were obtained for solar UVB at the surface for July 1992, and alcohol consumption, and diabetes and obesity prevalence near the 2016–2020 period. Lung cancer incidence rates were also used in the analyses as a surrogate for smoking, diet, and air pollution. The cancers for which solar UVB is significantly associated with reduced incidence are bladder, brain (males), breast, corpus uteri, esophageal, gastric, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, pancreatic, and renal cancer. Lung cancer was significantly associated with colorectal, laryngeal, and renal cancer. Diabetes was also significantly associated with breast, liver, and lung cancer. Obesity prevalence was significantly associated with breast, colorectal and renal cancer. Alcohol consumption was associated with bladder and esophageal cancer. Thus diet has become a very important driver of cancer incidence rates. The role of solar UVB in reducing risk of cancer has been reduced due to people spending less time outdoors, wearing sunscreen that blocks UVB but not UVA radiation, and population increases in overweight and obesity, which lowers 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations and generates systemic inflammation, a risk factor for cancer. The dietary approach that would reduce the risk of diabetes, obesity, lung cancer, and, therefore cancer, would be one based mostly on whole-plants and restrictions on red and processed meats and ultraprocessed foods. Solar UVB exposure for a few minutes before applying sunscreen and taking vitamin D supplements would also help reduce risk of cancer.Keywords: alcohol consumption; cancer incidence;

The cause of sarcoidosis is unknown, and vitamin D is contraindicated to treat the condition. We therefore ask what causes sarcoidosis and why vitamin D can be dangerous for those so afflicted. We propose a contrary hypothesis: sarcoidosis is a physiological process of defense against cancer that requires the substrate vitamin D. We tested this hypothesis, finding many case reports involving sarcoidosis and cancer—further cases of cancer mimicry by sarcoidosis. Several reports describe spontaneous healing of cancer in the presence of sarcoidosis. In the context of the granulomas of sarcoidosis, monocytes are the site of vitamin D release. Furthermore, active vitamin D can control cancer cells by using the vitamin D receptors of the nucleus. That granulomas consistently do not caseate is explained as a confrontation with human molecules and the cancer cells’ complete absorption. The striking fact that granulomas of sarcoidosis mostly lack cancerous cells is interpreted as a result of a well-functioning sarcoidosis process. We view the typical sarcoidosis monocytic synthesis of active vitamin D as a successful defense against cancer: a theory we call the “endogenous program organizing cancer apoptosis” (EPOCA).

Many risk-modifying factors affect cancer incidence and mortality rates. We present an ecological study of incidence and/or mortality rates for cancers during 2007–2016 of 17 anatomical sites with respect to solar ultraviolet-B (UVB) doses and obesity prevalence. Solar UVB reduces cancer risk by producing vitamin D, which has many mechanisms to reduce risk of cancer incidence, progression, and metastasis. Obesity increases cancer risk through several mechanisms, including increased systemic inflammation. Data were averaged for 12 geographical regions. Solar UVB doses were significantly inversely correlated with mortality rates for five cancers for males and four for females. Obesity prevalence was directly correlated with mortality rates for three cancers for males and seven for females. The population attributable fraction of cancer mortality rates ascribed to low solar UVB dose was 0.03 for both males and females, whereas that for obesity prevalence was 0.05 for males and 0.08 for females. Thus, cancer mortality rates in France could be reduced through vitamin D supplementation and reducing the prevalence of obesity. Doing so also could reduce risk of other adverse health outcomes.

The world is in the grips of the COVID-19 pandemic. Public health measures that can reduce the risk of infection and death in addition to quarantines are desperately needed. This article reviews the roles of vitamin D in reducing risk of respiratory tract infections, knowledge about the epidemiology of influenza and COVID-19, and how vitamin D supplementation might be a useful measure to reduce risk. Through several mechanisms, vitamin D can reduce risk of infections. Those mechanisms include inducing cathelicidins and defensins that can lower viral replication rates and reducing concentrations of pro-inflammatory cytokines that produce the inflammation that injures the lining of the lungs, leading to pneumonia, as well as increase concentrations of anti-inflammatory cytokines. Several observational studies and clinical trials reported that vitamin D supplementation reduced risk of influenza, whereas others did not. Evidence supporting the role of vitamin D in reducing risk of COVID-19 includes that the outbreak occurred in winter, a time when 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] concentrations are lowest; that the number of cases in the Southern Hemisphere near the end of summer are low; that vitamin D deficiency has been found to contribute to acute respiratory distress syndrome, and that case-fatality rates increase with age and with chronic disease comorbidity, both of which are associated with lower 25(OH)D concentration. To reduce risk of infection, 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 25(OH)D concentrations, followed by 5000 IU/d. The goal should be to raise 25(OH)D concentrations above 40–60 ng/ml (100–150 nmol/l). For treatment of people who become infected with COVID-19, higher vitamin D₃ doses might be useful. Randomized controlled trials and large population studies should be conducted to evaluate these recommendations.

We propose that a dietary reduction of Lipopolysaccharide (LPS) could reduce risk and slow the progression of cognitive decline and Alzheimer’s disease. LPS is a component of the highly inflammatory cell membrane of Gram-negative bacteria. The highest dietary sources of LPS are processed meat and dairy products, which can sharply raise plasma LPS within one to two hours. The LPS in these foods is packaged into chylomicrons, which enter the bloodstream. Smaller amounts of LPS from colonic microbiota do not account for the sharp postprandial increase of plasma LPS. Once in the bloodstream, LPS can trigger the release of inflammatory cytokines within three hours. LPS can increase cytokines via LPS binding protein and cluster of differentiation-14, triggering toll-like receptor-4, and activating nuclear factor kappa-B. Nuclear factor kappa-B can increase cytokine levels, including interleukin-1-beta, interleukin-6, and tumor necrosis factor-alpha. LPS and inflammatory cytokines are higher in Alzheimer’s disease, both in plasma and in the central nervous system. These cytokines can enter the brain via active transport and induce microglial activation and inflammatory damage in the brain, including loss of synapses and neurons. Elevated brain inflammation from dietary LPS can contribute to cognitive impairment and increased risk of dementia.

Daily vitamin D supplementation using higher than normal dosing (up to the upper limit, UL) and intermittent (once or twice per week) dosing were studied in patients with increased risk of vitamin D deficiency. Using a PubMed database an adequate search for published randomized control trials and other studies was done and results were analyzed. This review provides overview of use of 7000 IU daily, 30,000 IU per week or twice weekly and 50,000 IU weekly of vitamin D on rapid restore of 25(OH)D concentrations to at least 30 ng/mL in different groups of patients at high risk of vitamin D deficiency. The above mention dosing should be considered in adults with obesity or multi-diseased patients on requiring multi-treatment with the use of several drugs, including drugs affecting vitamin D metabolism. The simple schedule for 7000 IU/day, 30,000 IU/week or twice weekly or 50,000 IU/week, all for 6-8 weeks of use by patients representing the increased risk of vitamin D deficiency were provided for consideration. It appeared that higher daily doses or intermittent doses suggested above are effective, safe and responsive for patient’s preferences.