Vitamin D - A Physician Separates Truth from Hype

gdbear65

gdbear65

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
September 2007

By Zoltan P. Rona, M.D., M.Sc.

When the June 8, 2007 front page of the Toronto Globe and Mail proclaimed the cancer preventing benefits of vitamin D (a.k.a. “the sunshine vitamin” or D3), and the Canadian Cancer Society chirped in with their modest recommendation for everyone to take 1100 IU of vitamin D daily, the natural health community may have felt vindicated. Yet many scientists felt hoodwinked.

This cancer preventive property of vitamin D was no big news to world experts and researchers who have been touting the numerous benefits of the vitamin for well over a decade. The medical profession and its various antiquated societies are, unfortunately, far behind in applying scientific data to clinical health concerns. It’s a nice gesture on their part to recommend 1100 IU of vitamin D a day to prevent cancer, but it’s far from enough. Current research indicates that the figure for cancer prevention should be closer to 10,000 IU daily.

Vitamin D is really not a vitamin but a steroid hormone precursor that plays a major role in many diseases. It is created under the skin by ultraviolet light and is found in few foods commonly consumed by most Canadians. Vitamin D deficiency or insufficiency (sub-optimal levels) plays a role in causing seventeen types of cancer (especially breast, prostate and colon) as well as heart disease, stroke, hypertension, autoimmune diseases like multiple sclerosis, diabetes, depression (especially seasonal affective disorder), chronic pain, fibromyalgia, osteoarthritis, osteoporosis, muscle weakness, muscle wasting, birth defects, and periodontal disease.

In my practice, at least half the patients I see for chronic health problems have insufficient blood levels of vitamin D despite consuming vitamin D fortified dairy products or taking a multiple vitamin supplement. Sun-phobia, a condition imposed on the population by sun-paranoid dermatologists, along with sunscreens and spending too much time indoors have all contributed to the vitamin D insufficiency problem. In fact, one of the worst offenders in creating vitamin D deficiency is the use of commercial sun blocks. And studies now indicate that while these may prevent sunburns, they do virtually nothing to prevent skin cancer.

Research indicates that to get 4000 IU of vitamin D, if you totally avoid the sun, you must drink 40 glasses of milk a day or take 10 typical multivitamin pills daily. As mentioned earlier, a more optimal daily dose of vitamin D is 10,000 IU.

The purported toxicity of vitamin D is overstated. According to well-documented research, a person standing in the summer sun for an hour at noontime in a southern latitude in swim trunks, would naturally produce about 10,000 IU of vitamin D through skin exposure. But sun poisoning from vitamin D overdose has never been reported anywhere.

For those who cannot tolerate the sun and prefer to take supplements, Dr. Reinhold Vieth PhD, researcher at the University of Toronto, notes that vitamin D toxicity begins at 40,000 IU daily only after many weeks of use. Taking 10,000 IU daily for months at a time, provided there is no sun exposure, is perfectly safe. Blood levels can be tested periodically to verify this.

BESIDES CANCER, WHY TAKE VITAMIN D?
Vitamin D supplementation is not only effective for cancer prevention (60% of all cancers can be prevented) and treatment, but for a long list of other conditions. Below are a rapidly growing number of health problems that are proven to be either prevented or treated effectively by boosting the blood levels of vitamin D:

- Rickets – even conventional medicos know this childhood bone disease is caused by vitamin D deficiency, and was the major reason why milk became fortified with tiny doses of the supplement.

- Osteoporosis – even though this is common knowledge, many people who suffer from osteoporosis are low in their D levels and simply need to take more.

- Heart disease – hardening of the arteries is caused by calcium deposition. Vitamin D is an anti-calcifying agent when at optimal levels in the bloodstream; both extremely high and low intake levels of vitamin D induce calcification of arteries but calcification from overdose of vitamin D requires many hundreds of thousands of international units and is rare. Vitamin D deficiency is common and calcified arteries are a direct result of deficiency. Also, as is noted below, heart disease is often triggered and perpetuated by inflammation, and vitamin D is anti-inflammatory.

- Diabetes – evidence is mounting that vitamin D can improve insulin resistance and favourably affect Type 2 diabetes.

- Hypertension – emerging evidence has compared the blood pressure lowering effects of vitamin D to ace (angiotensin converting enzyme) inhibitors, a class of blood pressure lowering drugs commonly prescribed by conventional doctors; don’t go off your blood pressure pills yet but consider high dose supplements of vitamin D and get your blood levels checked along with your blood pressure.

- The Common Cold and Influenza – ditch that mercury and formaldehyde laden flu shot; vitamin D has strong antibiotic properties and some studies indicate that optimal blood levels will prevent influenza far better than those toxic ‘flu shots. Dr. John Cannell, the director of the Vitamin D Council, suggests high-dose vitamin D (50,000 IU) be consumed for three days at the first sign of a cold or the ‘flu. If you have an infection, you need more vitamin D. That’s a given.

- Autism - Research has shown that low maternal vitamin D levels can adversely affect the developing brain and lead to autism, and that vitamin D supplements can improve some of the signs of autistic behaviour. Since most of the medical and conventional treatments for autism are so dismal, supplementing with vitamin D may be well worth a try.

- Inflammation – vitamin D is anti-inflammatory; if you have inflammation (arthritis, iritis, thyroiditis, pancreatitis, anything ending in “itis”), you need more vitamin D.

- Autoimmune Disease – multiple sclerosis, psoriasis, scleroderma, rheumatoid arthritis, fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue syndrome and numerous other diseases where the immune system attacks various organs, involves inflammation that can be arrested by a high dose vitamin D.

- Melanoma – this most deadly form of skin cancer is now thought to be caused by a sunlight/vitamin D deficiency; safe sun exposure actually helps prevent melanoma, a counter intuitive finding confusing the heck out of dermatologists.

Obesity – vitamin D levels are significantly lower in overweight individuals; taking a vitamin D supplement certainly beats dieting but check your blood levels first.

The Bottom Line
The only way to ensure vitamin D adequacy is to expose yourself to the sun regularly. In Canada and other northern latitude countries, this is next to impossible at any time other than the summer. As discussed earlier, drinking milk is not the answer. Although frowned upon by frumpy dermatologists, I recommend people use a sun bed (avoiding sunburn) during the winter months. Either that or make frequent trips to Florida, southern California or the Caribbean.

For people who want nothing to do with sun beds or trips to the deep south, there are oral supplements that will do the trick. One choice would be cod liver oil or halibut liver oil liquid or capsules. The only problem here might be the high vitamin A (each capsule may contain as much as 5000 IU of vitamin A) that comes along with the vitamin D (usually 200 – 400 IU per capsule). If you want to take 2000 IU daily of vitamin D, then fish liver oil capsules might be suitable. If you want to push the dose up to 10,000 IU of vitamin D daily, you might be getting too much vitamin A.

An alternative to cod or halibut liver oil would be capsules containing only vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol). These usually come in dosages of 400 IU or 1000 IU per capsule. Higher potencies per capsule are available by prescription only. Biotics Research makes a vitamin D supplement called Bio-D-Mulsion, a water-soluble form of vitamin D3 in liquid form (1000 IU per drop). This version of vitamin D may be more suitable for people who hate taking pills of any kind or who have problems absorbing fat soluble vitamins (A, D, E, and K). Bio-D-Mulsion is available from some health care practitioners, pharmacies specializing in natural remedies (ie. Hoopers Pharmacy, Ottway), and the Big Carrot Dispensary. For more information on this product, see http://www.mercola.com/forms/vitamind.htm

If you suffer from any chronic health problem, ask your doctor to check your blood level of 25-hydroxy vitamin D, the most accurate indicator of vitamin D status. The optimal blood levels should be between 100 and 250 ng/ml. Levels below 50 are considered insufficient and levels below 25 are definitely in the deficiency category. With continued research, I predict these numbers will all change, so stay tuned.
 
gdbear65

gdbear65

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
REFERENCES
The Vitamin D Council. http://www.vitamindcouncil.com/

Bill Sardi, Just One Pill Away. http://www.lewrockwell.com/sardi/sardi70. html

Martin Mittelstaedt: Sweeping cancer edict: take vitamin D daily: Recom-mendation comes on heels of U.S. study suggesting supplement slashes risk of disease by as much as 60 per cent; Toronto Globe and Mail; June 8, 2007.

l Dawson-Hughes B, Harris SS, Krall EA, Dallal GE. Effect of calcium and vitamin D supplementation on bone density in men and women 65 years of age or older. New England Journal of Medicine 1997;337:670-6.

Chapuy MC, Arlot ME, Duboeuf F, et al. Vitamin D3 and calcium to prevent hip fractures in elderly women. N Engl J Med 1992; 327:1637-42.

Kyriakidou-Himonas M, Aloia JF, Yeh JK. Vitamin D supplementation in postmenopausal black women. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1999; 84:3988-90

Zamora SA, Rizzoli R, Belli DC, et al. Vitamin D supplementation during infancy is associated with higher bone mineral mass in prepubertal girls. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1999; 84:4541-4.

Minne HW, Pfeifer M, Begerow B, et al. Vitamin D and calcium supplementation reduces falls in elderly women via improvement of body sway and normalization of blood pressure: a prospective, randomized, and double-blind study. Abstracts World Congress on Osteoporosis 2000.

Gesensway D. Vitamin D and sunshine. Ann Int Med 2000; 133:319-20.

Shearer MJ. The roles of vitamins D and K in bone health and osteoporosis prevention. Proc Nutr Sci 1997; 56:915-37.

l Food and Nutrition Board, Institute of Medicine. Dietary Reference Intakes for Calcium, Phosphorus, Magnesium, Vitamin D, and Fluoride. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1999. Available at: http://books.nap.edu/books/0309063507/html/index.html.

Krall EA, Wehler C, Garcia RI, et al. Calcium and vitamin D supplements reduce tooth loss in the elderly. Am J Med 2001; 111:452-6.

Chapuy MC, Pamphile R, Paris E, et al. Combined calcium and vitamin D3 supplementation in elderly women: confirmation of reversal of secondary hyperparathyroidism and hip fracture risk: the Decalyos II study. Osteoporos Int 2002; 13:257-64.

Terry P, Baron JA, Bergkvist L, et al. Dietary calcium and vitamin D intake and risk of colorectal cancer: a prospective cohort study in women. Nutr Cancer 2002; 43:39-46.

Hypponen E, Laara E, Reunanen A, et al. Intake of vitamin D and risk of type 1 diabetes: a birth-cohort study. Lancet 2001; 358:1500-3.

Meyer H, Smedshaug GB, Kvaavik E, et al. Can vitamin D supplementation reduce the risk fracture in the elderly? A randomized controlled trial. J Bone Miner Res 2002; 17:709-15.

Devine A, Wilson SG, **** IM, Prince RL. Effects of vitamin D metabolites on intestinal absorption and bone turnover in elderly women. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 2002; 75:283-8.

Koutkia P, Chen TC, Holick MF. Vitamin D intoxication associated with an over-the-counter supplement. N Engl J Med 2001; 345:66-7.

Matsuoka LY, Ide L, Wortsman J, et al. Suncreens suppress cutaneous vitamin D3 synthesis. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1987;64:1165-8.

Matsuoka LY, Wortsman J, Hanifan N, Holick MF. Chronic suncreen use decreases circulating concentrations of 25-hydroxyvitamin D. Arch Dermatol 1988; 124:1802-4.

Dr. Zoltan P. Rona practices Complementary and Alternative Medicine in Toronto and is the medical editor of “The Encyclopedia of Natural Healing.” He has also published several Canadian best selling books including “Return to The Joy of Health”. For more of his articles, see http://www. mydoctor.ca/drzoltanrona.


Prystowsky JH. Photoprotection and the vitamin D status of the elderly. Arch Dermatol 1988; 124:1844-8.

Moon J. The role of vitamin D in toxic metal absorption. J Am Coll Nutr 1994; 13:559-64.

Kenny AM, Biskup B, Robbins B, et al. Effects of vitamin D supplementation on strength, physical function, and health perception in older, community-dwelling men. J Am Geriatr Soc 2003; 51:1762-7.

Vieth R. Vitamin D supplementation, 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations, and safety. Am J Clin Nutr 1999; 69:842-56.

Bischoff-Ferrari HA, Dawson-Hughes B, Willett WC, et al. Effect of Vitamin D on falls: a meta-analysis. JAMA 2004; 291:1999-2006.

Flicker L, Mead K, MacInnis RJ, et al. Serum vitamin D and falls in older women in residential care in Australia. J Am Geriatr Soc 2003; 51:1533-8.

Dhesi JK, Moniz C, Close JC, et al. A rationale for vitamin D prescribing in a falls clinic population. Age Ageing 2002; 31:267-71.

Janssen HC, Samson MM, Verhaar HJ. Vitamin D deficiency, muscle function, and falls in elderly people. Am J Clin Nutr 2002; 75:611-5.

Bischoff-Ferrari HA, Borchers M, Gudat F, et al. Vitamin D receptor expression in human muscle tissue decreases with age. J Bone Miner Res 2004; 19:265-9.

Pfeifer M, Begerow B, Minne HW. Vitamin D and muscle function. Osteoporos Int 2002; 13:187-94.

Prabhala A, Garg R, Dandona P. Severe myopathy associated with vitamin D deficiency in western New York. Arch Intern Med 2000; 160:1199–203.

Pfeifer M, Begerow B, Minne HW, et al. Effects of a short-term vitamin D and calcium supplementation on body sway and secondary hyperparathyroidism in elderly women. J Bone Miner Res 2000; 15:1113-8.

Dhesi JK, Bearne LM, Moniz C, et al. Neuromuscular and psychomotor function in elderly subjects who fall and the relationship with vitamin D status. J Bone Miner Res 2002; 17:891-7.

Graafmans WC, Ooms ME, Hofstee HM, et al. Falls in the elderly: a prospective study of risk factors and risk profiles. Am J Epidemiol 1996; 143:1129-36.

Meyer HE, Smedshaug GB, Kvaavik E, et al. Can vitamin D supplementation reduce the risk of fracture in the elderly? A randomized controlled trial. J Bone Miner Res 2002; 17:709-15.

Lips P, Graafmans WC, Ooms ME, et al. Vitamin D supplementation and fracture incidence in elderly persons. A randomized, placebo- controlled clinical trial. Ann Intern Med 1996; 124:400-6.

Chapuy MC, Arlot ME, Duboeuf F, et al. Vitamin D3 and calcium to prevent hip fractures in the elderly women. N Engl J Med 1992; 327:1637-42.

Trivedi DP, Doll R, Khaw KT. Effect of four monthly oral vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol) supplementation on fractures and mortality in men and women living in the community: randomised double blind controlled trial. BMJ 2003;326:469.

Holick MF. Vitamin D: importance in the prevention of cancers, type 1 diabetes, heart disease, and osteoporosis. Am J Clin Nutr 2004; 79:362-71.

Holick MF. Sunlight and vitamin D: both good for cardiovascular health. J Gen Intern Med 2002; 17:733-5.

Arnas LAG, Heaney RP, Hollis BW. Vitamin D2 is much less effective than vitamin D3 in humans (abstract OR22-2). The Endocrine Society 86th Annual Meeting, June 16-19, New Orleans, LA.

Trang HM, Cole DE, Rubin LA, et al. Evidence that vitamin D3 increases serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D more efficiently than does vitamin D2. Am J Clin Nutr 1998; 68:854-8.

Bischoff HA, Stahelin HB, **** W, et al. Effects of vitamin D and calcium supplementation on falls: a randomized controlled trial. J Bone Miner Res 2003; 18:343-51.

L'Abbe MR, Whiting SJ, Hanley DA. The Canadian health claim for calcium, vitamin D and osteoporosis. J Am Coll Nutr 2004; 23:303-8.

Grau MV, Baron JA, Sandler RS, et al. Vitamin D, calcium supplementation, and colorectal adenomas: Results of a randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003; 95:1765-71.

Cho E, Smith-Warner SA, Spiegelman D, et al. Dairy foods, calcium, and colorectal cancer: A pooled analysis of 10 cohort studies. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004; 96:1015-22.

Merlino LA, Curtis J, Mikuls TR, et al. Vitamin D intake is inversely associated with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2004; 50:72-7.

Baker K, Zhang YQ, Goggins J, et al. Hypovitaminosis D and its association with muscle strength, pain, and physical function in knee osteoarthritis (OA). American College of Rheumatology Meeting; San Antonio, Texas, October 16-21, 2004. Abstract 1755.

National Osteoporosis Foundation. Physician's Guide to Prevention and Treatment of Osteoporosis. Universal Recommendations for All Patients. Available at: http://www.nof.org/physguide/univeral_recommendations.htm#adequate. (Accessed 14 May 2005).

Porthouse J, Cockayne S, King C, et al. Randomised controlled trial of calcium and supplementation with cholecalciferol (vitamin D3) for prevention of fractures in primary care. BMJ 2005; 330:1003.

Larsen ER, Mosekilde L, Foldspang A. Vitamin D and calcium supplementation prevents osteoporotic fractures in elderly community dwelling residents: a pragmatic population-based 3-year intervention study. J Bone Miner Res 2004; 19:370-8.

Sambrook P. Vitamin D and fractures: quo vadis? Lancet 2005; 365:1599-600.

Bischoff-Ferrari HA, Willett WC, Wong JB, et al. Fracture prevention with vitamin D supplementation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. JAMA 2005; 293:2257-64.

Boonen S, Body JJ, Boutsen Y, et al. Evidence-based guidelines for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis: a consensus document of the Belgian Bone Club. Osteoporos Int 2005; 16:239-54.

Weingarten MA, Zalmanovici A, Yaphe J. Dietary calcium supplementation for preventing colorectal cancer and adenomatous polyps. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2004;(1):CD003548.

Papadimitropoulos E, Wells G, Shea B, et al. Meta-analyses of therapies for postmenopausal osteoporosis. VIII: Meta-analysis of the efficacy of vitamin D treatment in preventing osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. Endocr Rev 2002; 23:560-9.

Holick MF. Sunlight "D"ilemma: risk of skin cancer or bone disease and muscle weakness. Lancet 2001; 357:4-6.

Reichrath J. Protecting against adverse effects of sun protection. J Am Acad Dermatol 2003; 49:1204-6.

John EM, Schwartz GG, Koo J, et al. Sun exposure, vitamin D receptor gene polymorphisms, and risk of advanced prostate cancer. Cancer Res 2005; 65:5470-9.

Hanley DA, Davison KS. Vitamin D insufficiency in North America. J Nutr 2005; 135:332-7.

Holick MF, Siris ES, Binkley N, et al. Prevalence of Vitamin D inadequacy among postmenopausal North American women receiving osteoporosis therapy. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2005; 90:3215-24.

Hollis BW. Circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels indicative of vitamin D sufficiency: implications for establishing a new effective dietary intake recommendation for vitamin D. J Nutr 2005; 135:317-22.

Duplessis CA, Harris EB, Watenpaugh DE, Horn WG. Vitamin D supplementation in underway submariners. Aviat Space Environ Med 2005; 76:569-75.

Holick MF. Vitamin D: A millenium perspective. J Cell Biochem 2003;88:296-307.

Engelsen O, Brustad M, Aksnes L, Lund E. Daily duration of vitamin D synthesis in human skin with relation to latitude, total ozone, altitude, ground cover, aerosols and cloud thickness. Photochem Photobiol 2005; 81:1287-90.

The RECORD Trial Group. Oral vitamin D3 and calcium for secondary prevention of low-trauma fractures in elderly people (Randomised Evaluation of Calcium Or vitamin D, RECORD): a randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 2005; 365:1621-8.

Bertone-Johnson ER, Hankinson SE, Bendich A, et al. Calcium and vitamin D intake and risk of incident premenstrual syndrome. Arch Intern Med 2005; 165:1246-52.

Dawson-Hughes B, Heaney RP, Holick MF, et al. Estimates of optimal vitamin D status. Osteoporos Int 2005; 16:713-6.

Black PN, Scragg R. Relationship between serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D and pulmonary function in the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Chest 2005; 128:3792-8.

Wright RJ. Make no bones about it: increasing epidemiologic evidence links vitamin D to pulmonary function and COPD. Chest 2005; 128:3781-3.

Liu S, Song Y, Ford ES, et al. Dietary calcium, vitamin D, and the prevalence of metabolic syndrome in middle-aged and older US women. Diabetes Care 2005; 28:2926-32.

Jackson RD, LaCroix AZ, Gass M. Calcium plus vitamin D supplementation and the risk of fractures. N Engl J Med 2006; 354:669-83.

Wactawski-Wende J, Kotchen JM, Anderson GL. Calcium plus vitamin D supplementation and the risk of colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 2006; 354:684-96.

Giovannucci E, Liu Y, Rimm EB, et al. Prospective study of predictors of vitamin d status and cancer incidence and mortality in men. J Natl Cancer Inst 2006; 98:451-9.

Munger KL, Levin LI, Hollis BW, et al. Serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels and risk of multiple sclerosis. JAMA 2006; 296:2832-8.

Armas LA, Hollis BW, Heaney RP. Vitamin D2 is much less effective than vitamin D3 in humans. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2004; 89:5387-91.

Houghton LA, Vieth R. The case against ergocalciferol (vitamin D2) as a vitamin supplement. Am J Clin Nutr 2006;84:694-7.

Major GC, Alarie F, Dore J, et al. Supplementation with calcium + vitamin D enhances the beneficial effect of weight loss on plasma lipid and lipoprotein concentrations. Am J Clin Nutr 2007; 85:54-9.

Caan B, Neuhouser M, Aragaki A, et al. Calcium plus vitamin d supplementation and the risk of postmenopausal weight gain. Arch Intern Med 2007; 167:893-902.

Broe KE, Chen TC, Weinberg J, et al. A higher dose of vitamin D reduces the risk of falls in nursing home residents: a randomized, multiple-dose study. J Am Geriatr Soc 2007; 55:234-9.

Lappe JM, Travers-Gustafson D, Davies KM, et al. Vitamin D and calcium supplementation reduces cancer risk: results of a randomized trial. Am J Clin Nutr 2007; 85:1586-91.

Martins D, Wolf M, Pan D, et al. Prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors and the serum levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D in the United States. Arch Intern Med 2007; 167:1159-65..

Lin J, Manson JE, Lee IM, et al. Intakes of calcium and vitamin D and breast cancer risk in women. Arch Intern Med 2007; 167:1050-9.

Canadian Cancer Society Announces Vitamin D Recommendation. Canadian Cancer Society Press Release, June 8, 2007. Available at: www.cancer.ca/ccs/internet/mediareleaselist/ 0,3208,3172_1613121606_1997621989_langId-en,00.html. (Accessed 13 June 2007).

Boonen S, Lips P, Bouillon R, et al. Need for additional calcium to reduce the risk of hip fracture with vitamin D supplementation: evidence from a comparative metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2007; 92:1415-23.

Dietrich T, Joshipura KJ, Dawson-Hughes B, Bischoff-Ferrari HA. Association between serum concentrations of 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 and periodontal disease in the US population. Am J Clin Nutr 2004; 80:108-13.

Egawa K, Ono T. Topical vitamin D3 derivatives for recalcitrant warts in three immunocompromised patients. Br J Dermatol 2004;150:374-6.

Bischoff-Ferrari HA, Dietrich T, Orav EJ, et al. Higher 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations are associated with better lower-extremity function in both active and inactive persons aged 60 y. Am J Clin Nutr 2004; 80:752-8.

Levis S, Gomez A, Jimenez C, et al. Vitamin D deficiency and seasonal variation in an adult South Florida population. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2005; 90:1557-62

Holick MF. Sunlight and vitamin D for bone health and prevention of autoimmune diseases, cancers, and cardiovascular disease. Am J Clin Nutr 2004; 80 (6 Suppl):1678S-88S.

Leading World Experts/Researchers on Vitamin D
Bess Dawson-Hughes MD, Former President, National Osteoporosis Foundation, Professor of Medicine, Tufts University, Senior Scientist and Director, Bone Metabolism Laboratory, Jean Mayer USDA HNRCA at Tufts University, 711 Washington St., Boston, MA 02111, USA, Ph.: 617-556-3064, Fax: 617-556-3305, Email: [email protected], Google Scholar: B Dawson-Hughes, PubMed: Dawson-Hughes B

Cedric F. Garland DrPH FACE, Professor of Medicine, Moores Cancer Center, Dept. of Family and Preventive Medicine, University of California San Diego, 9500 Gilman Dr., La Jolla, CA 92093, USA, Ph.: 858-534-0520, Email: [email protected], Google Scholar: CF Garland, PubMed: Garland CF

Edward Giovannucci MD ScD, Professor of Nutrition and Epidemiology, Dept. of Nutrition, Dept. of Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health, 655 Huntington Ave., Building II Room 319, Boston, MA 02115, USA, Ph.: 617-432-4648, Email: [email protected], Google Scholar: E Giovannucci, PubMed: Giovannucci E

William B. Grant PhD, Former Senior Research Scientist, Atmospheric Sciences, SRI International, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, NASA Langley Research Center, Elected Fellow, Optical Society of America, Director, Sunlight, Nutrition, and Health Research Center, San Francisco, CA 94109-2510, USA, Email: [email protected], Google Scholar: WB Grant, PubMed: Grant WB

Robert P. Heaney MD FACP FACN, Member, American Dietetic Association, Elected Fellow, American College of Nutrition, Emeritus Board Member, National Osteoporosis Foundation, Professor of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Osteoporosis Research Center, Creighton University Medical Center, 601 N 30th Street, Suite 4820, Omaha, NE 68131, USA, Ph.: 402-280-4029, Email: [email protected], Google Scholar: RP Heaney, PubMed: Heaney RP

Michael Holick PhD MD, Director, General Clinical Research Center, Director, Bone Health Care Clinic, Boston University Medical Center, Professor of Medicine, Physiology, and Biophysics, Boston University School of Medicine, 715 Albany St. M_1013, Boston, MA 02118, USA, Ph.: 617-638-4545, Fax: 617-638-8882, Email: [email protected], Google Scholar: MF Holick, PubMed: Holick MF

Dr. Holick is the world's foremost authority on vitamin D. In 2006, Dr. Holick received the 18th Annual Award for Excellence in Clinical Research for his pioneering contributions in the basic science of vitamin D.

Bruce W. Hollis PhD, Professor of Pediatrics, Professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Director of Pediatric Nutritional Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, 171 Ashley Ave. Charleston, SC 29425, USA, Ph.: 843.792.6854, Fax: 843-792-8801, Email: [email protected], Google Scholar: BW Hollis, PubMed: Hollis BW


Christel Lamberg-Allardt PhD, Dept. of Applied Chemistry and Microbiology, University of Helsinki, PO Box 27, FIN, 00014, Finland, Ph.: 358-9-1-915-8266, Fax: 358-9-1-915-8475, Email: [email protected], Google Scholar: C Lamberg-Allardt, PubMed: Lamberg-Allardt C

Anthony W. Norman PhD, Emeritus, Presidential Chair, and, Distinguished Professor of Biochemistry and Biomedical Sciences, Dept. of Biochemistry, University of California Riverside, Room 5456 Boyce Hall, Riverside, CA 92521, USA, Ph.: 909-787-4777, Fax: 909-787-4784, Email: [email protected], Web: http://www.biochemistry.ucr.edu/faculty/norman.html

Google Scholar: AW Norman, PubMed: Norman AW


Reinhold Vieth PhD, Associate Professor, Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto, Director, Bone and Mineral Laboratory, Dept. of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Mount Sinai Hospital, 600 University Ave., Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5G 1X5, Ph.: 416.586.5920, Fax: 416.586.8628, Email: [email protected], Google Scholar: R Vieth, PubMed: Veith R
 
bioman

bioman

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Good article, but with one exception...

"But sun poisoning from vitamin D overdose has never been reported anywhere. "

That's because your body isn't going to poison you and it will shut down D production when saturation levels are met. This compensatory mechanism is not present when you orally ingest D..so a little bit of caution is warranted.

I'll probably dose about 6-10,000 ius of D this winter to see if it offsets the SAD I often get.
 
TheCrownedOne

TheCrownedOne

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
Good article, but with one exception...

"But sun poisoning from vitamin D overdose has never been reported anywhere. "

That's because your body isn't going to poison you and it will shut down D production when saturation levels are met. This compensatory mechanism is not present when you orally ingest D..so a little bit of caution is warranted.

I'll probably dose about 6-10,000 ius of D this winter to see if it offsets the SAD I often get.
Read my mind :thumbsup:
 
John Smeton

John Smeton

Legend
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
around 10,000 uis of Vit D Dayum! I take in abotu I thought around 1,000 ui's was optimal
 
John Smeton

John Smeton

Legend
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
This is just one -physican. have most physicans come to this same conclusion?

Life extension magzine says 1500- 2,000 ui's per day.

Dr. John Can you give your facts about vitamin D and your opinion about what the best dosing is for every individual.

example

Josh weight 150

I weigh 205

etc
 
John Smeton

John Smeton

Legend
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
so is it really 20,000 ui's per day or what about what the 1,500 ui's?
 
bioman

bioman

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
The 1000 to 2000 recommendations are based off one group of researchers suggestion to the get the FDA to raise the RDA of D. The science is showing that we can go higher..with caution..considering that the skin makes so much more in the sun.

I think it boils down to taking babysteps in terms of getting the policy and the perception changed.
 
John Smeton

John Smeton

Legend
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
The 1000 to 2000 recommendations are based off one group of researchers suggestion to the get the FDA to raise the RDA of D. The science is showing that we can go higher..with caution..considering that the skin makes so much more in the sun.

I think it boils down to taking babysteps in terms of getting the policy and the perception changed.
There was a study done oin Hawaiian people who got eleven Yes eleven hours of sun a day . Half of the people were vit D deficient. Other half had optimal so sun depends on the person.
 
John Smeton

John Smeton

Legend
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
what are side effects of going too high with the Vit D?
 
Iron Warrior

Iron Warrior

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
That would get very expensive at 20,000 IU wouldn't it ?
 

Redeemer

Member
Awards
0
You guys are forgetting the very beginning of the article where it says vitamin D is a steroid precursor. Be careful as you might go to jail unless you get a prescription from your MD for .5 IU capsules. But seriouslt though, steroid precursor, don't you guys know how downright evil and bad for you those things can be?
 
bioman

bioman

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Side effects of overdose using include nausea, headaches, aching joints. Extreme dosing for long periods of time can result in calcification of organs and arteries..but I think this is pretty rare.
 

McBurly

Active member
Awards
2
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
I'll probably dose about 6-10,000 ius of D this winter to see if it offsets the SAD I often get.
You should try tanning beds, I remember reading in one of my mens health magazines an article talking about a correlation between sun and serotonin levels

its something Im going to do this winter as I've noticed my moods tend to be rather down and gloomy during the winter months. and if nothing else I get a sweet tan out of it
 

hardasnails1973

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
You should try tanning beds, I remember reading in one of my mens health magazines an article talking about a correlation between sun and serotonin levels

its something Im going to do this winter as I've noticed my moods tend to be rather down and gloomy during the winter months. and if nothing else I get a sweet tan out of it

GEt vitmain D levles checked if below 30 add in 50,000ius for a day for 4 weeks retest again. My levels where at 27 and took 50,000 ius for 8 weeks to get back up to 60 range. Every one is different, but it should be monitored. with vitamin D masure to get 800-1000 mgs calcium with same magneisum. People with mg or iodine defieincy have hard time
absorbing vitamin D. I use biotic resarch vitamin d forte its already in bioactive form so people with bile acids problems can absorb it. Point being i had vitamin d level at 20 took 100,000 ius a day for several weeks it never budge because I was not absorbing it
 
DR.D

DR.D

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
There was a study done oin Hawaiian people who got eleven Yes eleven hours of sun a day . Half of the people were vit D deficient. Other half had optimal so sun depends on the person.
Yes, it all depends on the individuals ergosterol content, and certain other 7-dehydrocholesterol derivatives. I think that's the limiting substrate for solar activation?
 

fitnecise

Member
Awards
0
Good article, but with one exception...

"But sun poisoning from vitamin D overdose has never been reported anywhere. "

That's because your body isn't going to poison you and it will shut down D production when saturation levels are met. This compensatory mechanism is not present when you orally ingest D..so a little bit of caution is warranted.

I'll probably dose about 6-10,000 ius of D this winter to see if it offsets the SAD I often get.
I recall one case of two accidental D overdoses from intake, it took them 1,700,000 IU daily for months until they finally got sick. They recovered fine

LD50 in humans would be over 40,000,000 IU IIRC.
 

fitnecise

Member
Awards
0
There was a study done oin Hawaiian people who got eleven Yes eleven hours of sun a day . Half of the people were vit D deficient. Other half had optimal so sun depends on the person.
Which should tell us perhaps we aren't defining "deficient" correctly ...

According to a paper last month in the NEJM it is estimated that 1 billion worldwide are "deficient"
 
John Smeton

John Smeton

Legend
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
GEt vitmain D levles checked if below 30 add in 50,000ius for a day for 4 weeks retest again. My levels where at 27 and took 50,000 ius for 8 weeks to get back up to 60 range. Every one is different, but it should be monitored. with vitamin D masure to get 800-1000 mgs calcium with same magneisum. People with mg or iodine defieincy have hard time
absorbing vitamin D. I use biotic resarch vitamin d forte its already in bioactive form so people with bile acids problems can absorb it. Point being i had vitamin d level at 20 took 100,000 ius a day for several weeks it never budge because I was not absorbing it
hardasnails how do you know if your Vit D are in bioactive form?

Is spring valleys brand, The Wal-mart kind, with Calcuim ok?



Dr. D what is your recommendation for weight range?

example

100-150

150-200

200-250

250 plus
 
xjsynx

xjsynx

Member
Awards
0
Sub.

Don't have time to read it now, but we back to check it out.
 
bioman

bioman

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
I'm definitely going to do the tanning bed thing this winter..starting as soon as it's too cold to do yard work shirtless. Even taking in 5,000 iu's of D last winter I still got sick and was depressed...but then I had a lot of bad stuff going on.

Saw a study where a single 150,000 iu dose of D3 alleviated SAD symptoms in the majority of patients tested.

Vitamin D Council has all the pertinent studies. Great site.
 
dsade

dsade

NutraPlanet Fanatic
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
Has anyone seen a study showing correlations of the diseases listed with geographic regions/sun exposure?

Are levels of cancers listed lower in areas where the majority of the population gets optimal sun exposure?
 
John Smeton

John Smeton

Legend
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
Has anyone seen a study showing correlations of the diseases listed with geographic regions/sun exposure?

Are levels of cancers listed lower in areas where the majority of the population gets optimal sun exposure?
No Dsade I havnt seen one study. Your a smart man though and Im sure if there arnt any studies , you could do them and publish them.
 
bioman

bioman

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Vitamin D Council has some studies or discussions of studies on their site that state the incidence of MS and few other diseases are higher in higher latitudes. I don't recall one for cancer though.
 
DR.D

DR.D

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Has anyone seen a study showing correlations of the diseases listed with geographic regions/sun exposure?

Are levels of cancers listed lower in areas where the majority of the population gets optimal sun exposure?
There is a strong correlation with the percentage of rickets cases in children that do not receive adequate ultraviolet exposure (not really a 'disease' I suppose) but many compounding variables related to diet also contribute to osteopathic probs in kids so it's tough to quantitate.
 
DR.D

DR.D

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
... Dr. D what is your recommendation for weight range?

example

100-150

150-200

200-250

250 plus
Just the typical dose you get in your multi. If you drink lots of milk, like I'll assume most of us do with our daily protein shakes, then that's fortified with D also to add even more. I never felt the need to take extra beyond that.
 
John Smeton

John Smeton

Legend
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
I got my Vit D levels checked at the Doctor yesterday. Ill post my report when I get it
My Mutli has 400 Ui's
I get Sunlight almost Daily(not in winter months though)
and I supplement with Calcuim and Vit D about 800 grams per day
I don't drink Milk
 

fitnecise

Member
Awards
0
Has anyone seen a study showing correlations of the diseases listed with geographic regions/sun exposure?

Are levels of cancers listed lower in areas where the majority of the population gets optimal sun exposure?
PMID: 17368188
 
methodice

methodice

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
I haven't checked the PMID, but sun exposure in our land down under increases the incidence of skin cancer compared to other countries
 
dsade

dsade

NutraPlanet Fanatic
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
Interesting, since they specifically cite breast cancer. Personal observation (and slight theory behind a new product), when using UV beds, my pecs lean up significantly...I would assume from both an anti-estrogenic and usage of fatty deposits to synthesize vitamin D?
 
crader

crader

Board Sponsor
Awards
1
  • Established
Not sure if this is relevant


6. Ecological studies
Most epidemiological investigations of aetiology are observational. They look for associations between the occurrence of disease and exposure to known or suspected causes. In ecological studies the unit of observation is the population or community. Disease rates and exposures are measured in each of a series of populations and their relation is examined. Often the information about disease and exposure is abstracted from published statistics and therefore does not require expensive or time consuming data collection. The populations compared may be defined in various ways.

Geographical comparisons
One common approach is to look for geographical correlations between disease incidence or mortality and the prevalence of risk factors. For example, mortality from coronary heart disease in local authority areas of England and Wales has been correlated with neonatal mortality in the same places 70 and more years earlier. This observation generated the hypothesis that coronary heart disease may result from the impaired development of blood vessels and other tissues in fetal life and infancy.

Many useful observations have emerged from geographical analyses, but care is needed in their interpretation. Allowance can be made for the potential confounding effects of age and sex by appropriate standardisation (see Chapter 3). More troublesome, however, are the biases that can occur if ascertainment of disease or exposure, or both, differs from one place to another. For example, a survey of back disorders found a higher incidence of general practitioner consultation for back pain in the north than the south of Britain, which might suggest greater exposure to some causative agent or activity in the north. Closer investigation, however, indicated that the prevalence of back symptoms was similar in both regions and that it was patients' consultation habits that varied. Thus, in this instance correlations based on general practitioner consultation rates would be quite misleading. A study based on rates of admission to hospital for perforated peptic ulcer would probably be reliable as in affluent countries almost all cases will reach hospital and be diagnosed. On the other hand, unbiased ascertainment of disorders such as depression or Parkinson's disease may be difficult without a specially designed survey. When there is doubt about the uniformity of ascertainment, it may be necessary to explore the extent of any possible bias in a validation exercise.



Time trends
Many diseases show remarkable fluctuations in incidence over time. Rates of acute infection can vary appreciably over a few days, but epidemics of chronic disorders such as lung cancer and coronary heart disease evolve over decades. If time or secular trends in disease incidence correlate with changes in a community's environment or way of life then the trends may provide important clues to aetiology. Thus, the currently increasing incidence of melanoma in Britain has been linked with greater exposure to sunlight (from fashions in dress and holidays abroad); and successive rises and falls in mortality from cervical cancer have been related to varying levels of sexual promiscuity, as evidenced by notification rates for gonorrhoea.

Like geographical studies, analysis of secular trends may be biased by differences in the ascertainment of disease. As health services have improved, diagnostic criteria and techniques have changed. Furthermore, whereas in geographical studies the differences are accessible to current inquiry, validating secular changes is more difficult as it depends on observations made and often scantily recorded many years ago. Nevertheless, the reality - if not the true size - of secular trends can often be established with reasonable certainty. The rise and subsequent fall in the incidence of appendicitis in Britain during the past 100 years is a good example.



Migrants
The study of migrant populations offers a way of discriminating genetic from environmental causes of geographical variation in disease, and may also indicate the age at which an environmental cause exerts its effect. Second generation Japanese migrants to the USA have substantially lower rates of stomach cancer than Japanese people in Japan, indicating that the high incidence of the disease in Japan is environmental in origin. In first generation migrants rates are intermediate, which suggests that the adverse environmental influences act, at least in part, early in life.

In interpreting migrant studies it is important to bear in mind the possibility that the migrants may be unrepresentative of the population that they leave, and that their health may have been affected directly by the process of migration. Norwegian immigrants into the USA, for example, have been found to have a higher incidence of psychosis than people in Norway. Although this may indicate environmental influences in the USA that led to psychotic illness, it may also have resulted from selective emigration from Norway of people more susceptible to mental illness, or from the unusual stresses imposed on immigrants during their adjustment to a foreign culture.

Despite these difficulties, migrant studies have contributed importantly to our understanding of several diseases.



Occupation and social class
The other populations for whom statistics on disease incidence and mortality are readily available are occupational and socioeconomic groups. Thus, mortality from pneumonia is high in welders, and the steep social class gradient in mortality from chronic obstructive lung disease is evidence that correlates of poverty, perhaps bad housing, have an important influence on the disease.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Return to main page
Go to previous page
Go to next page
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Home | Current issue | Past issues | Classified ads | Career Focus | Feedback
Collections | About this site | About the BMJ | BMA | Medline
 
John Smeton

John Smeton

Legend
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
Got my bloodwork back from My Doctor's Lab.

My levels are Perfectly normal at 48

The range you want them is is 20-100
 
Flaw

Flaw

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
My doctor prescribed me 50,000 units once a week for 8 weeks. I'm concerned about that high of a amount, Any thoughts.
 
kingdong

kingdong

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
My doctor prescribed me 50,000 units once a week for 8 weeks. I'm concerned about that high of a amount, Any thoughts.
A lot of doctors perscribe D2, which is a manmade chemical and not as good as D3.
 
Flaw

Flaw

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
No, he prescribed me cholecalciferol which is D3. D2 is ergocalciferol.
 
Dutchman

Dutchman

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
A lot of outdated misinfo on a huge, complex, rapidly evolving topic.

I had been taking 10,000 IUs daily for a couple of years. Now for over a year I have been taking 15,000 IUs daily. At 10,000 I was unable to raise my ng/ml levels up to my desired range of 60 to 70. My late wife who was dying from severe, metasticized cancers of her Lungs, Brain, Liver and 3 Lymph Nodes agreed to begin taking Vitamin D3 at 20,000 IUs. ALL of her metasteses stopped spreading and eventually she died from the negative side effects of the radiation and chemotherapy they put her on. I have colllected a ton of articles on this subject for years because of my own interest and then the appropriateness with my wife's problems. Many of the DOCs I respect recommend 5,000 IUs daily for the average person.......in their 20ies. By the time we are over 60 our bodies only process about 25% of the D3we receive regardless of method, hence the need for much higher doses as we age. Similarly if one has a lot of body fat or darker skin (negro, hispanic, native american etc) then your ability to process D3 drops dramatically. Besides it's ability to help prevent 77% of the known cancers affecting us D3 has many other uses. My niece is closly following and trying on her own the major test program ongoing with 30,000 IUs daily for MS patients. The old toxicity levels once thought to be around 10,000 to 12,000 are as valid as the World is Flat BS. Taking the larger doses is not expensive. For example I now prefer to use the Sam's Club version which gives me 400 X 5,000 IU gel caps for only $14 bucks. I completely believe in the extensive research info available on D3 and Lung, Prostate and Breast Cancer. Add in that it has such a positive effect on my bones and my heart and I can't afford NOT to use it.

In general I highly recommend roaming around the Vitamin D Council site at http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/, and searching the topic at Dr Joseph Mercola at http://www.mercola.com/ and the Health Ranger at http://www.naturalnews.com/Index.html.

In addition the following article from three years ago by Dr Cannell, perhaps the most highly accredited, recognized specialist on D3 is particularly interesting for us in the IronWorld. http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/newsletter/2007-mar.shtml
 
thebigt

thebigt

Legend
Awards
6
  • Best Answer
  • The BigT Award
  • Established
  • Legend!
  • RockStar
  • First Up Vote
A lot of outdated misinfo on a huge, complex, rapidly evolving topic.

I had been taking 10,000 IUs daily for a couple of years. Now for over a year I have been taking 15,000 IUs daily. At 10,000 I was unable to raise my ng/ml levels up to my desired range of 60 to 70. My late wife who was dying from severe, metasticized cancers of her Lungs, Brain, Liver and 3 Lymph Nodes agreed to begin taking Vitamin D3 at 20,000 IUs. ALL of her metasteses stopped spreading and eventually she died from the negative side effects of the radiation and chemotherapy they put her on. I have colllected a ton of articles on this subject for years because of my own interest and then the appropriateness with my wife's problems. Many of the DOCs I respect recommend 5,000 IUs daily for the average person.......in their 20ies. By the time we are over 60 our bodies only process about 25% of the D3we receive regardless of method, hence the need for much higher doses as we age. Similarly if one has a lot of body fat or darker skin (negro, hispanic, native american etc) then your ability to process D3 drops dramatically. Besides it's ability to help prevent 77% of the known cancers affecting us D3 has many other uses. My niece is closly following and trying on her own the major test program ongoing with 30,000 IUs daily for MS patients. The old toxicity levels once thought to be around 10,000 to 12,000 are as valid as the World is Flat BS. Taking the larger doses is not expensive. For example I now prefer to use the Sam's Club version which gives me 400 X 5,000 IU gel caps for only $14 bucks. I completely believe in the extensive research info available on D3 and Lung, Prostate and Breast Cancer. Add in that it has such a positive effect on my bones and my heart and I can't afford NOT to use it.

In general I highly recommend roaming around the Vitamin D Council site at http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/, and searching the topic at Dr Joseph Mercola at http://www.mercola.com/ and the Health Ranger at http://www.naturalnews.com/Index.html.

In addition the following article from three years ago by Dr Cannell, perhaps the most highly accredited, recognized specialist on D3 is particularly interesting for us in the IronWorld. http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/newsletter/2007-mar.shtml
this is a great post, thanks dutch! very sorry to hear about your wife-my condolences.
 
BigBlackGuy

BigBlackGuy

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
A lot of outdated misinfo on a huge, complex, rapidly evolving topic.

I had been taking 10,000 IUs daily for a couple of years. Now for over a year I have been taking 15,000 IUs daily. At 10,000 I was unable to raise my ng/ml levels up to my desired range of 60 to 70. My late wife who was dying from severe, metasticized cancers of her Lungs, Brain, Liver and 3 Lymph Nodes agreed to begin taking Vitamin D3 at 20,000 IUs. ALL of her metasteses stopped spreading and eventually she died from the negative side effects of the radiation and chemotherapy they put her on. I have colllected a ton of articles on this subject for years because of my own interest and then the appropriateness with my wife's problems. Many of the DOCs I respect recommend 5,000 IUs daily for the average person.......in their 20ies. By the time we are over 60 our bodies only process about 25% of the D3we receive regardless of method, hence the need for much higher doses as we age. Similarly if one has a lot of body fat or darker skin (negro, hispanic, native american etc) then your ability to process D3 drops dramatically. Besides it's ability to help prevent 77% of the known cancers affecting us D3 has many other uses. My niece is closly following and trying on her own the major test program ongoing with 30,000 IUs daily for MS patients. The old toxicity levels once thought to be around 10,000 to 12,000 are as valid as the World is Flat BS. Taking the larger doses is not expensive. For example I now prefer to use the Sam's Club version which gives me 400 X 5,000 IU gel caps for only $14 bucks. I completely believe in the extensive research info available on D3 and Lung, Prostate and Breast Cancer. Add in that it has such a positive effect on my bones and my heart and I can't afford NOT to use it.

In general I highly recommend roaming around the Vitamin D Council site at http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/, and searching the topic at Dr Joseph Mercola at http://www.mercola.com/ and the Health Ranger at http://www.naturalnews.com/Index.html.

In addition the following article from three years ago by Dr Cannell, perhaps the most highly accredited, recognized specialist on D3 is particularly interesting for us in the IronWorld. http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/newsletter/2007-mar.shtml
I don't think I've seen a post more worthy of being read, thanks for this brother.
 
Dutchman

Dutchman

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
I wouldn't be the least bit concerned about 50,000 IUs, once a week. My weekly total is 105,000, my wife was at 140,000 per week and my niece is doing 30,00 per day ie 210,000 per week. There are suggestions now from some Docs tht over 100,000 per day is OK. Ten years ago they were telling us that 400 a day was the max. As i said above, this is an extremely fast moving target that keeps getting reset with all the research going on.
 
thebigt

thebigt

Legend
Awards
6
  • Best Answer
  • The BigT Award
  • Established
  • Legend!
  • RockStar
  • First Up Vote
I wouldn't be the least bit concerned about 50,000 IUs, once a week. My weekly total is 105,000, my wife was at 140,000 per week and my niece is doing 30,00 per day ie 210,000 per week. There are suggestions now from some Docs tht over 100,000 per day is OK. Ten years ago they were telling us that 400 a day was the max. As i said above, this is an extremely fast moving target that keeps getting reset with all the research going on.
my wife was put on 20,000 2x week for 2 months, she couldn't tolerate the stomach distress [chron's disease], so i ended up taking it. i didn't have any problems at all with this dose. i did seem to feel more healthy at the end of the 2 months and have continued to take 5,000 daily.

you think that is enough to see benefits, dutch? i am 52.
 
Flaw

Flaw

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
I wouldn't be the least bit concerned about 50,000 IUs, once a week. My weekly total is 105,000, my wife was at 140,000 per week and my niece is doing 30,00 per day ie 210,000 per week. There are suggestions now from some Docs tht over 100,000 per day is OK. Ten years ago they were telling us that 400 a day was the max. As i said above, this is an extremely fast moving target that keeps getting reset with all the research going on.
Thanks bud! My mother was histerical as she has always read that you should not go over 1,000 IU and thought it had to be a typo on the sheet. I thought so at first to. Today the pharmacist said it was cool. I'll have to convince my mom it's fine. lol. I know that the facts on vitamin D are constantly changing along with the numbers. Reports from a couple months ago are obsolete. Thankyou for the reassurance!
 
Dutchman

Dutchman

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
you think that is enough to see benefits, dutch? i am 52.
T, since 5,000 is recommended for 20 somethings and I at my age, was unable to raise my levels high enough with 10,000, you might want to try more yourself. I would consider 10,000 per day and in 2 or 3 months get a Vitamin D3 test to see what your ng/ml levels are. If they are between at least 50 or better yet, 60 and 70 you're doing great One theory is that since being out in the sun you can get your 10,000 IUs in a half an hour or so, being out longer would have meant being overdosed at possibly toxic levels. However that doesn't happen hence the theory that the body has it's own means of limiting the amount you take.
 
thebigt

thebigt

Legend
Awards
6
  • Best Answer
  • The BigT Award
  • Established
  • Legend!
  • RockStar
  • First Up Vote
T, since 5,000 is recommended for 20 somethings and I at my age, was unable to raise my levels high enough with 10,000, you might want to try more yourself. I would consider 10,000 per day and in 2 or 3 months get a Vitamin D3 test to see what your ng/ml levels are. If they are between at least 50 or better yet, 60 and 70 you're doing great One theory is that since being out in the sun you can get your 10,000 IUs in a half an hour or so, being out longer would have meant being overdosed at possibly toxic levels. However that doesn't happen hence the theory that the body has it's own means of limiting the amount you take.
10,000 it is then. here indiana, this time of year there isn't going to be a whole lot of sunshine, lol.

thanks, dutch!
 
prld2gr8ns

prld2gr8ns

Idiot Savant
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
No, he prescribed me cholecalciferol which is D3. D2 is ergocalciferol.
from my understanding I thought D2 was only prescription based. D3 is available in most vitamin supps.....
 
Dutchman

Dutchman

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
from my understanding I thought D2 was only prescription based. D3 is available in most vitamin supps.....
You are correct sir. It is always the D2 version that Doctors prescribe. Again like in so many other situations, this is the synthetic version and one could assume with an eye out for the typical Big Pharma - Medical Inddustry kickbacks, that there are multiple reasons for this standard. In fact many researchers say that D2 is maybe 1.7 times to 10 times less effective than D3, ie that 50,000 IUs D2 are only as effective as perhaps as low as 5,000 IUs of D3. The D2 version is used in milk, cereals and many multiple vitamin formulations. It is also considered by some to be more toxic as well. This mess reminds me greatly of the entire synthetic progestin vs all natural, bio-identical progesterone mess. The resuts depend on whose labs are doing the study and whether they are independant or industry financed. I guess I am just a complete Big Pharma doubter.
 
Flaw

Flaw

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
from my understanding I thought D2 was only prescription based. D3 is available in most vitamin supps.....
Like I said mine says cholecalciferol on the prescription. Maybe things have changed recently. Took my first dose today. Can't say I feel anything. It will probably take awhile since I am deficient to know a difference. It appears to be a liquid gel as well.
 
thebigt

thebigt

Legend
Awards
6
  • Best Answer
  • The BigT Award
  • Established
  • Legend!
  • RockStar
  • First Up Vote
You are correct sir. It is always the D2 version that Doctors prescribe. Again like in so many other situations, this is the synthetic version and one could assume with an eye out for the typical Big Pharma - Medical Inddustry kickbacks, that there are multiple reasons for this standard. In fact many researchers say that D2 is maybe 1.7 times to 10 times less effective than D3, ie that 50,000 IUs D2 are only as effective as perhaps as low as 5,000 IUs of D3. The D2 version is used in milk, cereals and many multiple vitamin formulations. It is also considered by some to be more toxic as well. This mess reminds me greatly of the entire synthetic progestin vs all natural, bio-identical progesterone mess. The resuts depend on whose labs are doing the study and whether they are independant or industry financed. I guess I am just a complete Big Pharma doubter.
tylenol-the brands hospitals trust most. when i 1st saw that ad on tv i about had a stroke, tylenol and all acetaminophen products are toxic crap. there is a good reason for your doubting big pharma.
 
prld2gr8ns

prld2gr8ns

Idiot Savant
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
You are correct sir. It is always the D2 version that Doctors prescribe. Again like in so many other situations, this is the synthetic version and one could assume with an eye out for the typical Big Pharma - Medical Inddustry kickbacks, that there are multiple reasons for this standard. In fact many researchers say that D2 is maybe 1.7 times to 10 times less effective than D3, ie that 50,000 IUs D2 are only as effective as perhaps as low as 5,000 IUs of D3. The D2 version is used in milk, cereals and many multiple vitamin formulations. It is also considered by some to be more toxic as well. This mess reminds me greatly of the entire synthetic progestin vs all natural, bio-identical progesterone mess. The resuts depend on whose labs are doing the study and whether they are independant or industry financed. I guess I am just a complete Big Pharma doubter.
It's funny, in terms of D3 Doctors prescribe D2 because it's the only version big pharma has legislation on. They don't prescribe D3 because, well, it doesn't make them or big brother any money(even thought it's the more effective form)
tylenol-the brands hospitals trust most. when i 1st saw that ad on tv i about had a stroke, tylenol and all acetaminophen products are toxic crap. there is a good reason for your doubting big pharma.
Plus all the tylenol recall crap that has been going on lately. I worked for the pharm industry for a couple of years and a lot of their stuff is total bs bottom dollar type crap. I've come to dislike everything about their rules, regulations and subsidization broohaha. In the end though, it's the name of the game and the nature of the beast. You actually live close to one of the biggest corp clowns in America T. P&G is just right down the road a couple of hours from Indianapolis.
 

Similar threads


Top