|
|
|
|
|
| Vitamin D Deficiency
Posted: 7/5/2008 3:15:03 AM | You're ranting against "too much" Vit D.
Nobody but you is talking about "too much". The objective is to remove deficiency with supplemenation or sunshine.
You raise the straw man, you fight it by yourself.
Another aspect of widespread Vit D deficiency was a report this week about pregnant women with Vit D deficiency causing dental problems in their babies. | |
|
| Vitamin D Deficiency
Posted: 7/5/2008 9:26:58 AM | | I take you haven't examined the info and links on the site I have mentioned. Please take the time to do the research and reply. | |
|
| Vitamin D Deficiency
Posted: 7/18/2008 7:16:12 AM | http://www.naturalnews.com/023653.html
http://medheadlines.com/2008/07/15/wham-another-knockout-punch-for-vitamin-d/
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/114949.php | |
|
| Vitamin D Deficiency
Posted: 7/18/2008 7:40:29 AM | solomon999, the sun is not a big bad company, it doesn't cost a penny!. You can not overdose vitamin d from sunlight exposure. Sunlight is usually recommended for vitamin d not supplements. Supplements is usually for people who have very low vitamin d level and for some people in the winter time.
For people who think sun screen prevents skin cancer think again, the sun screen itself can cause cancer. You're better off covering yourself up. | |
|
| Vitamin D Deficiency
Posted: 7/18/2008 11:03:13 PM | Re sihtdaeruoynac 7/19/08.
I'm sure everybody knows the sun is not a big bad company, including myself.
You have obviously missed my point. And obviously didn't look at the site I mentioned either.
I was just saying that nowdays many supplements of many kinds are being overhyped. Even many of these studies.
This thread is about vitD deficiency. The levels of D for humans has slowly been pushed up over the years, so what used to be considered normal levels are now considered low levels.
There is also the case of many vitamins and minerals having their RDA , recommened daily allowance lowered. There's much controversy on these matters by the medical community, which doesn't help people much.
I remember some studies done about 25yrs ago,when my girlfriend at the time was doing her nursing degree. I read all of her books about vitamins mineral etc and also all of these studies. I remember a couple in particular. In one high doses of vitamin C were given to children recovering from appendicectomies. Those on the C healed up 3 times faster than those who weren't. Today we know that vitamin C has many more functions than known then, especially that it is important for assimilation of protein into muscle tissue, the most recent findings that vit C is extremely important for the skin. They even put in skin creams now .
In another study high doses of vit A were used in a similar experiment to the one aforemetioned. The children healed many times faster than than those who weren't treated. These are just 2 examples. I know vit A in too large a dose for prolonged periods can cause serious illness and death. The controversey was even more extreme then than what it is now.
Ofcourse clean unadulterated food and sunlight is the best form of nutrition. Unfortunately here in Australia we have the highest rates of skin cancer than anywhere in the world, and have constant warnings on television about the problem and campains on protection from the sun. Ten minutes in the sun here at the wrong time causes sunburn. Sunblock lotions 50+ are used here now for summer use and special clothes with sunblock value 50+ and 100+ are also used, especially for children and outdoor workers, as well as ofcourse sunglasses to prevent cataracts. You can be sunburnt here through a normal shirt or Tshirt. Sun exposure is ok at the right time of day without sunscreen, but one must be careful.
Satx78218 stated bad diet causes skin cancer. You don't have the slightest clue at all about skin cancer obviously. You also stated skin will add melonin in response to the sun to protect it self. Increased melonin reduces vitD production. That is true but not to the extent you are implying.
You also stated, "Dark skinned people don't produce much/any vitD in skin ". This is absolute rubbish; better learn some real medicine !
Dark skinned people produce less vitD to the same amount of sun exposure than light skinned people. But to say they produce none is total rubbish !!!
I think too much learning doth make thee mad !
I think satx78218 should stop playing doctor. His misinformation is astounding.
VitaminD is a secosteroid and any small amount too much can have devastating effects on people with immune system problems as it is immunosuppressive. Also cause chronic problems for people with inflamatory problems/diseases and Th1 inflamatory problems. See bactriality.com for proper information on the SECOSTEROID called vitamin D.
Also osteoporosis is caused by lack of the hormones testosterone and progesterone in men not lack of vitD. And lack of oestrogen, progesterone and testosterone in women not lack of SECOSTEROID called vitamin D !!!
Also as I mentioned previously depression, early dementia and many other problems are caused by lack of hormones in poeple of both sexes over all age groups, ESPECIALLY the elderly ! ! ! ! !
Excess vitD will actually remove calcium from the bones. So please do the researh and find the true facts.
Calcium, magnesium,silica,vitamin K, zinc, boron,copper manganese are the main elements needed for bone health, not vitD. Calcium carbonate and citrate are the best main forms of calcium.
All this vitD hype is from those with vested interests in making money from it and all the sheep that believe that believe it and crow about it to others, that's all there is to it.
I would like to see what would happen if mr satx took his recommended 10,000 IU dose of vitD a day seeing he states that it is quite safe. Go on give it a trial for a year or so and let us all know how much better you are and how much more super protected you are against all those nasties. If not peddle your nonsense elsewhere. | |
|
| Vitamin D Deficiency
Posted: 7/19/2008 3:14:50 AM | Cod Liver Oil is a good natural source of vitamin D. 1 tablespoon has like, 1200+ IU's
I take it every morning with my kale/carrot****ail. | |
|
| Vitamin D Deficiency
Posted: 7/29/2008 4:27:05 AM | Children at Risk From Current Low Vitamin D Recommendations
http://www.naturalnews.com/z023713.html | |
|
| Vitamin D Deficiency
Posted: 7/30/2008 9:12:28 AM | Calcium and VitD intakes were significantly positively correlated with brain lesion volume........In a multivariable model containing both cacium and vitD, only vitD remained significantly positively associated with lesion volume.
http://www.fasebj.org/cgi/content/meeting_abstract/21/6/A1072
Overview: This article discusses new Duke University research showing a highly significant correlation (p=0.007) between higher vitamin D intake and MRI brain lesions (see above site page), as well as the potential for lesion reversal. These lesions have been associated with cognitive impairment, stroke, psychiactric disorders and mortality. This article also discusses the levels of vitD and calcium needed to avoid osteoporosis and vascular calcification in the light of new research on blockage of the vitD receptor due to bacterial products and elevated 25D.
Introduction
Recently there have been increasing calls for higher levels of vitD intake, particularly for the prevention and treatment of various chronic conditions, including osteoporosis in older adults (1). Such calls for increasing vitD intake continue, despite a large meta analysisthat recently failed to show that vitD when added to cacium supplementation had a significantly greater reduction in fractures than calcium alone (2,3). And another meta analysis looking at mortality over a 1-5 year period, also failed to show a statistically significant effect from vitD supplementation (3,4). Despite these meta analysis, vitD supplementation is still being urged at higher and higher levels and some contend that there is still evidence in its favor (1,5,6).
There is another emerging view that centres on the vitD receptor (VDR). It is based on the work of Trevor Marshall,Ph.D., who argues that vitD receptor(VDR) competence is a crucial, but overlooked factor in chronic disease (7,8). His disease model is based on molecular modeling and clinical research that provides a model of chronic inflamatory disease(7,8,9). In this view , a properly functioning vitD receptor is seen as a key to innate immune function (7,10,11).
This new work has revealed that the ability of the VDR to properly stimulate the innate immune system is impeded by high levels of vitD-(measured as the precursor form, the secosteroid 25D)-which binds and decreases the activity of the receptor.Thus higher levels of 25D decrease the ability of the active hormonal form of vitD, 125D, to activate the VDR. Bacterial products have been identified that also the activity of theVDR (8). Sophisticated computer modeling has determined that olmesartan,an angiotension receptor blocker (ARB) , is able to displace substances that block the VDR and itself, activate the VDR (7,8,9). When combined with vitamin D reduction and low dose pulsed antibiotics, Marshall's protocol is gradually able to eliminate cell wall deficient (CWD L-form) and biofilm bacteria at the heart of many unexplained inflammatory diseases. These treatment-resistant bacteria, acquired over a lifetime, are thought to stimulate inflammation in many diseases, ranging from sarcoidosis, "autoimmune" diseases and diseases of aging, such as diabetes, osteoporosis and cardiovascular disease.
As a result of the problems with VDR blockage just mentioned, this new view does not regard vitD supplementation and a higher 25D as generally beneficial for the treament or prevention of chronic inflammatory diseases. These new findings call for a re-examination of past research on vitamin D in the light of Marshall's work ond other new research.
Association of Higher Vitamin D Intakes with Increased Volume of Brain Lesions.
Although a few researchers have cautioned against a general recommendation for increased vitD and have stressed the need for more research the calls have NOT recreceived much attention of late. A new study may help change this, especially when considered along with Marshall's work.
Researchers at Duke University have found a correlation between higher intakes of vitD and increased brain lesions shown by MRI (white matter hyperintensities-WMH). Although calcium intake was also correlated with increased lesions, vitD was the only variable that retained it's correlation with lesion volume in multivariate analysis. This was true, despite the fact that vitD intake in the 232 patients never exceeded 1015 IU, and was seldom even above 800IU (mean 341 IU).Calcium failed to show correlation with lesion volume in the multivariate analysis, despite several patients consuming more than the recognised safe upper limit of 2500 mg ( mean 1280mg).
These MRI lesions have been shown to be associated with Alzheimer's disease and mild cognitive impairment, stroke, conduct disorder/attention deficit disorder and depression, bipolar disorder, several measures of brain atrophy.
Greater progression of lesion volume is also associated with poor outcomes in late life depression. In a community-based study of older adults, higher lesion volume was associated with a two-fold increase in death in the 11yrs following the MRI assessment. In another study conducted over a 3yr period, the lesions increased in most patients , however in a small percentage the lesions regressed slightly, leaving room for hope that they are reversible.
Few other variables seem to predict the extent of lesions, although in some cases vascular disease risk factors are associated with lesion volume. One study found that the only factor that predicted the future increase in lesion volume was the current lesion volume.
It appears that the lesions are related to both calcium deposition in blood vessels and to the degeneration of tissue that occurs in Alzheimer's disease. Below the calcium deposition will be addressed.
Vascular Calcification and Osteoporosis
There have been increasing calls to increase intake of calcium and vitD based primarily on research on osteoporosis and fracture risk. The research discussed above, however indicates that vitD supplementation may increase the risk of vascular calcification and diseases associated with brain lesion progression and other chronic diseases.
This seems to post a diemma for patients. This is likely to be a very commom dilemma in aging patients, since it is widely recognized that vascular calcification is frequently associated with osteoporosis. The question raised by the brain lesion study is whether patients who supplement with calcium and/or vitD are increasing their risk of vascular calcification leading to blokage of arteries, heart attack and stroke, and the other neurological impairments associated with the brain lesions shown by MRI ?
By looking more deeply into past research and into some new studies, one solution to ths dlemma regarding supplementation becomes apparent. As mentioned above a recent meta analysis indicates that calcium alone is probably as effectiveas calcium and vitD for improving fracture rates and bone density. Furthermore, a team of researches in Germany recently reported that calcium and vitD together are no better than calcium alone in correcting disturbed bone metabolism in congestive heart failure. They noted that another team's finding supported their own observations and concluded that "calcium supplementation with 500mg/day may be more effective than increasing 25(OH)D levels by 60nmol/l[24ng/ml].
Thus, empirically, part of the answer with regard to supplementation may be to use supplemental calcium, but NOT supplemental vitD. However ,many researchers still contend that adding vitD leads to superior results. The foundation of their reasons for seeking to obtain higher vitD levels (eg above 10-15ng/ml) is related to parathyroid hormone production and this requires an examination of the most recent studies looking at this issue. What is revealed is that foundation for recommending high 25D levels based on parathyroid has many serious FLAWS.
The view that low vitD automatically causes poorer health status due to elevated PTH in all or most paients and that consuming more vitD results in long term improved health does not appear to be justified by the most recent analyses, as will be discussed later. | |
|
| Vitamin D Deficiency
Posted: 8/8/2008 5:39:28 PM | http://www.naturalnews.com/z023807.html
Originally published August 8 2008
Sun Exposure Saves Ten Times as Many Lives Via Vitamin D than Die From Skin Cancer
by David Gutierrez
(NaturalNews) The number of lives saved by people doubling their sun exposure might be 10 times higher than the number of fatal skin cancers that would result, according to a study conducted by researchers at the Institute for Cancer Research in Oslo, Norway, and published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
Exposure to the ultraviolet radiation from sunlight increases the risk of developing skin cancer, but also increases the body's production of vitamin D. The connection between vitamin D and bone health is well-known, and recent research suggests that a higher vitamin D intake might also provide protection against certain cancers, diabetes and multiple sclerosis. Vitamin D is also believed to help with the proper functioning of the immune system.
"The skin cancer risk is there, but the health benefits from some sun exposure are far larger than the risk," said lead researcher Johan Moan. "What we find is modest sun exposure gives enormous vitamin D benefits."
Vitamin D deficiency is a particular problem at northern latitudes, where the sun is weaker, particularly during the winter. Researchers calculated that in response to the same amount of time spent outdoors, Australians living just south of the equator produce 3.4 times more vitamin D than people living in Britain and 4.8 times more than people living in Scandinavia.
According to Moan, if the general population of Norway doubled the amount of time spent in the sun, approximately 300 more people would die each year from skin cancer, representing twice the current death rate. At the same time, there would be 3,000 fewer deaths from other types of cancer.
"The current data provide a further indication of the beneficial role of sun-induced vitamin D for cancer prognosis," said researcher Richard Setlow, from the U.S. Department of Energy's Brookhaven National Laboratory.
Moan recommends that people spend half as much time in the sun each day as it would take them to develop a sunburn.
Recommended resource: The Healing Power of Sunlight and Vitamin D, featuring an exclusive interview with Dr. Michael Holick.
================
moderate exposure to sun/UVB will cause the skin to generate 1000s of IUs of Vit D3. So how is 1000 IU/day as supplement going to cause harm?
Solomon, are you a shill paid by BigPharma to rant against products not sold by BigPharma?
And where are the bodies dead from Vit D supplementation? habeaus corpus, dude! | |
|
| Vitamin D Deficiency
Posted: 8/8/2008 6:31:19 PM | Vitamin D as an Analgesic for Patients With Type 2 Diabetes and Neuropathic Pain
http://archinte.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/extract/168/7/771 | |
|
| Vitamin D Deficiency
Posted: 8/11/2008 3:51:17 PM | Low vitamin D levels pose large threat to health
Researchers at Johns Hopkins are reporting what is believed to be the most conclusive evidence to date that inadequate levels of vitamin D, obtained from milk, fortified cereals and exposure to sunlight, lead to substantially increased risk of death.
http://www.physorg.com/news137689518.html | |
|
| Vitamin D Deficiency
Posted: 8/12/2008 4:25:37 AM | Pain 'linked with low vitamin D'
Low levels of the sunshine vitamin, vitamin D, may contribute to chronic pain among women, scientists believe.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7553833.stm | |
|
| Vitamin D Deficiency
Posted: 8/12/2008 8:03:30 PM | | Re satx78218 Are you a shill with shares in some Vit D companies paid to rant for over consumption ? | |
|
| Vitamin D Deficiency
Posted: 8/12/2008 8:37:48 PM | | You can't over consume vitamin D with sunlight. The liver produces what it needs nothing more. One to three teaspoon of cod liver oil is enough during the winter time. Very hard to over consume vitamin d with food, only with supplements. I don't believe in supplements, food is best medicine. | |
|
| Vitamin D Deficiency
Posted: 8/13/2008 5:36:46 AM | The Australian Cancer Council gives this guide to sun exposure for Australia.
As a guide, sufficient vitD is obtained by exposing face arms and hands to the sun
a) for a few minutes a day either side of the peak UV period on most days.
b) during winter in southern regions where UV radiation is less intense -- up to 2-3 hrs over the period of a week.
The info I have posted previously is from a paper presented to me by a qualified immunology specialist and specialist physician.
The heading is
Vitamin D the Vitamin D Receptor and Chronic Disease
Brain Lesions, Vascular Calcification and Osteporosis:
Two Veiws of Vitamin D Supplementation and Parathyroid Horome
by J. C. Waterhouse, Ph.D.
I shall continue where I left off.
What is the Optimum Level of Vitamin D ? Vitamin D and Secondary Hyperparathyroidism (SHPT)
Vitamin D supplementation is commonly recommended for osteoporosis based on studies that focus on what is purported to be a strong direct casual relationship between low 25D levels and elevated parathyroid hormone.
The parathyroid gland produces parathyroid hormone (PTH) when serum calcium levels are low. PTH elevation then causes increased conversion of the precurser 25D to the active 1,25D hormonal form in the kidneys. The elevated 1,25D is thought to lead to increased activation of the VDR, which increases calcium reabsorbtion in the kidneys, intestinal calcium absorbtion and mobilization of calcium from bone. These changes are important to maintain calcium levels within the narrow range necessary for life. However, a prolonged high PTH also increases excretion of phosphorus and has been associated with negative outcomes in bone density and longevity. The conventional view, is that secondary hyperparathyroidism occurs primarily when calcium intake is low or when serum phosphate levels are high (usually due to reduced kidney function) or when vitD status (measured as 25D) is too low.
The levels of serum 25D recommended for optimal PTH levels and calcium absorbtion vary from 16ng/ml to 30ng/ml and above. These recommendations are usually based on cross sectional in which the precurser form of vitD, 25D, has been measured and the level of PTH has been reported. Many studies have used statistical correlational analysis to deterdmine wha blood level of 25D is necessary to avoid an elevated PTH.
This relationship with PTH has led some to conclude that 15-20ng/ml is adequate and led others to conclude 30-40ng/ml of 25D is needed for optimal PTH levels and calcium absorbtion. The intake of vitD needed is said by some vitD proponents to be at least 800-1000IU daily and by others, 2000IU or more although these values exceed the current suggested intake levels set by various government health agencies in Europe and North America. There is reason to question whether even the current 200-600IU are appropriate, especially for some populations.
The following points regarding the causes of elevated parathyroid hormone in secondary hyperparathyroidism (SHPT) can be gleaned from a variety of recent studies. These points show that high levels of vitD ingestion are NOT necessary OR desirable and that CALCIUM supplementation is what deserves the greater focus.
1 PTH and vitD studies often DO NOT take into account calcium intake and thus have been flawed.
A recent study points out one of the flaws in many of the studies on vitD and one of the reasons for their divergence with regard to the 25D intake levels they recommend. Most studies do not ensure adequate CALCIUM intake before assessing the relationship between vitD and PTH. Aloia et al in contrast, did ensure adequate calcium and concluded that 16ng/ml was an adequate 25D level in the calcium replete patients they studied. They did a systematic review of studies that tried to determine the optimal 25D level based on PTH levels. The found that in the studies in which the calcium intake was adequate (exceeding 1000mg daily), the estimated optimal 25D level to avoid SHPT was less than or equal to 20ng/ml (50nmol/L). It was the studies that reported LOWER calcium intake or DID NOT CONSIDER IT AT ALL, that recommended the higher 25D levels.
2 PTH and patient outcome is usually NORMAL when 25D is LOW as long as CALCIUM intake is adequate.
When calcium intake is adequate, Aloia et al found that only a small % of those with low 25D levels had elevated PTH. This as confirmed recently in a study that found that PTH levels were frequently normal in patients even with very low 25D. In these frail elderly patients with normal PTH and low 25D,the bone density and survival were compatible with those with higher vitD levels. By the same token, elevated PTH was associated with a poorer outcome, and this occurred whether or not vitD levels were considered normal or low.
3 Lowering PTH is neither necessary nor sufficient to improve bone status.
Besides the issue of calcium, there are no other flaws in the work relating 25D to PTH. For instance, Schleithoff et al reported that findings in congestive heart failure agreed with previous research showing that " a change in serum PTH levels is not necessary to result in a decrease in bone turnover markers in subjects with improved CALCIUM supply." Thus lowering PTH is not necessary to improve bone density.
Another study showed that lowering PTH is not sufficient to improve bone density.
This was shown in the only study to date to directly compare supplemental calcium alone to vitD alone, which revealed that lowering PTH does not automatically improve BMD. They found that the addition of supplemental calcium alone or vitD alone were both effective in lowering PTH levels. Yet they found that CALCIUM supplementation had a sgnificant benefit for bone density over the 4 years of the study, while the vitD DID NOT.
4 Variation in 25D accounts for only a very small % of PTH variability.
Many studies make it clear that variation in 25D only accounts for a very small % of variation in PTH (eg 4%-10%), especially when there is adequate CALCIUM intake. And other factors, such as low magnesium, increasing age or elevated serum phosphate and creatinine due to kidney disease are also implicated in contributing to elevated PTH. Saleh et al foud that most subjects with elevared PTH had normal values for calcium and vitD intake, as well as fractional calcium absorption. And they concluded that the cause of elevated PTH "is therefore probably a combination of factors." Another study looking at vitD intake, 25D levels and PTH in patients aged from 19 to 97 found a strong relationship between PTH and kidney function as measured by creatinine levels particularly in older age groups. They found strong age related differences in PTH that could not be explained on the basis of vitD intake alone.
More later. | |
|
|
|
Home
login 