Vit D - A very urgent case
Nayyer
or even more. Five nights ago I undersand it and I stopped it. What
should I do now? Am I losing Calcium now? What will happen to me? What
should I do?
Art S
"Nayyer" <nay...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:e0d6064c.02030...@posting.google.com...
I'm not sure I follow.
The general recommendation is to get enough calcium and Vitamin D. Note
that if you are out in the sun for very long, you will get enough Vitamin D
that way.
Why do you think you need Vitamin E?
Art
John
properly use calcium. You get it frm many sources and if you
are out in the sunshine daily for at least an hour, you are
getting enough. If not then a supplement may be the answer.
Second - why would you need Vitamin E? I am unsure of any
link between E and Osteo.
Third- don't worry - none of these can harm you short of
taking megadoses and even then it is questionable.
John
Art S
"John" <jm...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:3C89E92B...@yahoo.com...
> First - Vitamin D is what is required for the body to
> properly use calcium. You get it frm many sources and if you
> are out in the sunshine daily for at least an hour, you are
> getting enough.
John,
Do you have a reference for that (the one hour)?
I tried asking my pharmacist and never did get an answer.
(She was guessing at 15 minutes, but never checked the
literature to confirm it.)
Thanks,
Art
bj
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/002405.htm
for info on Vitamin D
it says 15 minutes 3x a week is enough.
But I've read elsewhere that the quality of the sunshine is also
important; i.e. in northern climes it can be less effective in the
winter so you need more. (go far enough north and there isn't *any*
and yes, people do live there)
bj
"Art S" <TheDabbl...@att.net> wrote in message
news:vqqi8.1827$Ex5.1...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Art S
"bj" <bjon...@bellatlantic.net> wrote in message news:7Jqi8.3863$KK5....@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
> See:
> http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/002405.htm
> for info on Vitamin D
> it says 15 minutes 3x a week is enough.
> But I've read elsewhere that the quality of the sunshine is also
> important; i.e. in northern climes it can be less effective in the
> winter so you need more. (go far enough north and there isn't *any*
> and yes, people do live there)
> bj
>
Interesting.
Thanks,
Art
blueb...@yahoo.ca
>First - Vitamin D is what is required for the body to
>properly use calcium. You get it frm many sources and if you
>are out in the sunshine daily for at least an hour, you are
>getting enough. If not then a supplement may be the answer.
There is a trial going on here in Toronto giving big doses of
Vitamiin D. I am trying to get 800mg per day but those in the trial
are getting more I believe. Here in Canada the amount absorbed from
sun in winter is practically nil.
J Gillen
At least you won't get rickets!
I advise you to tell your doctor straight away....
There are problems with too much Vit D. when the calcium goes into the
blood...
At least you haven't got summer over there, like we have in New Zealand! (s)
Hope someone can help,
Judy.
Nayyer" <nay...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e0d6064c.02030...@posting.google.com...
Tom Warner
> I am trying to get 800mg per day but those in the trial
> are getting more I believe.
Man, that's a lot of Vit D. The RDA is down in the microgram range.
Got any more details on the trial?
All the best,
Tom
--
My ol' grandaddy taught me to always:
Post in plain text
Quote only that portion to which you are replying
Post replies at the bottom
blueb...@yahoo.ca
><blueb...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>
>> I am trying to get 800mg per day but those in the trial
>> are getting more I believe.
>
>Man, that's a lot of Vit D. The RDA is down in the microgram range.
>
>Got any more details on the trial?
>
>All the best,
>Tom
Well -- when I look at my various vitamins some count Vitamin D in
UI and others as mg. I'm really not up on these measurements --
perhaps they mean the same thing?
Regarding the study: It's called POWDER, phone number 416 946 7553
Participants will receive either 600 or 400 units per day, taken once
weekly in a drink. No placebos, all participants will get Vitamin D
After 2 years, density will be tested.
I forgot to see who was doing the study -- maybe the university?
blueb...@yahoo.ca
>Participants will receive either 600 or 400 units per day, taken once
>weekly in a drink. No placebos, all participants will get Vitamin D
>After 2 years, density will be tested.
Sorry I should have said --
either 600 or 4000 units per day!!!!
Nayyer
I did a blood test. The Calcium and Phosphur content of my blood is
in the normal range. Does this mean that everything is ok with me
now?
Art S
"Nayyer" <nay...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:e0d6064c.02031...@posting.google.com...
>
> I did a blood test. The Calcium and Phosphur content of my blood is
> in the normal range. Does this mean that everything is ok with me
> now?
The first question is why are you concerned? Have you been
diagnosed with Osteoporosis or Osteopenia? Do you have relatives
with Osteoporosis and are concerned about it?
If you were diagnosed with Osteoporosis or Osteopenia, how did
they do the diagnosis (DEXA? X-ray? heel scan?) and what were
the results?
Art
John
beyond the normal and your doctor needs to be informed of
this. I have never heard of any benefits of doing this.
john
blueb...@yahoo.ca
>I agree with the others, this much Vitamin D is definitely
>beyond the normal and your doctor needs to be informed of
>this. I have never heard of any benefits of doing this.
>
>john
>
My original post said that I was taking 800mg per day. I
should have said 800 IU. I told my doctor this -- who really goes by
the book -- and she said it was fine. Then I posted information about
a new study being done here in Toronto. Some participants will receive
600 per day and the rest will receive 4000 per day
This group usually has good information but on this point it
looks like there is some piece of missing information, perhaps in our
way of measuring. It is also pretty well understood that the RDA is a
guideline on the poverty side of requirements.
Martin Jakob Larsen
ways to do it. Either in I.U. (International Units) or in 痢 (micrograms):
1 IU is equivalent to 25 ng (0,025 痢).
800 IU = 20 痢 (microgram)
Recomended daily dose, 4-60 years old: 5 痢 (200 IU)
Recomended daily dose, younger & older: 10 痢 (400 IU)
Regards from Denmark.
Martin J. Larsen
stud.scient
University of Southern Denmark
blueb...@yahoo.ca wrote in message news:<jbmv8us8l9kqsqn94...@4ax.com>...
John
the latest published information as well as that which is
given to us by our local specialists. In my case it is the
Metabolic bone unit of Columbia Presbyterian's Medical
center in New York. I do not believe we are missing
anything.
as to the RDA values being low - from where did that
information arise? Can you give us a reference so we cal
enlighten ourselves further...
John
This group usually has good information but on this point it
> looks like there is some piece of missing information, perhaps in our
> way of measuring. It is also pretty well understood that the RDA is a
> guideline on the poverty side of requirements.
blueb...@yahoo.ca
>I disagree wholeheartedly with your conclusion. We are using
>the latest published information as well as that which is
>given to us by our local specialists. In my case it is the
>Metabolic bone unit of Columbia Presbyterian's Medical
>center in New York. I do not believe we are missing
>anything.
>
>as to the RDA values being low - from where did that
>information arise? Can you give us a reference so we cal
>enlighten ourselves further...
>
>John
I admit that over the years I have absorbed LinusPauling's byword --
that the RDA is the amount we need in order avoid illness but it
hasn't yet been studied how much we need for optimum health. I think
the word isn't in on the amounts. That doesn't mean I would take crazy
chances by overdosing with something like Vitamin D. I don't have lots
of source books at my command here but I will quote the amount they
are using in the study and from two books I have here at home. I don't
think they are out of line with other sources I've come across.
THE POWDER STUDY -- Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto (416 946
7553)
[Participants will] Take vitamin D supplement, either 600 or 4000
units per day, in a form that you take once weekly." …."you will add
it to a drink (no pills!)
FROM "ALL ABOUT VITAMINS" by Jack Challem, Avery's FAQs Series
Taking 400 to 800 IU of vitamin D daily is safe for adults. The RDA is
400 IU daily. Very high doses of vitamin D for extended periods of
time can be toxic.
FROM "STRONG WOMEN, STRONG BONES" by Miriam E. Nelson, Ph.D. Schol of
Nutrition Science and Policy, Tufts University
The established safe upper limit for vitamin D is 2000 international
units per day. …. Unless your doctor has suggested a higher amount, I
recommend that you take no more than 600 IU daily.
Reinhold Vieth
D: Evaluation of Responses as quoted here
blueb...@yahoo.ca wrote in message
> UI and others as mg. I'm really not up on these measurements --
> perhaps they mean the same thing?
> Regarding the study: It's called POWDER, phone number 416 946 7553
> Participants will receive either 600 or 400 units per day, taken once
> weekly in a drink. No placebos, all participants will get Vitamin D
> After 2 years, density will be tested.
> I forgot to see who was doing the study -- maybe the university?
The POWDER study is aimed at answering the question, "if you are a
postmenopausal woman who has had bone density done, and it is reported
back to you as normal, will a physiologically natural supply of
vitamin D slow down the progression of bone loss?"
I am the principal investigator of this study, supported by Canadian
Institutes for Health Research. We randomize volunteers to receiving
vitamin D3 in a dose that what works out to either 800 IU or 4200 IU
per day.
Note that the teaspoon-ful of cod-liver oil given to infants contains
400 IU/day to prevent rickets, thus the 4000 IU/day we are trying to
evaluate for adults is only the adult equivalent of the rickets
prevention dose for babies. We have published in Dec 2001 European J
Clin Nutrition that you cannot detect the effect in the blood, of the
officially "recommended" intake of vit D, and thus adults do need a
higher dose of vitamin D to produce a detectable benefit. What needs
to be proven is whether more than 800 IU/day will offer any added
benefit. The research must be done to prove it one way or the other.
In the new units for nutrients (by weight) used in our POWDER study
are daily supplementations of either 20 microgram (often mistakenly
written as mg because the greek letter "mu" is replaced by the roman
"m"; ug to mg errors are common misprints) or 100 microgram (1/10th of
a milligram). Note, that a white person spending 20 min in summer sun
with a bathing suit easily produces 250 microgram of vit D3, so you
see we are well within the "natural" supply of vit D for adults.
Black people, depending on darkness of skin are reported to need up to
6 times longer than white people to produce the SAME dose of vit D via
the skin.
We have had a hard time promoting the POWDER study, and it is
difficult to find healthy people willing to see whether disease can be
prevented. Unfortunately, research is far easier to do on people who
are already sick. We need women who recently had bone density
measured to take part. Right now we are changing our study protocol
to make participation easier for volunteers to take part in the study
(i.e. no visits needed to Mt Sinai Hospital in Toronto, just take the
vitamin D we plan send ).
Reinhold Vieth
p.s. I am curious how you learned of our study.
Reinhold Vieth
inadequacy of "RDA" for vitamin D, as quoted here
John <jm...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<3C913900...@yahoo.com>...
> I disagree wholeheartedly with your conclusion. ...
> as to the RDA values being low - from where did that
> information arise? Can you give us a reference so we cal
> enlighten ourselves further...
> John
In response,
I direct you to the following articles, and several more similar cited
in them, that 200-400 IU daily of vit D has practically NO detectable
effect in the adult. I also point out to you that contrary to popular
belief, there is NO RDA established for vit D. The current FNB
recommendation, and what you get in your multivitamins, is a
guesstimate, called an "adequate intake" (AI). That is, there was NO
appropriate scientific evidence to support the Food and Nutrition
Board's 1997 recommendations for how much vitamin D adults should be
taking. Since then, the data have been coming in, from Toronto, and
several other groups.
Eur J Clin Nutr 2001 Dec;55(12):1091-7
Wintertime vitamin D insufficiency is common in young Canadian women,
and their vitamin D intake does not prevent it.
Vieth R, Cole DE, Hawker GA, Trang HM, Rubin LA.
Here is a shortened version of its abstract:
OBJECTIVE: We asked whether women self-reporting the recommended
consumption of vitamin D from milk and multivitamins would be less
likely to have low wintertime 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) levels.
METHODS: This cross-sectional study enlisted at least 42 young women
each month (age 18-35 y, 796 women total) through one year. We
measured serum 25(OH)D and prevalence of low 25(OH)D (<40 nmol/l) was
21% of the 146 consuming no vitamin D, in 26% of the 140
reporting some vitamin D intake, up to 5 microg/day (median, 2.5
microg/day), and in 20% of the 149 women reporting vitamin D
consumption over 5 microg/day (median, 10 microg/day).
INTERPRETATION: The self-reported vitamin D intake from milk and/or
multivitamins does not relate to prevention of low vitamin D
nutritional status of young women in winter. Recommended vitamin D
intakes are too small to prevent insufficiency.
2: Am J Clin Nutr 2001 Feb;73(2):288-94
Efficacy and safety of vitamin D3 intake exceeding the lowest observed
adverse effect level. Vieth R, Chan PC, MacFarlane GD.
This article shows just how much vit D3 an adult needs to hit
desirable targets in terms of the 25D level in the blood. And the Dec
2001 issue of AJCN has editorial followup on this.
John, if you still think the "RDA" is appropriate for vit D in adults,
then I would ask you to cite evidence to show that it is. I am
comfortable in predicting that you will find nothing solid on that.
Best wishes,
Reinhold Vieth
blueb...@yahoo.ca
Vieth) wrote:
>Concerning the POWDER Study: Prevention of Osteoporosis With vitamin
>D: Evaluation of Responses as quoted here
>blueb...@yahoo.ca wrote in message
...< >....
>The POWDER study is aimed at answering the question, "if you are a
>postmenopausal woman who has had bone density done, and it is reported
...<>...
>I am the principal investigator of this study, supported by Canadian
>Institutes for Health Research. We randomize volunteers to receiving
>vitamin D3 in a dose that what works out to either 800 IU or 4200 IU
>per day.
>
...< >...
>
>Reinhold Vieth
>
>p.s. I am curious how you learned of our study.
It was posted in the exercise club where I work out. I was
amazed at the amount of 4000 you are using in your study. So thank you
for clarifying this. I see now that taking 800 IU per day is not
overdoing it. I was worried about toxicity -- one source says that
you'd have to take 65,000 per day for an extended period to get a
toxic dose. Does that make sense to you?
Nikole
Nayyer
Dear Art
I have used Vit d 50,000 by mistake for about or more than two months.
I really don't know how many I have eaten. THe only test I can do in
my country is the determination of Calcium and phosphur content which
I have done and they have been in a normal range. But I am still
worried about my livre and also my bons, because i am 46 and I am
already monopause.