- Joined
- Apr 10, 2010
- Messages
- 2,606
My rheumatologist said I was vitamin D deficient a few years ago. After supplementing with 4000 iu of D3 per day for a while, a follow up blood test showed I was above 50, so I have been maintaining that dose.
A DEXA scan (to measure bone density) two years ago revealed osteopenia (precursor to osteoporosis) so I've been supplementing with calcium orotate daily. The supplementation, and maybe daily smoothies containing yogurt in the summer, helped increase my bone density as revealed in more recent DEXA scan results late last summer so I'm happy about that. Still trying to get out of osteopenia range, though. Maybe I'll start making smoothies without ice during the non-summer months. I prefer the ones with ice, though, because I make them have a consistency of a milkshake. Yum. Too cold when the weather gets cooler, though.
Back to vitamin D. It looks like the recommended daily allowance and optimum level has increased after discovery earlier this year of mistake in prior research which lead to lower values.
Abstract: Since 2006, type 1 diabetes in Finland has plateaued and then decreased after the authorities’ decision to fortify dietary milk products with cholecalciferol. The role of vitamin D in innate and adaptive immunity is critical. A statistical error in the estimation of the recommended dietary allowance (RDA) for vitamin D was recently discovered; in a correct analysis of the data used by the Institute of Medicine, it was found that 8895 IU/d was needed for 97.5% of individuals to achieve values ≥50 nmol/L. Another study confirmed that 6201 IU/d was needed to achieve 75 nmol/L and 9122 IU/d was needed to reach 100 nmol/L. The largest meta-analysis ever conducted of studies published between 1966 and 2013 showed that 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels <75 nmol/L may be too low for safety and associated with higher all-cause mortality, demolishing the previously presumed U-shape curve of mortality associated with vitamin D levels. Since all-disease mortality is reduced to 1.0 with serum vitamin D levels ≥100 nmol/L, we call public health authorities to consider designating as the RDA at least three-fourths of the levels proposed by the Endocrine Society Expert Committee as safe upper tolerable daily intake doses. This could lead to a recommendation of 1000 IU for children <1 year on enriched formula and 1500 IU for breastfed children older than 6 months, 3000 IU for children >1 year of age, and around 8000 IU for young adults and thereafter. Actions are urgently needed to protect the global population from vitamin D deficiency.
Conclusion: Unfortunately, medicine took a very long time to realize that vitamin D is not simply a vitamin that prevents rickets. For that purpose, 400-600 IU/d may be enough. However, we know today that vitamin D is a powerful nuclear receptor-activating hormone of critical importance, especially to the immune system. With the available data mentioned above, the proposed doses would probably suffice to maintain vitamin D levels around or over 75-100 nmol/L, with practically zero risk of toxicity. Undeniably, further studies are needed to clarify the optimal supplementation of vitamin D, although it is uncertain whether a universal recommended dietary allowance is feasible. Meanwhile, actions are urgently needed to protect the global population from the threats posed by vitamin D deficiency.
ETA: quoted study here https://www.jpmph.org/journal/view.php?doi=10.3961/jpmph.16.111
A DEXA scan (to measure bone density) two years ago revealed osteopenia (precursor to osteoporosis) so I've been supplementing with calcium orotate daily. The supplementation, and maybe daily smoothies containing yogurt in the summer, helped increase my bone density as revealed in more recent DEXA scan results late last summer so I'm happy about that. Still trying to get out of osteopenia range, though. Maybe I'll start making smoothies without ice during the non-summer months. I prefer the ones with ice, though, because I make them have a consistency of a milkshake. Yum. Too cold when the weather gets cooler, though.
Back to vitamin D. It looks like the recommended daily allowance and optimum level has increased after discovery earlier this year of mistake in prior research which lead to lower values.
Abstract: Since 2006, type 1 diabetes in Finland has plateaued and then decreased after the authorities’ decision to fortify dietary milk products with cholecalciferol. The role of vitamin D in innate and adaptive immunity is critical. A statistical error in the estimation of the recommended dietary allowance (RDA) for vitamin D was recently discovered; in a correct analysis of the data used by the Institute of Medicine, it was found that 8895 IU/d was needed for 97.5% of individuals to achieve values ≥50 nmol/L. Another study confirmed that 6201 IU/d was needed to achieve 75 nmol/L and 9122 IU/d was needed to reach 100 nmol/L. The largest meta-analysis ever conducted of studies published between 1966 and 2013 showed that 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels <75 nmol/L may be too low for safety and associated with higher all-cause mortality, demolishing the previously presumed U-shape curve of mortality associated with vitamin D levels. Since all-disease mortality is reduced to 1.0 with serum vitamin D levels ≥100 nmol/L, we call public health authorities to consider designating as the RDA at least three-fourths of the levels proposed by the Endocrine Society Expert Committee as safe upper tolerable daily intake doses. This could lead to a recommendation of 1000 IU for children <1 year on enriched formula and 1500 IU for breastfed children older than 6 months, 3000 IU for children >1 year of age, and around 8000 IU for young adults and thereafter. Actions are urgently needed to protect the global population from vitamin D deficiency.
Conclusion: Unfortunately, medicine took a very long time to realize that vitamin D is not simply a vitamin that prevents rickets. For that purpose, 400-600 IU/d may be enough. However, we know today that vitamin D is a powerful nuclear receptor-activating hormone of critical importance, especially to the immune system. With the available data mentioned above, the proposed doses would probably suffice to maintain vitamin D levels around or over 75-100 nmol/L, with practically zero risk of toxicity. Undeniably, further studies are needed to clarify the optimal supplementation of vitamin D, although it is uncertain whether a universal recommended dietary allowance is feasible. Meanwhile, actions are urgently needed to protect the global population from the threats posed by vitamin D deficiency.
ETA: quoted study here https://www.jpmph.org/journal/view.php?doi=10.3961/jpmph.16.111