![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 8 of 8. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Netch on February 27, 2008, at 8:46:21
Presented by Michael Holick, PhD, MD, Professor of medicine, physiology and biophysics
and director of the General Clinical Research Center at Boston University Medical Center
Posted by ClearSkies on February 28, 2008, at 10:29:39
In reply to The Vitamin D Pandemic and its Health Consequences, posted by Netch on February 27, 2008, at 8:46:21
My gyn mentioned to me to be sure to get enough D in my diet; that even though I live in the Sunshine State, so many of the skin preparations I use are made with sunscreens, I may not be getting enough because of what I'm screening out for my body to be able to utilize calcium properly. She's been seeing it in her practice, and told me to make sure I get 10 minutes of sun exposure a day, and to make certain my calcium supplement also has Vit D in it.
Thanks for the link.
ClearSkies
Posted by bleauberry on February 28, 2008, at 18:25:53
In reply to The Vitamin D Pandemic and its Health Consequences, posted by Netch on February 27, 2008, at 8:46:21
It is strange how theories collide. I was at a site the other day where they treat people for haywire immune systems, with resistant depression as a common trait. They do it with a drug that sensitizes certain receptors and also with longterm antibiotics. But the main most important part of the protocol is...zero vitamin D, you even have to wear sunglasses indoors! Absolutely zero vitamin D. Their very technical scientific explanation is that too much vitamin D is what causes the cascade of events that throws everything else out of whack.
So who knows. I am still in the camp that says take vitamin D if you think you aren't getting enough. Or if your lab test says you aren't getting enough. It is easy to test for.
As in all things, do it healthy and in moderation. I think that's where the human body takes care of itself the best.
Posted by Netch on February 29, 2008, at 6:12:49
In reply to Re: The Vitamin D Pandemic and its Health Consequences, posted by bleauberry on February 28, 2008, at 18:25:53
I get the feeling there is a paradigm shift going on right now when it comes to vitamin D and toxicity. Science is beginning to understand that vitamin D is not as toxic as they once believed.
But it's a sensitive topic and I think Michael Holick also suffered from this when he got sacked.Strange enought I do not tolerate fish liver oil very well but I seem to tolerate synthetic vitamin D3 much better. Right now I'm testing 2000 IU of vitamin D3.
Safe upper limit is considered to be 2000 IU but now some claim upper limit to be anything from 3800 IU (lowest dose with adverse effect) to 10 000 IU (maximum endogenous production of vitamin D3 from sun exposure)
"All of the reports of vitamin D toxicity showing the convincing evidence of hypercalcemia involve serum 25(OH)D concentrations well above 200 nmol/L (Table 5), which requires a daily intake of 1000 µg (40000 IU), and which could thus be conservatively considered the LOAEL. "http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/69/5/842
/Netch
Posted by zatar on March 2, 2008, at 23:19:40
In reply to The Vitamin D Pandemic and its Health Consequences, posted by Netch on February 27, 2008, at 8:46:21
I just saw an Endocrinologist for a low vitamin D level, among other things, who said it is pandemic, even in Florida where we live, with all that sunshine.
Two months of vitamin D3 emulsion drops have brought my levels back to normal. BUT, I caution anyone NOT TO TAKE VITAMIN D WITHOUT HAVING THEIR BLOOD LEVELS DRAWN due to serious side effects of too much vitamin D. Levels must be monitored.
-zatar
> Presented by Michael Holick, PhD, MD, Professor of medicine, physiology and biophysics
> and director of the General Clinical Research Center at Boston University Medical Center
>
> http://www.uvadvantage.org/portals/0/pres/
Posted by cumulative on March 3, 2008, at 7:00:08
In reply to Re: The Vitamin D Pandemic and its Health Consequences, posted by bleauberry on February 28, 2008, at 18:25:53
I know the anti-D group you mentioned. I don't buy it at all. There's a good discussion on imminst.
Posted by bleauberry on March 4, 2008, at 17:31:10
In reply to Re: bleauberry, posted by cumulative on March 3, 2008, at 7:00:08
> I know the anti-D group you mentioned. I don't buy it at all. There's a good discussion on imminst.
Yeah, me too. I did spend an hour or so reading a bunch of their stuff. It tends to make sense in some ways, but then my gut instinct says it is nonsense. It is so scientifically detailed I doubt even 1% of professionals out there could even begin to understand what it all means. I mean, if someone is going to have a good reason why vitamin D is bad, they had better at least be able to explain it in a way where any regular person could understand it. Even if it is legit, I have read the horror stories of people taking the drugs in that protocol. Not only is the avoiding D thing a major problem in every day living, but the effects of those drugs is downright devastating. People get so sick they can't even work or function, and yet they are expected to wait it out for months on end to reach the supposed successful end.
What I found real interesting was that a good number of their patients left and went back to chelation treatments. Ahhh, chelation. The true cause of whacko immune systems? I don't think it is vitamin D. If it is, it is only a sidenote caused by something else. That something else is mercury and lead. Those people who left the study to back to chelation were, in my opinion, extremely smart wise people. They truly understand the root cause of perplexing illnesses of all kinds. The hidden deceptive powerful culprit is Hg, not D.
Posted by Mistermindmasta on March 17, 2008, at 11:11:52
In reply to Re: bleauberry » cumulative, posted by bleauberry on March 4, 2008, at 17:31:10
I've read a LOT of well written and well organized studies on vitamin D and pretty much all of them say that people with various disease states can benefit from vit D supplementation. Depression, immmune system disorders, etc. While I can't remember specifics anymore, I can be confident enough to say that it would be extremely surprisingly if eliminating all forms of vitamin D could ever have any positive influence on disease states. It's completely against the real science out there. For most of us, we could easily go with a 4,000 IU supplement per day with no ill effects unless you live in Florida and tan every single day. I live in the northeast US and have taken 4,000 IU with only positive effects for the past year or so.
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Alternative | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.