Re: Vitamin D Reduces Risk of Diabetes by 75%!!!!!

[Guest guest]

I suppose this means that we should not be too eager to avoid moderate

exposure to sunshine. Because of the concerns about skin cancer

(which are very real for those who spend many hours in the sun) we

have been scared into avoiding the sun altogether and covering

ourselves with SPF 40 sunblock before we even go outdoors. I have

read in several books that exposure to the sun converts cholesterol

into Vitamin D precursors (the chemical structure of cholesterol and

Vitamin D3 differ only in a couple of double bonds). The benefits of

sunlight seem to be many: reduced cholesterol, Vitamin D production

(which builds stronger bones), prevention of Seasonal Affective

Disorder, and now ... reduced risk of diabetes.

Tony

>>>

From: " Rodney " <perspect1111@y...>

Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 9:01 pm

Subject: Vitamin D Reduces Risk of Diabetes by 75%!!!!!

http://snipurl.com/b778

>>>

Dec 03 (Reuters Health) - As blood levels of vitamin D increase, the

risk of diabetes decreases in non-Hispanic whites and Mexican

Americans -- but not in blacks -- researchers have found.

The findings may " offer an explanation, in part, for the generally

lower prevalence of type 2 diabetes observed in Caucasian populations

around the world compared with other ethnicities, " Dr. Scragg,

from the University of Auckland in New Zealand, and colleagues suggest

in the medical journal Diabetes Care.

The results are based on a study of 6228 subjects, representative of

the US population, who participated in the Third National Health and

Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES III, so-called).

Whites with the highest vitamin D levels had only one quarter the risk

of having diabetes compared to those with the lowest levels. For

Mexican Americans, the comparative risk dropped even further.

The reason why this pattern was not seen in blacks is unclear, but the

researchers believe it may " reflect decreased sensitivity to vitamin D

and/or related hormones " in this group.

The team calls for further research to confirm the findings and to

pinpoint underlying mechanisms, but notes that simple and cheap ways

to increase vitamin D levels are readily available.

SOURCE: Diabetes Care, December 2004.

[Guest guest]

Hi Francesca:

I have serious doubts that sunshine in winter in northern latitudes,

being filtered through much more of the atmosphere than in summer,

even contains enough of the wavelength of light required to generate

vitamin D, even if you were naked.

I noted in the spring that my indoor tarragon plants, that had been

in full sun all winter and been in hibernation, sprang to life as the

sun got higher in the sky along with the plants outside. Since the

indoor plants were still at the same temperature as they had been all

winter it does seem that either the higher angle of the sun or the

longer days are what causes plants to grow. Could it be a lack of

important nutrients produced by leaves in insufficient quantities in

reduced sunlight?

This is speculation, of course. But whatever, it does seem clear

that one should be ABSOLUTELY sure not to be on the low side in

vitamin D intake. Of course it is toxic in high doses. I remember a

discussion here with on this issue some months back. Can

anyone remember what we concluded was the upper safe daily limit for

vitamin D?

(I VAGUELY remember it was 3000 I.U.. I believe it was suggested

that you can get 10,000 a day from exposure to sunlight. But I do

not want to get this statistic wrong. So, as always, caveat

swallowor).

This source says upper safe limit for vitamin D is 2000 IU, fwiw:

http://www..net/info/vitamin_a_d.pdf

Rodney.

>

> >

> > I suppose this means that we should not be too eager to avoid

moderate

> > exposure to sunshine. Because of the concerns about skin cancer

> > (which are very real for those who spend many hours in the sun) we

> > have been scared into avoiding the sun altogether and covering

> > ourselves with SPF 40 sunblock before we even go outdoors. I have

> > read in several books that exposure to the sun converts

cholesterol

> > into Vitamin D precursors (the chemical structure of cholesterol

and

> > Vitamin D3 differ only in a couple of double bonds). The

benefits of

> > sunlight seem to be many: reduced cholesterol, Vitamin D

production

> > (which builds stronger bones), prevention of Seasonal Affective

> > Disorder, and now ... reduced risk of diabetes.

> >

> > Tony

> >

[Guest guest]

I wonder how many Caucasians/ Hispanics that work in the sun every day, have diabetes?

Regards.

----- Original Message -----

From: Rodney

Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 8:01 PM

Subject: [ ] Vitamin D Reduces Risk of Diabetes by 75%!!!!!

Hi folks:Yes. Vitamin D AGAIN:http://www.heartcenteronline.com/myheartdr/home/research-detail.cfm?reutersid=4906 & nl=4http://snipurl.com/b778Astonishing.Rodney.

[Guest guest]

Hi JW:

Well the study that originated this thread found that there appeared

to be benefit for those with high blood levels of vitamin D.

Presumably this rules out the possibility the benefit is from some

other - non-vitamin D - result of sunlight.

But there is the issue of whether supplements are adequate to raise

blood levels. As discussed here before, at least for some people, at

least some supplements do not raise blood vitamin D, apparently.

Rodney.

--- In , " jwwright " <jwwright@e...>

wrote:

> Notice you just changed subjects. sun versus a vit d pill.

>

> ----- Original Message -----

> From: Rodney

>

> Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 2:49 PM

> Subject: [ ] Re: Vitamin D Reduces Risk of Diabetes

by 75%!!!!!

>

>

>

> Hi Francesca:

>

> I have serious doubts that sunshine in winter in northern

latitudes,

> being filtered through much more of the atmosphere than in

summer,

> even contains enough of the wavelength of light required to

generate

> vitamin D, even if you were naked.

>

> I noted in the spring that my indoor tarragon plants, that had

been

> in full sun all winter and been in hibernation, sprang to life as

the

> sun got higher in the sky along with the plants outside. Since

the

> indoor plants were still at the same temperature as they had been

all

> winter it does seem that either the higher angle of the sun or

the

> longer days are what causes plants to grow. Could it be a lack

of

> important nutrients produced by leaves in insufficient quantities

in

> reduced sunlight?

>

> This is speculation, of course. But whatever, it does seem clear

> that one should be ABSOLUTELY sure not to be on the low side in

> vitamin D intake. Of course it is toxic in high doses. I

remember a

> discussion here with on this issue some months back.

Can

> anyone remember what we concluded was the upper safe daily limit

for

> vitamin D?

>

> (I VAGUELY remember it was 3000 I.U.. I believe it was suggested

> that you can get 10,000 a day from exposure to sunlight. But I

do

> not want to get this statistic wrong. So, as always, caveat

> swallowor).

>

> This source says upper safe limit for vitamin D is 2000 IU, fwiw:

>

> http://www..net/info/vitamin_a_d.pdf

>

> Rodney.