Re: Study shows adverse effects from > 800 ug/d daily iodine intake

[Guest guest]

Why post this? It's just a bunch of lies!

Kathleen

moderator

Study shows adverse effects from > 800 ug/d daily iodine intake

Here's a study about the safe upper limit of iodine that will get you all riled up.http://www.ajcn.org/content/early/2011/12/26/ajcn.111.028001.abstractExploration of the safe upper level of iodine intake in euthyroid Chinese adults: a randomized double-blind trial1,2,3AbstractBackground: The beneficial health effects associated with Universal Salt Iodization are well known. Yet, little is known about the possible adverse health effects in people with high iodine intake and the safe daily intake upper limit in the Chinese population. Objective: The objective of this study was to explore the safe upper level of total daily iodine intake among adults in China. Design: A 4-wk, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized controlled trial was conducted in 256 euthyroid adults. Participants were randomly assigned to 12 intervention groups with various iodine supplement doses ranging from 0 to 2000 & #956;g/d. Total iodine intake included iodine from both supplements and diet. Multiple outcome measures were used to evaluate possible adverse effects, including thyroid function, thyroid size, and urinary iodine. Results: The mean iodine intake from the diets and salt intake of the participants were 105 ± 25 and 258 ± 101 & #956;g/d, respectively. In comparison with the placebo group, all iodide-supplemented groups responded with significant increases in median urinary iodine concentrations (P < 0.05) and in thyroid-stimulating hormone concentration (P < 0.05). Thyroid volume decreased after 4 wk in the high-iodine intervention groups (1500-2000 & #956;g). Subclinical hypothyroidism appeared in the groups that received 400 & #956;g I (5%) and 500-2000 & #956;g I (15-47%). Conclusions: This study showed that subclinical hypothyroidism appeared in the participants who took the 400- & #956;g I supplement, which provided a total iodine intake of & #8764;800 & #956;g/d. Thus, we caution against a total daily iodine intake that exceeds 800 & #956;g/d in China and recommend further research to determine a safe daily upper limit. Received January 3, 2011. Accepted November 16, 2011.

[Guest guest]

I agree with Kathleen. We all know there are lies about iodine all over the

internet

and almost all science done about iodine is predicated in the scientific fraud

that is

the Wolff-Chaikoff Effect. So we really don't need to have posts of the lies

here.

--

moderator

On 19 Jan 2012 at 15:05, Kathleen Blake wrote:

>

>

>

> Why post this? It's just a bunch of lies!

> Kathleen

> moderator

> Study shows adverse effects from > 800 ug/d

> daily iodine intake

>

>

> Here's a study about the safe upper limit of iodine that will get you

> all riled up.

>

> http://www.ajcn.org/content/early/2011/12/26/ajcn.111.028001.abstract

> Exploration of the safe upper level of iodine intake in euthyroid

> Chinese adults: a randomized double-blind trial1,2,3

>

> Abstract

>

> Background: The beneficial health effects associated with Universal

> Salt Iodization are well known. Yet, little is known about the

> possible adverse health effects in people with high iodine intake and

> the safe daily intake upper limit in the Chinese population.

>

> Objective: The objective of this study was to explore the safe upper

> level of total daily iodine intake among adults in China.

>

> Design: A 4-wk, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized

> controlled trial was conducted in 256 euthyroid adults. Participants

> were randomly assigned to 12 intervention groups with various iodine

> supplement doses ranging from 0 to 2000 & #956;g/d. Total iodine intake

> included iodine from both supplements and diet. Multiple outcome

> measures were used to evaluate possible adverse effects, including

> thyroid function, thyroid size, and urinary iodine.

>

> Results: The mean iodine intake from the diets and salt intake of the

> participants were 105 ± 25 and 258 ± 101 & #956;g/d, respectively. In

> comparison with the placebo group, all iodide-supplemented groups

> responded with significant increases in median urinary iodine

> concentrations (P < 0.05) and in thyroid-stimulating hormone

> concentration (P < 0.05). Thyroid volume decreased after 4 wk in the

> high- iodine intervention groups (1500-2000 & #956;g). Subclinical

> hypothyroidism appeared in the groups that received 400 & #956;g I (5%)

> and 500-2000 & #956;g I (15-47%).

>

> Conclusions: This study showed that subclinical hypothyroidism

> appeared in the participants who took the 400- & #956;g I supplement,

> which provided a total iodine intake of & #8764;800 & #956;g/d. Thus, we

> caution against a total daily iodine intake that exceeds 800 & #956;g/d

> in China and recommend further research to determine a safe daily

> upper limit. Received January 3, 2011. Accepted November 16, 2011.

[Guest guest]

Hello Kathleen and All,

It is better to study the study and try to understand the reason they got the

results they did....

First, it was only a 4 week study....the subjects would be heavy into the detox

period, mobilizing the many many xenoestrogens and environmental chemicals into

active metabolism that are known already to compromise thyroid function and

biochemical pathways, including lowering the parameters they measured.

Second, it was China....one of the most polluted areas on Earth! And that ties

in with the above....

Now if they would have continued the trial longer to see the long term effects,

and also measured the rest of the parameters on thyroid that we can...ie:

autoimmune antibodies, rT3, liver enzymes, other autoimmune diseases that are

assoc with thyroid like CFS, fibromyalgia, RA; and also measured other body

responses like syndromes of diabetes, obesity, mood, productivity (the Chinese

would really be interested in that!), learning abilities etc etc etc....then

they would have a study worth studying! And they did not say exactly where the

study was conducted....China is a huge place...was it downwind from one of their

totally environmentally polluting factories? This we need to know...likely it

was done in some urban area and not in the more relatively clean mountains....

To your good health!

Linsey

Vita Royal Products, Inc.

Biochemist | CEO

vitaroyalproducts.com