Guest guest Posted October 22, 2009 Report Share Posted October 22, 2009 Hi folks: I recently received an email from a member who apparently is shy about posting here. He asked that if I thought it was worthwhile, would I like to post a link he had found which provides a great deal of information on vitamin D. I don't know much about the organization - GrassRootsHealth - but it appears to be associated with a number of campuses of the University of California. So it seems likely that it is reliable. There is some pretty interesting data at the site, including the following chart which shows, in graphical form, the reduction in risk for several diseases afforded by various given levels of serum 25(OH)D. http://www.grassrootshealth.net/media/download/disease_incidence_prev_chart_1016\ 08.pdf This is the site's home page link: http://www.grassrootshealth.net/ A couple of videos are also available there, presented by Carole Baggerly and Cedric Garland, that I found worth watching, discussing a possible 75% reduction in overall cancer incidence. Also on vitamin D, my (very enlightened) GP indicated that in her opinion, once one had raised serum 25(OH)D to above 70 nmol/L, 2000 IU of D daily was the most she felt able to recommend. She also indicated that she doubted a high serum vitamin D level would prevent flu. Of course it is important for her, as well as all other physicians these days, to do nothing out of the ordinary that might end up being a cause for lawsuits. Adhering to the current conventional wisdom appears to be the best approach to maintaining reasonable levels of malpractice insurance premiums. Perhaps in a year or two, when/if the upper safe limit for vitamin D is raised sizeably above the current 2000 IU level, she will feel safe in recommending higher intakes. Also at the GrassRootsHealth website there is a notification of an upcoming - ten days from now - full day seminar, featuring many of the world's leading authorities on vitamin D, which is to take place at the University of Toronto. I will be attending this meeting, fwiw. Of course I will report any new information revealed at the meeting which has not already been posted here. Rodney. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 22, 2009 Report Share Posted October 22, 2009 Hi Rodney, I looked at the paper and the charts in your post which are informative, but I think that the grassrootshealth.net website is mostly geared toward marketing tests for Vitamin D, rather than for disseminating information about Vitamin D. All the FAQ page seems to be aimed toward marketing. Tony > > > > Hi folks: > > > > I recently received an email from a member who apparently is shy about posting here. He asked that if I thought it was worthwhile, would I like to post a link he had found which provides a great deal of information on vitamin D. > > > > I don't know much about the organization - GrassRootsHealth - but it appears to be associated with a number of campuses of the University of California. So it seems likely that it is reliable. There is some pretty interesting data at the site, including the following chart which shows, in graphical form, the reduction in risk for several diseases afforded by various given levels of serum 25(OH)D. > > > > http://www.grassrootshealth.net/media/download/disease_incidence_prev_chart_1016\ 08.pdf > > > > This is the site's home page link: > > > > http://www.grassrootshealth.net/ > > > > A couple of videos are also available there, presented by Carole Baggerly and Cedric Garland, that I found worth watching, discussing a possible 75% reduction in overall cancer incidence. > > > > Also on vitamin D, my (very enlightened) GP indicated that in her opinion, once one had raised serum 25(OH)D to above 70 nmol/L, 2000 IU of D daily was the most she felt able to recommend. She also indicated that she doubted a high serum vitamin D level would prevent flu. Of course it is important for her, as well as all other physicians these days, to do nothing out of the ordinary that might end up being a cause for lawsuits. Adhering to the current conventional wisdom appears to be the best approach to maintaining reasonable levels of malpractice insurance premiums. Perhaps in a year or two, when/if the upper safe limit for vitamin D is raised sizeably above the current 2000 IU level, she will feel safe in recommending higher intakes. > > > > Also at the GrassRootsHealth website there is a notification of an upcoming - ten days from now - full day seminar, featuring many of the world's leading authorities on vitamin D, which is to take place at the University of Toronto. I will be attending this meeting, fwiw. Of course I will report any new information revealed at the meeting which has not already been posted here. > > > > Rodney. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 Hi folks: I also had my B12 tested again. You may recall that about six months ago, at the other end of this very wide country, I was 'diagnosed' as appreciably deficient B12, with my metric units number coming in at around 120, compared with the 'low safe threshold' of 150. Since then I have been supplementing 1000 mcg daily. My new number (507) is almost three-and-one-half times the 'low safe threshold' number! My GP says she finds it difficult to believe, even given the supplements I was taking, that my number could go so high in just six months. Her conclusion is that I am certainly not having a problem absorbing B12, which had been assumed previously. In any event, the point that may be of interest for this group is that if you have a B12 deficiency you certainly want to know about it, and fix it, one way or another. So testing for it is desirable. My folate level was also checked. It came in at ten times the 'low safe threshold' level. I used to take one folate pill weekly. But now it looks like the fortification of bread with folate makes supplements of it redundant - at least for me. fwiw Rodney. > > >>> > > > > >>> > > Hi folks: > > >>> > > > > >>> > > I recently received an email from a member who apparently is shy about > > >>> posting here. He asked that if I thought it was worthwhile, would I like to > > >>> post a link he had found which provides a great deal of information on > > >>> vitamin D. > > >>> > > > > >>> > > I don't know much about the organization - GrassRootsHealth - but it > > >>> appears to be associated with a number of campuses of the University of > > >>> California. So it seems likely that it is reliable. There is some pretty > > >>> interesting data at the site, including the following chart which shows, in > > >>> graphical form, the reduction in risk for several diseases afforded by > > >>> various given levels of serum 25(OH)D. > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> http://www.grassrootshealth.net/media/download/disease_incidence_prev_chart_ > > >>> 101608.pdf > > >>> > > > > >>> > > This is the site's home page link: > > >>> > > > > >>> > > http://www.grassrootshealth.net/ > > >>> > > > > >>> > > A couple of videos are also available there, presented by Carole > > >>> Baggerly and Cedric Garland, that I found worth watching, discussing a > > >>> possible 75% reduction in overall cancer incidence. > > >>> > > > > >>> > > Also on vitamin D, my (very enlightened) GP indicated that in her > > >>> opinion, once one had raised serum 25(OH)D to above 70 nmol/L, 2000 IU of D > > >>> daily was the most she felt able to recommend. She also indicated that she > > >>> doubted a high serum vitamin D level would prevent flu. Of course it is > > >>> important for her, as well as all other physicians these days, to do nothing > > >>> out of the ordinary that might end up being a cause for lawsuits. Adhering > > >>> to the current conventional wisdom appears to be the best approach to > > >>> maintaining reasonable levels of malpractice insurance premiums. Perhaps in > > >>> a year or two, when/if the upper safe limit for vitamin D is raised sizeably > > >>> above the current 2000 IU level, she will feel safe in recommending higher > > >>> intakes. > > >>> > > > > >>> > > Also at the GrassRootsHealth website there is a notification of an > > >>> upcoming - ten days from now - full day seminar, featuring many of the > > >>> world's leading authorities on vitamin D, which is to take place at the > > >>> University of Toronto. I will be attending this meeting, fwiw. Of course I > > >>> will report any new information revealed at the meeting which has not > > >>> already been posted here. > > >>> > > > > >>> > > Rodney. > > >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 Quick question, was the former low B12 an established pattern over multiple test periods or one low test, followed by supplements and the later normal-high test? JR On Oct 25, 2009, at 1:47 PM, perspect1111 wrote: Hi folks: I also had my B12 tested again. You may recall that about six months ago, at the other end of this very wide country, I was 'diagnosed' as appreciably deficient B12, with my metric units number coming in at around 120, compared with the 'low safe threshold' of 150. Since then I have been supplementing 1000 mcg daily. My new number (507) is almost three-and-one-half times the 'low safe threshold' number! My GP says she finds it difficult to believe, even given the supplements I was taking, that my number could go so high in just six months. Her conclusion is that I am certainly not having a problem absorbing B12, which had been assumed previously. In any event, the point that may be of interest for this group is that if you have a B12 deficiency you certainly want to know about it, and fix it, one way or another. So testing for it is desirable. My folate level was also checked. It came in at ten times the 'low safe threshold' level. I used to take one folate pill weekly. But now it looks like the fortification of bread with folate makes supplements of it redundant - at least for me. fwiw Rodney. > > >>> > > > > >>> > > Hi folks: > > >>> > > > > >>> > > I recently received an email from a member who apparently is shy about > > >>> posting here. He asked that if I thought it was worthwhile, would I like to > > >>> post a link he had found which provides a great deal of information on > > >>> vitamin D. > > >>> > > > > >>> > > I don't know much about the organization - GrassRootsHealth - but it > > >>> appears to be associated with a number of campuses of the University of > > >>> California. So it seems likely that it is reliable. There is some pretty > > >>> interesting data at the site, including the following chart which shows, in > > >>> graphical form, the reduction in risk for several diseases afforded by > > >>> various given levels of serum 25(OH)D. > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> http://www.grassrootshealth.net/media/download/disease_incidence_prev_chart_ > > >>> 101608.pdf > > >>> > > > > >>> > > This is the site's home page link: > > >>> > > > > >>> > > http://www.grassrootshealth.net/ > > >>> > > > > >>> > > A couple of videos are also available there, presented by Carole > > >>> Baggerly and Cedric Garland, that I found worth watching, discussing a > > >>> possible 75% reduction in overall cancer incidence. > > >>> > > > > >>> > > Also on vitamin D, my (very enlightened) GP indicated that in her > > >>> opinion, once one had raised serum 25(OH)D to above 70 nmol/L, 2000 IU of D > > >>> daily was the most she felt able to recommend. She also indicated that she > > >>> doubted a high serum vitamin D level would prevent flu. Of course it is > > >>> important for her, as well as all other physicians these days, to do nothing > > >>> out of the ordinary that might end up being a cause for lawsuits. Adhering > > >>> to the current conventional wisdom appears to be the best approach to > > >>> maintaining reasonable levels of malpractice insurance premiums. Perhaps in > > >>> a year or two, when/if the upper safe limit for vitamin D is raised sizeably > > >>> above the current 2000 IU level, she will feel safe in recommending higher > > >>> intakes. > > >>> > > > > >>> > > Also at the GrassRootsHealth website there is a notification of an > > >>> upcoming - ten days from now - full day seminar, featuring many of the > > >>> world's leading authorities on vitamin D, which is to take place at the > > >>> University of Toronto. I will be attending this meeting, fwiw. Of course I > > >>> will report any new information revealed at the meeting which has not > > >>> already been posted here. > > >>> > > > > >>> > > Rodney. > > >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 26, 2009 Report Share Posted October 26, 2009 Thanks for sharing your B12 results. Â Did you notice a difference in how you felt when your levels were low vs. after supplementation?Thanks, On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 12:47 PM, perspect1111 <perspect1111@...> wrote: Â Hi folks: I also had my B12 tested again. You may recall that about six months ago, at the other end of this very wide country, I was 'diagnosed' as appreciably deficient B12, with my metric units number coming in at around 120, compared with the 'low safe threshold' of 150. Since then I have been supplementing 1000 mcg daily. My new number (507) is almost three-and-one-half times the 'low safe threshold' number! My GP says she finds it difficult to believe, even given the supplements I was taking, that my number could go so high in just six months. Her conclusion is that I am certainly not having a problem absorbing B12, which had been assumed previously. In any event, the point that may be of interest for this group is that if you have a B12 deficiency you certainly want to know about it, and fix it, one way or another. So testing for it is desirable. My folate level was also checked. It came in at ten times the 'low safe threshold' level. I used to take one folate pill weekly. But now it looks like the fortification of bread with folate makes supplements of it redundant - at least for me. fwiw Rodney. > > >>> > > > > >>> > > Hi folks: > > >>> > > > > >>> > > I recently received an email from a member who apparently is shy about > > >>> posting here. He asked that if I thought it was worthwhile, would I like to > > >>> post a link he had found which provides a great deal of information on > > >>> vitamin D. > > >>> > > > > >>> > > I don't know much about the organization - GrassRootsHealth - but it > > >>> appears to be associated with a number of campuses of the University of > > >>> California. So it seems likely that it is reliable. There is some pretty > > >>> interesting data at the site, including the following chart which shows, in > > >>> graphical form, the reduction in risk for several diseases afforded by > > >>> various given levels of serum 25(OH)D. > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> http://www.grassrootshealth.net/media/download/disease_incidence_prev_chart_ > > >>> 101608.pdf > > >>> > > > > >>> > > This is the site's home page link: > > >>> > > > > >>> > > http://www.grassrootshealth.net/ > > >>> > > > > >>> > > A couple of videos are also available there, presented by Carole > > >>> Baggerly and Cedric Garland, that I found worth watching, discussing a > > >>> possible 75% reduction in overall cancer incidence. > > >>> > > > > >>> > > Also on vitamin D, my (very enlightened) GP indicated that in her > > >>> opinion, once one had raised serum 25(OH)D to above 70 nmol/L, 2000 IU of D > > >>> daily was the most she felt able to recommend. She also indicated that she > > >>> doubted a high serum vitamin D level would prevent flu. Of course it is > > >>> important for her, as well as all other physicians these days, to do nothing > > >>> out of the ordinary that might end up being a cause for lawsuits. Adhering > > >>> to the current conventional wisdom appears to be the best approach to > > >>> maintaining reasonable levels of malpractice insurance premiums. Perhaps in > > >>> a year or two, when/if the upper safe limit for vitamin D is raised sizeably > > >>> above the current 2000 IU level, she will feel safe in recommending higher > > >>> intakes. > > >>> > > > > >>> > > Also at the GrassRootsHealth website there is a notification of an > > >>> upcoming - ten days from now - full day seminar, featuring many of the > > >>> world's leading authorities on vitamin D, which is to take place at the > > >>> University of Toronto. I will be attending this meeting, fwiw. Of course I > > >>> will report any new information revealed at the meeting which has not > > >>> already been posted here. > > >>> > > > > >>> > > Rodney. > > >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 26, 2009 Report Share Posted October 26, 2009 Hi : No. It is rather boring really. I always feel fine, I am sorry to have to report(!) One might expect in a situation like this to experience some kind of intestinal symptoms. But no symptoms at all of any kind in my case. At the time I got the deficiency test numbers I did scan a few (probably weird) health discussion websites after doing a Google search. Someone at one of these sites said their test number was 60 - half my level. She reported a long list, perhaps 25 of them, of nasty symptoms which, when I checked out the symptoms of B12 deficiency, seemed to be a perfect match. Perhaps symptoms of B12 deficiency do not appear until levels drop drastically low? I don't know. Rodney. > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > Hi folks: > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > I recently received an email from a member who apparently is > > shy about > > > > >>> posting here. He asked that if I thought it was worthwhile, would I > > like to > > > > >>> post a link he had found which provides a great deal of information > > on > > > > >>> vitamin D. > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > I don't know much about the organization - GrassRootsHealth - > > but it > > > > >>> appears to be associated with a number of campuses of the > > University of > > > > >>> California. So it seems likely that it is reliable. There is some > > pretty > > > > >>> interesting data at the site, including the following chart which > > shows, in > > > > >>> graphical form, the reduction in risk for several diseases afforded > > by > > > > >>> various given levels of serum 25(OH)D. > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > http://www.grassrootshealth.net/media/download/disease_incidence_prev_chart_ > > > > >>> 101608.pdf > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > This is the site's home page link: > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > http://www.grassrootshealth.net/ > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > A couple of videos are also available there, presented by > > Carole > > > > >>> Baggerly and Cedric Garland, that I found worth watching, > > discussing a > > > > >>> possible 75% reduction in overall cancer incidence. > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > Also on vitamin D, my (very enlightened) GP indicated that in > > her > > > > >>> opinion, once one had raised serum 25(OH)D to above 70 nmol/L, 2000 > > IU of D > > > > >>> daily was the most she felt able to recommend. She also indicated > > that she > > > > >>> doubted a high serum vitamin D level would prevent flu. Of course > > it is > > > > >>> important for her, as well as all other physicians these days, to > > do nothing > > > > >>> out of the ordinary that might end up being a cause for lawsuits. > > Adhering > > > > >>> to the current conventional wisdom appears to be the best approach > > to > > > > >>> maintaining reasonable levels of malpractice insurance premiums. > > Perhaps in > > > > >>> a year or two, when/if the upper safe limit for vitamin D is raised > > sizeably > > > > >>> above the current 2000 IU level, she will feel safe in recommending > > higher > > > > >>> intakes. > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > Also at the GrassRootsHealth website there is a notification of > > an > > > > >>> upcoming - ten days from now - full day seminar, featuring many of > > the > > > > >>> world's leading authorities on vitamin D, which is to take place at > > the > > > > >>> University of Toronto. I will be attending this meeting, fwiw. Of > > course I > > > > >>> will report any new information revealed at the meeting which has > > not > > > > >>> already been posted here. > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > Rodney. > > > > >>> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 26, 2009 Report Share Posted October 26, 2009 Hi JW: No symptoms of any kind. And this certainly did not correspond to a low vitamin D status. I have been supplementing vitamin D in 'size' for quite some time. My serum 25(OH)D test result from blood drawn at the same time as the B12 test showed 127 nmol/L (51 ng/ml). This is very close to the middle of what 'new enlightened world authorities' on the vitamin would have us believe is the optimal range - that is between 100 and 150 nmol/L. And, based on what I have seen, I do believe, at least for now, that that very probably is the optimal range. Rodney. > > Did you have symptoms of B12 deficiency. Anything to do with the Vit D low? > Regards > > [ ] Re: More On Vitamin D > > > Hi folks: > > I also had my B12 tested again. You may recall that about six months ago, at > the other end of this very wide country, I was 'diagnosed' as appreciably > deficient B12, with my metric units number coming in at around 120, compared > with the 'low safe threshold' of 150. Since then I have been supplementing > 1000 mcg daily. > > My new number (507) is almost three-and-one-half times the 'low safe > threshold' number! My GP says she finds it difficult to believe, even given > the supplements I was taking, that my number could go so high in just six > months. Her conclusion is that I am certainly not having a problem absorbing > B12, which had been assumed previously. > > In any event, the point that may be of interest for this group is that if > you have a B12 deficiency you certainly want to know about it, and fix it, > one way or another. So testing for it is desirable. > > My folate level was also checked. It came in at ten times the 'low safe > threshold' level. I used to take one folate pill weekly. But now it looks > like the fortification of bread with folate makes supplements of it > redundant - at least for me. > > fwiw > > Rodney. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.