Guest guest Posted January 29, 2008 Report Share Posted January 29, 2008 Who is allergic to the sun??? You Roni??????? ???? --- Roni Molin <matchermaam@...> wrote: > I just discovered that I am vitamin D deficient, and > I take well over 1000 IU of vitamind D > a day. However, I am allergic to the sun, so I > never go into the sun for more than a minute > or two. > > Here's a site: > Roni > > Diet, nutrition & weight loss > Preventing vitamin D deficiency — the new > breakthrough? by Marcelle Pick, OB/GYN NP > > I just returned from a conference where everyone > was discussing vitamin D. It’s been a hot topic in > both conventional and alternative medicine lately > because vitamin D deficiency seems to be related to > so many health concerns: depression, heart disease > and stroke, cancer, osteoporosis, parathyroid > problems, immune function — even weight loss. > Practitioners from both sides of the aisle are > seeing more cases of vitamin D deficiency — one > colleague reported that 85–90% of his patients don’t > get enough D. And that’s consistent with what we see > at Women to Women. > How can this be happening? And what should you do > about it for you and your family? The answer isn’t > as simple as drinking more fortified milk. > We’ve been testing and treating patients for > vitamin D deficiencies for several years, and I know > there are effective, natural strategies that work in > most cases. In others, vitamin D therapy is needed > and can bring wonderful results. So let’s explore > vitamin D’s role in your health and how to determine > what you should do. > What does vitamin D do for the body? This > essential nutrient is called a vitamin, but vitamin > D is actually a precursor hormone — the building > block of a powerful steroid hormone in your body > called calcitriol. It’s been known for many years > that vitamin D is critical to the health of our > bones and teeth, but our deeper insight into D’s > true role in our health is quite new. > Vitamin D works in concert with other nutrients > and hormones in your body to support healthy bone > renewal — the ongoing process of mineralization and > demineralization that when awry shows up as rickets > in children and osteomalacia (“soft bones”) in > adults. > Researchers are discovering that D also promotes > normal cell growth and differentiation throughout > the body, a key factor in maintaining hormonal > balance and a healthy immune system. It appears that > calcitriol actually becomes part of the physical > composition of cells, assisting in the buildup and > breakdown of healthy tissue — in other words, the > process that keeps you well. > What’s more, evidence from studies that track the > prevalence of disease by geography and nationality > shows links between vitamin D deficiency and > obesity, insulin resistance, heart disease, certain > cancers, and depression. I test all of my patients > and have been surprised to find that 85% come up > with a vitamin D deficiency. > Your body can’t create vitamin D on its own. > Instead, it’s designed to make it through sun > exposure. In theory, you can make an ample supply of > vitamin D with as little as a couple of hours per > week in the sun. You can also ingest D through food, > especially eggs and certain fish. So vitamin D > deficiency should be an easy problem to solve, > right? But the truth is we’re just not getting > enough. > Vitamin D requirements The growing awareness of > how much our bodies rely on vitamin D has raised > concern that the dietary recommended daily intake > values (DRI’s) are obsolete — 200 IU (International > Units) a day for adults 19–50 years old, 400 IU for > those 51–70, and 600 IU for those over 70. Many > experts now agree that the DRI’s for vitamin D are > way too low, particularly for people who don’t get > sufficient sun exposure. It’s also important to note > that we lose some of our ability to absorb vitamin D > as we age. Some studies have shown that adults can > metabolize up to 10,000 IU per day without side > effects. The European Union’s Scientific Committee > on Food lists 2000 IU per day as the safety cut-off, > as does the US Food and Nutrition Board, but until > we have more complete information on who needs how > much, general wisdom has put the tolerable intake > level at 1000 IU per day. > Vitamin D supplementation appears beneficial > throughout our lifespan, from in utero to advanced > age. A recent long-term study indicates that we are > at less risk of developing osteoporosis later in > life if our mothers had adequate stores on board > while pregnant. Another age group needing ample > vitamin D is teenage girls living in northern > climates who cannot get enough sunlight to make > enough vitamin D naturally. Optimal bone growth and > accumulation during puberty may be a factor in > preventing osteoporosis later on in life, and a new > daily recommendation for teenage girls of 400-600 IU > — up from 200 IU — would be wise, particularly in > winter. > The elderly, who are at increased risk of falls > and fractures, also stand to benefit. Some studies > in the US indicate that supplementation with vitamin > D and calcium significantly reduces bone loss and > incidence of nonvertebral fractures in women 65 and > over. Even in sunny Australia, a two-year study > conducted among the elderly showed that > supplementation with vitamin D reduced incidence of > falls and fractures. Yet all these studies have > their limitations, and it’s a misconception to think > that supplements alone are enough to protect your > bones for life. > Another consideration is that not all forms of > vitamin D are the same — some are more usable > (bioavailable). Our bodies can naturally synthesize > more than 20,000 IU of vitamin D in just 20 minutes > of sun exposure without ill effect. That’s because > we have a natural check-and-balance mechanism that > shuts off the synthesis when we get enough. This > doesn’t happen when we eat sources of vitamin D — > the same 20,000 IU of vitamin D taken as an oral > supplement could be toxic. > Most milk suppliers fortify their products with > vitamin D in the form of ergocalciferol (also called > D2). Some orange juice makers are doing the same, > and like many food fads, you can soon expect to see > lots of other products claiming to be good for you > because they’re fortified with vitamin D. While the > amount in these beverages is enough to ward off > malnutrition, you’d have to drink four or five > glasses a day to reach optimal levels; that’s just > too much milk or juice for most adults. > But let’s not write off vitamin D-fortified foods > altogether. It’s interesting that a bakery here in > the US had to test their new vitamin D bread in > Europe because of the high amount of vitamin D it > contained. The bread also contained calcium > carbonate and was reported to increase lumbar bone > mineral density in the elderly patients consuming > it. > The bottom line is, we still don’t really > understand the mechanism behind vitamin D — we just > know our bodies rely on a certain amount and that > many of us aren’t getting enough. The truth is that > adequate levels are probably highly individualized > and depend on a variety of factors. To know whether > you’re D–deficient, you need to get a blood test > from your healthcare practitioner. > Why the lack of vitamin D? Awareness of vitamin D > first took center stage in the early part of the > 20th century, although it was described in medical > writings as early as the 17th century. Children with > vitamin D deficiency developed rickets, a condition > in which the body fails to mineralize bone. This led > to a movement to fortify milk and cereal with > vitamin D. By the 1960’s, rickets had become a > relatively rare disease. > As we now know, sun exposure is critical to > sufficient vitamin D. Until modern times, human > beings spent a great deal of time outdoors. The > origin of our species was subtropical, meaning we > naturally got enough sun exposure to generate > vitamin D. But as Homo sapiens migrated to less > temperate climes this changed. The shift from an > agrarian-based society to an increasingly industrial > society also meant less time in the sun. > Today many of us work in sealed buildings with > glazed windows, and we wear sunblock and drive > everywhere in cars instead of walking outdoors. Any > sunblock with an SPF above 8 will block the UV rays > necessary for vitamin D conversion. > If you live in a region above latitude 40 (a > horizontal line that runs from just below New York > City west to northern California), then the sun is > only strong enough to trigger the vitamin D > conversion between May and September. This means > that a large percentage of the population is at risk > much of the year for vitamin D deficiency. On the > other hand, don’t just assume that because you live > in New England, for example, that you are deficient. > You really need to see your practitioner and have > your vitamin D levels tested before upping your > supplemental dose. > Vitamin D deficiency symptoms Vitamin D > deficiency may be characterized by muscle pain, weak > bones/fractures, low energy and fatigue, lowered > immunity, depression and mood swings, and sleep > irregularities. Women with renal problems or > intestinal concerns (such as IBS or Crohn’s disease) > may be vitamin D deficient because they can neither > absorb nor adequately convert the nutrient. > Vitamin D, menopause and osteoporosis As we age, > our bodies slowly lose the ability to mobilize > vitamin D, a process that lowers our calcium > absorption rates. This creates a higher risk of > osteoporosis, particularly in post-menopausal women. > === message truncated === ________________________________________________________________________________\ ____ Never miss a thing. Make your home page. http://www./r/hs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 In the 2007 LDN conference video, it was reported that Dr. Gilhooly (Scotland) tests his LDN patients for vitamin D levels and supplements as needed along with omega-3 fatty acids and other vitamins and minerals. Some people have a gene thing that makes vitamin D supplementation not a good idea, but they are a small minority. The Marshall Protocol has been hurtful for some with CFIDS. I have found vitamin D significantly decreased spine pain and helps my immune system. By prescription based on blood tests, I took 50,000 ius per week to bring up the vitamin D levels. Now on a daily maintenance dose. mjhStart the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape in the new year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 Yep, that's me, since 1966. I don't go into the sun and sit, ever. I always wear long sleeved and long legged clothing, and even gloves driving. I have been doing this for so long that it is second nature now. I don't react to the usual UV rays, only to carbon arc, which is what comes out of movie projector lights. I can actually get reflected light (UV) and I'm o.k. It's only direct contact of the sun that I react to. Porphyria and/or solar urticaria it's called. Roni Roni Bradin <ebradi3951@...> wrote: Who is allergic to the sun??? You Roni??????? ???? --- Roni Molin <matchermaam@...> wrote: > I just discovered that I am vitamin D deficient, and > I take well over 1000 IU of vitamind D > a day. However, I am allergic to the sun, so I > never go into the sun for more than a minute > or two. > > Here's a site: > Roni > > Diet, nutrition & weight loss > Preventing vitamin D deficiency — the new > breakthrough? by Marcelle Pick, OB/GYN NP > > I just returned from a conference where everyone > was discussing vitamin D. It’s been a hot topic in > both conventional and alternative medicine lately > because vitamin D deficiency seems to be related to > so many health concerns: depression, heart disease > and stroke, cancer, osteoporosis, parathyroid > problems, immune function — even weight loss. > Practitioners from both sides of the aisle are > seeing more cases of vitamin D deficiency — one > colleague reported that 85–90% of his patients don’t > get enough D. And that’s consistent with what we see > at Women to Women. > How can this be happening? And what should you do > about it for you and your family? The answer isn’t > as simple as drinking more fortified milk. > We’ve been testing and treating patients for > vitamin D deficiencies for several years, and I know > there are effective, natural strategies that work in > most cases. In others, vitamin D therapy is needed > and can bring wonderful results. So let’s explore > vitamin D’s role in your health and how to determine > what you should do. > What does vitamin D do for the body? This > essential nutrient is called a vitamin, but vitamin > D is actually a precursor hormone — the building > block of a powerful steroid hormone in your body > called calcitriol. It’s been known for many years > that vitamin D is critical to the health of our > bones and teeth, but our deeper insight into D’s > true role in our health is quite new. > Vitamin D works in concert with other nutrients > and hormones in your body to support healthy bone > renewal — the ongoing process of mineralization and > demineralization that when awry shows up as rickets > in children and osteomalacia (“soft bones”) in > adults. > Researchers are discovering that D also promotes > normal cell growth and differentiation throughout > the body, a key factor in maintaining hormonal > balance and a healthy immune system. It appears that > calcitriol actually becomes part of the physical > composition of cells, assisting in the buildup and > breakdown of healthy tissue — in other words, the > process that keeps you well. > What’s more, evidence from studies that track the > prevalence of disease by geography and nationality > shows links between vitamin D deficiency and > obesity, insulin resistance, heart disease, certain > cancers, and depression. I test all of my patients > and have been surprised to find that 85% come up > with a vitamin D deficiency. > Your body can’t create vitamin D on its own. > Instead, it’s designed to make it through sun > exposure. In theory, you can make an ample supply of > vitamin D with as little as a couple of hours per > week in the sun. You can also ingest D through food, > especially eggs and certain fish. So vitamin D > deficiency should be an easy problem to solve, > right? But the truth is we’re just not getting > enough. > Vitamin D requirements The growing awareness of > how much our bodies rely on vitamin D has raised > concern that the dietary recommended daily intake > values (DRI’s) are obsolete — 200 IU (International > Units) a day for adults 19–50 years old, 400 IU for > those 51–70, and 600 IU for those over 70. Many > experts now agree that the DRI’s for vitamin D are > way too low, particularly for people who don’t get > sufficient sun exposure. It’s also important to note > that we lose some of our ability to absorb vitamin D > as we age. Some studies have shown that adults can > metabolize up to 10,000 IU per day without side > effects. The European Union’s Scientific Committee > on Food lists 2000 IU per day as the safety cut-off, > as does the US Food and Nutrition Board, but until > we have more complete information on who needs how > much, general wisdom has put the tolerable intake > level at 1000 IU per day. > Vitamin D supplementation appears beneficial > throughout our lifespan, from in utero to advanced > age. A recent long-term study indicates that we are > at less risk of developing osteoporosis later in > life if our mothers had adequate stores on board > while pregnant. Another age group needing ample > vitamin D is teenage girls living in northern > climates who cannot get enough sunlight to make > enough vitamin D naturally. Optimal bone growth and > accumulation during puberty may be a factor in > preventing osteoporosis later on in life, and a new > daily recommendation for teenage girls of 400-600 IU > — up from 200 IU — would be wise, particularly in > winter. > The elderly, who are at increased risk of falls > and fractures, also stand to benefit. Some studies > in the US indicate that supplementation with vitamin > D and calcium significantly reduces bone loss and > incidence of nonvertebral fractures in women 65 and > over. Even in sunny Australia, a two-year study > conducted among the elderly showed that > supplementation with vitamin D reduced incidence of > falls and fractures. Yet all these studies have > their limitations, and it’s a misconception to think > that supplements alone are enough to protect your > bones for life. > Another consideration is that not all forms of > vitamin D are the same — some are more usable > (bioavailable). Our bodies can naturally synthesize > more than 20,000 IU of vitamin D in just 20 minutes > of sun exposure without ill effect. That’s because > we have a natural check-and-balance mechanism that > shuts off the synthesis when we get enough. This > doesn’t happen when we eat sources of vitamin D — > the same 20,000 IU of vitamin D taken as an oral > supplement could be toxic. > Most milk suppliers fortify their products with > vitamin D in the form of ergocalciferol (also called > D2). Some orange juice makers are doing the same, > and like many food fads, you can soon expect to see > lots of other products claiming to be good for you > because they’re fortified with vitamin D. While the > amount in these beverages is enough to ward off > malnutrition, you’d have to drink four or five > glasses a day to reach optimal levels; that’s just > too much milk or juice for most adults. > But let’s not write off vitamin D-fortified foods > altogether. It’s interesting that a bakery here in > the US had to test their new vitamin D bread in > Europe because of the high amount of vitamin D it > contained. The bread also contained calcium > carbonate and was reported to increase lumbar bone > mineral density in the elderly patients consuming > it. > The bottom line is, we still don’t really > understand the mechanism behind vitamin D — we just > know our bodies rely on a certain amount and that > many of us aren’t getting enough. The truth is that > adequate levels are probably highly individualized > and depend on a variety of factors. To know whether > you’re D–deficient, you need to get a blood test > from your healthcare practitioner. > Why the lack of vitamin D? Awareness of vitamin D > first took center stage in the early part of the > 20th century, although it was described in medical > writings as early as the 17th century. Children with > vitamin D deficiency developed rickets, a condition > in which the body fails to mineralize bone. This led > to a movement to fortify milk and cereal with > vitamin D. By the 1960’s, rickets had become a > relatively rare disease. > As we now know, sun exposure is critical to > sufficient vitamin D. Until modern times, human > beings spent a great deal of time outdoors. The > origin of our species was subtropical, meaning we > naturally got enough sun exposure to generate > vitamin D. But as Homo sapiens migrated to less > temperate climes this changed. The shift from an > agrarian-based society to an increasingly industrial > society also meant less time in the sun. > Today many of us work in sealed buildings with > glazed windows, and we wear sunblock and drive > everywhere in cars instead of walking outdoors. Any > sunblock with an SPF above 8 will block the UV rays > necessary for vitamin D conversion. > If you live in a region above latitude 40 (a > horizontal line that runs from just below New York > City west to northern California), then the sun is > only strong enough to trigger the vitamin D > conversion between May and September. This means > that a large percentage of the population is at risk > much of the year for vitamin D deficiency. On the > other hand, don’t just assume that because you live > in New England, for example, that you are deficient. > You really need to see your practitioner and have > your vitamin D levels tested before upping your > supplemental dose. > Vitamin D deficiency symptoms Vitamin D > deficiency may be characterized by muscle pain, weak > bones/fractures, low energy and fatigue, lowered > immunity, depression and mood swings, and sleep > irregularities. Women with renal problems or > intestinal concerns (such as IBS or Crohn’s disease) > may be vitamin D deficient because they can neither > absorb nor adequately convert the nutrient. > Vitamin D, menopause and osteoporosis As we age, > our bodies slowly lose the ability to mobilize > vitamin D, a process that lowers our calcium > absorption rates. This creates a higher risk of > osteoporosis, particularly in post-menopausal women. > === message truncated === __________________________________________________________ Never miss a thing. Make your home page. http://www./r/hs --------------------------------- Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Mobile. Try it now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 , You wrote: > > Who is allergic to the sun??? You Roni??????? > My wife is also. It's more common than you evidently think. She can take about an hour, though. Maybe 15 minutes if it is direct and near noon. Chuck Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 The seco-steroids D2 and D3 are stored in fatty tissues and converted and circulated in the blood stream as 25-D bound to the VDBP (vitamin D binding protein). The molecular modeling and clinical experience bears out that 25-D blocks the activation of the VDR (vitamin D receptor) that is activated in healthy people by proper levels of the more active hormone 1,25-D. When levels of 1,25-D are too high in chronic illnesses there is a feedback mechanism whereby 25-D levels can drop independently of any fat stores. It is my firm opinion that taking D supplements or fish oils defeats the purposes of taking LDN, as it reduces the ability of the innate immune system to deal with pathogens. best, P.B. > > I wonder whether it was supplemental D2 or D3 that was looked at to come > to the conclusion that " vitamin D is immunosuppressive and that low blood > levels of vitamin D may be actually a result of the disease process. > Supplementation may make the disease worse. " > > Kathie > > > On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 07:20:16 +0000 " dan.wade@... " > <dan.wade@...> writes: > > Some doubts raised about ingested Vitamin D here: > > > > http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080125223302.htm > > > > Will be interesting to see how you get on with that... > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 PB, Apparently you haven't done a google search using the terms " vitamin D " and " innate immunity " together. If you did you'd find numerous scientific studies documenting that vitamin D taken orally increases innate immunity. You'll find specific information involving vitamin D for influenza, mycobacterium that causes tuberculosis, and more. I'm not disputing that some information suggests that 25-D blocks the VDR, but what population has been studied in this regard. In other words can this be generalizable to the entire population? Also, how do you reconcile the fact that most studies show just the opposite when it comes to improving innate immunity? Debunk the positive studies instead of merely presenting information from the negative studies and you'll have some believers - otherwise the information just doesn't seem plausable. Elliot > > > > I wonder whether it was supplemental D2 or D3 that was looked at to come > > to the conclusion that " vitamin D is immunosuppressive and that low > blood > > levels of vitamin D may be actually a result of the disease process. > > Supplementation may make the disease worse. " > > > > Kathie > > > > > > On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 07:20:16 +0000 " dan.wade@ " > > <dan.wade@> writes: > > > Some doubts raised about ingested Vitamin D here: > > > > > > http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080125223302.htm > > > > > > Will be interesting to see how you get on with that... > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 Nutrition, Supplementation, and Vitamin D are discussed extensively on the discussion group MS-Diet I also believe that this forum is relevant to all those with immune conditions and indeed the wider population. As I have said before the advocates of LDN claim that LDN can stop progression, but the advocates of nutrition go further, and claim that correct nutrition can reverse the damage caused by autoimmune conditions. I suspect that most of those who report symptom improvement with LDN, may have improved their nutrition, or may have resolved some issues that may have been preventing the body from making best use of the food being taken. I believe that LDN helps the body to stop doing harm to itself, but for really positive results you must go further. The arguments with regard to vitamin D are very confusing, but in my view the evidence for Vitamin D supplementation is strong. However it is important to get a blood test done before you start, and regularly afterwards. For much more information on this, go here: http://www.msrc.co.uk/downloads/bbd_Vitamin_D_update_GP_Letter.doc Tommy From: low dose naltrexone [mailto:low dose naltrexone ] On Behalf Of Elliot Sent: 01 February 2008 15:02 To: low dose naltrexone Subject: [low dose naltrexone] Re: vitamin D PB, Apparently you haven't done a google search using the terms " vitamin D " and " innate immunity " together. If you did you'd find numerous scientific studies documenting that vitamin D taken orally increases innate immunity. You'll find specific information involving vitamin D for influenza, mycobacterium that causes tuberculosis, and more. I'm not disputing that some information suggests that 25-D blocks the VDR, but what population has been studied in this regard. In other words can this be generalizable to the entire population? Also, how do you reconcile the fact that most studies show just the opposite when it comes to improving innate immunity? Debunk the positive studies instead of merely presenting information from the negative studies and you'll have some believers - otherwise the information just doesn't seem plausable. Elliot > > > > I wonder whether it was supplemental D2 or D3 that was looked at to come > > to the conclusion that " vitamin D is immunosuppressive and that low > blood > > levels of vitamin D may be actually a result of the disease process. > > Supplementation may make the disease worse. " > > > > Kathie > > > > > > On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 07:20:16 +0000 " dan.wade@ " > > <dan.wade@> writes: > > > Some doubts raised about ingested Vitamin D here: > > > > > > http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080125223302.htm > > > > > > Will be interesting to see how you get on with that... > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 > > > Hi everyone i will keep you updated,,but iam seeing some relief taking highdose good old vitamin D 4000IU,S + 4.5 ldn just started.. > _________________________________________________________________ > Very timely topic for me. I just had my blood tested for " Vit D, 25 Hydroxy " levels were low at 21.4. There was a wide margin of acceptable levels of " 32.0 to 100.0 " . Doc recommended I start with 800 IU for a month and decrease down to 400 IU. This thread is confusing in whether its good or bad for supplementation for Vit D. Any thoughts (in english, lol?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 Good nutrition is extremely good....Adding in D [which is not a vitamin] may act like an immune suppresor,and seem to help,in short term,like steroids,but long term maybe very bad. There is no suggestion in the original LDN studies by the DR.... that reccomemnded this. You might want to read www.bacteriality.com . The science is interesting,wife wife is a Biologist and reviewed it. I was on the Marshall Protocol,and got healed from lyme [now negative on tests]. Please at least read the info.. Adding D,might make the difference in ultimate healing,not being attained. If you change your diet,eat well and let the LDN,work to promote a good immune fuction,the body heals itself. Look at hormone replacement theory, now we find many were damaged. ________________________________ From: low dose naltrexone on behalf of Tommy Harraghy Sent: Fri 2/1/2008 9:14 AM low dose naltrexone Cc: R. Subject: RE: [low dose naltrexone] Re: vitamin D Nutrition, Supplementation, and Vitamin D are discussed extensively on the discussion group MS-Diet <mailto:MS-Diet > I also believe that this forum is relevant to all those with immune conditions and indeed the wider population. As I have said before the advocates of LDN claim that LDN can stop progression, but the advocates of nutrition go further, and claim that correct nutrition can reverse the damage caused by autoimmune conditions. I suspect that most of those who report symptom improvement with LDN, may have improved their nutrition, or may have resolved some issues that may have been preventing the body from making best use of the food being taken. I believe that LDN helps the body to stop doing harm to itself, but for really positive results you must go further. The arguments with regard to vitamin D are very confusing, but in my view the evidence for Vitamin D supplementation is strong. However it is important to get a blood test done before you start, and regularly afterwards. For much more information on this, go here: http://www.msrc.co.uk/downloads/bbd_Vitamin_D_update_GP_Letter.doc <http://www.msrc.co.uk/downloads/bbd_Vitamin_D_update_GP_Letter.doc> Tommy ________________________________ From: low dose naltrexone [mailto:low dose naltrexone ] On Behalf Of Elliot Sent: 01 February 2008 15:02 low dose naltrexone Subject: [low dose naltrexone] Re: vitamin D PB, Apparently you haven't done a google search using the terms " vitamin D " and " innate immunity " together. If you did you'd find numerous scientific studies documenting that vitamin D taken orally increases innate immunity. You'll find specific information involving vitamin D for influenza, mycobacterium that causes tuberculosis, and more. I'm not disputing that some information suggests that 25-D blocks the VDR, but what population has been studied in this regard. In other words can this be generalizable to the entire population? Also, how do you reconcile the fact that most studies show just the opposite when it comes to improving innate immunity? Debunk the positive studies instead of merely presenting information from the negative studies and you'll have some believers - otherwise the information just doesn't seem plausable. Elliot > > > > I wonder whether it was supplemental D2 or D3 that was looked at to come > > to the conclusion that " vitamin D is immunosuppressive and that low > blood > > levels of vitamin D may be actually a result of the disease process. > > Supplementation may make the disease worse. " > > > > Kathie > > > > > > On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 07:20:16 +0000 " dan.wade@ " > > <dan.wade@> writes: > > > Some doubts raised about ingested Vitamin D here: > > > > > > http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080125223302.htm <http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080125223302.htm> > > > > > > Will be interesting to see how you get on with that... > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 Elliot, It is commonly accepted in molecular biology that "vitamin" D3 and 25-D are immuno-suppressive seco-steroids. I have been researching vitamin D for over three years and read many hundreds of studies, many of which were deeply flawed with erroneous conclusions. Sadly in the field of clinical nutrition most of the studies conclusions are in error. I certainly don't expect you to change your opinion over-night. My (our) position sometimes seems like a snowball rolling uphill when compared to the misdirected avalanche of the vitamin D proponents. Five years ago I was taking large doses of D and fish liver oil and I was only getting sicker. Healthy people can generally tolerate D and fish oil; but many sick people will be setting themselves back in the longer term. We are looking at a wide range of autoimmune and unexplained conditions with a clinical trial and are finding that people usually will not start to have an fully functional immune system until they get their 25-D down to 20 (American units) or less. Sick people with TH1 inflammation that are not using replacement will naturally have a downregulated 25-D due to an upregulated 1,25-D. Taking large doses of D with tuberculosis will prolong the infection, as it will with every infection. Fighting a hormonal feedback system is not the answer. The body produces antimicrobial peptides through the activation of the nuclear receptor VDR and blocking its functionality is unwise. At one point the scientific community believed that the sun rotated around the earth. When the data does not explain the popular hypothesis, it is time to look at the alternative hypothesis. The D studies are full of contradictions that can not be explained without an alternative hypothesis. I fully agree that much more research is needed to flesh out the data for the alternative hypothesis to the satisfaction of all. In the meantime much of the population is getting sicker. cordially, P.B. PB, Apparently you haven't done a google search using the terms "vitamin D" and "innate immunity" together. If you did you'd find numerous scientific studies documenting that vitamin D taken orally increases innate immunity. You'll find specific information involving vitamin D for influenza, mycobacterium that causes tuberculosis, and more. I'm not disputing that some information suggests that 25-D blocks the VDR, but what population has been studied in this regard. In other words can this be generalizable to the entire population? Also, how do you reconcile the fact that most studies show just the opposite when it comes to improving innate immunity? Debunk the positive studies instead of merely presenting information from the negative studies and you'll have some believers - otherwise the information just doesn't seem plausable. Elliot Never miss a thing. Make your homepage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 There are 63 epidemiological studies showing a correlation between low vitamin d levels and increased cancer -also lack of sunlight explosure and increased cancer levels. There are preclinical studies showing vit D is activiated in the peripheral tissues where it has an antiproliferative and an apoptotic effect Finally there is a double blind placebo controlled study run over 5 years that showed vit D supplementation resulted in a 70% decrease in the incidence of cancer. Dont get too tied up in the science, look for the clinical effects!!"P. B." <ursus357@...> wrote: Elliot, It is commonly accepted in molecular biology that "vitamin" D3 and 25-D are immuno-suppressive seco-steroids. I have been researching vitamin D for over three years and read many hundreds of studies, many of which were deeply flawed with erroneous conclusions. Sadly in the field of clinical nutrition most of the studies conclusions are in error. I certainly don't expect you to change your opinion over-night. My (our) position sometimes seems like a snowball rolling uphill when compared to the misdirected avalanche of the vitamin D proponents. Five years ago I was taking large doses of D and fish liver oil and I was only getting sicker. Healthy people can generally tolerate D and fish oil; but many sick people will be setting themselves back in the longer term. We are looking at a wide range of autoimmune and unexplained conditions with a clinical trial and are finding that people usually will not start to have an fully functional immune system until they get their 25-D down to 20 (American units) or less. Sick people with TH1 inflammation that are not using replacement will naturally have a downregulated 25-D due to an upregulated 1,25-D. Taking large doses of D with tuberculosis will prolong the infection, as it will with every infection. Fighting a hormonal feedback system is not the answer. The body produces antimicrobial peptides through the activation of the nuclear receptor VDR and blocking its functionality is unwise. At one point the scientific community believed that the sun rotated around the earth. When the data does not explain the popular hypothesis, it is time to look at the alternative hypothesis. The D studies are full of contradictions that can not be explained without an alternative hypothesis. I fully agree that much more research is needed to flesh out the data for the alternative hypothesis to the satisfaction of all. In the meantime much of the population is getting sicker. cordially, P.B. PB, Apparently you haven't done a google search using the terms "vitamin D" and "innate immunity" together. If you did you'd find numerous scientific studies documenting that vitamin D taken orally increases innate immunity. You'll find specific information involving vitamin D for influenza, mycobacterium that causes tuberculosis, and more. I'm not disputing that some information suggests that 25-D blocks the VDR, but what population has been studied in this regard. In other words can this be generalizable to the entire population? Also, how do you reconcile the fact that most studies show just the opposite when it comes to improving innate immunity? Debunk the positive studies instead of merely presenting information from the negative studies and you'll have some believers - otherwise the information just doesn't seem plausable. Elliot Never miss a thing. Make your homepage. Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Mobile. Try it now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 2, 2008 Report Share Posted February 2, 2008 I'm a lurker here but felt I had to jump in with my .02 ;-) I agree with P.B. I have studied and used nutrition for many years, had my own holistic practice. I always look for the natural solution to health problems, so I also jumped on the 'High doses of Vit D are good for everyone " bandwagon about 3 years ago. However, earlier this year I was feeling horrendous and spent much time trying to ascertain the cause. I finally realized I was having Vit D toxicity symptoms, despite only taking 2,000 IU/day, and only a few times/week. Getting off it was like night and day. I also added natural Vit A (not beta Carotene) since I have discovered through personal experience and research that it can prevent the TH0 from converting to TH1 and directs it more towards TH2. There are also some nutritional experts who believe that A and D complement each other and I have found that taking extra A has helped immensely with my Hashimoto's thyroiditis symptoms. I have friends who were taking much lower doses of D and also were suffering from toxicity, which totally resolved upon discontinuation of the D. I fear that as time goes on, we will hear more and more of the inevitable downside of Vit D in the doses people are taking. Even in healthy people, taking high doses of any one nutrient at some point will cause deficiencies of others that often does not become apparent until much time has elapsed and the health declines. I have a few study abstracts of the role of Vit A and inflammation and immunity. I have found it to work near miracles for me. > > Elliot, It is commonly accepted in molecular biology that " vitamin " D3 and 25-D are immuno-suppressive seco-steroids. I have been researching vitamin D for over three years and read many hundreds of studies, many of which were deeply flawed with erroneous conclusions. Sadly in the field of clinical nutrition most of the studies conclusions are in error. I certainly don't expect you to change your opinion over-night. My (our) position sometimes seems like a snowball rolling uphill when compared to the misdirected avalanche of the vitamin D proponents. Five years ago I was taking large doses of D and fish liver oil and I was only getting sicker. Healthy people can generally tolerate D and fish oil; but many sick people will be setting themselves back in the longer term. We are looking at a wide range of autoimmune and unexplained conditions with a clinical trial and are finding that people usually will not start to have an fully functional immune system until > they get their 25-D down to 20 (American units) or less. Sick people with TH1 inflammation that are not using replacement will naturally have a downregulated 25-D due to an upregulated 1,25-D. Taking large doses of D with tuberculosis will prolong the infection, as it will with every infection. Fighting a hormonal feedback system is not the answer. The body produces antimicrobial peptides through the activation of the nuclear receptor VDR and blocking its functionality is unwise. At one point the scientific community believed that the sun rotated around the earth. When the data does not explain the popular hypothesis, it is time to look at the alternative hypothesis. The D studies are full of contradictions that can not be explained without an alternative hypothesis. I fully agree that much more research is needed to flesh out the data for the alternative hypothesis to the satisfaction of all. In the meantime much of the population is getting sicker. > > cordially, P.B. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 2, 2008 Report Share Posted February 2, 2008 , I'm one of those who disagrees with PB about the negative effects of higher doses of vitamin D categorically. He has stated that D is immunosuppresive and impairs the innate immune system, while all the studies I've read indicate just the opposite. Your post, therefore, is verrrry important to the discussion on the efficacy and safety of higher dose vitamin D supplementation. May I ask what condition you have? Also, what condition did the other people you mention have that " were suffering from toxicity, which totally resolved upon discontinuation of the D " . Certainly if their condition improved after stopping D supplementation that's important evidence as the disadvantage of taking D for them, but what were the signs and symptoms of their D toxicity before improvement occurred? My problem with PB's position is the insistance that vitamin D is immunosuppressive categorically. I don't doubt that it might be in some individuals with certain disease states (ie Lyme), but the studies I've read indicates that D improves the innate immune system, not detract from it. Also, vitamin D receptor gene polymorphisms have been shown to affect the response of standard drug treatment for tuberculosis (Roth DE. J Inf Dis 2004;190:920-7) and I'm thinking that those with certain disease states might be more inclined to have certain genes that predispose to ill effects with high dose D. Knowing which disease conditions that might lead to poor responses with vitamin D supplementation therefore might be one way to reconcile the differences between the " D is good camp " vs " D is bad " camp. In other words, we need to figure out why people seem to have a beneficial response to D supplementation while others seem to have a negative response. Finally, would you mind emailing the abstracts on vitamin A preventing the TH0 from converting to TH1 and directing it more towards TH2, and any information you might have that A and D complement each other. I always thought cod liver oil shouldn't be used for it D content because of the potential for A toxicity. Any clarity on this issue would be most appreciated. Regards, Elliot > > I'm a lurker here but felt I had to jump in with my .02 ;-) > > I agree with P.B. I have studied and used nutrition for many years, > had my own holistic practice. I always look for the natural solution > to health problems, so I also jumped on the 'High doses of Vit D are > good for everyone " bandwagon about 3 years ago. > > However, earlier this year I was feeling horrendous and spent much > time trying to ascertain the cause. I finally realized I was having > Vit D toxicity symptoms, despite only taking 2,000 IU/day, and only a > few times/week. Getting off it was like night and day. > > I also added natural Vit A (not beta Carotene) since I have discovered > through personal experience and research that it can prevent the TH0 > from converting to TH1 and directs it more towards TH2. There are > also some nutritional experts who believe that A and D complement each > other and I have found that taking extra A has helped immensely with > my Hashimoto's thyroiditis symptoms. > > I have friends who were taking much lower doses of D and also were > suffering from toxicity, which totally resolved upon discontinuation > of the D. > > I fear that as time goes on, we will hear more and more of the > inevitable downside of Vit D in the doses people are taking. Even in > healthy people, taking high doses of any one nutrient at some point > will cause deficiencies of others that often does not become apparent > until much time has elapsed and the health declines. > > I have a few study abstracts of the role of Vit A and inflammation and > immunity. I have found it to work near miracles for me. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 2, 2008 Report Share Posted February 2, 2008 Hi JoAnn, That may actually be a more correct amount, as they are upping recommended doses of daily Vit D. My doctor just recommended 1000I U for me daily as routine and know others,too, who have been told the same...perhaps you could/should check with your doctor if you have a doubt? Good Luck!! S. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 3, 2008 Report Share Posted February 3, 2008 Again, this is not a vitamin D...... or a vitamin A discussion group. This group is to discuss low dose Natrexone. LDN. Why don't you take the discussion to LDNsupport or privately between the two of you. mjh Who's never won? Biggest Grammy Award surprises of all time on AOL Music. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 3, 2008 Report Share Posted February 3, 2008 Hi , RE: I have found that taking extra A has helped immensely with my Hashimoto's thyroiditis symptoms. Re: I have a few study abstracts of the role of Vit A and inflammation and immunity. I have found it to work near miracles for me. I'm also interested in your comments about vitamin A and Hashi's. I have Hashi's, Sjogrens, vitiligo. I take a supplement for my dry eyes that has " A " and also omega 6 -- and I do notice a difference when I don't take it, so I know that it does help with inflammation. I also take a LOT of other supplements too, ie; 6grams fish oil -- so I think my entire regimen is helping me manage my symptoms. Oh... and I take a lot of vitamin D too. I have several 25,hydroxy blood tests done a year to manage my levels. I've not noticed any negative effects with my vitamin D supplementing...but everybody's different so you just have to figure what works for you. Could you post the links or send those abstracts about vitamin A, inflammation, and immunity --??-- Also, are you taking LDN..?? You described yourself as a 'lurker' so I wasn't sure if that meant you haven't yet decided to try LDN --??-- Jann Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 3, 2008 Report Share Posted February 3, 2008 Chuck- Wow, I didn't know that it was common? In terms if skin cancer, perhaps it is a blessing in disguise? Peace, --- Chuck B <gumboyaya@...> wrote: > , > > You wrote: > > > > Who is allergic to the sun??? You Roni??????? > > > > My wife is also. It's more common than you evidently > think. She can take > about an hour, though. Maybe 15 minutes if it is > direct and near noon. > > Chuck > ________________________________________________________________________________\ ____ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile./;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 Again......... take this discussion private or to another group. Not here. Please also review this group's rules on the home page. The focus of this group is low dose Naltrexone. mjhWho's never won? Biggest Grammy Award surprises of all time on AOL Music. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 Nigel, If one does not look at the science of molecular endocrinology and steroidal hormone effects it is impossible to correctly interpret epidemiological studies on " vitamin " D and cancer or chronic autoimmune disease. You are making an incorrect leap of faith in thinking D3 and 25-D have the same biologic effects as 1,25-D. 1,25-D activates the VDR and has antiproliferative effects. D3 transformed into 25-D acts as a VDR antagonist and is immunosuppressive for that reason. Our disease model explains the reasons for low levels of 25-D in cancers and chronic diseases that have an upregulation of 1,25-D. Correlation of lower 25-D levels with disease does not by any means show causation. The disease process down-regulates 25-D even with adequate sunlight or dietary D3 intake. " Vitamin " D supplementation will reduce the diagnosis of cancers since inflammation is reduced by the steroidal effects. The cancers will still be there but more masked. A reduction in the number of early diagnoses is not a good thing for cancers. Longer studies are needed that will show that a functional innate immune system helps control cancers better than one suppressed with D3. Also lack of sunlight exposure can be linked to cancer by the fact that people with cancer are often too ill and undiagnosed to go outdoors and a certain percentage of these people have found that the sun makes them feel terrible because of a dysregulated " vitamin " d metabolism. Again the correlation can be explained without the simplistic low D-25 levels cause cancer assumption that is an incorrect conclusion. Look to the science to understand the clinical effects of the seco-steroidal hormone " vitamin " D . This discussion is integral to LDN use, since steroids are to be avoided to permit LDN to have optimum effectiveness. Why disable part of the immune system if one wants to fully enable it? best, P.B. See: Marshall TG: VDR Nuclear Receptor Competence is the Key to Recovery from Chronic Inflammatory and Autoimmune Disease. Abstract presentation, Days of Molecular Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, May 2006. Copy available from URL http://autoimmunityresearch.org/karolinska-handout.pdf > Elliot, It is commonly accepted in molecular biology that " vitamin " D3 and 25-D are immuno-suppressive seco-steroids. I have Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 26, 2008 Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 Never mind, I found his answer on Planet Thrive, copied here for anyone interested: " I have researched this and have read the material about vitamin d and lyme and we are into one of those areas that often occurs with lyme where a lot of opinions are in conflict and where there is just not enough research data to make a determination one way or another. So, it comes down to competing opinions based on gut instinct more than anything else. I would need to see much more data on the negative effects of vitamin d to feel comfortable asserting that it is contraindicated in lyme. In my opinion at this point in time I see no reason not to use it and have found that it does help considerably in both muscle and joint / bone pain. My personal preference is for the vitamin d3 form of vitamin d, 12,000 IU daily. " > > Does anyone know whether S.H. Buhner has addressed the topic of > vitamin D and the immune system? Some people say it's great for > everything and you should take a lot, while others say it's a steroid > that depresses the immune system and allows bacteria to reproduce and > invade tissues unchecked, so you should avoid it at all costs. I'm > confused! > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 7, 2009 Report Share Posted March 7, 2009 My vitamin D levels are really low, rated 12...... should be 30-100, optimum is around 50. Dr has me taking 50,000 units once a week for 12 weeks........ One of the websites has Vit D on the list of things to avoid. Anyone have a comment on this issue? Thanks so much! Patty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 8, 2009 Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 Patty, here are some links I got from the vitamin d council. I hope this helps. I take 5,000 IU's a day myself and it's only made me feel better and improved my balance. I don't get sick either. _http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/newsletter/2005-nov.shtml_ (http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/newsletter/2005-nov.shtml) _Cannell JJ, et al. Epidemic influenza and vitamin D. Epidemiology and Infection. 2006 Dec;134(6):1129-40._ (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16959053?ordinalpos=1 & itool=EntrezSystem2.PE\ ntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_Defa ultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum) _The antibiotic vitamin: deficiency in vitamin D may predispose people to infection. Science News, November 11, 2006_ (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1200/is_20_170/ai_n16865477) _Vitamin D deficiency linked to more colds and flu. Scientific American, Feb 23, 2009_ (http://www.sciam.com/blog/60-second-science/post.cfm?id=vitam in-d-deficiency-linked-to-more-2009-02-23) _Top 20 most accessed articles for last year in Virology Journal_ (http://www.virologyj.com/mostviewedbyyear) _Adit A, et al. Association Between Serum 25-Hydroxyvitamin D Level and Upper Respiratory Tract Infection in the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Arch Intern Med. 2009;169(4):384-390._ (http://archinte.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/169/4/384) (mailto:unsubscribe@...) _Cannell JJ, et al. On the epidemiology of influenza. Virology Journal. 2008 Feb 25;5:29._ (http://www.virologyj.com/content/5/1/29) Influenza kill around 35,000 Americans every year and similar viruses cause additional mortality and untold morbidity. The Vitamin D council, the nearly broke non-profit educational organization, now believes most of those deaths could be prevented if Americans, and their doctors, understood some simple facts: Vitamin D is not a vitamin, but a steroid hormone precursor, which has profound effects on innate immunity. The amount of vitamin D in most food and nearly all multivitamins is literally inconsequential. The correct daily dose of vitamin D for adults is approximately 5,000 IU/day, not the 200-600 IU recommended by the Institute of Medicine, the National Institutes of Medicine and the FDA. The only blood test to determine vitamin D adequacy is a 25-hydroxy-vitamin D, not the 1,25-di-hydroxy-vitamin D test many physicians now order. Healthy vitamin D blood levels are between 50-80 ng/ml, levels obtained by fewer than 5% of Americans. Medicares new proposed rule change, which forbids Medicare carriers from paying for virtually vitamin D blood tests (_Draft LCD for Vitamin D Assay Testing (DL29510)_ (http://www.ngsmedicare.com/NGSMedicare/lcd/dl29510_c_lcd.htm) , will kill tens of thousands of Americans yearly. The mechanism of action of vitamin D in infection, dramatically increasing the bodys production of broad-spectrum natural antibiotics (anti-microbial peptides) suggests pharmaceutical doses of vitamin D will effectively treat not only influenza and the common cold, but a host of other seasonal infections, including meningitis, septicemia, and pneumonia, in both children and adults. In 1997, when the Food and Nutrition Board (FNB) set the current guidelines for vitamin D intake, they forgot to correct for the widespread sun avoidance that began in the late 1980’s when the _AMAs Council of Scientific Affairs warned against sun-exposure_ (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2661872?dopt=AbstractPlus) , and recommended that all Americans should make every effort to never let a photon of sunlight strike their skin. This failure of the 1997 FNB has led to millions of deaths around the world. Physicians who ignore vitamin D deficiency will eventually suffer medical-legal consequences. While many think the influenza virus causes influenza, Cannell notes it was Bernard Shaw who first understood: The characteristic microbe of a disease might be a symptom instead of a cause. Bernard Shaw, (Preface on Doctors, The Doctors Dilemma, 1911). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 9, 2009 Report Share Posted March 9, 2009 Hi Patty, I was tested for low Vit D last month. I had a normal level which is unusual for us Oregonians. I sit in the sun, which isn't around much these month ;-) I also use a sun lamp and take Vit D...they all must be working. Hope this helps, Kay ~ Overcast At The Oregon Coast ;-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 Patty, I was tested last July and my Vit. D level was 14. I was retested last month and it had dropped lower to 7 my Dr. has me on 4,000 units of Vit. D a day and I have actually started feeling better. My Dr. will retest me again in 6 mo. He wants my level to be at least 40. Good luck to everyone. Silvia Strickland Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 18, 2009 Report Share Posted March 18, 2009 My doctor had me take 3000 mg of Vitamin D3. Make sure you get the krill oil. I did better after three months. It's part of this health issue. Also have the doctor check it again after a period of time. I am taking 1000mg right now daily. Eva 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.