Starting with Vitamin D - first post - Re: Lab Results

[Guest guest]

Steve,

I am taking 50,000 units once a week and will be for about 2 more

weeks. At that point I will have another blood test. I was a 70,

stopped taking it for a couple of months and then went down to I

believe 35. Started taking it again and I hope my doctor will keep me

on some sort of supplement of D. Or I will do it on my own and just

keep getting checked. He is also conservative in the numbers he likes

to see. I will be showing him your post.

Venizia

>

> Forwarded:

>

> http://heartscanblog.blogspot.com/2008/12/high-dose-vitamin-d.html

>

> --- " High-dose " Vitamin D

> Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2008 03:57:53 GMT

> From: Dr. <noreply@...>

>

>

> I stumbled on one of the growing number of local media stories on the

> power of vitamin D.

>

> In one story, a purported " expert " was talking about the benefits of

> " high-dose " vitamin D, meaning up to 1000, even 2000 units per day.

>

> I regard this as high-dose---for an infant.

>

> Judging by my experiences, now numbering well over 1000 patients over

> three years time, I'd regard this dose range not as " high dose, " nor

> moderate dose, perhaps not even low dose. I'd regard it as barely

adequate.

>

> Though needs vary widely, the majority of men require 6000 units per

> day, women 5000 units per day. Only then do most men and women achieve

> what I'd define as desirable: 60-70 ng/ml 25-hydroxy vitamin D blood

level.

>

> I base this target level by extrapolating from several simple

observations:

>

> --In epidemiologic studies, a blood level of 52 ng/ml seems to be an

> eerily consistent value: >52 ng/ml and cancer of the colon, breast, and

> prostate become far less common; <52 ng/ml and cancers are far more

> likely. I don't know about you, but I'd like to have a little larger

> margin of safety than just achieving 52.1 ng/ml.

>

> --Young people (not older people >40 years old, who have lost most of

> the capacity to activate vitamin D in the skin) who obtain several days

> to weeks of tropical sun typically have 25-hydroxy vitamin D blood

> levels of 80-100 ng/ml without adverse effect.

>

> More recently, having achieved this target blood level in many

people, I

> can tell you confidently that achieving this blood level of vitamin D

> achieves:

>

> --Virtual elimination of " winter blues " and seasonal affective disorder

> in the great majority

> --Dramatic increases in HDL cholesterol (though full effect can require

> a year to develop)

> --Reduction in triglycerides

> --Modest reduction in blood pressure

> --Dramatic reduction in c-reactive protein (far greater than achieved

> with Crestor, JUPITER trial or no)

> --Increased bone density (improved osteoporosis/osteopenia)

> --Halting or reversal of aortic valve disease

>

> (I don't see enough cancer in my cardiology practice to gauge

whether or

> not there has been an impact on cancer incidence.)

>

> My colleagues who have bothered to participate in the vitamin D

> conversation have issued warnings about not going " overboard " with

> vitamin D, generally meaning a level of >30 ng/ml.

>

> I know of no rational basis for these cautions. If hypercalcemia

> (increased blood calcium) is the concern, then calcium levels can be

> monitored. I can reassure them that calcium levels virtually never

go up

> in people (without rare diseases like sarcoid or hyperparathyroidism).

> Then why any hesitation in recreating blood levels that are enjoyed by

> tropical inhabitants exposed to plentiful sun that achieve these

> extraordinary health effects?

>

> For the present, I have applied the target level of 60-70 ng/ml without

> apparent ill-effect. In fact, I have witnessed nothing but hugely

> positive effects.

>

> --

>

> Steve - dudescholar4@...

>

> Take World's Smallest Political Quiz at

> http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html

>

> " If a thousand old beliefs were ruined on our march

> to truth we must still march on. " --Stopford

>

[Guest guest]

Isn't taking that much vit d dangerous? I started taking it also because of

fibromyalgia and other benefits it had, but was looking at the recommended

dosage and the dangers of too much. Curious what you've heard about that.

In a message dated 1/4/2009 7:20:09 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,

nelsonck@... writes:

Steve,

I am taking 50,000 units once a week and will be for about 2 more

weeks. At that point I will have another blood test. I was a 70,

stopped taking it for a couple of months and then went down to I

believe 35. Started taking it again and I hope my doctor will keep me

on some sort of supplement of D. Or I will do it on my own and just

keep getting checked. He is also conservative in the numbers he likes

to see. I will be showing him your post.

Venizia

>

> Forwarded:

>

> http://heartscanblog.blogspot.com/2008/12/high-dose-vitamin-d.html

>

> --- " High-dose " Vitamin D

> Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2008 03:57:53 GMT

> From: Dr. <noreply@...>

>

>

> I stumbled on one of the growing number of local media stories on the

> power of vitamin D.

>

> In one story, a purported " expert " was talking about the benefits of

> " high-dose " vitamin D, meaning up to 1000, even 2000 units per day.

>

> I regard this as high-dose---for an infant.

>

> Judging by my experiences, now numbering well over 1000 patients over

> three years time, I'd regard this dose range not as " high dose, " nor

> moderate dose, perhaps not even low dose. I'd regard it as barely

adequate.

>

> Though needs vary widely, the majority of men require 6000 units per

> day, women 5000 units per day. Only then do most men and women achieve

> what I'd define as desirable: 60-70 ng/ml 25-hydroxy vitamin D blood

level.

>

> I base this target level by extrapolating from several simple

observations:

>

> --In epidemiologic studies, a blood level of 52 ng/ml seems to be an

> eerily consistent value: >52 ng/ml and cancer of the colon, breast, and

> prostate become far less common; <52 ng/ml and cancers are far more

> likely. I don't know about you, but I'd like to have a little larger

> margin of safety than just achieving 52.1 ng/ml.

>

> --Young people (not older people >40 years old, who have lost most of

> the capacity to activate vitamin D in the skin) who obtain several days

> to weeks of tropical sun typically have 25-hydroxy vitamin D blood

> levels of 80-100 ng/ml without adverse effect.

>

> More recently, having achieved this target blood level in many

people, I

> can tell you confidently that achieving this blood level of vitamin D

> achieves:

>

> --Virtual elimination of " winter blues " and seasonal affective disorder

> in the great majority

> --Dramatic increases in HDL cholesterol (though full effect can require

> a year to develop)

> --Reduction in triglycerides

> --Modest reduction in blood pressure

> --Dramatic reduction in c-reactive protein (far greater than achieved

> with Crestor, JUPITER trial or no)

> --Increased bone density (improved osteoporosis/osteopenia)

> --Halting or reversal of aortic valve disease

>

> (I don't see enough cancer in my cardiology practice to gauge

whether or

> not there has been an impact on cancer incidence.)

>

> My colleagues who have bothered to participate in the vitamin D

> conversation have issued warnings about not going " overboard " with

> vitamin D, generally meaning a level of >30 ng/ml.

>

> I know of no rational basis for these cautions. If hypercalcemia

> (increased blood calcium) is the concern, then calcium levels can be

> monitored. I can reassure them that calcium levels virtually never

go up

> in people (without rare diseases like sarcoid or hyperparathyroidism).

> Then why any hesitation in recreating blood levels that are enjoyed by

> tropical inhabitants exposed to plentiful sun that achieve these

> extraordinary health effects?

>

> For the present, I have applied the target level of 60-70 ng/ml without

> apparent ill-effect. In fact, I have witnessed nothing but hugely

> positive effects.

>

> --

>

> Steve - dudescholar4@...

>

> Take World's Smallest Political Quiz at

> http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html

>

> " If a thousand old beliefs were ruined on our march

> to truth we must still march on. " --Stopford

>

------------------------------------

To unsubscribe, send blank message to:

hypothyroidism-unsubscribe

Web Sites:

Curing Protocol: http://curezone.com/dis/1.asp?C0=842

Forum: http://curezone.com/forums/f.asp?f=25

Books: http://curezone.com/books/best/categoryx.asp?CAT=842

Cleansing: http://curezone.com/cleanse/

Liver Flush: http://curezone.com/cleanse/liver/

Foods: http://CureZone.com/foods/

Diet: http://CureZone.com/diet/

Teeth: http://curezone.com/dental/

change status to digest: hypothyroidism-digest

change to normal: hypothyroidism-normal

To subscribe: hypothyroidism-subscribe

Have a nice day ! Links

**************New year...new news. Be the first to know what is making

headlines. (http://www.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000026)