Re: Re: Vitamin D: Neil

[Guest guest]

Resended...

and Irwin <familyirwin@...> wrote: Hi Neil,

Thanks for this information. Initially, back in August, my vitamin D level

was 14. So, the doc prescribed me some, and I didn't like the contents of the

pill, so I went to the health food store. Started taking about 10,000 a day.

Went back, and got the blood drawn again, and now I am at 41. I still need to

come up. Plus, what is wierd...I live in Sunny California. So, I know there is

somthing going on.

So, you think I should aim at 50?

Thanks so much!!

neil <neilneil@...> wrote:

Hi ,

If you have confirmed low blood levels it is ok to take that much for

a couple of weeks. I would not be comfortable taking that much for

longer than that. My wife gets her levels to 50ng/ml (considered

optimal) by taking 4,000iu daily. She is petite, I'm a big guy and it

takes 6,000iu+...but a lot depends on age, skin color, where you live,

genetics, etc. Both of my kids take 2,400iu daily of an oil based

vitamin D3 gel cap daily. Our family has not had a single cold/flu

this season, the people all around us are dropping from virus's like

crazy.

Remember, blood testing when taking big doses of vitamin D3 is

mandatory! You can really get too much of vitamin D! Dr. says it

best... " Some authorities call the behavior of vitamin D " bi-phasic " :

Deficiency is toxic, excessive levels are toxic. We're really just

trying to achieve a middle ground in vitamin D levels that are above

deficiency but below toxicity. In reality, deficiency is exceptionally

common. In fact, it's the rule around here (northern U.S.), with >95%

of everybody we check severely deficient in winter, mildly-moderately

deficient in summer. Very few people approach normal levels year round

without supplementation. Toxicity, on the other hand, is exceedingly

rare. I have seen it once in a woman who was taking a toxic dose of

50,000 units a day on the instructions of her (mis-guided) doctor.

Thankfully, no ill-effects developed from this little " experiment. "

So, it's not toxicity that is the overwhelmingly common worry, but

deficiency, severe and sustained. "

This collection of articles by cardiologist Dr. covers this and

much more, here is one in the series...Neil

http://heartscanblog.blogspot.com/search/label/vitamin%20D

End-stage vitamin D deficiency

Let me paint a picture:

A 78-year old woman, tired and bent. She's lost an inch and a half of

her original height because of collapse of several vertebra in her

spine over the years, leaving her with a " dowager's hump, " a stooped

position that many older women assume with advanced osteoporosis. It's

also left her with chronic back pain.

This poor woman also has arthritis in her knees, hips, and spine. All

three locations add to her pain.

She also has hypertension, a high blood sugar approaching diabetes,

and distortions of cholesterol values, including a low HDL and high

triglycerides.

Look inside: On a simple x-ray, we see that the bones of her body are

unusually transparent, with just a thin rim of bone at the outer

edges, depleted of calcium. Weight-bearing bones like the spine, hips,

and knees have eroded and collapsed.

On an echocardiogram of her heart (ultrasound), she has dense calcium

surrounding her mitral valve ( " mitral anular calcium " ), a finding that

rarely impairs the valve itself but is a marker for heightened

potential for heart attack and other adverse events. Her aortic valve,

another of the four heart valves, is also loaded with calcium. In the

aortic valve, unlike the mitral valve, the collection of calcium makes

the valve struggle to open, causing a murmur. The valve is rigid and

can barely open to less than half of its original opening width.

If a heart scan were performed, we'd see the coronary calcification,

along with calcification of the aorta, and the mitral and aortic valves.

Obviously, it's not a pretty picture. It is, however, a typical

snapshot of an average 78-year old woman, or any other elderly man or

woman, for that matter.

This collection of arthritis, osteoporosis, coronary and valve

calcification, high blood pressure, abnormal cholesterol patterns, and

pain is not unusual by any stretch. Perhaps you even recognize someone

you know in this description. Perhaps it's you.

Look at this list again. Does it seem familiar? I'd say that the

common factor that ties these seemingly unrelated conditions together

is chronic and severe deficiency of vitamin D. Vitamin D deficiency

leads to arthritis, osteoporosis, coronary and valve calcification,

high blood pressure, abnormal cholesterol patterns, and pain.

Should we go so far as to proclaim that aging, or at least many of the

undesirable phenomena of aging, are really just manifestations of

vitamin D deficiency? I would propose that much of aging is really

deficiency of vitamin D, chronic and severe, in its end stages.

My colleagues might propose a 30- or 40-year long randomized trial,

one designed to test whether vitamin D or placebo makes any difference.

Can you wait? " "

http://heartscanblog.blogspot.com/2006/12/dont-overdo-vitamin-d.html

" Saturday, December 16, 2006

Don't overdo the vitamin D

As time passes and I advise more and more people to supplement vitamin

D, I gain increasing respect for this powerful " vitamin " . I am

convinced that vitamin D replacement is the reason for a recent surge

in our success rates in dropping CT heart scan scores. I believe it is

also explains the larger drops we've been witnessing lately--20-30%.

But vitamin D can be overdone, too. Too much of a good thing . . .

Despite being labeled a " vitamin " , cholecalciferol is actually a

hormone. Vitamins are obtained from food and you can thereby develop

deficiencies because of poor intake. Deficiency of vitamin C, for

instance, arises from a lack of vegetables and fruits.

Vitamin D, on the other hand, is nearly absent from food. The only

naturally-occuring source is oily fish like salmon and sardines. Milk

usually has a little (100 units per 8 oz) because milk producers have

been required by law to put it there to reduce the incidence of

childhood rickets.

A woman came to me with a heart scan score of nearly 3800, the highest

score I've every seen in a woman. (Record for a male >8,000!) She was

taking vitamin D by prescription from her family doctor but at a dose

of 150,000 units per week, or approximately 21,000 units per day. This

had gone on for about 3-4 years. This may explain her excessive

coronary calcium score. Interestingly, she had virtually no

lipoprotein abnormalities identified, which by itself is curious,

since most people have some degree of abnormality like small LDL.

Obviously, I asked her to stop the vitamin D.

Should you be afraid of vitamin D? Of course not. If your neighbor is

an alcoholic and has advanced cirrhosis, does that mean you shouldn't

have a glass or two of Merlot for health and enjoyment? It's a matter

of quantity. Too little vitamin D and you encourage coronary plaque

growth. Too much vitamin D and you trigger " pathologic calcification " ,

or the deposition of calcium in inappropriate places and sometimes to

extreme degrees, as in this unfortunate woman.

Ideally, you should have your doctor check your 25-OH-vitamin D3 blood

levels twice a year in summar and in winter. We aim for a level of 50

ng/ml, the level at which the phenemena of deficiency dissipate.

Posted by Dr. at 7:06 PM " "

>

> Hi Neil Venizia,

> Thanks so much for the information on Vitamin D. Very very

informative. I am taking about 10,000 IU's a day. I need my levels up.

>

> Blessings,

>

>

>

>

>