Vitamin D Is As Bad In Excess As It Is In Deficiency

Waynish

Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2016
Messages
2,206
Yeah, I dislike studies because they mean nothing for the individual. You guys have probably never worked with a real client. Hand them a logbook, track their responses to everything, and watch them get results. Give them some basic dietary guidelines and watch their anecdotal success.

I'll leave it to you guys to sit around with "impressive" studies bending them to whatever conclusion you want. Are studies interesting? Yes. Should a lot of them be taken with a grain of salt? Yes.

Again, correlation does not prove causation. Somehow that keeps getting ignored.

This is a reason why I made the thread asking who on this forum works in the industry and in what fashion. For example, I've watched people gain a lot from vitamin D, but I had them get it from the sun or short sessions in tanning beds.
 

Travis

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2016
Messages
3,189
Masterjohn advocates obtaining a Vitamin D level that (assuming adequate calcium status) maximally suppresses parathyroid hormone. For some that means 30 ng/ml for others 50 ng/ml or more.
And some maybe even less! Quite a bit of calcium gets absorbed independent of vitamin D. The parathyroid has a magic calcium-sensing domain (need to find-out how that works exactly) that releases the parathyroid hormone. This is an interesting process, and I should read more about it.

But I did read a bit about 11β-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase, which works in the kidneys to regulate the Na⁺/K⁺ ratio through cortisol. The calcium/phosphate regulation seems even more interesting, and I can only imagine how this happens. I think it works initially through phosphate, with Ca²⁺ following PO₄²⁻ everywhere it goes like a lost puppy—but more like your cousin's little brother, technically.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 4, 2017
Messages
240
Take me for example. I had clinically low vitamin d levels (under 15) that didn't respond to vitamin d supplementation. My vitamin d came up with lifestyle changes. Vitamin d supplementation caused severe joint pain at 5000 iu's/day. Does that mean I trash vitamin d? No, I just say it doesn't work for me. Thus, your vitamin d studies (that everyone here is lauding) hurt me.
 

Waynish

Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2016
Messages
2,206
Take me for example. I had clinically low vitamin d levels (under 15) that didn't respond to vitamin d supplementation. My vitamin d came up with lifestyle changes. Vitamin d supplementation caused severe joint pain at 5000 iu's/day. Does that mean I trash vitamin d? No, I just say it doesn't work for me. Thus, your vitamin d studies (that everyone here is lauding) hurt me.
I had problems with all vitamin D in pill form, but did you try topically in small doses? It does seem to work a lot better. Not as good as the sun, of course.
 
Joined
Jul 4, 2017
Messages
240
@Waynish, totally.

Anyone who says supplemental vitamin d is a natural substitute for the sun isn't thinking clearly.

The sun activates the SCN of the hypothalamus. This sets your circadian clock, this initiates a parasympathetic response, and this activates the master pituitary gland. Do you think a vitamin d pill can do the above? Hardly. The lux produced by the sun on a cloudy day is way brighter than an office building.

I argue most health issues are circadian driven. If you're a shift worker, you're screwed. You're fighting your body's primal mechanisms. Take your d supplements and think it's that simple? It's not. Light has to, I mean has to, hit the eyeball at morning and at noon.

If you have poor circadian health, you won't sleep, you will have leptin/insulin issues, you will have no energy, it goes on and on. Again, nothing that a vitamin d supplementation is going to fix.
 

Mito

Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2016
Messages
2,554
And some maybe even less!
Yes good point.
The calcium/phosphate regulation seems even more interesting, and I can only imagine how this happens. I think it works initially through phosphate, with Ca²⁺ following PO₄²⁻ everywhere it goes like a lost puppy—but more like your cousin's little brother, to be specific.
I oversimplified what Masterjohn said. Phosphorus complicates things. “So for example, whereas calcium suppresses PTH, and calcium deficiency causes PTH to rise, phosphorus increases PTH, and phosphorus deficiency causes PTH to fall. Whereas PTH causes the kidneys to conserve calcium, PTH causes the kidneys to excrete phosphorus.” https://chrismasterjohnphd.com/2016/05/11/the-daily-lipid-podcast-9-balancing/
 
Joined
Jul 4, 2017
Messages
240
@Waynish, I tried everything. Mega dose injections. Small doses. Different brands. I paired it with k2, Mg, Ca, saturated fat, low fat. Doctors couldn't help me. It was all anecdotal after that. My last test was 46. I sit around there constantly with zero supplementation. Again, this is my story. Whatever can keep your levels up great.

But please, don't avoid the sun because you're supplementing. The sun is up there for a reason and not to just give us a sun tan. You will never discover great health without great circadian health.
 

HDD

Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2012
Messages
2,075
Anyone who says supplemental vitamin d is a natural substitute for the sun isn't thinking clearly.

Sun exposure doesn't always raise vitamin D levels, however sunlight does have other benefits. And apparently supplementing vitamin D doesn't always raise levels. There was a recent email response from Ray Peat regarding adding liver to the diet in this instance.
 

Wilfrid

Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2012
Messages
723
Are there any chances that by keeping TSH relatively low ( vitamin D level is inversely related to the TSH one ) along with enough calcium and vitamin K rich foods, like cooked greens, cheeses like brie, gouda, and even fermented soy like natto now and then ect...( to suppress PTH ) the need for extra supplemental vitamin D is not as necessary as we think? At least for some individuals?
Increasing also dietary intake of magnesium, salt ( up to one's craving ), very low dose of supplemental T3 ( 1 mcg<) taken with foods, avoiding as much as possible hypoglycemia ( and thus FFA release that can also disrupt vitamin D metabolism ), food sources of vitamin D and trace minerals, now and then, like ( and I say it carefully ) canned sardines ect...
Is there also a possibility that supplemental vitamin D could interact with toxic metals by increasing their absorption in humans ( it's the case for rodents and some animals )?
 
Last edited:

EIRE24

Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2015
Messages
1,792
If you are eating lots of liver which obviously comes with lots of vitamin A, is this something to be worried about lowering vitamin D further?
 

raypeatclips

Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2016
Messages
2,555
If you are eating lots of liver which obviously comes with lots of vitamin A, is this something to be worried about lowering vitamin D further?

In a recent email Peat said to me people he knew that avoided eating liver struggled to raise their D levels. Doing both would probably be best, I'm not sure what effect eating liver and not supplementing would have on vitamin D levels.
 

EIRE24

Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2015
Messages
1,792
In a recent email Peat said to me people he knew that avoided eating liver struggled to raise their D levels. Doing both would probably be best, I'm not sure what effect eating liver and not supplementing would have on vitamin D levels.
Thank you.
 
L

lollipop

Guest
I argue most health issues are circadian driven. If you're a shift worker, you're screwed. You're fighting your body's primal mechanisms. Take your d supplements and think it's that simple? It's not. Light has to, I mean has to, hit the eyeball at morning and at noon.

If you have poor circadian health, you won't sleep, you will have leptin/insulin issues, you will have no energy, it goes on and on. Again, nothing that a vitamin d supplementation is going to fix.
I am seeing this same around circadian Rhythm. I agree that its importance is highly under discussed and under considered.
 

kayumochi

Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2015
Messages
376
Do you do oral or topical? What doses?

Currently 5000 iu a day- orally. Been taking D3 for quite a few years now ... first time I was tested at 29 (USA) and later at 110 (USA). When I feel a cold coming on once a year I follow something called Stoss Therapy (very high doses). Respiratory infections were once a regular part of my life but not anymore ...
 

CLASH

Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2017
Messages
1,219
@Travis
You mentioned that topical vit D requires a similar dose as oral, do you have any references for this? I have always applied vit D topically because I assumed this was the most logical way to use it as our skin is the main generator as you mentioned. I thought that more was required trasndermally though so I have taken higher doses. My serum level, which I have recieved today is currently too high (76ng/ ml) so I have been searching around for info.
 

Travis

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2016
Messages
3,189
You mentioned that topical vit D requires a similar dose as oral, do you have any references for this?
I bet I could find one pretty quickly.
I have always applied vit D topically because I assumed this was the most logical way to use it as our skin is the main generator as you mentioned. I thought that more was required trasndermally though so I have taken higher doses.
I had too, but not after I had read this study:
Now they had a control group, but not a group which took it orally so you can't say it was equally effective as oral from this study alone; but I think with a little bit of prodding you will agree that oral vitamin D of same dose (5,000IU) raises blood levels to more-or-less the same degree, on average, than what was shown here.
 

Wilfrid

Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2012
Messages
723
In the study made by Sadat-Ali and Al, they used a proniosomal gel formula of vitamin D. That is: proniosomes are dry formulation of water soluble carrier particles that are coated with surfactant.
They didn't specify it directly ( patent pending related? ) except when writing: " The most ideal penetration enhancer discovered to date is undoubtedly water. "
Here is a more accurate describition of their protocol:
Topical Delivery of Vitamin D3 as Vitamin D Supplementation - Full Text View - ClinicalTrials.gov
Not the current oily based formulation, that mostly everyone here use for their topical application, which is, I think, far far more less effective.
 
Last edited:

Travis

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2016
Messages
3,189
Studies on other steroid hormones prove transdermal absorption. I know that vitamin D is a secosteroid—so there is really no close comparison—but I think progesterone* would be the most similar (besides cholesterol or course, but who'd study that?) Vitamin D only has one polar group, so you might think that it would be absorbed about as well as stearic acid.

There is not enough data to estimate how much a certain amount will be absorbed transdermally, but even oral supplementation is unpredictable. With the same oral dose, blood levels change widely among subjects—even between those of the same body weight.

There appears to be essentially no data on this besides Sadat-Ali's (and others), but I think absorption rates could be estimated by examining those of it's closest molecular cousins.

*Wren, Barry G., et al. "Transdermal progesterone and its effect on vasomotor symptoms, blood lipid levels, bone metabolic markers, moods, and quality of life for postmenopausal women." Menopause 10.1 (2003): 13-18.
 

Milko Georgiev

New Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2018
Messages
2
Hi!
Here is my example.
I take Vitamin D3 supplement since 2002.
In the last 10 years my main supplements look like:
  • Vitamin A (Retinol): 40'000 IU
  • Vitamin D3 (Cholecalciferol): 20'000 IU
  • Vitamin K2 (Menaquinone): 200 mcg
  • Magnesium (Citrate): 400 mg
Every day I eat at least 15 eggs. I eat meat, liver, heart. Very low carbs and alcohol.
I feel and function very well and active.
My LBM is 72 kg. I'm 42 yo.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom