Vitamin D intake guidelines underestimated by a factor of 10

[haidut]

I don't know what Ray's specific guidelines on daily intake of vitamin D are, but I have seen him express opinion that 400 IU - 800 IU is likely too low to make a difference. This study claims that the current guidelines are underestimated by a factor of 10, so a person should really be ingesting north of 4,000 IU of vitamin D3 daily.
If true, this may explain why most studies with vitamin D did not see effects with doses of less then 3,000 IU.

http://www.newswise.com/articles/scient ... ar-too-low

 

[chris]

Will you be making adjustments to Estroban because of these findings?

 

[haidut]

Will you be making adjustments to Estroban because of these findings?

No planning on it for now. The doses in EstroBan have studies behind them showing these specific doses being "optimal" for lowering estrogen without the side effects of hypercalcemia (vitamin D) or competing with each other for absorption (vitamin E and K). Let's see if another study corroborates these findings.

 

[Sheila]

With respect I would ask that you don't change the formula for a while. Some patients of mine go very badly on vitamin D but respond well to ADEK which leads me to conclude they are missing the other three, tests showing they are at 'sufficiency' around 50 on D tests. I would love a Vitamin A only too since Interplexus' Vit A - which worked well in my experience - remains out of stock, some 6 months now.
Respectfully,
Sheila

 

[haidut]

With respect I would ask that you don't change the formula for a while. Some patients of mine go very badly on vitamin D but respond well to ADEK which leads me to conclude they are missing the other three, tests showing they are at 'sufficiency' around 50 on D tests. I would love a Vitamin A only too since Interplexus' Vit A - which worked well in my experience - remains out of stock, some 6 months now.
Respectfully,
Sheila

No worries Sheila, I don't plan on changing it for now. Btw, if some of your patients do badly on vitamin D only, have you considered checking their calcitriol (activated vitamin D) levels? Sometimes, the reason for reacting badly to vitamin D is that the patient has a condition forcing the conversion of D3 into calcitriol, so the more vitamin D they get the more calcitriol they produce. Short of a blood test, a quick way to test if this is the case would be to administer just vitamin A and vitamin D in combination, with a ratio 5:1 in favor of vitamin A. If this improves the situation it implies that they have high calcitriol and are getting soft tissue calcification from taking vitamin D only. For those people, vitamin D should only be taken in combo with the other 3 vitamins, and in some cases they may even need a short-term course of high dose vitamin K2 (MK-4) only to get some calcification reversed.

 

[moss]

With respect I would ask that you don't change the formula for a while. Some patients of mine go very badly on vitamin D but respond well to ADEK which leads me to conclude they are missing the other three, tests showing they are at 'sufficiency' around 50 on D tests. I would love a Vitamin A only too since Interplexus' Vit A - which worked well in my experience - remains out of stock, some 6 months now.
Respectfully,
Sheila

No worries Sheila, I don't plan on changing it for now. Btw, if some of your patients do badly on vitamin D only, have you considered checking their calcitriol (activated vitamin D) levels? Sometimes, the reason for reacting badly to vitamin D is that the patient has a condition forcing the conversion of D3 into calcitriol, so the more vitamin D they get the more calcitriol they produce. Short of a blood test, a quick way to test if this is the case would be to administer just vitamin A and vitamin D in combination, with a ratio 5:1 in favor of vitamin A. If this improves the situation it implies that they have high calcitriol and are getting soft tissue calcification from taking vitamin D only. For those people, vitamin D should only be taken in combo with the other 3 vitamins, and in some cases they may even need a short-term course of high dose vitamin K2 (MK-4) only to get some calcification reversed.

Hi Haidut, I also echo Sheila's plea for a liquid Vitamin A.
NutriSorb is/was a decent product and I received a reply from the company a few days ago and they are still unsure when the product will come back in...

I think Vitamin D dose of 400 IU - 800 IU is way to low and generally go for between 2000 IU - 5000 IU based on time of year.
Shelia, that is interesting with negative reactions with Vitamin D and I shall look out for that and note possible deficiencies of AEK as well, thanks.

 

[barbwirehouse]

GrassrootsHealth is a nonprofit public health research organization dedicated to moving public health messages regarding vitamin D from science into practice. GrassrootsHealth is currently running the D*action population intervention program to solve the vitamin D epidemic worldwide. Under the D*action umbrella, there are programs looking at the entire population as well as targeted programs for breast cancer prevention and a newly announced ‘Protect Our Children NOW!’ program to reduce the complications of vitamin D deficiency encountered during pregnancy and childhood.

Very suspect, hardly a reliable source.

 

[Sheila]

Haidut,
Thank you for your considered reply. I had thought for a while Vit A was an issue here for these patients; all the reactive ones, to date, have kidney issues, some to the point of regular dialysis and often hypocalcaemia even with supplementation. I am considering Vit K2 for a short period, there is definitely soft tissue calcification in these pictures which calcitriol can exacerbate. But with kidney disease the action of calcitriol is not as cut and dried as it 'should be' and some of the interactions are conflicting/confusion to regular with kidney function, where the full extent of the interactions between all the hormones is not 100% clear either. I shall continue to work gently and slowly to improve metabolism here and I thank you for your suggestions.
Sheila

 

[haidut]

With respect I would ask that you don't change the formula for a while. Some patients of mine go very badly on vitamin D but respond well to ADEK which leads me to conclude they are missing the other three, tests showing they are at 'sufficiency' around 50 on D tests. I would love a Vitamin A only too since Interplexus' Vit A - which worked well in my experience - remains out of stock, some 6 months now.
Respectfully,
Sheila

No worries Sheila, I don't plan on changing it for now. Btw, if some of your patients do badly on vitamin D only, have you considered checking their calcitriol (activated vitamin D) levels? Sometimes, the reason for reacting badly to vitamin D is that the patient has a condition forcing the conversion of D3 into calcitriol, so the more vitamin D they get the more calcitriol they produce. Short of a blood test, a quick way to test if this is the case would be to administer just vitamin A and vitamin D in combination, with a ratio 5:1 in favor of vitamin A. If this improves the situation it implies that they have high calcitriol and are getting soft tissue calcification from taking vitamin D only. For those people, vitamin D should only be taken in combo with the other 3 vitamins, and in some cases they may even need a short-term course of high dose vitamin K2 (MK-4) only to get some calcification reversed.

Hi Haidut, I also echo Sheila's plea for a liquid Vitamin A.
NutriSorb is/was a decent product and I received a reply from the company a few days ago and they are still unsure when the product will come back in...

I think Vitamin D dose of 400 IU - 800 IU is way to low and generally go for between 2000 IU - 5000 IU based on time of year.
Shelia, that is interesting with negative reactions with Vitamin D and I shall look out for that and note possible deficiencies of AEK as well, thanks.

OK, I think I can release a product matching Nutrisorb's quantity and price. Essentially, 850,000 IU of vitamin A in one bottle for about $20. It will probably take a month to get the raw materials but I will keep you posted.

 

[Sheila]

Haidut, regarding your Vitamin A product, count me in! It's often the one I want to use solo together with ADEK as background. THANK YOU. Sheila

 

[moss]

OK, I think I can release a product matching Nutrisorb's quantity and price. Essentially, 850,000 IU of vitamin A in one bottle for about $20. It will probably take a month to get the raw materials but I will keep you posted.

Excellent Haidut!
This would be fantastic and sounds very reasonably priced. Thank you in advance for looking into this much appreciated.
moss

 

[dd99]

Haidut, you might want to mention it on the Facebook RP Inspired group, too, if you go ahead with it. They've been getting pretty agitated about the lack of Nutrisorb.

 

[haidut]

Haidut, you might want to mention it on the Facebook RP Inspired group, too, if you go ahead with it. They've been getting pretty agitated about the lack of Nutrisorb.

Thanks, I will have to join those groups finally. I've been hearing about them for more than a year.

 

[Suikerbuik]

I actually didn't want to reply, like Barbwirehouse I don't consider this as a reliable source and something purely theoretical, anyway here's something to consider http://nutrevolve.blogspot.ca/2015/03/using-dris-vitamin-d-case-study.html.

 

[Filip1993]

Regarding your Vitamin A product Haidut, count me in too! Great news!

 

[tara]

OK, I think I can release a product matching Nutrisorb's quantity and price. Essentially, 850,000 IU of vitamin A in one bottle for about $20. It will probably take a month to get the raw materials but I will keep you posted.

Hi Haidut,
Are you still planning on doing this? Any time estimates? I'm due to place another order soon, and if this is imminent, I'll hold off so I can get this too.
Ta

 

[haidut]

The vitamin A product is actually ready. I will post the ordering link tomorrow. Thanks for the patience.

 

[tara]

The vitamin A product is actually ready. I will post the ordering link tomorrow. Thanks for the patience.

Great, ta.

 

[Filip1993]

The vitamin A product is actually ready. I will post the ordering link tomorrow. Thanks for the patience.

Fantastic!

 

[XPlus]

I don't know what Ray's specific guidelines on daily intake of vitamin D are, but I have seen him express opinion that 400 IU - 800 IU is likely too low to make a difference. This study claims that the current guidelines are underestimated by a factor of 10, so a person should really be ingesting north of 4,000 IU of vitamin D3 daily.
If true, this may explain why most studies with vitamin D did not see effects with doses of less then 3,000 IU.

http://www.newswise.com/articles/scient ... ar-too-low

There's something I wanted to get your opinion of, Haidut.
Although I'm supposedly deficient, vitamin D is the least effective of the fat soluble vitamins in my experience.
I feel indifferent to taking it.
Why do you think is that?