Why You Shouldn't Supplement Vitamin D

Zpol

Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
929
Age
45
In an email RP recommended UV light as a consideration...
"Has your parathyroid hormone ever been measured? Your calcium to phosphate ratio seems very low. Do you salt your food? Occasional liver is a safer way to get B vitamins. Much larger vitamin D supplements might help, or using an ultraviolet light. "

I have the Sperti nUVB. I use it 5 mins a day for about 4 months and it got my 25OHD level up to 49 from 32 ( my doc won't test for other levels). I do usually do red light simultaneously.
 

Jessie

Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2020
Messages
1,018
Morley doesn't seem to want to concede that the cod liver oil is not a good recommendation due to the PUFAs. The amount of D in CLO is not that high, and I believe Morley feels that it is the high dose of vitamin D taken in supplements that is problematic. We do not have to yield to taking supplemental oral D, even if there is no sun, a proper lamp like the Sperti-D lamp will provide the UVB rays that produce vitamin d anytime of the year. The Sperti-D lamp has been proven and certified by the FDA to produce and raise vitamin D levels in test subjects. This company has been around and producing these type lamps since early last century, making them for nursing homes and hospital patients that cannot get sun exposure, so they are not new to the business. Interesting that this information has been suppressed since the pharma industry started selling vitamin D to the agricultural businesses, and telling people they can get all the D they need from drinking milk, etc.
What is high dose for vitamin D? Different people get different results on a wide range of dosages. Some people experience differences on doses as low as 2,500iu. Others can take upwards of 50,000iu and barely notice any changes on serum level. That low end (2,500iu) of the spectrum is similar to the amount of vit D you'd typically find in a tbsp of CLO, depending on brand.
 
OP
ddjd

ddjd

Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2014
Messages
6,673
In an email RP recommended UV light as a consideration...


I have the Sperti nUVB. I use it 5 mins a day for about 4 months and it got my 25OHD level up to 49 from 32 ( my doc won't test for other levels). I do usually do red light simultaneously.
is that the same as the sperti vitamin d sunlamp? ive heard that's the best one
 

Dave Clark

Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2017
Messages
1,978
is that the same as the sperti vitamin d sunlamp? ive heard that's the best one
I would say yes, called a Sperti-D lamp, which produces UVB waves for vitamin D production in the skin. Sperti company has been in business since the 1930s making lamps for nursing homes and hospitals, so they are not new to the business. This is the unit I use: Sperti Vitamin D Sunlamp
 

Amazoniac

Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2014
Messages
8,583
Location
Not Uganda
:hilarious:

When I have or want to check out long videos, I put the speed up to 1.5 or more. Most videos have a lot of small talk and casual talk in it, and if you cruise through that stuff, you can get to the meat/point of the video without having to listen to talk that is not pertinent. Also, some people that do the talks are very slow talkers that take forever to get to the point, so upping the speed gets you through that. Morley may have some good points on how oral vitamin D can imbalance other nutrients and proteins in the liver, along side of raising calcium levels. Historically, man has never consumed large doses of oral D in the diet, sans eskimos or people like that, so I feel it is possible that taking D orally might be problematic and listening to Morley is worth a listen. There is a FB group called Secosteroid Hormone D that may be of interest for an opposing view on taking vitamin D supplements.
Indeed. Since it's an interview trashing venom D, the guest possibly has slow metabolism, so it could be normalizing the metabolic rate for the audience while shortening the torture. If you increase it further, it becomes an anti-attention-deficit measure because the faster it gets, the less distractions the person can afford. It's also a method for practicing skills: last saturday Diokine played Guitar Hero with a friend, masked James, at maximum speed and after returning to normal they mailed it; they perceived reality in slow motion, thought 'This is easy for me, I must be gifted.', and acted by later pressing the lever for more.

These regulatory compounds [such as poisonoids, venomoids, wateroids (Jammal, 2020)] are far more depleting than repleting, it's conceivable for them to promote intolerance in susceptible people, the dose has to match the condition to not make it worse. If there's no ample dietary support, there's still an opportunity to obtain what's missing by using it as modulator to shape the gut composition towards a cooperating profile (amounts would be small but the supply can be steady), also silencing immunity for resolution that minimizes inflammation (prevention of wastage).

The moments when the person has the least inflammation are appropriate for greater doses, whereas at inflammatory peaks the cautionary approach is preferable. For someone that's constantly on the edge, it requires fine-tuning because any dose can be excessive, there are the inflammatory signals that create a futile cycle. The optimal application times in these cases would be on every instance that safe fermentable carbs are consumed but things start derailing (the basic cofactors are probably needed), discontinuing as soon as the first adversity is detected (amplification of existing issues, drop in temperature, pains, tears, and so on). This should be more effective for weakened people than the occasional lethal doses.


These people's hysterical tones are a disservice:
- RoundUp (Glyphosate) Finally Proven Toxic - It Depletes Glycine

Garrett, Charnathan, Morley and Stephanie are more or less on the same boat. I think that the lack of ponderation in their words is reflected on their problem approach as well, but it's not harmless because on every foolish assertion they delegitimize cases who are struggling and could be examined for an accurate explanation. The situation is akin to false sexual assault accusations. For example, if you encountered someone claiming that's suffering from 'Poison A toxicity' after adopting the same speech as the proponents of the movement, how likely it is that the person is going to be taken seriously? If there's no discouragement right away from the term, after inspection and not detecting anything that was claimed, everything that follows is discredited. Something like 'Retinoid Hypomobilization/Dysregulation/Hyperreactive Syndrome' is much better.

Anyway, one of the justifications against its supplementation is that it's a poison A antagonist, which is needed for ceruloplasmin synthesis. There are those who have a functional 'insufficiency' of poison, perhaps the extra venom is enough to aggravate it, but to use it as justification against venom D supplementation seems one more precipitated conclusion. I've never came across reports of (actual) venom D toxicity where ceruloplasmin became critical. How pure the person has to be for ceruloplasmin to be affected? I don't know if something conclusive has been offered, but from the posts that I read there was nothing concrete, it was insane how dots were connected and the jump to the conclusion.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Apr 22, 2019
Messages
799
put the speed up to 1.5 or more. Most videos have a lot of small talk and casual talk in it, and if you cruise through that stuff, you can get to the meat/point of the video without having to listen to talk that is not pertinent.

This. We shouldn't have to invest our entire brain to listen to the bouncing ball on every word when most podcasts take 25 minutes before anything novel or meaty is spoken. Even skipping 10-30second intervals is a great way to catch the thick of a message without making it a part time job.

More vitamin D3 needs more vitamin K2 and magnesium.

At least 1 mg MK-4 and 100 mcg MK-7 per 10,000 IU.

I've been over 50,000 IU for 2+ years and serum calcium is always in range. Near the top, but still in range.

Four things come to mind,
1) all artificially separated compounds, while they definitely have acute results, are isolated from the natural package that they arose from in the first place. It doesn't matter if we're talking about a plant, piece of meat, or naturally occurring minerals... They all have dozens, if not hundreds of surrounding compounds, chemicals, complexes, enzymes, etc etc. Regardless of if someone is on the side of creation or evolution, the fact remains that our bodies clearly have a fractal nature about them which is cohesive to other fractal substances.

2) as far as I can tell, the most salient defense mechanism of the body is to store poison in fat tissue. Whether it's too much carbon in food, chemical poisoning, or fat soluble vitamin, the body will house these things in fat. Just because one diagnosable metric has managed to stay in range doesn't mean that the entire body is benefiting.

3) some people grow up eating liver on regular occasion, turn vegan at 25 and are great until their 50 because of all of the stored B12 they accrued... But then they crash. Some people go vegan off the back of a standard American diet and hit the dirt within 3 months.
Same thing with carnivore dieters that can go for 10+ years. It's great for them until they're beyond the pale in deep waters... Because the consequences of fat storage toxicity are unknown until they become apparent all the time. Filling up this cup is probably a risky game. Take the typical visceral fat-laden individual who can't go 12 hours without food unless they feel like garbage because of the inordinate amounts of poison that their fat stores are releasing all at once. They quickly need food to stabilize their blood sugar and cease this energetic expenditure of fat.

4) supplementing the storage form of a hormone for 2 years... And a common goal of the people on this forum is long life, say 120 years. Doesn't seem that unreasonable that the body can withstand an acute punishment for 2 years if the potential for life is 120 years. You're talking about less than 2% of the time of a healthy human life... even though 2 years is 2 years... This is a drop in the bucket all things considered.

If you exclude the thousands that show benefits, yeah.

Fish oil studies show anti-inflammatory benefit which is supposed to be good, right?
Except it's not, lol. Often the defensive reaction of the body supercedes the sensation of degradation, but this is only acute relief. Thank God the feeling of pain is minimal shortly after suffering a traumatic wound.

even if there is no sun, a proper lamp like the Sperti-D lamp will provide the UVB rays that produce vitamin d anytime of the year.

Allowing the skin to make active vitamin D from light seems WORLDS safer than adding more garbage to the dumpster fire that is the liver and fat storage of most of the members on this forum lol. It's like less than 30 minutes a week of this to get positive effect. To agree with OP, why are we even considering supplementing rat poison in ANY dose!?
 

Zpol

Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
929
Age
45
is that the same as the sperti vitamin d sunlamp? ive heard that's the best one
Yes, the Sperti nUVB is the Vit D lamp. It's a bit pricey but it's worth it in my experience. I consider it an investment in my health.
 

Forsythia

Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2014
Messages
195
why are we even considering supplementing rat poison in ANY dose!?

Because it's the dose that makes it poison. Just as someone above mentioned, too much water can kill you (and rats), but no one calls it poison. Cholecalciferol (D3), water, table salt, aspirin and many other things can kill you, but it is the dose that makes the poison. Stop with the hysterics already.
 

jmojo

Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2013
Messages
98
In an email RP recommended UV light as a consideration...


I have the Sperti nUVB. I use it 5 mins a day for about 4 months and it got my 25OHD level up to 49 from 32 ( my doc won't test for other levels). I do usually do red light simultaneously.

I'm probably going to buy one as my winters are rough and vitamin D supplements usually cause side effects for me. How long did it take you to go from 32 to 49?
 

Davsey85

Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2017
Messages
332
Sometimes low vitamin d is from lack of sunlight,latitudes othertimes a
feedback mechanism for blocked vitamin d receptor from viruses,excessive emf

Sometimes any supplementation of vitamin d can be bad for some while ok for others
In general better not to mess with bodies feedback mechanism unless needed
 

Zpol

Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
929
Age
45
How long did it take you to go from 32 to 49?
It was 32 ng/mL when I got it checked last year October 25th. I only used the lamp occasionally for a few months after that and then I started using it religiously for 5 mins a day for about 4 months before I got it checked again at which time it measured 49 ng/mL. I emailed the company asking how much time I needed to use the lamp daily before retesting, they said at least three months.
 
Joined
Oct 8, 2016
Messages
464
Location
Colorado, USA
Garrett, Charnathan, Morley and Stephanie are more or less on the same boat. I think that the lack of ponderation in their words is reflected on their problem approach as well, but it's not harmless because on every foolish assertion they delegitimize cases who are struggling and could be examined for an accurate explanation. The situation is akin to false sexual assault accusations. For example, if you encountered someone claiming that's suffering from 'Poison A toxicity' after adopting the same speech as the proponents of the movement, how likely it is that the person is going to be taken seriously? If there's no discouragement right away from the term, after inspection and not detecting anything that was claimed, everything that follows is discredited. Something like 'Retinoid Hypomobilization/Dysregulation/Hyperreactive Syndrome' is much better.

Anyway, one of the justifications against its supplementation is that it's a poison A antagonist, which is needed for ceruloplasmin synthesis. There are those who have a functional 'insufficiency' of poison, perhaps the extra venom is enough to aggravate it, but to use it as justification against venom D supplementation seems one more precipitated conclusion. I've never came across reports of (actual) venom D toxicity where ceruloplasmin became critical. How pure the person has to be for ceruloplasmin to be affected? I don't know if something conclusive has been offered, but from the posts that I read there was nothing concrete, it was insane how dots were connected and the jump to the conclusion.

Who is Charnathan?

By the way, ceruloplasmin is an acute phase reactant/protein, just like CRP or ferritin (it occurs in an inflammatory state). I don't remember Morley ever discussing that. I would like to know how he explains that. Is ceruloplasmin just "better ferritin" like how copper is "better iron"?

I like Retinoid Dysregulation or Retinoid Hyperreactive Syndrome. The hypomobilization is good, but too suggestive of a solution. We should avoid naming conditions such that they have the "answer" in the name.
 

Maljam

Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2020
Messages
715
It was 32 ng/mL when I got it checked last year October 25th. I only used the lamp occasionally for a few months after that and then I started using it religiously for 5 mins a day for about 4 months before I got it checked again at which time it measured 49 ng/mL. I emailed the company asking how much time I needed to use the lamp daily before retesting, they said at least three months.

What distance did you use the lamp and did you move it around the body for the 5 minutes or stand in front of it? How did you use it?
 

Geronimo

Member
Joined
May 11, 2020
Messages
346
I'd block you from this entire thread if i could because it's such a great problem for you

Yeah, you're being incredibly rude. As someone said, this is the ray peat forum. Don't expect everyone to watch 2 hours worth of someone else, especially if they specifically ask you to summarize the points. It's basic forum etiquette to summarize these things upon request, and it's especially proper etiquette to not whine and be insulting about it. People here are really polite and nice. Let's keep it that way.
 
OP
ddjd

ddjd

Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2014
Messages
6,673
Yeah, you're being incredibly rude. As someone said, this is the ray peat forum. Don't expect everyone to watch 2 hours worth of someone else, especially if they specifically ask you to summarize the points. It's basic forum etiquette to summarize these things upon request, and it's especially proper etiquette to not whine and be insulting about it. People here are really polite and nice. Let's keep it that way.
@charlie can you please delete this entire thread that i started here. i can't believe instead of people saying thanks for starting an interesting conversation, offering information that a lot of people seem to find worthwhile, I'm getting criticised for not providing a good enough summary of the 2hr video and for being rude(??). i find this unbelievable. next time i just won't post anything in case i don't summarise the topic well enough first (??). i find it laughable!!
 
Last edited:

Quelsatron

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2020
Messages
484
@charlie can you please delete this entire thread that i started here. i can't believe instead of people saying thanks for starting an interesting conversation, offering information that a lot of people seem to find worthwhile, I'm getting criticised for not providing a good enough summary of the 2hr video and for being rude(??). i find this unbelievable. next time i just won't post anything in case i don't summarise the topic well enough first (??). i find it laughable!!
I agree, if anything it's rude to take offense over being called an idiot.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom