Improved
6112 HealthChanged
3786 LivesSaved
3568 Lives0 lives impacted in the last 24 hrs Learn More
Vitamin D has been making its way into the news more frequently these days. This attention has been slow in coming but researchers seem interested in making up for lost time.
Vitamin D has long been acknowledged for its role of assisting the body in the absorption of calcium. It is essential for strong, healthy bones. But wait, there's more.
While research is in its early stages, some interesting data has been emerging. Recent studies indicate that there may be a correlation between low levels of Vitamin D and mental deterioration.
And it is possible that a correlation exists between low Vitamin D levels and the danger of loss of balance or falls, for older people.
"But vitamin D also seems to have anti-inflammatory effects that may help keep blood vessels healthy, ensuring nutrient- and oxygen-rich blood flow to brain cells, says Amie Peterson, MD, of Oregon Health & Science University in Portland."
http://www.webmd.com/healthy-aging/news/20100416/low-vitamin-d-level-tied-to-cognitive-decline?src=RSS_PUBLIC
Add a Comment8 Comments
To all:
Never think of 'vitamin D" as a vitamin. Its activated form is a steroid. Steroids are what medicine uses for its most difficult cases. And "vitamin D" is what evolution saw fit to protect us the most. We are and always will be creatures of the sun and to deny that results in disease. Perhaps a million years from now we will have found a way to change that but for the foreseeable future we are stuck with it.
Always understand that the bright people who run and do research for drug companies have seen the threat of D. It will make many, if not most, of their molecules worthy of reconsideration. It will make their testing of dubious value. All those vitamin D deficient patients/subjects could not possibly have given healthy results. So why not start all over again with healthy subjects and see what happens?
Suppose all of a sudden people stopped developing chronic and acute diseases? Suppose that number was cut in half? What on earth would the drug companies do but try to stop it for fear of financial ruin?
You will see nothing but deception, obfuscation, and smoke screens from the drug companies re: D. They will do their utmost to keep their franchises. They will do it at the cost of our health.
People need to start thinking about avoiding diseases and not resigning themselves to a "family history". So often a "family history" has its roots in inherited tendencies towards major vitamin D deficiency. Think about it when you realize the extent of vitamin D deficiency and its impact on practically everyone. It starts in the womb and goes from there...
April 20, 2010 - 9:06amThis Comment
I think the BSN RN is listening to the medical community who stands to benefit from this information not being well known. If people were healthy, why would we need as many hospitals, clinics, etc as we have? When I was a kid, our city had three hospitals and maybe a handful of doctor's offices. Now, you can't walk down the street without running into some kind of medical facility. And, now they advertise and compete for our 'sick care' dollars. Well intended doctors, and in this case RN's are being misled by the powers that be that want us to be sick so that they can profit.
April 20, 2010 - 7:21amThis Comment
Anonymous-
I would like to see the evidence showing that 80% of breast cancer can be prevented using vitamin D. I would appreciate if you could avoid personal attacks as well. If you think as a nurse or a human being I would not love to see cancer disappear, then you clearly know nothing about me or any other nurse. I take vitamin D myself because it helps with my rheumatoid arthritis. But I have seen nothing that says it will prevent 80% of breast cancers other than the empty claim above.
Please keep your aspersions on my motives to yourself.
April 20, 2010 - 7:26amThis Comment
Hold it!!!!
That "anonymous" comment was not made by me!
I do get overzealous but that was not me.
I ALWAYS post with my moniker!
The last thing on earth I would want is to turn off a medical pro whose interest would directly lead to reduced suffering through D awareness.
So please forget about the peanut gallery if and when it throws shells.
Please, please, please read on!
p.s.
I was in exactly the same position as yours before I did my research. I belived NOTHING about
vitamin claims other than C prevents scurvy. Seriously- I am VERY sceptical of claims because 99% of the time they are applicable to 1% of the public.
D is applicable to 99% of the public and not for the 1% with D polymorphisms.
I repeat myself but the magic number is 50 ng/ml, year round. Think of it as water and a few small cups a day won't get you through. Of course swimming in it will not get you through te day (toxicity- swallow too much). With D we have been given a dixie cup's worth and told that was enough. Wrong by a quart...if you catch my drift?
April 20, 2010 - 9:29amThis Comment
I sincerely apologize for any personal injury from my overzealous words.
Here is the proof:
(Links removed by EmpowHER moderator)
Please investigate this site thoroughly. Breast cancer studies are just one of many, many diseases considered by Grassroots Health.
Also I have a correction to make about the reduction in breast cancer cases- I cited a figure of 80% that was indeed incorrect and I apologize for the error.
The correct figure is 83%.
What needs to be made clear- beyond clear- is that the healthy, natural of activated vitamin D (25 OH D) MUST be at least 50 ng/ml, year round, to maximize its protective power.
Based on my review of abstracts, studies, research and the like, 98+% of them used 30 ng/ml of (25 OH D) as a level of sufficiency. This level is unnatural and arbitrary based on mostly false, inappropriate data.
Further the RDI for D and age groups was established by swag and guessing. It used the amount of D known to cure rickets. Thus the absurdly small intake of 200- 400 i.u. I challenge anyone to find a more devastating, lethal mistake in all of medicine? 200 i.u. of D for a 35 year old, 250 lb. man who works as a pipe fitter? Or the same for a single mother of 4, living in Seattle, trying to raise a flock of small children?
A daily intake of 200 i.u. for an adult male of 200 lbs. will barely register on a 25 OH D test. What little has been reported (HUGELY embarrassing for the medical and public health communities) on such intakes/demographics typically results in readings below 10 ng/ml!!! A figure considered unhealthy by everyone. Thus anyone abiding by the RDI is doing so with a dog that won’t hunt.
I digress..the 30 ng/ml is unnatural and foreign to humanity whose evolution resulted in regular sun exposure. That level is naturally around 60 ng/ml, year round. 30 ng/ml is only half of that and most people are not there anyway. 30 ng/ml has been shown to result in nearly immediate degradation of coronary/vascular health...see the vitamin D Mormon heart disease study 11/09:
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700016747/Intermountain-Medical-Center-research-shows-benefits-of-vitamin-D.html
The resultant understated sufficiency and RDI means that vitamin D’s powers are muted in 98+% of all studies. Even worse, it casts doubt on the value or accuracy of any, perhaps all, medical research- in any field or variety, of at least the last 20 years. Most, if not all subjects, were vitamin D deficient at some time during the studies.
Can you imagine testing anything on groups of patients suffering decade’s long chronic scurvy?
The findings would be junk, at best!
We only now begin to grasp the magnitude of the problem!
Reducing cancer rates is paramount for national health, but it doesn't end there. If you investigat in detail the roots and extensions associated with vitamin D deficiency it very quickly overwhelms. There is almost no end to the connections and ultimately, sufferings, of the world’s greatest health crisis. If you look at a list of diseases clearly influenced by vitamin D deficiency you will rapidly agree. It touches everyone and everybody who has at sometime in their life been below 50 ng/ml for any extended period of time.
It all makes sense when you realize how important evolution thought it. Show up- just get midday sun- and proceed. We did it easily for 99.9% of our existence. We were and are creatures of the day and creatures of travel.
We evolved with a method of delivery so simple it was nearly impossible to screw up. We did not have to drink it, farm it, chase it, plant it, breathe it, or catch it. Just show up!
I have studied nutrients and supplements and abstracts and the gamut. My father was a medical editor. That counts for nothing but the gene package which forces me to investigate. After many years of same and watching the failed pantheon of alphabetic vitamin claims along came cholecalciferol (D3).Finally, just as we nearly ran out of vitamin “letters”, we found one that works. Though strictly speaking D is nowhere close to a vitamin. Even the name/nomenclature is fouled up!
It is beyond clear D works- from hundreds of different points. All points focusing on the fact that every human cell has a VDR. At least 10% of the human genome is controlled or activated to some extent by D. Who knew?
I urge you to do your own research regarding vitamin D. You will find it the most satisfying mystery unfolding before your eyes. In this world of disappointments and uncertainty vitamin D is the greatest hope we have for human health improvement. Absolutely no doubt about it once you connect the dots. I am neither the first nor last to say that but I am sure you will see what I mean.
April 20, 2010 - 8:52amThis Comment
This comment is misleading and not backed up by current scientific research. Vitamin D has been linked to several chronic illnesses, but too much Vitamin D can make you ill. Always check with your health care provider before supplementing. In the case of Vitamin D, your levels can be tested with a blood draw, so you can take the right amount for you.
According to Mayo Clinic:
"Breast cancer prevention
High-dose vitamin D supplementation may be associated with a slightly reduced risk of developing breast cancer. Additional study in this area is warranted.
Cancer prevention
Limited research suggests that synthetic vitamin D analogs may play a role in the treatment of human cancers. However, it remains unclear if vitamin D deficiency raises cancer risk, or if an increased intake of vitamin D is protective against some cancers. Until additional trials are conducted, it is premature to advise the use of regular vitamin D supplementation to prevent cancer."
(Source: http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/vitamin-d/NS_patient-vitamind)
Always check reputable sources for health information, and remember if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.
April 19, 2010 - 8:00amThis Comment
Respectfully the Mayo Clinic information is out of date and its information is seriously dated. I think, based on what has transpired in the last 2 years, they would probably like to revise their position.
The scientists, researchers, and doctors comprising Grassroots Health have long been at the forefront of vitami n D research. The Mayo Clinic has many areas of interest, not just vitamin D investigation. And frankly, the documentation and scientific proof is irrefutable. So much so that the research findings have been sent to all world's national medical authorities (including our own) for dissemination and introduction to respective national health policies and guidelines.
Vitamin D deficiency is many millions of times more common than vitamin D toxicity. In fact I would like you to cite, identify, or validate only 500 cases of same that were not industrial accidents. Please present them any time while I present you with at least 200 million in this country alone. Nobody above the latitude of central Georgia- in winter- can be vitamin D replete (50 ng/ml 25 OH D) without supplementation or regular, moderate tanning.
I will revise my request from 500 individuals to 5. And those 5 may be from any decade of which documentation can be produced. I have quite the lead on you already so I can wait as you sift through the archives.
Humans can easily tolerate 10,000 i.u. per day with no ill effects whatsoever. That is of course any easy statement to make- and to prove- when one realizes that it is well documented that white skinned people synthesize 20,000 i.u. in 15 minutes of sunbathing - high sun angle.
Please check the facts and reevaluate your position. Vitamin D research has moved very quickly and unless one is reading everything available- for the last 3 years- and I mean EVERYTHING- then they will not be aware of various developments.
Vitamin D supplementation/repletion most definitely reduces breast cancer cases dramatically. And by far the biggest problem to carrying this and much more is the fact that most medical professionals know less about D than they do malaria- seriously speaking.
Do take the time to read the cited links on my previous comment and then follow up with the internet vitamin D sites- Vitamin D Council- Vitamin D3 World, and Grassroots Health. There is a world of hope
April 19, 2010 - 6:49pmThis Comment
80 % of all breast cancer cases can be avoided by maintaining vitamin D levels of 50 ng/ml- 25 OH D- in the blood- year round.
The research is irrefutable.
Breast cancer- and at least 15 other types- are strongly associated with vitamin D deficiency. It is also an independent risk factor for heart disease, diabetes, obesity, depression, PMS,infertility, Crohn's, IBD, lupus, fibro, autism, PAD,gum disease, cavities, eczema, flu and colds, muscle weakness and bone diseases, dementias, cognitive decline, schizophrenia, asthma and allergies, chronic pain, lower back pain etc etc etc.
Frankly you can not be healthy without natural levels of vitamin D present. To miss this will result in the beginning of early onset chronic diseases.
If yo ucare about your children's health you must investigate the new findings. It will be the most important, beneficial thing you will ever do for your family's and your own health.
Check the following sites:
Vitamin D3 World
Vitamin D Council
Grassroots Health.
April 19, 2010 - 7:36amThis Comment