Has anyone exhausted Vit D supplement research? Please?

[madteaparty]

I can't figure this out. Some research says it needs to be taken with vit K (?) and this comes in tablet form. Other says the oil form is best absorbed. I have the Nordic naturals complete omega D3 and wondering whether this is enough. If not, what's the recommended supplement?

My doctor says everyone is so deficient they don't even test anymore. I'm also iron deficient for what that's worth...

[wapiti]

I have not exhausted anything.  I am as confused as ever.  Vitamin D supplementation exacerbates my kid's autoimmune issues, so I don't give it to him.  I take it once in a while.  In the past he has had a high calcitriol (1,25(OH)2D) level along with a low vitamin D level, which kind of explains that - calcitriol is much closer to vitamin D3 than the "vitamin D 25-hydroxy" that most docs test.  (I don't know why more don't just test calcitriol.  Labcorp does it for us.)  A couple of things:

 

- some people say low vitamin D (25-hydroxy) is a symptom of inflammation rather than a cause.

- some people say that vitamin D supplementation involves the further depletion of magnesium, as mag is required to process it.

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4160567/

 

This article reviews vitamin D's influence on the immune system, examines the myths regarding vitamin D photosynthesis, discusses ways to accurately assess vitamin D status, describes the risks of supplementation, explains the effect of persistent infection on vitamin D metabolism and presents a novel immunotherapy which provides evidence of an infection connection to inflammation.

 

Edited November 9, 2017 by wapiti

[3 ladybugs]

Were you tested and found out you are low in Vit. D? I was just tested last week and I am normal. So, no, not everyone is deficient in Vitamin D. I don't supplement. 

 

I believe you should take iron with C. However I could be wrong about that. 

[KathyBC]

We live in Canada. We try to remember to take Vitamin D daily in the winter, usually beginning and ending with the time change. That's all I know. 

[J-rap]

I have not exhausted anything.  I am as confused as ever.  Vitamin D supplementation exacerbates my kid's autoimmune issues, so I don't give it to him.  I take it once in a while.  In the past he has had a high calcitriol (1,25(OH)2D) level along with a low vitamin D level, which kind of explains that - calcitriol is much closer to vitamin D3 than the "vitamin D 25-hydroxy" that most docs test.  (I don't know why more don't just test calcitriol.  Labcorp does it for us.)  A couple of things:

 

- some people say low vitamin D (25-hydroxy) is a symptom of inflammation rather than a cause.

- some people say that vitamin D supplementation involves the further depletion of magnesium, as mag is required to process it.

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4160567/

 

That's all interesting.  My dd (24) has an ongoing autoimmune/inflammation situation (for about 8 years now).  About four years ago, she discovered that she was low in vitamin D.  So she began supplementing (a high, prescription form), and a while later she tested fine.  Then as soon as she went back to the more normal, OTC dose, it dropped low again, as though she wasn't taking anything.  She went back and forth with this a couple times.  In the end, I don't think she takes anything anymore because it didn't seem to help or hurt her condition either way.  However, it occurred to us that her condition probably causes her body to not be able to absorb vitamin D well.  In the end, we don't really know what's going on!

Are you saying that as long as your calcitriol level is high, it doesn't matter if your vitamin D level is low?

It all seems like such a delicate balance sometimes!

[wapiti]

Are you saying that as long as your calcitriol level is high, it doesn't matter if your vitamin D level is low?

 

Possibly.  However, processes in the body that intersect with the immune system are extremely complex and tinkering with one tiny part may oversimplify things IMO, possibly to our detriment, depending on the person of course.  Individual differences come on top of the extreme complexity.

 

FWIW, my kiddo with the autoimmune probably isn't simply autoimmune but rather has problems with the immune system caused by a variety of factors that involve the intersection of genetics, nutritional environment, and infection.  He has a polymorphism where he is homozygous for VDR taq, a defect in the vitamin D receptor, according to the usual genetic interpretation websites.  But to complicate matters further, one interpretation (Strategene) disagrees with that and says he has a homozygous polymorphism at VDR fok but that the VDR taq is ok.  Either way, he has issues at the vitamin D receptor, had low vitamin D and high calcitriol, though now his calcitriol is back into the normal range.

 

In the big picture, I'm a fan of trial-and-error for individuals.  With supplementing vitamin D, I'd be aware of this possible angle with magnesium depletion, as mag tends to be low in many people these days.

Edited November 9, 2017 by wapiti

[Carol in Cal.]

Let's not forget that the ideal is to get vitamin D from sun exposure.

That tends to be neglected in discussions like this.

[madteaparty]

Let's not forget that the ideal is to get vitamin D from sun exposure.

That tends to be neglected in discussions like this.

Of course. Failing that, one needs to supplement.

I'm not giving it to my RA DH not because I knew of the research on autoimmune issues wapiti mentioned above, but because he takes so much other stuff there would be mutiny if I added another supplement :)

I'm asking about myself :)

Edited November 9, 2017 by madteaparty

[Lady Florida.]

Let's not forget that the ideal is to get vitamin D from sun exposure.

That tends to be neglected in discussions like this.

 

Sunscreen prevents the absorption of vitamin D. I live in a state where sunscreen is necessary year round. A lot of people in The Sunshine State are low on D because of sunscreen.

[hornblower]

We live in Canada. We try to remember to take Vitamin D daily in the winter, usually beginning and ending with the time change. That's all I know. 

 

Yup, us too. My endocrinologist was quite firm that this was one she considered non negotiable.

 

I use D2 as D3 is often not vegan. 

 

[madteaparty]

Yup, us too. My endocrinologist was quite firm that this was one she considered non negotiable.

 

I use D2 as D3 is often not vegan.

 

What form/ brand do you take, if I may ask. Though I don't need vegan

[hornblower]

Let's not forget that the ideal is to get vitamin D from sun exposure.

That tends to be neglected in discussions like this.

 

Not only does sunscreen interfere with it, so does melanin. 

 

The color of your skin + your latitude of residence + lifestyle + clothing choices are important factors. 

 

Pale people who spend time outdoors in sunny areas may be able to synthesize adequate amounts. Darker colors skin, higher latitudes, indoor living or clothing choices which leave little skin exposed would change that. 

[hornblower]

What form/ brand do you take, if I may ask. Though I don't need vegan

 

(eta - ooops I just actually looked at the bottle & it's D3 but it it's vegan...so no I'm not using D2 atm...) 

 

Vegetology https://www.vegetology.com/

 

Edited November 9, 2017 by hornblower

[cjzimmer1]

Let's not forget that the ideal is to get vitamin D from sun exposure.

That tends to be neglected in discussions like this.

That is good advice if you live somewhere like CA but some of us llive in places where our high today is about 35 which means bundling up and leaving very little skin exposed to the sun.

[Carol in Cal.]

I'm fully aware of all the reasons why getting D from sun is difficult.

 

But still, it's the ideal that supplementation is trying to achieve, and that is worth keeping in mind.

 

This time of the year, little or no D production is possible at my latitude, and it's too cold to be exposed anyway, most of the time.  But if someone was outside for a reasonable amount of sun exposure daily during the summer here, supposedly she would store enough to last through the winter, for instance.  So that's one of the mechanisms that works naturally, and it's good to keep that in mind.

[hornblower]

I'm fully aware of all the reasons why getting D from sun is difficult.

 

But still, it's the ideal that supplementation is trying to achieve, and that is worth keeping in mind.

 

This time of the year, little or no D production is possible at my latitude, and it's too cold to be exposed anyway, most of the time.  But if someone was outside for a reasonable amount of sun exposure daily during the summer here, supposedly she would store enough to last through the winter, for instance.  So that's one of the mechanisms that works naturally, and it's good to keep that in mind.

 

This is just not true unless you're white. 

 

" under normal conditions at most latitudes in North America, even young, healthy blacks do not achieve optimal 25(OH)D concentrations at any time of year.

 

http://jn.nutrition.org/content/136/4/1126.full

Edited November 9, 2017 by hornblower

[mathnerd]

That is good advice if you live somewhere like CA but some of us llive in places where our high today is about 35 which means bundling up and leaving very little skin exposed to the sun.

I live in CA as well - but wear sweaters and jackets starting from November onwards. That, coupled with cloudy skies and being outside for less than an hour due to the cold breeze, made me develop a severe Vitamin D deficiency. Also, as our bodies age, the efficiency with which Vitamin D is absorbed also goes down. So, you can be living in the tropics and have the deficiency. It is best to get a blood test. And the melatonin level in the skin is a major factor in decreased Vitamin D levels.

 

Always get sun exposure - it helps with a lot of other things as well. But, never assume that sun exposure is all that is needed to get sufficient Vit D. Someone also told me that I should not take a shower within 2 hours of sun exposure as the Vitamin D secretion is interfered by water and soap - I am not sure if this is scientifically sound, but it does not hurt to try.

 

I found out that I had the Vitamin D deficiency when one year, I was falling sick constantly and there was no reprieve even in the summer. Nothing helped and I was sick for weeks. After investigating every thing, I came upon some research that said that low Vitamin D levels make your immune system weak. When I asked the doctor for a test on my levels, it came out super low. For me, flus, colds, bronchitis etc are a clue that my Vitamin D levels have dropped.

[Carol in Cal.]

This is just not true unless you're white. 

" under normal conditions at most latitudes in North America, even young, healthy blacks do not achieve optimal 25(OH)D concentrations at any time of year.

 

http://jn.nutrition.org/content/136/4/1126.full

That is different from saying that they cannot get *any* vitamin D from the sun, which was my point.  I stipulated that I'm familiar with this and the other barriers.  However, the ideal is still the ideal, and it's operable PLUS supplementation to be sufficient.  It's not all supplementation or nothing, which is the 'flavor' of a lot of the literature right now. 

[Carol in Cal.]

I live in CA as well - but wear sweaters and jackets starting from November onwards. That, coupled with cloudy skies and being outside for less than an hour due to the cold breeze, made me develop a severe Vitamin D deficiency. Also, as our bodies age, the efficiency with which Vitamin D is absorbed also goes down. So, you can be living in the tropics and have the deficiency. It is best to get a blood test. And the melatonin level in the skin is a major factor in decreased Vitamin D levels.

 

Always get sun exposure - it helps with a lot of other things as well. But, never assume that sun exposure is all that is needed to get sufficient Vit D. Someone also told me that I should not take a shower within 2 hours of sun exposure as the Vitamin D secretion is interfered by water and soap - I am not sure if this is scientifically sound, but it does not hurt to try.

 

I found out that I had the Vitamin D deficiency when one year, I was falling sick constantly and there was no reprieve even in the summer. Nothing helped and I was sick for weeks. After investigating every thing, I came upon some research that said that low Vitamin D levels make your immune system weak. When I asked the doctor for a test on my levels, it came out super low. For me, flus, colds, bronchitis etc are a clue that my Vitamin D levels have dropped.

I had a similar history, and I'm addressing it with BOTH outdoor exposure beyond what I used to do, and supplementation.  I can say for sure--I felt better this summer than I have in years, and this is part of the reason I am sure.  

[hornblower]

fwiw my endocrinologist told me 2000 IU  for me (50yo white woman, outside 1hr+ every day, just N of 49th parallel)

Edited November 9, 2017 by hornblower

[3 ladybugs]

Umm... I live in New Jersey and HATE the sun. Seriously I moved up here on purpose from Florida. It really doesn't take much. I love a light house. I must be getting some from that. I have 2 active boys who like to play outside but most of the time I don't follow them out there. I typically drive when in the car. I am not great about putting sunscreen on, but I do have sun protective clothing. I descend from Norwegian and English backgrounds (mostly). I was at the doctor yesterday and I was thinking my skin is nearly clear. Must have been strange lighting. But that is my way of saying that I am very light white. 

 

Either I am a freak of nature (entirely possible, I have been called worse) or it isn't impossible to get enough Vitamin D from the sun. 

[hornblower]

 But that is my way of saying that I am very light white. 

 

Either I am a freak of nature (entirely possible, I have been called worse) or it isn't impossible to get enough Vitamin D from the sun. 

 

But you're confirming what I'm saying - very white people can sometimes get enough from the sun even in northern hemisphere. 

 

Also, if you consume dairy products and fish, you're getting Vit D that way. 

 

 

 

The darker your skin, the harder it is to get enough from sunlight UV radiation unless you're near the equator.  

 

 

 

[Kassia]

 

Also, if you consume dairy products and fish, you're getting Vit D that way. 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

I eat a lot of cheese and yogurt and consume no Vitamin D.  I supplement.  

[Liz CA]

I can't figure this out. Some research says it needs to be taken with vit K (?) and this comes in tablet form. Other says the oil form is best absorbed. I have the Nordic naturals complete omega D3 and wondering whether this is enough. If not, what's the recommended supplement?

My doctor says everyone is so deficient they don't even test anymore. I'm also iron deficient for what that's worth...

 

My naturopath still tests - it's very inexpensive.

She told me to get the liquid form - recommended Blue Bonnet - and take it with a little bit of coconut oil. I am not supplementing with K at all and my numbers have risen into the "good" range.

[Liz CA]

Umm... I live in New Jersey and HATE the sun. Seriously I moved up here on purpose from Florida. It really doesn't take much. I love a light house. I must be getting some from that. I have 2 active boys who like to play outside but most of the time I don't follow them out there. I typically drive when in the car. I am not great about putting sunscreen on, but I do have sun protective clothing. I descend from Norwegian and English backgrounds (mostly). I was at the doctor yesterday and I was thinking my skin is nearly clear. Must have been strange lighting. But that is my way of saying that I am very light white. 

 

Either I am a freak of nature (entirely possible, I have been called worse) or it isn't impossible to get enough Vitamin D from the sun. 

 

I am also "Scandinavian-white :) and was not able to get enough through sun exposure. I live in a place where the sun is out for more than 300 days a year and I walk every day for 30-45 minutes. I think it depends on the individual.

 

[gardenmom5]

we've dealt with some pretty severe deficiencies here.  (1dd had a d3 level of 10.)  

 

d3 does do better when combined with vitamin k.  (for the most severe deficiencies.   most people, it doens't matter.)

drops are the most absorbable. - the oil with which it is combined, matters.  some oils do better than others.

geltabs are next.

personally, I wouldn't even bother with tablets.

 

btw: any supplement/vitamin that does not tell you the exact molecular form of the vitamin, is highly likely not worth your money.   odds are high it is a cheap form, and not a bioavailable one.

 

eta.  if you have an untreated mthf mutation, that can also affect d3 levels.   i was talking with one of my dr's, who also had a very low d3 level. (also two mutated genes.) she couldn't bring it up, it just wouldn't respond.   after she went onto mthf for her mutation - her d3 level came up without even trying.

my dd is homozygous for mthf- and hadn't been being treated when her deficiency was diagnosed.  treating  hers also improved her d3.

 

and,there  are two kinds of d3 levels in the blood.

 

for interesting  trivia- my pharmd dd told me it is being redefined as a hormone - and no longer a vitamin.  (they addressed this in one of her classes.)

Edited November 9, 2017 by gardenmom5

[madteaparty]

My naturopath still tests - it's very inexpensive.

She told me to get the liquid form - recommended Blue Bonnet - and take it with a little bit of coconut oil. I am not supplementing with K at all and my numbers have risen into the "good" range.

Exactly the info I was looking for--thank you!

[Laurie4b]

Let's not forget that the ideal is to get vitamin D from sun exposure.

That tends to be neglected in discussions like this.

 

One's ability to process Vit D from sun exposure decreases with age. 

 

Some people don't live at a latitude which allows this at least part of the year. 

 

Sometimes sun exposure + high vit D foods still = insufficient D and one must supplement. 

[Laurie4b]

Does anyone know what it means if your D2 is low and your D3 is normal? That is what my sister remembers about my mother's test. I didn't know they tested for both. 

[rose]

What confuses me about this discussion is why deficiency seems to be an issue now but wasn't (or probably wasn't) for the millennia of history where people didn't supplement. I can't help but feel skeptical that modern science might have this wrong. I know that the native people who lived in my area of BC ate copious amounts of salmon in the winter but the native people in places like Alberta, Saskatchewan or Manitoba wouldn't have had this available. Is the difference now just that we're not going outside enough? Are black people really only suited to live in the tropics and everyone needs to spend 6 hours+ outside year round with minimal clothing? IDK, I'm skeptical but I still go through stints of supplementing but then I peter out.

 

As a side question, does anyone know if babies get vitamin d in breast milk?

[Laurie4b]

What confuses me about this discussion is why deficiency seems to be an issue now but wasn't (or probably wasn't) for the millennia of history where people didn't supplement. I can't help but feel skeptical that modern science might have this wrong. I know that the native people who lived in my area of BC ate copious amounts of salmon in the winter but the native people in places like Alberta, Saskatchewan or Manitoba wouldn't have had this available. Is the difference now just that we're not going outside enough? Are black people really only suited to live in the tropics and everyone needs to spend 6 hours+ outside year round with minimal clothing? IDK, I'm skeptical but I still go through stints of supplementing but then I peter out.

 

As a side question, does anyone know if babies get vitamin d in breast milk?

 

I have the same questions about D . However there have also been significant changes in our environment : 1) the emphasis on using sunscreen, which is perhaps overdone 2( Obesity rates have risen tremendously and we know that obesity affects the way the body can use D 3)   Because D is a hormone, it's also possible that something else within our environment  is chemically disrupting it and affecting how many of us are processing the vitamin.

 

I also share your skepticism toward supplements in general. There are so many instances of scientists thinking ____ is the cure, isolating the vitamin or substance, and then finding that, isolated, it doesn't have the same positive effects or even has negative effects (Beta carotene supplements in lung cancer patients, Vit E with heart patients, calcium, etc. etc.  It always seems best to get things in your food (or sun) if at all possible because that way it is coming in the total package, and it may be that the total package is what does the trick. 

 

All that being said, I have had a serious illness that is impacted by low Vit D and have a strong family history of another, so this is one supplement I take. It may be the wrong choice, but it's the best decision I can make given the current state of research and my own medical history. I also take B12. I eat plenty of meat, but my levels are low. That can happen with age and it can affect cognitive functioning. That's it for me for supplements. 

[hornblower]

 

 

for interesting  trivia- my pharmd dd told me it is being redefined as a hormone - and no longer a vitamin.  (they addressed this in one of her classes.)

 

Yup, vit D is a fat soluble steroid. It's been recognized as functioning as a hormone (once converted to calcitriol) since the late 60's.

 

 

[hornblower]

What confuses me about this discussion is why deficiency seems to be an issue now but wasn't (or probably wasn't) for the millennia of history where people didn't supplement. I can't help but feel skeptical that modern science might have this wrong. I know that the native people who lived in my area of BC ate copious amounts of salmon in the winter but the native people in places like Alberta, Saskatchewan or Manitoba wouldn't have had this available. Is the difference now just that we're not going outside enough? Are black people really only suited to live in the tropics and everyone needs to spend 6 hours+ outside year round with minimal clothing? IDK, I'm skeptical but I still go through stints of supplementing but then I peter out.

 

As a side question, does anyone know if babies get vitamin d in breast milk?

 

Vitamin d levels in breastmilk depend on the mother's vitamin d status. We recommend breastfed babies be supplemented - not because there's anything wrong with breastmilk, but because our lifestyles have made mom deficient or borderline. 

 

If mom is taking a very large dose of supplement, her milk may provide adequate levels of D.

 

That said, I recommend breastfed babies be supplemented. 

 

 

As far as evolution, evolution only cares that you reproduce. You don't have to thrive. We can and do survive on marginal levels of many things.  For indigenous peoples esp in northern North America, there is some indication that they may have a slightly different receptors which optimized vit d conversion. There may be different metabolic pathways which developed as an evolutionary advantage.  

[gardenmom5]

What confuses me about this discussion is why deficiency seems to be an issue now but wasn't (or probably wasn't) for the millennia of history where people didn't supplement. I can't help but feel skeptical that modern science might have this wrong. I know that the native people who lived in my area of BC ate copious amounts of salmon in the winter but the native people in places like Alberta, Saskatchewan or Manitoba wouldn't have had this available. Is the difference now just that we're not going outside enough? Are black people really only suited to live in the tropics and everyone needs to spend 6 hours+ outside year round with minimal clothing? IDK, I'm skeptical but I still go through stints of supplementing but then I peter out.

 

As a side question, does anyone know if babies get vitamin d in breast milk?

 

where on earth did you get the idea it wasn't previously a problem?    (leprosy is still around too.  it's called "hansen's disease")

 

and supplementing for vitamin d isn't a new thing, that goes back at least until the 1800's - does giving children cod liver oil ring a bell?.   there was a huge outbreak in britian in the 17th century.  (described by daniel whistler 1645)  they didn't know what caused it - but they were still dealing with a severe (my dd's provider would say "catastrophic" deficiency.).    Incidentally, rickets becomes a threat at a d3 level of </=7.

 

The first description of rickets goes back 2000 years - first recorded by Soranus and Galeno.  

 

the amount of vitamin d3 considered optimum has increased as understanding of what it does in the body has increased.   it used to be though it only had to do with bones and teeth  (only requiring a d3 level >7) - hence a usrda of 400IUs.    Now, they know it does much much more.  One oncologist has bluntly stated she has never had a cancer patient with a D3 level >30. (but has had patients with d3 levels in the 20s)

[ktgrok]

There is some research that after sun exposure it takes some time for the conversion process or whatever in the skin. That if you wash with soap and remove your natural skin oils too soon after sun exposure you reduce the creation of D in the skin. 

 

So historically, people would not have been scrubbing down with a soapy body pouf in the shower daily. I'm willing to believe that played a part in people perhaps having higher levels in the past. 

 

Personally, I've had good D levels, but I only use soap on "pits and privates" in the shower. 

Edited November 10, 2017 by ktgrok

[Mergath]

I'm fully aware of all the reasons why getting D from sun is difficult.

 

But still, it's the ideal that supplementation is trying to achieve, and that is worth keeping in mind.

 

This time of the year, little or no D production is possible at my latitude, and it's too cold to be exposed anyway, most of the time.  But if someone was outside for a reasonable amount of sun exposure daily during the summer here, supposedly she would store enough to last through the winter, for instance.  So that's one of the mechanisms that works naturally, and it's good to keep that in mind.

 

I'm outside gardening constantly in the summer and I still have to supplement even then. If I don't my anxiety goes through the roof and I have constant heart palpitations.

 

[KathyBC]

What confuses me about this discussion is why deficiency seems to be an issue now but wasn't (or probably wasn't) for the millennia of history where people didn't supplement. I can't help but feel skeptical that modern science might have this wrong. I know that the native people who lived in my area of BC ate copious amounts of salmon in the winter but the native people in places like Alberta, Saskatchewan or Manitoba wouldn't have had this available. Is the difference now just that we're not going outside enough? Are black people really only suited to live in the tropics and everyone needs to spend 6 hours+ outside year round with minimal clothing? IDK, I'm skeptical but I still go through stints of supplementing but then I peter out.

 

As a side question, does anyone know if babies get vitamin d in breast milk?

It wouldn't have been an identified issue because humanity didn't know about it specifically at that time. It seems to me more likely that all problems existed in the past, unknown and unnamed.

[StephanieZ]

Well, I was diagnosed with VitD deficient this summer while I also had Lyme. My level was 17, so in the bad "deficient" zone. 

 

In consult with my DR, I have been taking about 50,000 units per week. Around 6000-8000 per day on average. It has a half life of something like 3 days, so you don't have to take it daily if it's easier to take bigger doses less frequently. I tend to take 10,000 -12,000 about 4-5 days a week. I take a K capsule along with the D gelcaps. I use NOW brand of both. The K is some MK7 variety or something like that -- whatever was supposed to be the best. D form is D-3, which is definitely supposed to be FAR superior to D-2.

 

I also stopped using sunscreen (except for on my face) during shorter sun exposures. If it's just a couple hours at the swimming hole, or similar, I don't even put on sunscreen except for my face. For a full day at the beach, I do use it, of course, or I'd be burnt like bad toast. My goal on sunscreen has become "avoid burning" and "try not to get tons of wrinkles". I'm happy to say I have a nice tan on most of my legs and arms/back/etc going in to the fall. Helps that we had a 10 day Bahamas vacation the day after I got my D deficient lab results, plus another fall beach trip. I took full advantage of the opportunities to tan. 

 

For sun exposure to be helpful, ideally you're looking at mid-day sun exposure on most/all of your skin . . . Apparently even 10 minutes can get you thousands of units . . . if the time is right and you are fully exposed. 

 

There are also new "safe" sun beds that can be used. I haven't gone that far, but I'd consider it if I don't respond well to what I've been doing thus far. 

 

I have the order form for re-testing, and will do it in a week or two (after about 3 1/2 months of supplementation). I'm aiming for above 50 on my levels. 60-80 would be my ideal zone. I'll see what my numbers are this month, and then adjust if needed. If it's gone in the right direction, substantially, then I'll just keep doing what I'm doing -- tweaking up or down as needed. 

 

My understanding is that once I hit my ideal D zone, I'll need to keep supplementing indefinitely, at least 2000/day (on average). I'm encouraging my family to supplement. I look at 2000/day as a modest, reasonable supplementation level for most people.

 

 

[liber]

So if one uses sunscreen in the summer they should still supplement?  i tend to taper off in the summer because I am outside so much.  I don't use a lot of sunscreen once I have a base tan but I just had a cancerous mole removed and the Dr. told me I should use at least a 30 spf.  I don't want to be completely covered up either as I am at the beach for a month in the summer.

[Liz CA]

What confuses me about this discussion is why deficiency seems to be an issue now but wasn't (or probably wasn't) for the millennia of history where people didn't supplement. I can't help but feel skeptical that modern science might have this wrong. I know that the native people who lived in my area of BC ate copious amounts of salmon in the winter but the native people in places like Alberta, Saskatchewan or Manitoba wouldn't have had this available. Is the difference now just that we're not going outside enough? Are black people really only suited to live in the tropics and everyone needs to spend 6 hours+ outside year round with minimal clothing? IDK, I'm skeptical but I still go through stints of supplementing but then I peter out.

 

As a side question, does anyone know if babies get vitamin d in breast milk?

 

Yes, some reasons likely are that we are not an agrarian society any longer and don't spend so much time outside. Other reasons may be epigenetics. Also, I think there is a wide individual difference - some people get their D from the sun without any issues, other have issues with conversion.

Edited November 10, 2017 by Liz CA

[Liz CA]

where on earth did you get the idea it wasn't previously a problem?    (leprosy is still around too.  it's called "hansen's disease")

 

and supplementing for vitamin d isn't a new thing, that goes back at least until the 1800's - does giving children cod liver oil ring a bell?.   there was a huge outbreak in britian in the 17th century.  (described by daniel whistler 1645)  they didn't know what caused it - but they were still dealing with a severe (my dd's provider would say "catastrophic" deficiency.).    Incidentally, rickets becomes a threat at a d3 level of </=7.

 

The first description of rickets goes back 2000 years - first recorded by Soranus and Galeno.  

 

the amount of vitamin d3 considered optimum has increased as understanding of what it does in the body has increased.   it used to be though it only had to do with bones and teeth  (only requiring a d3 level >7) - hence a usrda of 400IUs.    Now, they know it does much much more.  One oncologist has bluntly stated she has never had a cancer patient with a D3 level >30. (but has had patients with d3 levels in the 20s)

 

Yes, I forgot about Hansen's and interestingly, there used to be a colony in Hawaii of all places where one would think you get enough sun.

 

[gardenmom5]

It wouldn't have been an identified issue because humanity didn't know about it specifically at that time. It seems to me more likely that all problems existed in the past, unknown and unnamed.

 

they had rickets.  called it something else, but it was first described in the record in the first century AD.   a connection between rickets and sunlight was first made in the mid 1800's.

 

Yes, I forgot about Hansen's and interestingly, there used to be a colony in Hawaii of all places where one would think you get enough sun.

 

leprosy/hansen's isn't about sunlight.  it's caused by bacteria.  my point was names change.  even if they didn't know the cause, they likely had it.

[Liz CA]

they had rickets.  called it something else, but it was first described in the record in the first century AD.   a connection between rickets and sunlight was first made in the mid 1800's.

 

 

leprosy/hansen's isn't about sunlight.  it's caused by bacteria.  my point was names change.  even if they didn't know the cause, they likely had it.

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22170299

 

There seems to be a secondary correlation between Hansen's and Vit D metabolism but this likely veers off the OP's topic.

 

Edited November 10, 2017 by Liz CA

[gardenmom5]

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22170299

 

There seems to be a secondary correlation between Hansen's and Vit D metabolism but this likely veers off the OP's topic.

 

 

interesting.

 

I know they've found evidence of heart disease and various cancers in mummies, and other ancient bodies they've found and studied.  skeletal defects, etc.

[KathyBC]

I'm fully aware of all the reasons why getting D from sun is difficult.

 

But still, it's the ideal that supplementation is trying to achieve, and that is worth keeping in mind.

 

This time of the year, little or no D production is possible at my latitude, and it's too cold to be exposed anyway, most of the time.  But if someone was outside for a reasonable amount of sun exposure daily during the summer here, supposedly she would store enough to last through the winter, for instance.  So that's one of the mechanisms that works naturally, and it's good to keep that in mind.

Anecdotal, but in our family the members who get the most daily sun exposure in summer seem to miss D the most in winter, even though they are still outside much more than average. From what I remember, our latitude just does not get enough in winter, and they don't seem to store enough to be optimal through winter. Survive, sure.