Vitamin D studies 'inconsistant': doctors warn

AFP ^ | November 30, 2010 | Kerry Sheridan

[luckystarmom]

I don’t believe that.

My brother lived in Venezuela when he was a little boy.

He got skin cancer when he was in his early 20’s and died of it when he was 48.

[luckystarmom]

I should add that I did not grow up in Venezuela. My parents moved back to Texas when my brother was 6, and I was born here.

I have never had any skin cancer and I’m almost 50.

[luckystarmom]

And I’ll also add that my other brother has not died of skin cancer. He doesn’t have blue eyes and has darker skin than my brother that died and myself.

However, he has had bad skin cancer for years. He was 8 when my parents moved back to the states.

Both of my parents have also had skin cancer, but not as bad as my brothers.

I’m the only one that hasn’t had any, and I never lived in Venezuela.

There may be less skin cancer down there because so many of the natives have darker skin. You should look at the rates of skin cancer for those with red hair and blue eyes that live near the equator.

[goodnesswins]

Unfortunately, maybe skin cancer has more to do with nutrient uptakes inside our bodies than with skin melatonin...or maybe there are genetic issues we don’t know about??? There’s A LOT we don’t know.

[goodnesswins]

“nutrient uptakes” = ability of the body to use nutrients to keep us healthy

[aruanan]

“nutrient uptakes” = ability of the body to use nutrients to keep us healthy

nutrient uptake = ability of the body to absorb nutrients. Or, more narrowly, in the case of a specific nutrient, such as glucose, the ability of a particular cell to absorb, usually by active transport (the GLUT receptors in the case of glucose), a particular nutrient.

[goodnesswins]

thanks.

[CutePuppy]

Thanks for the ping and a great summary.

Here is a recent article on the role of vitamin D3 in some cases of depression (might coincide with or be the reason for what's known as "winter blues" / Seasonal Affected Disorder - SAD):
Depression Linked to Vitamin D Deficiency, Study Says - TET, by Alex Johnston, 2010 November 29 - December 01

Depression is likely to occur more often in people who get less vitamin D, a recent report has found.

Other studies have found that vitamin D deficiencies have been linked to an increase in depression. However, researchers at Georgia State University provided more conclusive evidence to support the vitamin D—depression link in research published earlier this month.

The study found that those with a significant deficiency in the vitamin had an 85 percent chance of being depressed.

Researchers evaluated nearly 8,000 non-institutionalized people in the US aged 15 to 39 to come up with their findings.

Related Articles
Natural Approaches to Combating Winter Blues - TET, by Dr. John Briffa, 2010 October 25
Sunlight Exposure Improves Brain Function - TET, by Dr. John Briffa, 2009 August 28

..... < snip >

I didn't see these posted, maybe someone can post all these on a thread.

[Future Useless Eater]

You’re basically correct, but you also know to take those with fat. Not everyone knows that so some will waste their money, get no results, get sick, badmouth the vitamin’s worthiness, etc.

There are so many people that take their morning vitamins with lowfat cereal and skim milk.

Congrats on your winter time level

[browniexyz]

The Institute of Medicine is funded essentially by Johnson & JOhnson, BIG PHARMA. BIG PHARMA doesn’t want you taking vitamins—they’d rather you take their products and really be sick!!! Always check the source of the information, and the source of funding for the information. And by the way, don’t be fooled when the funding is by a “Foundation” —

[Magic Fingers]

“Congrats on your winter time level”

Thanks - I was pleasantly surprisd. I take 5000 i.u. daily and probably get about another 2000 i.u. from other sources.

[Wonder Warthog]

"That is why the RDA is determined in much the same way as exposure limits for radiation or toxins: it includes a buffer zone."

LOL. And THAT notion makes it worse. In a former life I minored in nuclear science (at that point the most sensitive method of inorganic analysis was neutron activition, which I was interested in), so I "do" know about radiation and exposure limits, and have studied more over the years. The limits are almost totally political and unrelated to any real science. Look up "radiation hormesis".

And I got my PhD just about the time the enviromental movement was picking up steam, and have watched the "sausage making" process of seeing the levels set for enviromental "toxins". Yet more "political" science.

"Again, there is no evidence that they got more sunlight then than today. They made efforts to shield themselves from direct sunlight. And are you trying to say that clothes today are UV-opaque in a way they weren't back then? I don't buy that."

No, I'm saying that clothes, both then and now, were NOT UV-opaque, but that those wearing the clothes spent far more time in the sun that those of today. We simply do not know what our ancestors UV photosynthetic levels might have been. All we can positively say is that the amount of clothing they wore was sufficient to prevent sunburn and some tanning.

I suspect we could probably come close if some prof somewhere were to do a study on the Amish, or in one of the "re-enactment" villages, in which past lifestyles are acted out. But neither of us can legitimately make a dogmatic statement about their level of "D" photosynthesis, BECAUSE THERE IS NO DATA, and your supposition about "hiding from the sun" is just that.....a supposition.

"Since my background is toxicology, it goes against everything I was taught to just start consuming large amounts of any bioactive substance willy-nilly.

And what makes you think people do that?? "I" certainly haven't done so. My increase in Vitamin D supplementation has been based completely on a series of blood tests over time. If it's so damned easy to get a "normal" blood level by diet, I wish to hell you'd tell me how to do it, because "I" have not succeeded in doing so. And in fact even WITH consumption of 4000 IU/day of Vitamin D (and yes, it is the correct form), my blood levels are STILL < 20.

"The dose makes the poison, and all that."

OK, what is the toxic level for Vitamin D??

"You should have read the second paragraph."

I read the whole article. I also note that the scientist who actually did the research was a lot less dogmatic about the reliability of his research than you are.

"I think your issue is not that I am "so certain" of what I say; it is that I refuse to jump on the bandwagon with the believers of nutritional supplementation, and my reasoning is based on my science background."

No, my problem is that you flatly state that anyone can get an adequate level of Vitamin D from diet alone. I know from my own experience that that is baloney. I can't get my levels up much even WITH supplementation, AND a pretty healthy diet.

[luckystarmom]

I didn’t know about taking vitamin D with fat. The doctor’s never told us to take it with fat, and my daughter’s level barely went up in a year of supplementing.

[Wonder Warthog]

For your education:

http://www.ajcn.org/content/85/1/6.long

Note the conclusion that 10,000 IU/day is safe.