3 replies to this topic

[nameless]

Just got back my D3 levels and have a question, which I think I've asked before, but was just wondering....

Is there any significance to 1, 25 levels? My doc checked both 25-D, and 1, 25.

My 25-D was at 36. My 1, 25 was at 70. Both within normal ranges, although the 1, 25 was on the high side of things.

I believe 1,25 is basically 'storage levels' and can vary a lot, depending on infections, parathyroid and stuff like that?

My endo and almost every doc I've seen, considers 1,25 sort of useless, unless it's way out of range. So I was wondering if there is any significance to it at all.

Also wondering how much D3 most need to take to get into the 35-40 range. I've been taking 2500 IU/6 days a week, to get a serum of 36.  I probably should get outside a bit more, I expect.

Edited by nameless, 02 April 2012 - 06:39 PM.

[npcomplete]

nameless, on 02 April 2012 - 06:38 PM, said:

...snip...
Also wondering how much D3 most need to take to get into the 35-40 range. I've been taking 2500 IU/6 days a week, to get a serum of 36.  I probably should get outside a bit more, I expect.

"first time poster, long time snoop".

I was low normal for 25(OH)D from a career as a chair jockey (physicist), so I tried the suggestions from Athanasios in the link below, and the paper he linked to in the post:

post:
http://www.longecity...post__p__147927

paper:
http://jn.nutrition....5/11/2739S.long

I wanted to titrate 25(OH)D to about 50 ng/ml from my low-normal of 34 ng/ml. Pushing it any higher would be complicated since I have been high-normal borderline hypercalcemic for a long time (normal PTH, normal INR, no obvious cancer, etc.), and of course was concerned about soft tissue calcification risks.

After reading Athanasios's excellent post and the paper I did a quick calculation and supplemented with D-3, expecting multiple tries for the titration to desired levels. After about three months I rechecked the 25(OH)D levels and found they had risen to 49.7. Not bad for a first try!!! I also added Vit. K2-MK7/MK4 to deal with potential soft-tissue calcification risks, and the calcium levels also improved.

This is a fantastic site, so I just wanted to say "thanks" to Athanasios and the many other posters that make it great.

"Vitamin D toxicity redefined: vitamin K and the molecular mechanism:"
http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/17145139

[DbCooper]

Thats a real good research paper.

[albedo]

I try to target 25OH(D) in the high of the 30-40 ng/ml range and I am around 35ng/ml using only 1000-1500IU supplementation. I do not think there is necessity to be over 50ng/ml as several claim. There is an enlightening discussion HERE which I found as I am at higher risk of atrial fibrillation.