Posted 19 June 2007 - 11:36 PM
OK, this is seriously confusing. In the first paper, 80 nmol/l is above the good range. In the second, 80 nmol/l is the minimum to avoid deficiency. LEF uses the second paper to justify their recommendation of 80-250 nmol/l.
Int J Cancer. 2004 Jan 1;108(1):104-8.
Both high and low levels of blood vitamin D are associated with a higher prostate cancer risk: a longitudinal, nested case-control study in the Nordic countries.
Tuohimaa P, Tenkanen L, Ahonen M, Lumme S, Jellum E, Hallmans G, Stattin P, Harvei S, Hakulinen T, Luostarinen T, Dillner J, Lehtinen M, Hakama M.
Medical School, University of Tampere, Tampere, Finland. Pentti.Tuohimaa@uta.fi
Vitamin D inhibits the development and growth of prostate cancer cells. Epidemiologic results on serum vitamin D levels and prostate cancer risk have, however, been inconsistent. We conducted a longitudinal nested case-control study on Nordic men (Norway, Finland and Sweden) using serum banks of 200,000 samples. We studied serum 25(OH)-vitamin D levels of 622 prostate cancer cases and 1,451 matched controls and found that both low (</=19 nmol/l) and high (>/=80 nmol/l) 25(OH)-vitamin D serum concentrations are associated with higher prostate cancer risk. The normal average serum concentration of 25(OH)-vitamin D (40-60 nmol/l) comprises the lowest risk of prostate cancer. The U-shaped risk of prostate cancer might be due to similar 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D(3) availability within the prostate: low vitamin D serum concentration apparently leads to a low tissue concentration and to weakened mitotic control of target cells, whereas a high vitamin D level might lead to vitamin D resistance through increased inactivation by enhanced expression of 24-hydroxylase. It is recommended that vitamin D deficiency be supplemented, but too high vitamin D serum level might also enhance cancer development. Copyright 2003 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
PMID: 14618623
J Nutr. 2005 Feb;135(2):317-22.
Circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels indicative of vitamin D sufficiency: implications for establishing a new effective dietary intake recommendation for vitamin D.
Hollis BW.
Department of Pediatrics, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC 29425, USA. hollisb@musc.edu
It has been more than 3 decades since the first assay assessing circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] in human subjects was performed and led to the definition of "normal" nutritional vitamin D status, i.e., vitamin D sufficiency. Sampling human subjects, who appear to be free from disease, and assessing "normal" circulating 25(OH)D levels based on a Gaussian distribution of these values is now considered to be a grossly inaccurate method of identifying the normal range. Several factors contribute to the inaccuracy of this approach, including race, lifestyle habits, sunscreen usage, age, latitude, and inappropriately low dietary intake recommendations for vitamin D. The current adult recommendations for vitamin D, 200-600 IU/d, are very inadequate when one considers that a 10-15 min whole-body exposure to peak summer sun will generate and release up to 20,000 IU vitamin D-3 into the circulation. We are now able to better identify sufficient circulating 25(OH)D levels through the use of specific biomarkers that appropriately increase or decrease with changes in 25(OH)D levels; these include intact parathyroid hormone, calcium absorption, and bone mineral density. Using these functional indicators, several studies have more accurately defined vitamin D deficiency as circulating levels of 25(OH)D < or = 80 nmol or 32 microg/L. Recent studies reveal that current dietary recommendations for adults are not sufficient to maintain circulating 25(OH)D levels at or above this level, especially in pregnancy and lactation.
PMID: 15671234