171 replies to this topic

[niner]

Do we think all D-3 supplements are created equal? The Healthy Origins brand on iHerb seems like the best deal.

As long as they are an oil-based (softgel) formulation, any major brand should be fine. Tablets or other dry formulations should be avoided as they are poorly absorbed.

[chrono]

So I've been getting some unpleasant GI symptoms all week: constipation, diarrhea, and stomach pain after eating anything. At first I thought it was the magnesium taurate I started last week, but discontinued when these symptoms first showed up. When they persisted I did some more reading, and found quite a few examples of people with these effects at 50,000IU/day.

This is my second day off vitamin D, and it's much better, it doesn't hurt to eat any more. I think I'll wait a few more days to let things level off, and then start again at a lower dose, maybe 20-30k? Anyone have any recommendations for a dose which is likely to get me to normal in a couple months, without ruining my guts?

Will talk to my doctor again, but obviously other opinions would be helpful.

Edited by chrono, 20 February 2010 - 04:58 PM.

[ajnast4r]

So I've been getting some unpleasant GI symptoms all week: constipation, diarrhea, and stomach pain after eating anything. At first I thought it was the magnesium taurate I started last week, but discontinued when these symptoms first showed up. When they persisted I did some more reading, and found quite a few examples of people with these effects at 50,000IU/day.

This is my second day off vitamin D, and it's much better, it doesn't hurt to eat any more. I think I'll wait a few more days to let things level off, and then start again at a lower dose, maybe 20-30k? Anyone have any recommendations for a dose which is likely to get me to normal in a couple months, without ruining my guts?

Will talk to my doctor again, but obviously other opinions would be helpful.

10k/day 5 days per week.

[kismet]

I have to strongly agree here...Mercola is not to be considered a legitimate source. I mean there's UFO conspiracy websites with more legitimate claims on them. The vitamin D that gets created when you're out in the sun is underneath in the living layers of your skin, not on top of the dead skin cells that make up the outside of your skin.
Not to mention the idea of purposely not washing yourself is disgusting.

Mercola may be right on this one, although he is just parroting Cannell who advanced that hypothesis. Not that it matters, no one should get hir vitamin D from the sun...

chrono, were you trying to deliberately poison yourself? You are taking an order of magnitude too much! Go to a doctor and do a full D panel ASAP (incl. calcium, etc).

Edited by kismet, 22 February 2010 - 04:14 PM.

[ashen311]

I have to strongly agree here...Mercola is not to be considered a legitimate source. I mean there's UFO conspiracy websites with more legitimate claims on them. The vitamin D that gets created when you're out in the sun is underneath in the living layers of your skin, not on top of the dead skin cells that make up the outside of your skin.
Not to mention the idea of purposely not washing yourself is disgusting.

Mercola may be right on this one, although he is just parroting Cannell who advanced that hypothesis. Not that it matters, no one should get hir vitamin D from the sun...

chrono, were you trying to deliberately poison yourself? You are taking an order of magnitude too much! Go to a doctor and do a full D panel ASAP (incl. calcium, etc).

chrono did go to the dr. look up a few posts and you will see his post about it and that his dr prescribed him 50k per day for a couple weeks.

about 4-5 years ago my levels were just above single digits and my dr put me on the same amount. i'm still alive and it didn't poison me.

Edited by ashen311, 22 February 2010 - 05:56 PM.

[niner]

This is my second day off vitamin D, and it's much better, it doesn't hurt to eat any more. I think I'll wait a few more days to let things level off, and then start again at a lower dose, maybe 20-30k? Anyone have any recommendations for a dose which is likely to get me to normal in a couple months, without ruining my guts?

Will talk to my doctor again, but obviously other opinions would be helpful.

I agree with ajna, though I'd take 10K 7 days a week. Just make sure it's an oil-based formulation (softgel) and not dry. If you stay at that level for too long, you will probably overshoot the 50ng/ml that you're looking for. You might want to test in a couple months, and if your level is ok, back off to about 3-4K and retest in another three months. I assume that you weren't supplementing at all before this, right? If you had essentially no D input, 10K might actually bring you up fairly quickly. I think your doc was overdoing it a little.

[niner]

I have to strongly agree here...Mercola is not to be considered a legitimate source. I mean there's UFO conspiracy websites with more legitimate claims on them. The vitamin D that gets created when you're out in the sun is underneath in the living layers of your skin, not on top of the dead skin cells that make up the outside of your skin.
Not to mention the idea of purposely not washing yourself is disgusting.

Mercola may be right on this one, although he is just parroting Cannell who advanced that hypothesis. Not that it matters, no one should get hir vitamin D from the sun...

Mercola's right about washing D off? How do you figure? It makes zero sense if you think of the anatomy of skin. I'm starting to think that Cannell is a crank.

[stablemind]

I've been taking vitamin D for a few days to help increase my current level of 36 pg/ml, and its gotten me out of depression... This is a very important supplement if you're suffering from SAD or prone to vitamin d deficiency.

[ashen311]

I've been taking vitamin D for a few days to help increase my current level of 36 pg/ml, and its gotten me out of depression... This is a very important supplement if you're suffering from SAD or prone to vitamin d deficiency.

If you've only been taking D for a few days you are probably experiencing more of a placebo effect then anything. 3 days of D is not really going to do much of anything, but whatever works!

[kismet]

chrono did go to the dr. look up a few posts and you will see his post about it and that his dr prescribed him 50k per day for a couple weeks.

I figured this may be the case (although, I did miss his blood levels, etc). That's a dose usually prescribed by doctors in the treatment of deficiency (and probably rx only), but it is a dangerous and useless overdose, esp. (and usually only) when taken for prolonged periods of time. If you adhere you are willfully taking the risk and in effect.. what I said above applies.

about 4-5 years ago my levels were just above single digits and my dr put me on the same amount. i'm still alive and it didn't poison me.

Well, people smoke and they're "healthy". Nonetheless it isn't safe in the long term and not even a good idea in the short term (e.g. if the person happens to suffer from diseases predisposing to hypercalcemia). Certain circumstances definitely justify such treatment, most don't.

Mercola's right about washing D off? How do you figure?It makes zero sense if you think of the anatomy of skin.

Yes, *possibly* right. At least Cannell is creative with his crazy ideas. 
See:
On the epidemiology of influenza: reply to Radonovich et al
http://www.ncbi.nlm....cles/PMC2729747
And to clarify after re-reading his hypothesis:
It seems Mercola is most definitely right about washing vitamin D off the skin. The interesting question, however, is whether that vitamin D was ever going to be absorbed in the first place...

I'm starting to think that Cannell is a crank.

Yes, but for other reasons, i.e. his support of Mercola.

Edited by kismet, 23 February 2010 - 09:46 PM.

[niner]

Mercola's right about washing D off? How do you figure?It makes zero sense if you think of the anatomy of skin.

Yes, *possibly* right. At least Cannell is creative with his crazy ideas. 
See:
On the epidemiology of influenza: reply to Radonovich et al
http://www.ncbi.nlm....cles/PMC2729747
And to clarify after re-reading his hypothesis:
It seems Mercola is most definitely right about washing vitamin D off the skin. The interesting question, however, is whether that vitamin D was ever going to be absorbed in the first place...

I'm starting to think that Cannell is a crank.

Yes, but for other reasons, i.e. his support of Mercola.

Well, it's interesting to see the origin of this washing-off hypothesis:

However, even if no UVC penetrated the stratum corneum, Helmer and Jensen published a remarkable human/animal study in 1937, showing that significant amounts of Vitamin D are made on the surface of human skin [10]. They collected surface oils from young men, irradiated the oils, and showed those oils rapidly cured rachitic rats. Then, they tested a very practical and important question, can those oils be removed by washing. Indeed they found a simple water wash removed much of the Vitamin D from the surface of human skin. Holick et al's landmark study showing most human Vitamin D production occurs in the deep epidermis was based on surgically obtained (and assumedly surgically prepped) skin samples that then had surface oils removed again by washing in hot water [11]. Indeed, to accurately address the question, one would need to obtain unwashed human skin, difficult to do even from cadavers.

I guess it's not surprising that vitamin D precursors are exuded along with other lipids. When irradiated, they would react, but like you say, would they ever have gotten back in? It's conceivable that a small fraction would, but is it significant? It hasn't been quantified, so there's no evidence either way. We do know that D is produced in the deep epidermis, though, which makes a hell of a lot more sense. I guess the significance of this would be in estimating the D exposure of primitive humans. It certainly isn't a good reason to stop bathing. Using the sun as your main source of D is nuts anyway, unless you don't care about your skin. Cannell's argument that antimicrobial UVC lamps, that are designed to not shine on humans since they are mutagenic, were functioning more through D production in patients than they were via the killing of airborne microbes is just another nail in the coffin as far as my opinion of his judgment goes. He's kind of an ideologue about D. Would it be nicer to say "evangelist"?

[aaCharley]

Mercola's right about washing D off? How do you figure?It makes zero sense if you think of the anatomy of skin.

Yes, *possibly* right. At least Cannell is creative with his crazy ideas. 
See:
On the epidemiology of influenza: reply to Radonovich et al
http://www.ncbi.nlm....cles/PMC2729747
And to clarify after re-reading his hypothesis:
It seems Mercola is most definitely right about washing vitamin D off the skin. The interesting question, however, is whether that vitamin D was ever going to be absorbed in the first place...

I'm starting to think that Cannell is a crank.

Yes, but for other reasons, i.e. his support of Mercola.

Well, it's interesting to see the origin of this washing-off hypothesis:

However, even if no UVC penetrated the stratum corneum, Helmer and Jensen published a remarkable human/animal study in 1937, showing that significant amounts of Vitamin D are made on the surface of human skin [10]. They collected surface oils from young men, irradiated the oils, and showed those oils rapidly cured rachitic rats. Then, they tested a very practical and important question, can those oils be removed by washing. Indeed they found a simple water wash removed much of the Vitamin D from the surface of human skin. Holick et al's landmark study showing most human Vitamin D production occurs in the deep epidermis was based on surgically obtained (and assumedly surgically prepped) skin samples that then had surface oils removed again by washing in hot water [11]. Indeed, to accurately address the question, one would need to obtain unwashed human skin, difficult to do even from cadavers.

I guess it's not surprising that vitamin D precursors are exuded along with other lipids. When irradiated, they would react, but like you say, would they ever have gotten back in? It's conceivable that a small fraction would, but is it significant? It hasn't been quantified, so there's no evidence either way. We do know that D is produced in the deep epidermis, though, which makes a hell of a lot more sense. I guess the significance of this would be in estimating the D exposure of primitive humans. It certainly isn't a good reason to stop bathing. Using the sun as your main source of D is nuts anyway, unless you don't care about your skin. Cannell's argument that antimicrobial UVC lamps, that are designed to not shine on humans since they are mutagenic, were functioning more through D production in patients than they were via the killing of airborne microbes is just another nail in the coffin as far as my opinion of his judgment goes. He's kind of an ideologue about D. Would it be nicer to say "evangelist"?

So, then, the original comments that Mercola was a nut for writing that Vitamin D was washed form the skin were essentially incorrect? How about that? And you are certain that the Vitamin D lying on the surface of the skin is not absorbed into the skin to become a source to supply vitamin D? But it is certain that lots of other things are absorbed through the skin, just not vitamin D then? That is an interesting conclusion you've reached there.
Mercola is not an originator of any of the studies. The guy does seem to try to keep current on what is being published. And, sure. he is hawking his version of a product that will deliver the supposed benefit described by the "new research" or theory. Don't buy the stuff. I don't. In some regard, Mercola is not far removed from those offering the various versions and combinations of resveratrol. They do not originate much research, just try to stay current with the best information.
One of the ideas that Mercola trys to sell is the extreme danger of any exposure to ANY heavy metals and other chemicals from foods. He goes way overboard on the topic so that he can promote some more healthy version. Well, he recommends using some flat seed or oil for an Omega-3 source. Someone questioned him in a post about the dangers of using it since it does contain a trace of cyanide. His comment was that it was too small an amount to matter. Well, sure, and the same thing applies to much of the scare story industry regarding food. No doubt that general diet changes can improve health, but paying 5X more for something that is classified as Organic is nonsense.

[medievil]

Went up to 20.000 UI

[full_circle]

anyone here worried about vascular calcification? (why on earth take that much vit d..?) i also postulate that high vit d intake may strengthen biofilm of pathogens.

[eason]

anyone here worried about vascular calcification? (why on earth take that much vit d..?)

Vitamin D deficiency *causes* calcification. Excess vitamin D can accelerate it as well, but some of the more knowledgeable posters of this forum get enough K2, test regularly and have minimal calcification.

[full_circle]

anyone here worried about vascular calcification? (why on earth take that much vit d..?)

Vitamin D deficiency *causes* calcification. Excess vitamin D can accelerate it as well, but some of the more knowledgeable posters of this forum get enough K2, test regularly and have minimal calcification.

make sure to take mk-4

Edited by full_circle, 26 March 2010 - 06:26 PM.

[mustardseed41]

anyone here worried about vascular calcification? (why on earth take that much vit d..?)

Vitamin D deficiency *causes* calcification. Excess vitamin D can accelerate it as well, but some of the more knowledgeable posters of this forum get enough K2, test regularly and have minimal calcification.

make sure to take mk-4

Take mk7.....it stays in the body much longer. I know, I know...... I've read a couple of your other posts about this.

[full_circle]

longer plasma half-life = less bioavailability.

mk-4 is the preferred form by our body. mk-4 and mk-7 have been studied in korea and japan for decades (koreans too, consume natto-equivalent traditional food that is also rich in mk-7) and study after study, mk-4 shows superior efficacy. this is why, unlike mk-4, mk-7 has earned no official approval in treating any illness or condition in korea and japan.

note that mk-7 is only recently being pushed by nattokinase manufacturers who btw are paying for the recent flood of mk-7 studies. why? mk-7 is a byproduct of nattokinase (nattokinase is basically mk-7 removed natto) and as nattokinase gains huge popularity in the US, which btw is a nonsensical thing since nattokinase can be extremely dangerous (it dissolves clots indiscriminately which may lead to internal/brain hemorrhage), nattokinase manufacturers now are trying to catch two rabbits with one stone: clearing their huge surplus of mk-7 and profiting while doing so.

also note that k1, mk-4 and mk-7 all will, to varying degree on individual basis, shorten thrombin time (thicken blood: headaches some ppl get by supplementing these are most likely due to temporarily reduced blood flow) thus longer plasma half-life means higher risk of ischemic stroke i.e. mk-7 is also undesirable in this regard (mk-4's short plasma half life is due to its superior bio-availability, not because of its fast excretion)

human in general, unlike rats, are very inefficient in converting either k1 or mk-7 into mk-4.

Edited by full_circle, 26 March 2010 - 07:11 PM.

[bacopa]

anyone here worried about vascular calcification? (why on earth take that much vit d..?) i also postulate that high vit d intake may strengthen biofilm of pathogens.

do you have any evidence that vascular calcification occurs? Not challenging you just really want to find out from good sources.

[madanthony]

I take 2,500 IU twice daily for a total of 5,000 IU of vitamin D-3; I take it mainly for mood enhancement. I'm currently at 46 ng/mL at this amount.

I'm upping it from 5,000 IU to 6,000 IU until the end of July (yes -- with my doctors permission!) to get my liver enzymes lowered down to the normal range. They have already come down but there is still work to do.

John Cannell of the The Vitamin D Council sent me a study on vitamin D and liver enzymes.

PubMed:

http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/16928437

Hi. I take 10,000 IU sublingual / day and skip 1 or 2 days a week. I was prescribed 50,000 IU / week. When I went into menopause suddenly my back hurt so much I could barely turn over in bed. My doctor tested my D level and it was 27. After 2 months it was 50. I am to understand from a doctor on the web who tests his own blood levels that some people require as much as 6000 IU / day to not lose D status (that is how much he needed) and that one can take up to 10,000 IU / day before toxicity. I understand from various sources that the desired range of D3 is 50-70 (70 is better) (so I do not know where this idea that 50 is the desired D level as you folks seem to think is coming from). I stopped taking my perscription 50,000/week pill after 2 months as it caused nausea and went to a 10,000 / day sublingual. I meant to skip it 1-2 days / week but I did not because it is a hormone and I like hormonal stability. When I tested again 6 months later I was "only a little over" the upper limit of 70 (like 72 or something). So I need more than 5000 IU a day to stay stable, maybe 6,000 / day. I have problems retaining calcium and I like how I feel better on higher D levels. I do not like how I feel on non-sublingual D pills. I don't know the brand name of what I use but it has "No shot" on the box. Oh, it does not take care 100% of the joint problems, but at least 95%. But then I cannot say that exactly because joint problems have to do with methyl cycle metabolism and I take many supplements to affect that as well (B's). Always did so the D may be just that tip of the iceberg that is needed to work together with the other stuff I take.

[chrono]

An update on my usage: After taking a break, I've been taking 15,000IU for about 3 weeks now. For about the last week, I've been noticing that sharp pain in my stomach about 4 hours after my dosage. It's quite mild, and only lasts maybe half an hour at most, but it is noticeable. I'm wondering if this could be symptomatic of the vitamin D causing some kind of actual harm? I have no other stomach issues that I know of.

Can anyone recommend any strategies for avoiding this? I've been taking it shortly after supper, along with about 1.7g fish oil. Am thinking of dividing my dose up throughout the day, or maybe just dropping down to 10k, but I wanted to see if anyone else had any insight.

[nameless]

Can anyone recommend any strategies for avoiding this? I've been taking it shortly after supper, along with about 1.7g fish oil. Am thinking of dividing my dose up throughout the day, or maybe just dropping down to 10k, but I wanted to see if anyone else had any insight.

Could be a filler ingredient, I suppose. Or maybe the fish oil? You can try breaking up the dose, like you plan, and see if it helps. And why taking so much daily? Trying to correct a really big deficiency?

[chrono]

Could be a filler ingredient, I suppose. Or maybe the fish oil? You can try breaking up the dose, like you plan, and see if it helps. And why taking so much daily? Trying to correct a really big deficiency?

I'm certain it's not the fish oil, unless it's a weird interaction. I'm taking Healthy Origins D3 softgels, the only ingredients are olive oil, gelatin, glycerin, and water. Tests showed levels of 17ng/mL about two months ago, so I'm taking this to correct that. My GP put me on 50,000IU/day, but this produced severe sharp stomach pains after about a week. This is similar, though much, much weaker, so I'm assuming it's a property of the D3 itself.

[chrono]

I ended up settling on 10,000IU/day, and that went pretty well for the past 3 weeks. There was some stomach discomfort, but it didn't happen every day, and occurred as a few "twinges" that only lasted about 5 minutes or so.

My doctor has suggested that I decrease my dose to 2,000IU/day or so. I have a pretty large stock of 10,000IU gelcaps I'd like to work on before ordering smaller doses. What I'm wondering now is how occasional dosing works with vitamin D. I've seen a lot of people here and elsewhere take a certain amount per week, or even per month. Is taking 10,000IU every 5 days somewhat equivalent to taking 2,000IU every day?

[niner]

I ended up settling on 10,000IU/day, and that went pretty well for the past 3 weeks. There was some stomach discomfort, but it didn't happen every day, and occurred as a few "twinges" that only lasted about 5 minutes or so.

My doctor has suggested that I decrease my dose to 2,000IU/day or so. I have a pretty large stock of 10,000IU gelcaps I'd like to work on before ordering smaller doses. What I'm wondering now is how occasional dosing works with vitamin D. I've seen a lot of people here and elsewhere take a certain amount per week, or even per month. Is taking 10,000IU every 5 days somewhat equivalent to taking 2,000IU every day?

Yes, it's pretty similar. Vitamin D has a very long half life, which is why people can get away with taking it every couple weeks. If I was you, I would drop the dosage down to the point where you have no stomach problems, stay at that level for a couple months, and then get tested again. You need to find the dosage that gives you the 25-OH-D3 level that you want. For most people, that's around 50 ng/mL, which usually takes 2-4000 IU/d.

[k10]

I'm not convinced that high dose vitamin D is safe long term, plus most of the studies done are correlation studies which are useless.

[sentrysnipe]

Any fat-soluble vitamin should not be taken in high doses. Personally, I can only tolerate 2400 IU of D3 a day. Any more and my lips will swell up and my feet would itch at night. :(

[chrono]

Thanks for the responses. I'm still getting a mild stomach ache on the nights after I take the 10000IU. Will definitely be ordering some 2000IU with my next iHerb order.

For someone who started out with a pretty big deficit (17ng/mL), would 4000IU be a better dose to try for a month or two until I can afford my next blood test?

[mitkat]

Been taking between 3000-4000IU from NOW! gelcaps a day consistently for at least 6 months, got blood taken yesterday and am looking forward to seeing the results, with a little sunshine everyday I'm ramping up closer to where I want to be (hopefully!)

[brundall]

Been taking between 3000-4000IU from NOW! gelcaps a day consistently for at least 6 months, got blood taken yesterday and am looking forward to seeing the results, with a little sunshine everyday I'm ramping up closer to where I want to be (hopefully!)

Did you get the results of your bloodtest yet? I take the same dosage and brand as you and I live in Toronto as well. Just curious how this dosage affected your levels.