• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo

Vitamin D


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
22 replies to this topic

Poll: Vitamin D (38 member(s) have cast votes)

Vitamin D

  1. yes (36 votes [94.74%])

    Percentage of vote: 94.74%

  2. no (2 votes [5.26%])

    Percentage of vote: 5.26%

Vote

#1 ajnast4r

  • Guest, F@H
  • 3,925 posts
  • 148
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 29 October 2009 - 01:14 AM


Vitamin D

#2 ajnast4r

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest, F@H
  • 3,925 posts
  • 148
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 29 October 2009 - 01:51 AM

my suggestion is 1000iu as d3

Edited by ajnast4r, 29 October 2009 - 02:06 AM.


#3 Blue

  • Guest
  • 1,104 posts
  • 11

Posted 29 October 2009 - 02:04 AM

Why not 2000? This is still likely too be too low for many, if not most, people but should be safe for those not measuring their levels.

Edited by Blue, 29 October 2009 - 02:04 AM.


#4 ajnast4r

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest, F@H
  • 3,925 posts
  • 148
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 29 October 2009 - 02:07 AM

Why not 2000? This is still likely too be too low for many, if not most, people but should be safe for those not measuring their levels.


2000iu is too much for some, some people achieve >50mg/dl with only 1000iu ... anything above 1000 can be done with additional supplements.

#5 lunarsolarpower

  • Guest
  • 1,323 posts
  • 53
  • Location:BC, Canada

Posted 29 October 2009 - 03:05 AM

some people achieve >50mg/dl with only 1000iu


Is that a bad thing? Dr. Davis of track your plaque didn't seem to think so when he was on the Sunday Evening Update if I remember right. He aims to get it over 70 for his patients.

#6 ajnast4r

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest, F@H
  • 3,925 posts
  • 148
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 29 October 2009 - 03:11 AM

some people achieve >50mg/dl with only 1000iu


Is that a bad thing? Dr. Davis of track your plaque didn't seem to think so when he was on the Sunday Evening Update if I remember right. He aims to get it over 70 for his patients.



not necessarily a bad thing, but the solid research behind D drops off around 50ng/ml... grassroots health recommends 40-60 and their scientific panel is a virtual whos who in this field. i actually just took my second home-spot test for their study today ;)

#7 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 29 October 2009 - 03:40 AM

Who are these people who are hitting 50ng/ml on 1000 IU? Are they simultaneously doing a lot of mid-summer sunbathing? It seems like the more people report their dosage and measured levels, the more it looks like you need a lot. 2000 IU is the traditional NoAEL.

#8 okok

  • Guest
  • 340 posts
  • 239

Posted 29 October 2009 - 05:14 PM

Why not 2000? This is still likely too be too low for many, if not most, people but should be safe for those not measuring their levels.


2000iu is too much for some, some people achieve >50mg/dl with only 1000iu ... anything above 1000 can be done with additional supplements.


Just anecdotal, but ~1000 IU is just fine for me. After that my metabolism starts to crank up. Fine supp btw., also topical.

#9 kismet

  • Guest
  • 2,984 posts
  • 424
  • Location:Austria, Vienna

Posted 29 October 2009 - 07:03 PM

I think Krillin got to 45ng @1000IU. That's the only case-report I remember. 1000 IU as a *standard* dose may be fine, but if - assuming the multi is divided into x caps/serving - people only take 50-80% of the full dose (e.g. as they do with orthocore) then 1000 IU can turn out too low. That's one short-coming of orthocore IIRC, it's 1000 IU for all 8 caps, but virtually no one takes all of them.

The dose needs more consideration I believe; just guessing: 2k is too high, 1k may be too low. Lappe used 1100 IU in his trial (which could be -the- trial to emulate) and we're not sure if people take a full dose.

Is that a bad thing? Dr. Davis of track your plaque didn't seem to think so when he was on the Sunday Evening Update if I remember right. He aims to get it over 70 for his patients.

But he treats those who are sick. I'm less than enthused about his recommendations for the healthy.

Edited by kismet, 29 October 2009 - 07:15 PM.


#10 ajnast4r

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest, F@H
  • 3,925 posts
  • 148
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 29 October 2009 - 11:11 PM

this is how i feel about vitamin D and its inclusion in the formulation...

vitamin D is one of the only nutrients we can measure in the blood and have a reference range for, its action is dissimilar from other vitamins in that its function is hormonal... individual metabolism of vitD does vary somewat drastically... ~1000iu gets me to ~45ng/ml but it takes my mother 2500iu to achieve the same levels.

imo, vitamin D needs to be titrated and monitored individually to achieve desired blood levels. a single supplement is never going to be adequate for all people. i had originally thought to suggest vitamin D not be included in the formula.

#11 rwac

  • Member
  • 4,764 posts
  • 61
  • Location:Dimension X

Posted 29 October 2009 - 11:40 PM

How much of dry D3 do you absorb anyway ?

I know I don't absorb it very well if I don't take it with fat.

#12 ajnast4r

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest, F@H
  • 3,925 posts
  • 148
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 29 October 2009 - 11:41 PM

How much of dry D3 do you absorb anyway ?

I know I don't absorb it very well if I don't take it with fat.



depends if the vitamin D has been coated/encapsulated with/in a lipid carrier or not, and how much fat is present in the meal

#13 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 29 October 2009 - 11:46 PM

How much of dry D3 do you absorb anyway ?

I know I don't absorb it very well if I don't take it with fat.

Bill Davis has had a lot of patients on D, and has monitored their levels. He came to the conclusion that the dry formulations just didn't get people's levels up. I think that in order for them to be absorbed, they need to be taken with a lot of fat; probably more than most people were using. I suspect that most people take their once-daily meds in the morning, and breakfast tends to be a low fat meal for most people.

#14 FunkOdyssey

  • Guest
  • 3,443 posts
  • 165
  • Location:Manchester, CT USA

Posted 30 October 2009 - 09:26 PM

1000iu. Dry vitamin D is not well absorbed anyway, but not everyone knows that and they will want the multivitamin to contain a higher-than-RDA value with all the press Vit D has received.

1000iu is not too high for 99% of the population, 99.9% when you remember its dry.

Edited by FunkOdyssey, 30 October 2009 - 09:27 PM.


#15 rwac

  • Member
  • 4,764 posts
  • 61
  • Location:Dimension X

Posted 30 October 2009 - 09:38 PM

depends if the vitamin D has been coated/encapsulated with/in a lipid carrier or not, and how much fat is present in the meal


So how practical is it to actually do this ?

#16 ajnast4r

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest, F@H
  • 3,925 posts
  • 148
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 30 October 2009 - 10:10 PM

So how practical is it to actually do this ?


most commercial vitamin D is made that way i believe

#17 pycnogenol

  • Guest
  • 1,164 posts
  • 72
  • Location:In a van down by the river!

Posted 31 October 2009 - 02:36 PM

Yes. [5,000 IU q.d., d-3, softgel, 2 divided doses, blood test q 6 months, currently at 46ng]

Edited by pycnogenol, 31 October 2009 - 02:38 PM.


#18 waldemar

  • Guest
  • 206 posts
  • 0

Posted 31 October 2009 - 09:01 PM

A gelcap would really make sense for some supplements - especially D3. Maybe we should really split the supp up. What about an extra vote about this? ;-)

#19 Pike

  • Guest
  • 517 posts
  • 6

Posted 03 November 2009 - 06:54 PM

wait, wasn't 1100 IU the dose studied for the super reduction in all-cause cancer?

#20 kismet

  • Guest
  • 2,984 posts
  • 424
  • Location:Austria, Vienna

Posted 03 November 2009 - 07:07 PM

Yep, that's what we established. Which is also the reason why IMHO the sweet spot dose for a multi is more in the 11xx-12xx range. As even the skinniest and most conservative CRONies can make do with that much.
I've wanted to check my notes and see if there were any other important studies using similar doses... but so far haven't had the time.

Edited by kismet, 03 November 2009 - 07:08 PM.


#21 ensun

  • Guest
  • 55 posts
  • 0

Posted 04 November 2009 - 07:06 AM

Yes, there should be a separate softgel for fat soluble vitamins, carotenoids, etc.

#22 pro-d

  • Guest
  • 117 posts
  • 1
  • Location:London, England

Posted 04 November 2009 - 10:53 AM

5000IU took me to 76nmol/L, I'm using Bio-Tech capsules. I'm on 10,000IU currently and see where that gets me next week.

#23 shazam

  • Guest
  • 197 posts
  • 0

Posted 05 November 2009 - 05:26 AM

I like the idea of making it a multi "pack", thus being able to keep the fat solubles in lipid capsules. In all likelyhood, however, getting the right level of D3 will probably be more cost effective just buying it by itself, though. I'd be alright with you leaving this out and then shaving some of the price off.

If you decide not to, though, go with the pack idea unless it ends up pumping expenses up too much. Then I'd be find with some dry crap. Though I would still prefer "none" and "less expense". Like a few dollars off the price tag, which hopefully will be reasonable, or even *gasp* good.

Dose... go with 1.5-2k, if you include it at all. My vote is no, however.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users