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

Photo
- - - - -

Revealed: the pill that prevents cancer


  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

#1 biknut

  • Guest
  • 1,892 posts
  • -2
  • Location:Dallas Texas

Posted 28 December 2005 - 03:25 PM


http://news.independ...ticle335359.ece


Revealed: the pill that prevents cancer
By Jeremy Laurance, Health Editor
Published: 28 December 2005
A daily dose of vitamin D could cut the risk of cancers of the breast, colon and ovary by up to a half, a 40-year review of research has found. The evidence for the protective effect of the "sunshine vitamin" is so overwhelming that urgent action must be taken by public health authorities to boost blood levels, say cancer specialists.

A growing body of evidence in recent years has shown that lack of vitamin D may have lethal effects. Heart disease, lung disease, cancer, diabetes, high blood pressure, schizophrenia and multiple sclerosis are among the conditions in which it is believed to play a vital role. The vitamin is also essential for bone health and protects against rickets in children and osteoporosis in the elderly.

Vitamin D is made by the action of sunlight on the skin, which accounts for 90 per cent of the body's supply. But the increasing use of sunscreens and the reduced time spent outdoors, especially by children, has contributed to what many scientists believe is an increasing problem of vitamin D deficiency.

After assessing almost every scientific paper published on the link between vitamin D and cancer since the 1960s, US scientists say that a daily dose of 1,000 international units (25 micrograms) is needed to maintain health. " The high prevalence of vitamin D deficiency combined with the discovery of increased risks of certain types of cancer in those who are deficient, suggest that vitamin D deficiency may account for several thousand premature deaths from colon, breast, ovarian and other cancers annually," they say in the online version of the American Journal of Public Health.

The dose they propose of 1,000IU a day is two-and-a-half times the current recommended level in the US. In the UK, there is no official recommended dose but grey skies and short days from October to March mean 60 per cent of the population has inadequate blood levels by the end of winter.

The UK Food Standards Agency maintains that most people should be able to get all the vitamin D they need from their diet and "by getting a little sun". But the vitamin can only be stored in the body for 60 days.

High rates of heart disease in Scotland have been blamed on the weak sunlight and short summers in the north, leading to low levels of vitamin D. Differences in sunlight may also explain the higher rates of heart disease in England compared with southern Europe. Some experts believe the health benefits of the Mediterranean diet may have as much to do with the sun there as with the regional food.

Countries around the world have begun to modify their warnings about the dangers of sunbathing, as a result of the growing research on vitamin D. The Association of Cancer Councils of Australia acknowledged this year for the first time that some exposure to the sun was healthy.

Australia is one of the world's sunniest countries and has among the highest rates of skin cancer. For three decades it has preached sun avoidance with its "slip, slap, slop" campaign to cover up and use sunscreen. But in a statement in March, the association said: "A balance is required between avoiding an increase in the risk of skin cancer and achieving enough ultraviolet radiation exposure to achieve adequate vitamin D levels." Bruce Armstrong, the professor of public health at Sydney University, said: " It is a revolution."

In the latest study, cancer specialists from the University of San Diego, California, led by Professor Cedric Garland, reviewed 63 scientific papers on the link between vitamin D and cancer published between 1966 and 2004. People living in the north-eastern US, where it is less sunny, and African Americans with darker skins were more likely to be deficient, researchers found. They also had higher cancer rates.

The researchers say their finding could explain why black Americans die sooner from cancer than whites, even after allowing for differences in income and access to care.

Professor Garland said: "A preponderance of evidence from the best observational studies... has led to the conclusion that public health action is needed. Primary prevention of these cancers has been largely neglected, but we now have proof that the incidence of colon, breast and ovarian cancer can be reduced dramatically by increasing the public's intake of vitamin D." Obtaining the necessary level of vitamin D from diet alone would be difficult and sun exposure carries a risk of triggering skin cancer. "The easiest and most reliable way of getting the appropriate amount is from food and a daily supplement," they say.

The cost of a vitamin D supplement is about 4p a day. The UK Food Standards Agency said that taking Vitamin D supplements of up to 1,000IU was " unlikely to cause harm".

What it can do
Heart disease

Vitamin D works by lowering insulin resistance, which is one of the major factors leading to heart disease.

Lung disease

Lung tissue undergoes repair and "remodelling" in life and, since vitamin D influences the growth of a variety of cell types, it may play a role in this lung repair process.

Cancers (breast, colon, ovary, prostate)

Vitamin D is believed to play an important role in regulating the production of cells, a control that is missing in cancer. It has a protective effect against certain cancers by preventing overproduction of cells.

Diabetes

In type 1 diabetes the immune system destroys its own cells. Vitamin D is believed to act as an immunosuppressant. Researchers believe it may prevent an overly aggressive response from the immune system.

High blood pressure

Vitamin D is used by the parathyroid glands that sit on the thyroid gland in the neck. These secrete a hormone that regulates the body's calcium levels. Calcium, in turn, helps to regulate blood pressure, although the mechanism is not yet completely understood.

Schizophrenia

The chance of developing schizophrenia could be linked to how sunny it was in the months before birth. A lack of sunlight can lead to vitamin D deficiency, which scientists believe could alter the growth of a child's brain in the womb.

Multiple sclerosis

Lack of vitamin D leads to limited production of 1.25-dihydroxyvitamin D3, the hormonal form of vitamin D3 which regulates the immune system, creating a risk for MS.

Rickets and osteoporosis

The vitamin strengthens bones, protecting against childhood rickets and osteoporosis in the elderly.

A daily dose of vitamin D could cut the risk of cancers of the breast, colon and ovary by up to a half, a 40-year review of research has found. The evidence for the protective effect of the "sunshine vitamin" is so overwhelming that urgent action must be taken by public health authorities to boost blood levels, say cancer specialists.

A growing body of evidence in recent years has shown that lack of vitamin D may have lethal effects. Heart disease, lung disease, cancer, diabetes, high blood pressure, schizophrenia and multiple sclerosis are among the conditions in which it is believed to play a vital role. The vitamin is also essential for bone health and protects against rickets in children and osteoporosis in the elderly.

Vitamin D is made by the action of sunlight on the skin, which accounts for 90 per cent of the body's supply. But the increasing use of sunscreens and the reduced time spent outdoors, especially by children, has contributed to what many scientists believe is an increasing problem of vitamin D deficiency.

After assessing almost every scientific paper published on the link between vitamin D and cancer since the 1960s, US scientists say that a daily dose of 1,000 international units (25 micrograms) is needed to maintain health. " The high prevalence of vitamin D deficiency combined with the discovery of increased risks of certain types of cancer in those who are deficient, suggest that vitamin D deficiency may account for several thousand premature deaths from colon, breast, ovarian and other cancers annually," they say in the online version of the American Journal of Public Health.

The dose they propose of 1,000IU a day is two-and-a-half times the current recommended level in the US. In the UK, there is no official recommended dose but grey skies and short days from October to March mean 60 per cent of the population has inadequate blood levels by the end of winter.

The UK Food Standards Agency maintains that most people should be able to get all the vitamin D they need from their diet and "by getting a little sun". But the vitamin can only be stored in the body for 60 days.

High rates of heart disease in Scotland have been blamed on the weak sunlight and short summers in the north, leading to low levels of vitamin D. Differences in sunlight may also explain the higher rates of heart disease in England compared with southern Europe. Some experts believe the health benefits of the Mediterranean diet may have as much to do with the sun there as with the regional food.

Countries around the world have begun to modify their warnings about the dangers of sunbathing, as a result of the growing research on vitamin D. The Association of Cancer Councils of Australia acknowledged this year for the first time that some exposure to the sun was healthy.

Australia is one of the world's sunniest countries and has among the highest rates of skin cancer. For three decades it has preached sun avoidance with its "slip, slap, slop" campaign to cover up and use sunscreen. But in a statement in March, the association said: "A balance is required between avoiding an increase in the risk of skin cancer and achieving enough ultraviolet radiation exposure to achieve adequate vitamin D levels." Bruce Armstrong, the professor of public health at Sydney University, said: " It is a revolution."

In the latest study, cancer specialists from the University of San Diego, California, led by Professor Cedric Garland, reviewed 63 scientific papers on the link between vitamin D and cancer published between 1966 and 2004. People living in the north-eastern US, where it is less sunny, and African Americans with darker skins were more likely to be deficient, researchers found. They also had higher cancer rates.
The researchers say their finding could explain why black Americans die sooner from cancer than whites, even after allowing for differences in income and access to care.

Professor Garland said: "A preponderance of evidence from the best observational studies... has led to the conclusion that public health action is needed. Primary prevention of these cancers has been largely neglected, but we now have proof that the incidence of colon, breast and ovarian cancer can be reduced dramatically by increasing the public's intake of vitamin D." Obtaining the necessary level of vitamin D from diet alone would be difficult and sun exposure carries a risk of triggering skin cancer. "The easiest and most reliable way of getting the appropriate amount is from food and a daily supplement," they say.

The cost of a vitamin D supplement is about 4p a day. The UK Food Standards Agency said that taking Vitamin D supplements of up to 1,000IU was " unlikely to cause harm".

What it can do
Heart disease

Vitamin D works by lowering insulin resistance, which is one of the major factors leading to heart disease.

Lung disease

Lung tissue undergoes repair and "remodelling" in life and, since vitamin D influences the growth of a variety of cell types, it may play a role in this lung repair process.

Cancers (breast, colon, ovary, prostate)

Vitamin D is believed to play an important role in regulating the production of cells, a control that is missing in cancer. It has a protective effect against certain cancers by preventing overproduction of cells.

Diabetes

In type 1 diabetes the immune system destroys its own cells. Vitamin D is believed to act as an immunosuppressant. Researchers believe it may prevent an overly aggressive response from the immune system.

High blood pressure

Vitamin D is used by the parathyroid glands that sit on the thyroid gland in the neck. These secrete a hormone that regulates the body's calcium levels. Calcium, in turn, helps to regulate blood pressure, although the mechanism is not yet completely understood.

Schizophrenia

The chance of developing schizophrenia could be linked to how sunny it was in the months before birth. A lack of sunlight can lead to vitamin D deficiency, which scientists believe could alter the growth of a child's brain in the womb.

Multiple sclerosis

Lack of vitamin D leads to limited production of 1.25-dihydroxyvitamin D3, the hormonal form of vitamin D3 which regulates the immune system, creating a risk for MS.

Rickets and osteoporosis

The vitamin strengthens bones, protecting against childhood rickets and osteoporosis in the elderly.

#2 liorrh

  • Guest, F@H
  • 388 posts
  • -1

Posted 28 December 2005 - 04:17 PM

if I wanted to read news I would go on the cnn website. please post scientific, backed by research data next time. this is spam.

high levels of vitamins D can have many undesired effects including nice fat gain. but, where will be the alure of that news item.

#3 scottl

  • Guest
  • 2,177 posts
  • 2

Posted 28 December 2005 - 04:44 PM

Lior,

While your point about source of information is well founded in this case the information is correct.

The old RDA of 400 IU vit D with fears of toxicity is an oudated view of things. If you search pubmed or avant (I think benson had some posts on this) you'll find there is a good case for at least 800 IU if not 1000 IU/day and given this is winter few people (NB location/hemisphere bias) get enough vit d from the sun so supplementing is prudent.

Edit: nice fat gain?? Could you explain what the basis of this is?

Edited by scottl, 28 December 2005 - 05:30 PM.


sponsored ad

  • Advert

#4 bgwowk

  • Guest
  • 1,715 posts
  • 125

Posted 28 December 2005 - 05:29 PM

The Life Extension Foundation has been promoting the benefits of vitamin D3 for cancer prevention for more than 10 years. On their advice, I've been supplementing at 1000 IU/day for most of that time. The only side effect I've noticed is a tendency toward prolific argumentative Internet postings about unrelated subjects. :)

---BrianW

#5 xanadu

  • Guest
  • 1,917 posts
  • 8

Posted 28 December 2005 - 08:44 PM

My multi only has 400 iu of D. I'm wondering what foods have the most D in them? The article didn't say. It would be a hassle to buy a separate supplement just to make up the shortfall. Does anyone think 400 iu plus a diet high in veggies and fruits would be deficient? Or is D found mostly in animal source foods?

#6 scottl

  • Guest
  • 2,177 posts
  • 2

Posted 28 December 2005 - 10:37 PM

Very few foods are natural sources of vitamin D. Foods that do contain vitamin D include fatty fish, fish liver oils (e.g., cod liver oil) and eggs from hens that have been fed vitamin D. Nearly all the vitamin D intake from foods comes from fortified milk products and other foods, such as breakfast cereals, that have been fortified with vitamin D. Vitamin D is a fat-soluble vitamin and therefore its absorption is adversely affected in those with malabsorption disorders. Those with chronic liver disease, cystic fibrosis, Crohn's disease, Whipple's disease and sprue are prone to vitamin D deficiency. Others at risk for vitamin D deficiency, include those that do not drink milk and who do not receive much sunlight, those who live in regions where they receive little natural light and alcoholics. The elderly are at risk for vitamin D deficiency for several reasons, including inadequate exposure to sunlight, consumption of low amounts of vitamin D-containing foods and the use of certain drugs which interfere with the absorption and/or metabolism of vitamin D (see Interactions). The use of sunscreens may be another factor that may negatively affect vitamin D status.

The two forms of vitamin D used for nutritional supplementation are the secosterols ergocalciferol (vitamin D2) and cholecalciferol (vitamin D3). Secosterols or secosteroids are derived from the cyclopentanoperhydrophenanthrene ring structure, the basic structure of all steroids. The cyclopentanoperhydrophenanthrene structure is comprised of four rings (A, B, C and D). Secosterols or secosteroids are steroids in which one of the rings has been broken. In the case of vitamin D, the bond between carbons 9 and 10 of ring B is broken, and this is indicated by the inclusion of "9, 10-seco" in the chemical name of the molecule. Seco is from the Greek word for split.

more here:

http://www.pdrhealth.../vit_0265.shtml

#7 liorrh

  • Guest, F@H
  • 388 posts
  • -1

Posted 28 December 2005 - 10:40 PM

vitamin D diffrentiates adipocytes and also can fuck with your PTH. see the infamous avant calcium thread.

it does have tumor shrinking properties; sepcifically because its fat promoting/ growth factor reducing kind of messenger

#8 biknut

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,892 posts
  • -2
  • Location:Dallas Texas

Posted 29 December 2005 - 04:59 AM

when i first read this article i thought about milk. the whole milk i usually drink (i know a lot of people think it's bad for you) says vitamin d milk on the label. does 2% and skim milk have the same amount of d? is it possible to get enough vitamin d just from milk alone? if so how much would you have to drink? i'm thinking probably a lot.

#9 bgwowk

  • Guest
  • 1,715 posts
  • 125

Posted 29 December 2005 - 06:53 AM

You should take a D3 supplement. It costs practically nothing.

http://www.lef.org/n.../item00251.html

---BrianW

#10 xanadu

  • Guest
  • 1,917 posts
  • 8

Posted 29 December 2005 - 09:43 PM

I wonder if fish oil has any D in it? I eat salmon which is a fatty fish so that should have some. A couple oz of salmon a day may be enough. A separate supplement for D may cost almost nothing but it will cost a few cents or more which adds up over time plus the hassle of putting another pill into the pill caddy for each day. Finding a multi with more D may cost nothing and no added bulk. I saw a calcium supplement once that had added D in it. I haven't seen added D in anything in a while though.

#11 lemon

  • Guest
  • 389 posts
  • -2

Posted 30 December 2005 - 12:34 AM

My Life Extension Multi-Nutrient Mix contains 800 IU's (in three divided doses per pay). My soymilk also contains another 30% RDA per cup (I drink atleast two cups a day). That puts me over 1,000IU's a day before any sunlight vit-D synthesis or other dietary sources.

I don't drink cow's milk but suspect it's fortified to about the same amount as in my soymilk.

So even if your multi-nutrient formula has only the RDA (400 IUs) and you drink two cups of milk a day that places you at 640 IU's of D.

Anyone have any information about synthesis rates for vitamin D conversions from sunlight (I assume this will vary depending on your degree of skin pigmentation...).

#12 scottl

  • Guest
  • 2,177 posts
  • 2

Posted 30 December 2005 - 12:57 AM

AI think Mercola has a discussion about how much sunlight one needs, but again not very helpful to most in the US in the winter.

#13 Shepard

  • Member, Director, Moderator
  • 6,360 posts
  • 932
  • Location:Auburn, AL

Posted 30 December 2005 - 01:13 AM

Faigin recommends 30 minutes per day, if that means anything.

#14 FunkOdyssey

  • Guest
  • 3,443 posts
  • 166
  • Location:Manchester, CT USA

Posted 02 January 2006 - 06:34 PM

The Vitamin D entry on Wikipedia states that the body produces 20,000IU of Vitamin D during 15 minutes of exposure at noon-time. Important variables that they neglect to mention include age (a study I read showed elderly people made 1/3 the Vitamin D of younger people with the same sun exposure), skin color (dark skin synthesizes much less vitamin D), lattitude, and how much skin is exposed.

If we produce that much Vitamin D after a little time in the sun, it occurs to me that we probably have nothing to fear from Vitamin D supplementation well in excess of the accepted guidelines (400-1000iu).

#15 Pablo M

  • Guest
  • 636 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Sacramento

Posted 02 January 2006 - 07:40 PM

The Vitamin D entry on Wikipedia states that the body produces 20,000IU of Vitamin D during 15 minutes of exposure at noon-time.  Important variables that they neglect to mention include age (a study I read showed elderly people made 1/3 the Vitamin D of younger people with the same sun exposure), skin color (dark skin synthesizes much less vitamin D), lattitude, and how much skin is exposed.

If we produce that much Vitamin D after a little time in the sun, it occurs to me that we probably have nothing to fear from Vitamin D supplementation well in excess of the accepted guidelines (400-1000iu).

The Cholecalciferol Council (http://www.cholecalc...ol-council.com/) quotes a similar figure, 20,000IU for 20 minutes. They recommend 2000IU for most people.

This would appear to be another case of a suboptimal RDA that doesn't apply to most people.

#16 FunkOdyssey

  • Guest
  • 3,443 posts
  • 166
  • Location:Manchester, CT USA

Posted 03 January 2006 - 04:32 PM

They have a compelling argument for their recommendation of 2000IU daily. I'm going to start taking more.

#17 scottl

  • Guest
  • 2,177 posts
  • 2

Posted 03 January 2006 - 04:48 PM

They have a compelling argument for their recommendation of 2000IU daily.  I'm going to start taking more.


If one is taking >1000 IU/day (not a bad idea for some/many people) is it best to get blood levels done to make sure one is not entering toxic levels.

#18 xanadu

  • Guest
  • 1,917 posts
  • 8

Posted 03 January 2006 - 05:14 PM

This 20,000 iu in 20 minutes makes me wonder. Is that lying naked in the sun or wearing a T shirt and shorts or what? Seems like you could get your daily dose in a minute or two if it's that easy. What about sun lamps or indoor lighting? Is it the UV that makes D? Since D is fat soluable, you could probably get by with 10 minutes a week of sun and do it in one or two days. Just going from the house to the car might do it.

#19 biknut

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,892 posts
  • -2
  • Location:Dallas Texas

Posted 03 January 2006 - 05:34 PM

This 20,000 iu in 20 minutes makes me wonder. Is that lying naked in the sun or wearing a T shirt and shorts or what? Seems like you could get your daily dose in a minute or two if it's that easy.


I was wondering the same thing. What if it's winter and the only part of your body exposed to the sun is your face and maybe hands. What if it's cloudy?




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users