help with vit D levels

Char, you and I must have the same docs! 

JO, I understand about the 6-week stints but it doesn't seem as though 1000 IU's would be enough to maintain - JMHO.  But, like you, I try and follow my docs (or at least the ones who seem to know a little about something!)

Thanks to all for your info, follow-up, tips, everything.

That makes sense Jo.   

Notself: the material you copied is copyrighted. Unless you have the permission of the authors, it's not OK to copy and post the article in its entirety. Under fair use, yuu could have posted a short extract and added a link so those interested could go to the source to read the whole thing.

I have sent the following email to Grassrootshealth.org.

"I have just posted in its entirety, along with the link, "Vitamin D Scientists' Call to Action Statement" on a breast cancer forum.  A member was concerned that I might have violated your copyright.  If so, I apologize.  My intent was to educate my fellow members of the Breast Cancer Forum on the importance of Vitamin D.  I will take the post down until I hear from you giving permission to use the action statement."

I am waiting for a response.

Nan, just because you can find the article by using Google, does not make it fair game for copying and posting elsewhere. That is one of the commonly held myths about copyrighted material. There is a copyright notice at the bottom of the page in question. Even without a copyright notice, it would still be wrong to post without permission of the owner. When we join bc.org, one of the rules we agree to is "You agree not to violate the property rights of others, and you agree not to post any content that infringes any patent, trademark, trade secret, copyright or other proprietary rights of any party."

In the case of the website in question, I doubt they would go to the trouble of suing bc.org over someone copying and pasting one of their web pages over here. But I'm sure they would prefer that the article was just linked to, so it would drive traffic to their site. Under "fair use" one could quote a few lines from an article or one's own summary and then link to the complete item. To see how "fair use" works, I suggest you google that term. 

I agree that I posted in compliance with Fair Use.  However out of respect for this site and because Fair Use is filled with so many gray areas, I decided to delete the post.  If I do not hear from Grass Roots Health or if they do not grant permission, then I will wonder about their motives.  They say they are a non profit only interested in spreading the word about Vitamin D.  We'll see.  I don't expect to hear from then until sometime next week.

Granting permission does not in any way weaken their copyright protection.  It is done all the time by various writers.  I have had permission given in the past.

The videos are terrific and I think Grassrootshealth is a terrific site.  For those of you who have not taken the time to really wander around, I suggest you do.  The videos are worth the time and the PDF files contain some outstanding graphics.

JO-5,

The second time I was on D2 50,000 IU per week, my doctor told me it was OK to take calcium with D.  You may want to check with your doctor again.

Jeez we keep going around in circles on this.

The 50K once per week is D2. It is believed to be not as effective.

Take 5K once daily of D3.

Here it is.  The bold is mine:

--------------------------------------------

Scientists' Call to D*action

The Vitamin D Deficiency Epidemic

40-75% of the world's population is vitamin D deficient.

The causal link between severe vitamin D deficiency and rickets or the bone disease of osteomalacia is overwhelming, while the link between vitamin D insuffiency and osteoporosis with associated decreased muscle strength and increased risk of falls in osteoporotic humans is well documented by evidencebased intervention studies.

There are newly appreciated associations between vitamin D insufficiency and many other diseases, including tuberculosis, psoriasis, multiple sclerosis, inflammatory bowel disease, type-1 diabetes, high blood pressure, increased heart failure, muscle myopathy, breast and other cancers which are believed to be linked to the non-calcemic actions of the parent vitamin D and its daughter steroid hormone. However a causal link has yet to be proven by appropriate vitamin D intervention studies.

It is projected that the incidence of many of these diseases could be reduced by 20%-50% or more, if the occurrence of vitamin D deficiency and insufficiency were eradicated by increasing vitamin D intakes. The appropriate intake of vitamin D required to effect a significant disease reduction depends on the individual's age, race, lifestyle, and latitude of residence. New evidence indicates that the intake should be in the range of 2000 IU per day for adults. Intake of 2000 IU/day is the current no adverse event level of the National Academy of Sciences, Institute of Medicine, Food and Nutrition Board.

It is well documented that the darker the skin, the greater the probability of a vitamin D deficiency. Even in southern climates, 55% of African Americans and 22% of Caucasians are deficient.

More than 1 billion people worldwide are affected at a tremendous cost to society.

A Scientists' Call to Action has been issued to alert the public to the importance to have vitamin D serum levels between 40 and 60 nanograms/milliliter to prevent these diseases. Implementing this level is safe and inexpensive.

The benefit of an adequate vitamin D level to each individual will be better overall health and a reduction in illnesses and, ultimately, a significant reduction in health care costs. The benefit of adequate vitamin D levels to society/businesses is a more productive workforce and, lower health care costs.

The D*action project has as its purpose to serve as a model for public health action on vitamin D. It is a test bed for techniques, and for providing outcome evaluation at a community level.

---------------------------------

It took 4000 IU D3 for my level to rise to 54ng/ml from a low of 22ng/ml. 

I tried two rounds of eight weeks each using 50,000IU of D2 and my level only went to 29.  I would like to hear from anyone who has had their vitamin D level reach 40-60ng/ml while on D2.  How long did it take?

Notice the article advocates taking 2,000IU of Vitamin D per day and this is coming from a group with links to the Vitamin D testing business and to the vitamin supplement business. Despite this, it does not advise taking the extremely high amounts that have been described elsewhere.

Hi, Everyone ~
Ok, back in February, my vit D level was 8.5.  After 12 weeks of prescription Vit D (the famous 50,000 units), I started taking 5000 units of OTC Vit D3 in the middle of May. 

I was retested 3 weeks ago, and I'm now at 28.7.  Still not great, but definitely moving in the right direction!

I don't know if this had been discussed here, but my onc nurse told me that antacids like Pepcid can deplete vitamin D.  I've taken 2 Pepcid a day for five years plus I've avoided calcium and vitamin D for the past 30 years due to problems with kidney stones...hmmm...no wonder I was 8.5, lol!

So, in summary, I've had an increase of 20.2 in four months.   My onc doesn't want me to increase my daily 5000 units, but I think I might anyway.  Any thoughts anyone has about this are welcome!

Artemis

Watch the video by Dr. Heaney. At the very beginning he states he has no financial gain from Vitamin D.  He explains the whole issue of deficiency very clearly.  Here is the link.  I couldn't get the Grassrootshealth link to copy.  It is a long video but worth the time to watch. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emjCzaHtSrg

Here is a link to information about Dr. Heaney.  http://osteoporosis.creighton.edu/bio_faculty/dr_heaney.htm

Here is an article that just appeared in Yahoo news about about a link between low Vitamin D and Parkinson's .

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100712/hl_afp/healthresearchusfinlandparkinsons

Have you checked out the abstracts of studies I posted? 

Notself, I've done as much reading on Vitamin D as the next lay person. And I often feel like a dog chasing its tail as searches invariably lead back to the Vitamin D Council with its ties to the Vitamin D testing and supplement business. 

While I do take a Vitamin D supplement, I'm not an advocate of taking extremely high doses until more is known about both the benefits and the risks of doing so. Remember that Vitamin D is a fat-soluble vitamin, so excesses are not excreted as they would be with Vit B or Vit C.

If one were to believe all the hype about Vitamin D, one would see it as a cure for various cancers, multiple sclerosis, autism, depression, mental illness, dementia, osteoporosis, heart disease, hypertension, diabetes, autoimmune disease and chronic fatigue. I remain sceptical that its the cure-all that's being touted by a number of individuals who stand to profit by encouraging people to believe this before adequate scientific studies are done. For example, the Vitamin D Council have ties to the following:

   Stop Aging Now. They promise to donate 50% of Vitamin D sales to the Vitamin D Council.

   Bio-Tech. Donate $1 of the purchase price of each botttle of D3 to the Vitamin D Council.

   ZRT Labs. This link is so close that one can order the test without even leaving the Vitamin D Council website. "The Vitamin D Council and Dr. Cannell have partnered with ZRT Laboratory to offer selected products to you at a discount."

   Mercola. Go here for your tanning beds. Would you buy a tanning bed from Dr. Mercola? "[Vitamin D Council} recommend the use of any Mercola Tanning Systems as a safe and effective way to help you achieve natural levels of Vitamin D."

MaryNY,

You obviously have not read the links I have provided from PubMed.  PubMed is a service of the National Institute of Health (NIH).  Are you saying that the NIH is involved with the Vitamin D council? 

Other than selling Vitamin D at the same price as a health food store and selling test kits that end up costing less than going to a doctor's office, you really haven't explained your problem with the Vitamin D Council.  I think some of the claims made by the council may be ahead of the science, but I have provided links to the science that supports supplementation of Vitamin D to the level of 40-60 ng/ml.

Whether you choose to ignore the information on PubMed or not is up to you.  I find the information valuable as well as the information and documentation provided by Dr. Heaney in his video. 

As for high doses, people on extremely high doses are those who are on 50,000 IU of Vitamin D2 prescribed by their doctors.  I think D2 is a waste of time but these people are being monitored by their doctors for side effects. 

One of the abstracts I provided states that the RDA for D3 should be 2000 IU per day.  That is the recommended daily allowance for people who are not deficient.  Those of us who are taking more than 2000 IU are very deficient or do not get sufficient sun to maintain our levels without supplementation and we also are under our doctors' supervision.