Go easy on the vitamin D

chocomousse · September 2015

Vitamin Don't Overdo a Good Thing

"Until very recently, vitamin D was being touted by many doctors as something nearly everyone should take. However, over the past two years, many studies have shown negative results with vitamin D. For example, it was recently reported in JAMA Internal Medicine (JAMA) that women taking either high or low doses of vitamin D experienced no benefit with regards to bone density and muscle strength. Last month, a study in the British Journal of Nutrition showed no benefit from vitamin D on markers of inflammation, while yet another, on obese teens, published in Pediatric Obesity found no benefit on arterial function and an increase in triglyceride and total cholesterol levels.

What's worse, a study in London published in June in the journal Thorax showed that people given high-dose vitamin D every two months (averaging 2,000 IU per day) for a year were actually more likely to develop upper respiratory infections than those given a low dose (400 IU per day) -- and their infections lasted longer. Other studies have shown that people with the highest levels of vitamin D in their blood (over about 40 ng/mL -- typically due to excess supplement use) are more likely to develop heart disease, cancer, and die during studies when compared to people with moderate levels (National Acadamies Press 2010; JCEM 2012)..."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tod-cooperman-md/vit...

Sloan15 · September 2015

Wow. There are so many studies that say vitamin D is important during chemo and that people who have higher vit D have lower cancer rates. I'm interested in the reactions of this study with the others.

Anonymous · September 2015

Im a bit rusty on this but OK I'll weigh in. I say rubbish. There's no qualification on what type of VIT D they're talking about, and that's a red flag. As such I wont even bother to read the links. VIT D3 (Cholercalciferol) is the one we need to go for. VIT D3 is what we get from the sun. Our systems automatically stop intake when we get to 10,000 IU. When I researched this (albeit in my limited capacity) it was no secret that D2 was next to useless and that optimum levels of D3 have been grossly underestimated. It was also noted that there was a link between Low VITD3 levels and BC. I take 50,000IU D3 CHolercalciferol every 2 weeks in the winter and every 4 weeks in summer.

We all come to our conclusions of what we believe based on the evidence we gather. Sometimes one thing is enough, other times it can take many things to convince us. In this case I strongly believe we have a world wide shortage of D3 simply because it makes sense because of a number of factors.

Anonymous · September 2015

My MO always asks about my Vit D and orders a blood test for it every year. Currently she likes me at about 65-70 levels. I take 4000 IUs daily, through drops; she only said yesterday, at my quarterly checkup, that I could back it off to 3000 IU because sometimes Vit D can increase blood calcium, which can be misconstrued for problems when there aren't any.

chocomousse · September 2015

In the Journal Thorax that linked high intake to an increased risk of upper respiratory infection, Vitamin D3 was used.

I took 8000 IU's of D3 a day for over a year because I read that D3 could shrink uterine fibroids. It didn't shink my fibroids. I've read since that D3 should be taken with Vitamin K2 for it to be metabolized correctly.

What this article is stating and what the studies have shown is that the overconsumption of Vitamin D can be deleterious and only those with documented deficiencies should be taking extra Vitamin D.

SelenaWolf · September 2015

Not everyone needs to supplement with Vitamin D. There are certain times when you should, such as if your Vitamin D levels are abnormally low, but - for most people - it's not needed or necessary and doesn't give you an added health benefit. Mega-dosing Vitamin D - which is what I believe this article is talking about - definitely doesn't provide an added health benefit. Just because something may be good for you under certain circumstances, doesn't mean that it is good for you under all circumstances nor does it mean that if certain dosages of Vitamin D are beneficial, then you can increase that benefit by taking more.

Italychick · September 2015

Well I got my Vitamin D level to 98 during chemo, and my MO was very happy about it. Vitamin D is one of the few individual blood tests she ordered, and she is strictly a standard of care doctor, nothing alternative. The problem with all the vitamin D studies/issues, etc. is that calcium, D and K2 need to be in the proper ratio. And most people get significant calcium without any supplementation. I supplement with zero calcium, and 4 years post menopause, and have no arthritis, bone degeneration, etc. So I could I do not agree with the low levels of Vitamin D being acceptable, and I asked my MO point blank and she said nothing has really been proven for any toxicity even up to 150. I will keep taking my vitamin D3, with a normal ratio of other things.

The problem with supplementation and evaluation is some things function together synergistically, and if you take one thing, you need to take the other (K2, in the case of D3) to achieve the best results. It's not that cut and dried to say a supplementation is good or bad.

macb04 · October 2015

I agree with Italychick. If Vt D3 is used, K2 has to taken with it. The Vitamin K2 tells calcium to stay in your bones rather than inappropriately lodging in your arteries. Calcification in the arteries are a known marker for heart disease. Cardiologists get a

"Calcium score " as a test for coronary heart disease. My Vit D level is 58. Plan to get it higher, shooting for 80 to 90.

peggy_j · October 2015

FWIW, my endocrinologist (who I see for bone health) cautioned against mega-dosing on Vit D. (I currently take about 400 IU a day, which is not a mega-dose). Some vitamins (like Vit C) will flush from our system if we take too much, but Vit D does not. Most of my doctors say the same thing as SelenaWolf: if you are deficit, bringing it into the normal range will help, but maxing out may not help and could hurt.

During Tx, it's important to talk to your docs about any supplements. During rads I was told to avoid supplements (radiation works by oxiding the cells, so if you take large doses of anti-oxidents, your treatment may be less effective).

Fallleaves · October 2015

Yeah, I think there may be a sweet spot for vitamin D. Last time mine was checked it was at 58, and that was after taking 2,000 IU in the morning and again at night for about 6 months. Now I've eased up a bit, since I read that above 50 might not be that great, either. This is what I read, from a 2008 study:

"Several authors have commented that the optimal levels of 25(OH)D should be greater than 30 ng/mL.¹⁹^,20 In our observational study, we found that there was a lower risk of mortality at levels of 30 to 49 ng/mL, but that at levels greater than 50 ng/mL there was again a higher risk of mortality in women. This is similar to findings about antioxidant vitamins and vitamin E, which show that too much may be harmful.⁴⁴^,45"

http://archinte.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?artic...

Italychick · October 2015

It depends on how you take D3. If you take it without K2, in my opinion, then you are subject to calcium build-ups, e.g., calcifications, which are not good. My MO said vitamin D levels up to 150 have not been proven to cause any harm. In my opinion, taking D3 without K2 sets a person up for lots of calcification which can show up as breast calcifications or cardiovascular disease. Again, in my opinion, vitamin and mineral supplementation isn't something to "play around" with and I make sure I know what I am doing because so many substances work together synergistically. So it isn't as cut and dried as levels between xx and xx are good, above that they are bad. I have seen the articles saying there is a J shaped curve, below 20 bad, 30-49 good, 50 and over bad again. But my MO said there is no data to support that - I have asked her repeatedly.

All I know is that when mine measured 86 with a normal calcium level, she was ecstatic, and she is a very standard of care, no nonsense doctor.

I'm staying in the 80-90 range for my vitamin D level as long as my calcium level is normal.

katcar0001 · October 2015

I have been taking it without K2, so I guess I need to get both my calcium and D levels checked. Is it okay to take K2 with Tamoxifen? I thought that K2 also thickened the blood. I possibly have a MTHFR mutation and need to verify that as well as my homocysteine levels. I don't want to increase my odds for a clot.

Fallleaves · October 2015

Interesting what you say about the calcium aspect, Italychick. It seems like the experts are starting to rethink recommending calcium supplements for all women. http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/852011

I haven't been taking calcium and it doesn't seem to have affected my bones. I also cut dairy about 3 years ago (I'm a weird hybrid---mainly vegan/pescetarian), but just got a bone scan and only have a tiny bit of decrease in the hip area.

I've heard that K2 is good for heart and bones, but the only source I can still eat is natto. Tried it last year. Even the memory of it makes me want to hurl. That was without a doubt the slimiest thing I ever tried to eat! So, on the K2 front, I'm probably screwed.

Italychick · October 2015

I take a sublingual K2 in the form of MK7 and also take MK4, and both seem to work pretty good for me. The sublingual dissolves quickly, no nasty taste. But there are other supplement forms of it if you don't want to do a sublingual. I don't do slimy lol. Our bodies produce MK4, but it seems to have a short half life because our bodies are set up to take it up quickly. I may come to the conclusion that only MK4 is needed. We are still researching the two forms, so in the meantime are taking both forms just in case. It is hard to find data on this substance.

I can't seem to view the article link you sent, bummer.

My calcium is perfect, bones are great, no arthritis according to pet and ct scan, and I have been post menopausal for over three years. I take no calcium

Italychick · October 2015

katcar I don't know about k2use while taking Tamoxifen because I don't take Tamoxifen. Sorry I can't be more help.

abigail48 · October 2015

been trying to find the post, & unable to do so, about h

ow fresh juices have only the sugar. this is just not true, they don't have the fiber, but this is easy to get elsewhere, they have calories, they have phyto chemicals the substances so important for health, juicing makes them very much stronger by taking out the fiber

Fallleaves · October 2015

I can't believe it didn't occur to me to take K2 as a supplement! Thanks for suggesting that, Italychick. I checked the website where I buy my supplements, and sure enough there are several options for K2 (sourced from natto---but I think I can handle it as long as I don't have to see it, smell it, or taste it!)

Italychick · October 2015

awesome! And who wants to do slimy? Same reason I can't eat okra lol.

Do you know what your calcium level is? The reason I ask is if it is around 10.4, maybe take the K2 for a few weeks before increasing D3 supplementation to get things in a good range. That's what I did, and my calcium level stayed good. Below is the D3 supplement I take under my tongue, but to warn you, somebody else told me that it reminded them of spit lol. To me it looks like coconut nectar. It lasts a long time, and I get it on Amazon, but I'm sure it is available other places

And remember, what I say here is only my personal experience, don't want to come across as a doctor or anything lol. Disclaimer, disclaimer, disclaimer!

theresa45 · October 2015

I've been taking Vit D3 and calcium without K2. After seeing this thread, I'm interested in learning more about K2. One question, for those of us who are ER+/PR+ is natto a problem because it appears to be fermented soybeans and soybeans are a phytoestrogen? Thanks for any information...

Hopeful82014 · October 2015

Some mult-vitamins do contain K2 but the source is not generally known. I, too, am very careful about soy, for a variety of reasons.

Anonymous · October 2015

Just did a quick look and some Vit K2 supplements are derived from natto. Going to dig deeper as that is definitely not going to work for me and will have to continue my calcium and Vit D3 without it if true.

marijen · October 2015

huffington Post is not a reliable source.

Kathy044 · October 2015

The Linus Pauling Institute is a good source of information imo, here's the link to the Vit K and osteoporosis info, there are different kinds of K2, MK4 and MK7 are both mentioned for bone.

http://lpi.oregonstate.edu/mic/vitamins/vitamin-K#...

I replied because at first I was very mixed up about what I was reading over on the NOF osteoporosis forum as the mineral Potassium has the symbol K as well and, for me I feel the proper levels of this mineral is even more important than vitamin K for bone health in maintaining a good calcium balance.

Kathy

Italychick · October 2015

I have no input on whether the fermented soy (natto) with the MK7 form of K2 is an issue with estrogen positive cancer since I am estrogen negative. The second form of K2 that I use, MK4, I do not believe is soy based. But research it and make sure yourself if you decide to use it. Here is the MK4 form I use, get it on Amazon. I have no affiliation with any company, just share products I find to be of value to me.

Go easy on the vitamin D

Comments

Categories