Re:Vitamin D Is a Hormone
by ozim on Monday March 18, 2024 @03:49PM
(#39749105)
From the article:
*Of course, there is a selection bias in who comes to me. There are people out there doing just fine on 5000 units of Vitamin D daily. I only see the ones who develop high calcium levels. But I see enough of them to know that this is not an exceptionally rare occurrence. I have been to lectures in which physicians have claimed that Vitamin D toxicity almost never occurs. In my experience, this is false. I have seen many cases of Vitamin D toxicity in people who were taking the recommended dose from an over-the-counter bottle.*
I am also doing 4000IU in the half-autumn/winter/half-spring time and none during summer and doing blood work to test the levels and I am keeping it in 40ng/ml and from the article:
*...her blood Vitamin D level had risen to 79 ng/ml. This level is within what many labs call the normal range, between 30 and 100 ng/ml, but levels above 70 are almost always a result of high dose supplementation, and I have seen toxicity with levels between 70 and 100 ng/ml. (A better “normal range” based on what I have seen would probably be between 30 and 60.) Vitamin D builds up over time, so the longer someone is on a high dose, the more likely she is to develop toxicity.*
Lady in the article was taking 5000IU daily for 5 years.
Re:Vitamin D Is a Hormone
by ein0p on Monday March 18, 2024 @08:59PM
(#39751913)
They make it sound like 5000IU is something astronomical when in reality for many people who live in the less sunny climates and have office jobs this is the normal amount. Still, one needs to test in order to see what _their_ normal amount is
*Of course, there is a selection bias in who comes to me. There are people out there doing just fine on 5000 units of Vitamin D daily. I only see the ones who develop high calcium levels. But I see enough of them to know that this is not an exceptionally rare occurrence. I have been to lectures in which physicians have claimed that Vitamin D toxicity almost never occurs. In my experience, this is false. I have seen many cases of Vitamin D toxicity in people who were taking the recommended dose from an over-the-counter bottle.*
I am also doing 4000IU in the half-autumn/winter/half-spring time and none during summer and doing blood work to test the levels and I am keeping it in 40ng/ml and from the article:
*...her blood Vitamin D level had risen to 79 ng/ml. This level is within what many labs call the normal range, between 30 and 100 ng/ml, but levels above 70 are almost always a result of high dose supplementation, and I have seen toxicity with levels between 70 and 100 ng/ml. (A better “normal range” based on what I have seen would probably be between 30 and 60.) Vitamin D builds up over time, so the longer someone is on a high dose, the more likely she is to develop toxicity.*
Lady in the article was taking 5000IU daily for 5 years.