Bauman College Programs

Author Topic: New Vitamin D recommendations  (Read 10300 times)

Offline DeborahA

  • Alumni
  • ***
  • Posts: 57
  • "Don't be saddish. Have a radish!"
New Vitamin D recommendations
« on: October 13, 2008, 01:46:11 PM »
In case you all haven't seen the new *doubled* vitamin D recommendations for infants and children, here they are:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/10/081013141737.htm

I would be interested in discussing these new dosages and vitamin D in general with other Bauman folks.
Bauman NE Student, Santa Cruz
B.A., Biology
M.A., Clinical Psychology
M.F.T. (Marriage and Family Therapist)

KellyT

  • Guest
Re: New Vitamin D recommendations
« Reply #1 on: October 14, 2008, 10:48:41 AM »
Here is my reply from a different forum thread here at Bauman...

Vitamin D is meant to be made from sunlight. We are not meant to consume it. The reason it is low in breastmilk (20 IU/L) is because we are meant to synthesize it in the skin from cholesterol upon exposure to UVB radiation (sunshine), not because breastmilk is "deficient". As you may have noticed, the researchers behind this new recommendation have ties to formula manufacturers and the supplement industry. So in essence they are creating a recommendation that causes people to buy their products. If you tell everyone they need more vitamin D and that sunlight is dangerous (skin cancer warnings), then they will feel they need to buy supplements. If you tell pregnant or nursing moms that breastmilk is "deficient" in something, they will feel the need to either supplement with formula or to only feed formula. Notice in their recommendations that they mentioned that even moms supplementing breastfeeding with formula would be deficient. Pure scare tactics. It reminds me of the company pushing Gardasil.

Offline DeborahA

  • Alumni
  • ***
  • Posts: 57
  • "Don't be saddish. Have a radish!"
Re: New Vitamin D recommendations
« Reply #2 on: November 07, 2008, 09:55:46 PM »
Kelly, I agree that we're meant to get our vitamin D from sunlight. However, the majority of us are enclosed in houses/offices for the bulk of the daylight hours and are extremely sun-deprived. And apparently at latitudes above L.A., for several months of the year (winter), one cannot get adequate vitamin D from sun exposure. I don't see any way around having people get their vitamin D through food or supplement sources.
Bauman NE Student, Santa Cruz
B.A., Biology
M.A., Clinical Psychology
M.F.T. (Marriage and Family Therapist)

Offline Andrea Nakayama

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 51
Re: New Vitamin D recommendations
« Reply #3 on: November 20, 2008, 11:09:40 AM »
I agree, sunlight is great when we can get it. I live in Oregon, which means months devoid of sunlight.

This summer I really delved into the vitamin D issue as I'm surrounded by friends who are both NDs and DOs on the vitamin D supplement bandwagon. I also explored the issue with a friend in NJ who had a vitamin D level of 7 and had been avoiding sun most of her life because of a skin cancer scare. She brought her level up to the high 20's with 10-20 minutes of direct, full-exposure sunlight daily. That showed one person's diligent results from the sun, but that level is still low.

As I've said on the forum before, while I'm not a complete proponent of the dietary recommendations of the Weston A. Price Foundation, I do think they're doing some incredible research into dietary fats and the fat soluble vitamins. Their case for vitamin D is compelling. They point to its reliance on the coupling and correct proportion to vitamin A--another vitamin that has gone missing in the American diet. This is the piece lacking in most of the popular information regarding vitamin D, and also in the supplementation of high doses of vitamin D alone. These isolated sources of vitamin D are more difficult to absorb and less bioavailable, thus the need for such high dosage.

Not only has sun been eliminated from most of our days, but so has the consumption of liver--the main true dietary source of vitamin D AND vitamin A in their proper ratios for full potentiation. Cod liver oil is one of the best sources of vitamin A and D, but these vitamins have been removed from most of the on-the-shelf CLO products sold--which focus more on their EFA content than their vitamin content. This was due mainly to the fear of vitamin A toxicity--which is also regulated when in proper ratio to vitamin D.

I can go on and on, and am happy to do so with anyone who would like to further engage on the subject. However I'd also like to direct you to the Weston A. Price search engine where you can read many compelling articles, by myriad doctors and researches, on this very subject. It's truly an interesting one!

http://westonaprice.org/search-results.html?cx=006599781855607243500%3Aofb8viwlk8e&cof=FORID%3A11&q=vitamin+D&sa=Search#911

Let me know what you find!

Andrea

Offline DeborahA

  • Alumni
  • ***
  • Posts: 57
  • "Don't be saddish. Have a radish!"
Re: New Vitamin D recommendations
« Reply #4 on: December 03, 2008, 08:42:25 PM »
Andrea, Thanks so much for this detailed and thorough post. I didn't know about the pairing of vitamin A with D. You just taught me a lot and piqued my curiosity to explore the issue further.  Best,  Deb
Bauman NE Student, Santa Cruz
B.A., Biology
M.A., Clinical Psychology
M.F.T. (Marriage and Family Therapist)

Offline Andrea Nakayama

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 51
Re: New Vitamin D recommendations
« Reply #5 on: December 04, 2008, 09:42:54 AM »
Hi Deb.

I just posted a long letter from Sally Fallon at the Weston Price Foundation under a topic with the subject: Cod Liver Oil. That might be helpful in your continued research.

Good luck and let me know what else you uncover!

Andrea


Offline RobertB

  • Alumni
  • ***
  • Posts: 14
    • Wellness Focus
Re: New Vitamin D recommendations
« Reply #6 on: December 09, 2008, 06:49:48 PM »
I just finished a report on vitamin D for NE 104 and found the debate on the possibilities of vitamin D toxicity and the need for vitamin D blood testing over my head and too long for my paper. However, this paper struck me as very well done and very insightful. I'd recommend it highly for those considering vitamin D dosage and toxicity questions:
http://www.westonaprice.org/basicnutrition/vitamin-d-safety.html

Offline GigiC

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 24
Re: New Vitamin D recommendations
« Reply #7 on: December 09, 2008, 08:53:32 PM »
Like it was mentioned in Andrea's post, both my Naturopath and Nurse Practitioner are touting high doses of vitamin D.  My NP was able to bring up her D levels significantly with very high doses (10,000 iu/day).  That level is a little scary to me.  I have bones issues and live in Colorado so cannot rely on sunlight from September through April.  My comfort level is with about 5,000 iu/day.

Offline GigiC

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 24
Re: New Vitamin D recommendations
« Reply #8 on: December 09, 2008, 09:17:49 PM »

 


anything