Did you see the article that says Vit.D is a hormone? That it impacts a variety of body functions, when Vit.D is adequate.

Cannot find it on a SEARCH of this thread, so I googled and got http://ezinearticles.com/?Vitamin-D...mone?&id=151939 and a link to Dr.Joe: http://www.uncommondoctor.com/

Hmmm...wonder where Redwood City is, if it is possible for me to find my way to see Dr.Joe, an endocrinologist of some repute. Ah... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redwood_City,_California

Okay, so it's not in my neighborhood. And Tues I'm off to my HMO for another visit with a new MD who can (maybe) give me a dx on this hip that has been problematical/painful since Aug'06 and is now being numbed out by a chiro who is buying me time. Time? Yep, I think he's buying me time to find a real doctor who can tell me what happened, what is pinched in this hip, and how I can UNpinch it. Well, if I did it by sitting wrong, I ought to be able to UNdo it. Just seems to me that it ought to work that way. I'm getting rickety, to be sure, but...well...I can hope.

Just came across a PDF, http://www.food.gov.uk/multimedia/pdfs/vitmin2003.pdf ,apparently put out by the British govt about upper limits of various vitamins and minerals. The usual conservatism on D doses(although they admit further studies are needed) but I did see some interesting facts which I have never seen anywhere else before:

1. Tests on Rhesus monkeys showed D3 was more toxic than D2. Hmm..I though the opposite was true.

2. 25[OHD] is converted to the active 1,25[OHD] through the action of PTH. Well I never knew that! Here I was thinking that PTH just had some connection to bone marrow minerals reserves but evidently Vitamin D is very much involved in the extraction of minerals from the bones too!

3. Excess Vitamin D(article does not mention if it is 25 or 1,25) is excreted by the body in bile and urine. Interesting. I wonder which places the body stores D and how it retrieves reserves. Which more information was available.

The PDF also says:



I believe 0.025mg is 10,000 IU. Not sure if I did my math right but that is 10, 000 I.U. per day for a 60 KG person. Hard to believe the UK govt is saying thats safe and possibly even necessary for some!

Note date of the article is 2003 - with research from earlier dates, no doubt. Lots of newer research seems to be bursting out as people challenge low limits for optimal health.

I'm still feeling fine, with 200,000IU Vit.D3 daily, 20,000IU Vit.A from fish oil. I'm hopeful to discover better muscle strength as I pursue this course of therapeutic dosage of Vit.D3. Let's hope!

Bear in mind that I'm a 63yr-old woman, 5'10", 400# or so, who has recently lost significant FUNCTION in leg muscles. I'm keen to get back that FUNCTION, to be able to sit/stand without help and without leverage and calculation. Vit.D3 offers me hope.

0.025mg is 25 micrograms is 1,000IU.

Thanks for clarifying this measurement thing. So confusing to a novice!

Ok I think you must be right, my math was skewed. Very surprising to see the UK govt quote research by Dr. Vieth, yet ignore his conclusions that 10,000 IU per day is safe. Also the US govt has said 2,000 IU per day is safe as an upper limit yet the UK is located on a higher lattitude but the UK govt still insists 1,000 IU is their safe upper limit.

I am also a bit unsettled by their quoting a study that said D2 was less toxic in rhesus monkeys than D3 was. I thought that D3 was established as the least toxic vitamin in all mammals including humans? And that it was D2 that causes toxicity over 2000 IU per day in humans?

Also the UK govt claims PTH is the hormone that converts vitamin D from the inactive to the active hormone form. Yet, the site www.parathyroid.com which is run by a doctor specializing in parathyroid surgury makes absolutely no mention of this fact. How could such an important fact not be mentioned on that site or on any other sites for that matter? Where did the UK govt get that info from in the first place I wonder.

May I suggest that you take with a pinch of salt what the UK government has to say on the subject (as most of us here do) and read this report instead: Sunlight Robbery.

I don't take their upper limit of 1,000 IU seriously at all. I have already learned that what actually matters is how much your blood concentration of Vitamin D is raised by what you ingest, and there is no way someone can flat out propose that 1,000 IU is the right dose for people of all ages, skin tones, lattitudes and habits.

But at the same time I want to be careful and take what the other side says with a pinch of salt as well. Everyone can make mistakes and it does not hurt to be as thorough as possible and examine every single perspective. It is still my suspicion that taking two much D can shock the system and throw it out of wack with regards to Calcium, Mg, PTH and other elements of the body balance.

Hi folks,

We're closing and restarting journals and threads close to or longer than 2,000 posts, in order to improve the forum's speed/responsiveness, and restore the search function. And this thread is one of them

The current thread will still be visible and searchable, but will be closed to further new posts. New posts will go to the new "part 2" thread.

Best way to do it is start a new thread with the same name, or add "part 2". Or maybe set the title on monthly basis if you prefer a monthly/weekly/daily thread. Once the new thread is created, let me know, and I'll close this one with a link to the new one.

Thanks for your help and cooperation.

Wa'il

Zuleikaa first started this thread on Sept 15, 2005 it would be nice to update all new info and still keep the old as reference and maybe Zuleikaa should start the part 2 new thread in honor of all the greatness she has brought to our lives with her Vitamin D3 knowledge.

Zuleikaa - what do you think?

I agree that Zuleikaa should be the one to start the new thread off

No problem. I'll start a new thread, then change the author to Zule

Wa'il

Thread continues here: http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=332508