Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Big Vitamin D Mistake

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 459 posts

Re: The Big Vitamin D Mistake

#371

Post by gonehome »

netcraft wrote: post #341
ryanmarsh wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My doc prescribed me 25,000 IU once a week for 8 weeks then 10,000 IU daily thereafter. The kicks of 25k were what made the diff for me. YMMV

holy smokes, thats a ton. Are there any effects of too much?

Yeah, it's fat soluble so you can take too much (but you'd have to take a ridiculous amount).

The normal doctor prescription to increase levels is a 50k pill once a week for a couple months. The previous recommended level was 20ng/ml, but they increased it to 30ng/ml.

When I got tested mine was 11ng/ml (and this is in the sunny bay area). To have the recommended value from normal sun exposure you'd need face/legs/arms exposed to sunlight for ~30-45 minutes a day which most people don't get. It's very hard to increase D from food.

I'm also not sure how they determine the recommended amount and there seems to be a ton of pseudoscience around all of this stuff so it's hard to tell what's true.

Re: The Big Vitamin D Mistake

#372

Post by manmal »

logfromblammo wrote: post #328
manmal wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best „normal“ dietary source is Gouda cheese, and almost an order of magnitude better, Natto (though that’s hard on the taste buds).

False. The best "normal" source is foie gras. Natto is not "normal". It is an acquired taste. The acquisition of said taste is a difficult, nauseating, and extremely stinky path. Besides that, most of the vitamin K from natto is as MK-7. Animal-sourced vitamin K is mostly menatetrenone (aka menaquinone MK-4) whereas vitamin K from fermentation bacteria is various lengths of menaquinone, of which only MK-4 and MK-7 ha…

Foie gras is not "normal", because it's very expensive and its production inhumane. And I did not call Natto normal, if you read my comment carefully. It's not that easy to acquire, and as you said, it's disgusting.

Most pills/drops you would prefer over foie gras are mostly made from Natto (MK-7) btw.. there are some supplements with MK-4 but those are rare and quite expensive.

Re: The Big Vitamin D Mistake

#373

Post by tathougies »

mohaine wrote: post #78
guelo wrote: post #44

This is one of the reasons I hate dermatologist's panic against sun exposure. Vitamin D deficiency kills way more people than skin cancer.

My dermatologist actually told me to get more sun, but then I have psoriasis. I believe his exact recommendation was one beach vacation every early Feb.

Does insurance pay for that? :)

Re: The Big Vitamin D Mistake

#374

Post by redtuesday »

deepGem wrote: post #111
King-Aaron wrote: post #37

Anecdotally, I had this discussion with a cardiovascular interventionist specialist about seven or eight years ago when I was managing a team of cardio theatre orderlies in a private hospital. He made the comment, "mark my words, in about five to ten years time there will be a major scare about needing to absorb more vitamin D". His opinion was that the increase in sunscreen usage and the push to avoid skin cancer by…

The NIH guys also did a study that said that even in tropical countries, Vitamin D absorption has fallen dramatically because of lifestyle changes. One of the probable factors is the lust for fair skin. I routinely see people covered from head to toe to help them stay fair skinned, even kids are sent to play covered in full sleeve clothing. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3897581/

> [...] even kids are sent to play covered in full sleeve clothing.

Which is good because if I remember correctly the human skin has quit a bit natural sun protection, but is only fully developed in the twenties.

If I got that mixed up with something else please correct me if I'm wrong.

Re: The Big Vitamin D Mistake

#375

Post by otakucode »

pcarolan wrote: post #175
King-Aaron wrote: post #37

Anecdotally, I had this discussion with a cardiovascular interventionist specialist about seven or eight years ago when I was managing a team of cardio theatre orderlies in a private hospital. He made the comment, "mark my words, in about five to ten years time there will be a major scare about needing to absorb more vitamin D". His opinion was that the increase in sunscreen usage and the push to avoid skin cancer by…

What dose is recommended for adults and what is the best way to get it into your system?

Ask your doctor, really. When I got diagnosed with vitamin D deficiency (inside on the computer all the time, I'm quite pale) a few years ago the prescription I got was for pills that had 50,000 IUs each and I was to take one twice a week. I recently got a new doctor and was getting bloodwork done and she saw the mention of the deficiency and she asked if I wanted that tested for... she said she usually doesn't bother because everyone in my state (West Virginia) is deficient, she just recommends people take 1000 IUs a day or so. Personally I take 10,000 IUs about every other day. At least assuming the stuff I ordered off Amazon is at all legitimate (vitamins and such things are such a super sketchy market, companies get busted selling sawdust pills all the time).

One thing that I was not expecting, when I was on that prescription at first I noticed a marked improvement in my hearing (which I had not noticed being degraded at all previously...). I thought I was imagining it but upon doing some research it turns out that hearing loss is one of the possible complications of vitamin D deficiency.

Re: The Big Vitamin D Mistake

#376

Post by unsignedinteger »

martinko wrote: post #167
cies wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> [D and] B12. Folks, get both of these checked. Yes, please. I'm spreading this news for years. Many are deficient in both. B12 has a name for being low in veg*ans, while that is true many omnis are deficient as well. It's good to have more papers published on "high-dose D3". But by what I read this has been know for many years. And shun multi-AZ tablets, they provide a false sense of security. Eat loads of fresh pr…

> Limit (or drop) meat, fish and eggs What are you smoking?

Without being too facetious, do you have anything to contribute as to why you might think dropping meat, fish, and eggs from your diet would be detrimental?

The benefits of eliminating meat include reduced markers of inflammation within the body. Reduction of cholesterol. Changes in gut microbiome which as the emerging science is describing may have a more important impact on mood and cognition than we previously thought. Lengthening of telomeres. Oh and how about making the single most impactful change an individual can make to reduce climate change.

From my understanding of the subject the only real downside from eliminating meat or reducing it substantially is the reduction in essential B vitamins provided. This is widely recognized by those who promote a plant-based diet and the solution is to simply supplement with a super B vitamin supplement.

So what are you smoking?

Re: The Big Vitamin D Mistake

#377

Post by mturmon »

Spooky23 wrote: post #207
LeifCarrotson wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fair skin is a lot better than skin cancer!

People who work outside don’t get skin cancer. People who cook themselves for fun do. If they did, we would know, because workers compensation would be paying for it.

This is a pretty well-known anecdote: men in drive-on-right countries tend to get more skin cancers in their left sides than their right sides.

This is believed to be due to sun exposure of the left side while driving.

See: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3117975/

Re: The Big Vitamin D Mistake

#378

Post by redtuesday »

lostlogin wrote: post #255
deepGem wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The NIH guys also did a study that said that even in tropical countries, Vitamin D absorption has fallen dramatically because of lifestyle changes. One of the probable factors is the lust for fair skin. I routinely see people covered from head to toe to help them stay fair skinned, even kids are sent to play covered in full sleeve clothing. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3897581/

When the burn time is less than 10 minutes, you need to cover them up or have them play in the shade. The UV index for tomorrow is just shy of 14 and we are a month or two from the time of year when it’s highest, you would need medical treatment for a child who played in that and was uncovered all day. Related: I found the old measure (burn time) much easier to use than the new UV index, and while having it standard…

I never took the time to investigate how accurate this site is, but it seems quite nice since it has uv index, time to skin redness and time to sunburn:

http://sunburnmap.com

Re: The Big Vitamin D Mistake

#379

Post by Retric »

Fishkins wrote: post #338
kgwgk wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But if tanning also produces cancer it remains to be determined which effect dominates (unlike for people with naturally dark skin, where the effect can only go in the beneficial sense).

Every source I've seen clearly states tanning always increases your chance of skin cancer. Tanning does provide a small amount of protection against burning (around 3 SPF worth), but no protection against cancer. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fact-or-fiction-a...

They studied based on 2 weeks of tanning which is very minimal.

You clearly get more than SPF 3 with a deep tan as you can spend 8 hours in direct sun without obvious problems. Without any tan you get a burn in under an hour suggesting ~SPF 10+.

Re: The Big Vitamin D Mistake

#380

Post by Toast_25 »

andai wrote: post #171
manmal wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best „normal“ dietary source is Gouda cheese, and almost an order of magnitude better, Natto (though that’s hard on the taste buds).

Gouda is important for my health? Thanks, that's the best news I've heard all week !

It'll do you a lot of Gouda.
Post reply on HN