This article is very technical and difficult to read. Is there a TLDR?
Eat one small rock per day as important source of vitamins and minerals critical to digestive health.
The Big Vitamin D Mistake [pdf] (2017)
21–30 of 57 posts
Re: The Big Vitamin D Mistake [pdf] (2017)
#22Re: The Big Vitamin D Mistake [pdf] (2017)
#23My local grocery store offered free blood testing for Vitamin D a few years ago, and I was low. I take a 2000IU tablet a few times a week now.
Haha the article states that the recommended daily dose should be 6-8k
Re: The Big Vitamin D Mistake [pdf] (2017)
#24Do we need to be skeptical of NIH because of Trump? or they're still okay? Also, remember - don't take D on its own. Always with magnesium, or you get harmed by it, for all that it also does you good. Body is not built for raw D. Also also remember, D2 is a vitamin, D3 is a hormone.
I don't think this paper is associated with the NIH besides being hosted there.
To be clear, NIH hosts an online database called PubMed that contains almost all published biomedical literature. If the article is open access, then it also hosts a copy of the article on PubMed Central.
This is the link to the article in the PubMed database: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28768407/
You can click on the DOI link to go to the article hosted by the journal.
Re: The Big Vitamin D Mistake [pdf] (2017)
#25Re: The Big Vitamin D Mistake [pdf] (2017)
#26I'm conflicted.
It seems like in Canada the recommendation was that there was no actual error and the dosage of 1000 IU is still considered good.
It's hard to find more than 2500 IU.
I have no idea what to follow at this point
Re: The Big Vitamin D Mistake [pdf] (2017)
#27So is 10,000 IU of daily does ok ?
Re: The Big Vitamin D Mistake [pdf] (2017)
#28Re: The Big Vitamin D Mistake [pdf] (2017)
#29[deleted]
Re: The Big Vitamin D Mistake [pdf] (2017)
#30[deleted]