D3

http://www.diabeticconnect.com/news-articles/5721-the-vitamin-d-scam


http://twowitnessministries.com/Documents/D3%20LEGAL%20SIZE.pdf

http://www.poisonfluoride.com/pfpc/html/vit_d.html

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2008/06/28/if-you-choose-to-take-oral-vitamin-d-how-much-should-you-take.aspx

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2005/09/06/test-your-vitamin-d-knowledge.aspx

That mercola site has a stupid popup appear at the center of the screen and will not close! Cannot read most text

Mercola forces you to sign in, then it won't appear. Yeah it's a pain.

New research has once again placed optimum vitamin D intake at much higher than the current recommended amount.

The study of 138 subjects suggested a daily dose of 3800 IU for those with adequate blood vitamin D levels, and 5000 IU each day for those who are vitamin D deficient.

The current recommended intakes for vitamin D are as low as 200 IU daily for those aged 19-50, and go only as high as 600 IU daily for those over the age of 70.
Sources:

American Journal of Clinical Nutrition June 2008; 87(6):1952-1958



Dr. Mercola's Comments:

More and more scientific evidence is emerging, confirming that currently recommended intakes of vitamin D are completely insufficient and FAR below your optimal levels.

I’m pleased to see that this study upped the recommended dosages in order to achieve a healthier vitamin D level. But even their increased target serum concentration of 75 nmol/L is below the optimal level for maximum health benefits.

What is the OPTIMAL Level of Vitamin D?

The “normal” 25-hydroxyvitamin D lab values are 50-140 nmol/L (20-56 ng/ml).

However, this range is too broad to be ideal.

In fact, your vitamin D level should never be below 82 nmol/L (32 ng/ml), and any levels below 50 nmol/L (20 ng/ml) are considered serious deficiency states, increasing your risk of as many as 16 different cancers and autoimmune diseases like multiple sclerosis and rheumatoid arthritis.

The OPTIMAL value that you’re looking for is 115-128 nmol/L (50-55 ng/ml), which is still slightly higher than what this study aimed for.

Keeping your level in this range, and even erring toward the higher numbers in this range, is going to give you the most protective benefit.

A study published in March 2007 supports this higher range. After assessing data from two studies, they found that individuals with serum 25(OH)D of approximately 132 nmol/L (52 ng/ml) had a 50 percent lower risk of breast cancer than those with serums of less than 33 nmol/L (13 ng/ml).

so i'm confused whether D3 is a good thing to take or bad.... so confused!

Test Your Vitamin D Knowledge Posted By Dr. Mercola | September 06 2005 |

Vitamin D is the most common nutritional deficiency in the United States, and most physicians are clueless about its importance. If you can answer the majority of these questions correctly you are doing better than the majority of physicians.

Please remember that without question the best way to optimize your vitamin D level is with regular exposure of large portions of your skin to the sun. However, with Labor Day behind us it is time for most of us to consider switching our source of omega-3 fats from fish oil to cod liver oil, as that will supply the missing vitamin D that many of us will start lacking due to diminishing sun exposure.

This test was developed by Dr. John Cannell. He is one of the leaders in the vitamin D education movement and has a very comprehensive Web site dedicated to vitamin D. You can also subscribe to his free newsletter there.

1. Vitamin D reverses inflammatory changes associated with age-related memory impairment.

a) True

b) False

True. Researchers from Ireland were the first to demonstrate that vitamin D3 acts as an anti-inflammatory agent and turns old brains into young brains--at least as far as inflammatory cytokines are concerned. This research suggests vitamin D may prevent, or even treat, age-related cognitive decline!

Biochem Soc Trans. 2005 Aug;33(Pt 4):573-7.


2. Your blood sugar is closely associated with your vitamin D level.

a) True

b) False

True. Researchers in Australia added to the growing evidence that sun avoidance may have caused the epidemic of type 2 diabetes. The Australians' findings were straightforward and powerful. The higher your vitamin D level, the lower your blood glucose.

Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2005 Jun;62(6):738-41.


3. In July, a group from Minnesota found that 100 percent of elderly patients admitted for fragility fractures were vitamin-D deficient despite the fact that half of them were taking vitamin D supplements.

a) True

b) False

True. The authors found that women taking supplemental vitamin D had average levels of 16.4 ng/ml while women not taking supplements had levels of 11.9.ng/ml, both dangerously low. None of the 82 women got enough sun or took enough vitamin D to obtain a level of 40 ng/ml. These were fragility fractures, not fractures caused by unusual trauma. That is, their bones just sort of fell apart.

Curr Med Res Opin. 2005 Jul;21(7):1069-74.


4. Women with the lowest vitamin D levels had five times higher risk for breast cancer.

a) True

b) False

True. Women with 25(OH)-vitamin D blood levels less than 20 ng/ml were more than five times more likely to be diagnosed with breast cancer than were women with levels above 60 ng/ml. That is five, repeat five, times more likely!

Eur J Cancer. 2005 May;41(:1164-9. Epub 2005 Apr 14.


5. Avoiding the sun doubles the risk of prostate cancer.

a) True

b) False

True. Again, the risk of avoiding the sun is clear, this time in another study with prostate cancer. However, the authors pointed out that sun exposure increases the risk of skin cancer and believed that proper vitamin D supplementation "may be the safest solution to achieve an adequate vitamin D status."

Cancer Res. 2005 Jun 15;65(12):5470-9.


I also believe supplementation is the only way to go for many people. African Americans are simply unable to spend an adequate time in the sun. In addition, the sun ages the skin and that fact alone will keep many Americans out of the sun. That said, I go into the sun whenever I can. The reason is simple: it is the most conservative thing to do. Until we know everything the sun does--and it does more than just make vitamin D--the conservative approach is to mimic our ancestors and the environment in which humans evolved, whenever we can. Therefore, it makes sense to sunbathe sensibly in the late spring, summer and early fall and take supplements or use UVB lamps the rest of the time.


6. South Korean researchers associated vitamin D deficiency with Parkinson's disease.

a) True

b) False

True. Actually, they showed that certain genetic malformations (VDR polymorphisms) are more likely in patients with Parkinson's disease, implying an association with vitamin D and Parkinsonism.

J Korean Med Sci. 2005 Jun;20(3):495-8.


7. Researchers in England discovered that patients with chronic pain have phenomenally low vitamin D levels.

a) True

b) False

True. The authors added to the evidence that severe vitamin D deficiency is associated with chronic pain. They found that 88 percent of their patients with chronic pain had levels less than 10 ng/ml. If they treated their patients, they did not report it. However, Swiss researchers recently treated chronic pain patients with vitamin D and reported the pain "disappeared" within one to three months in most of their patients. This is the second open study that showed adequate doses of vitamin D dramatically improved chronic pain.

Ann Rheum Dis. 2005 Aug;64(:1217-9.

BMJ. 2004 Jul 17;329(7458):156-7.

Spine. 2003 Jan 15;28(2):177-9.


8. Severe vitamin D deficiency is common in TB patients. Some English doctors don't know the difference between ideal and "normal" levels. Most American doctors don't know the difference either.

a) All are true

b) All are false

c) Some are true and some are false

All are true. First, the authors reviewed the impressive animal evidence that vitamin D can help treat TB. Then they reported that most of their immigrant TB patients had undetectable vitamin D levels. Then they reported the normal range for their lab was between 5 to 47 ng/ml but "normal" was any level greater than 9 ng/ml. Finally, the researchers reported they treated their patients with "normal daily doses" of vitamin D, without reporting how much they gave. Apparently, they gave just enough to get patients above 9 ng/ml.

J Infect. 2005 Jun;50(5):432-7.


Keep in mind that different laboratory techniques result in different ranges for 25(OH)-vitamin D levels. No matter what technique is used, ideal levels can roughly be defined as any level above the median. In this case, as you will see below in Dr. Heaney's article, the doctors should have treated their patients with 4,000 units a day. They should also have watched for evidence of vitamin D hypersensitivity, which can occur when treating tuberculosis patients for vitamin D deficiency.


We can only mourn for the poor immigrants who have to suffer from both TB and vitamin D deficiency. Of course, few physicians in the United States know the difference between the Gaussian definition of "normal" (average ranges for the population tested) and the ideal definition of "normal" (levels above 32 ng/ml). Getting commercial reference labs to report ideal 25(OH)-vitamin D levels should be a priority of everyone involved in trying to end the epidemic of vitamin D deficiency.
9. Virtually all nephrologists give renal failure patients a vitamin D-like drug. Virtually all renal failure patients are severely vitamin D deficient. Some nephrologists know the difference between vitamin D and calcitriol.

a) All are true

b) All are false

c) Some are true and some are false.

All are true. Finally, the truth about renal failure patients: most of them are vitamin D deficient despite taking vitamin D analogs! Most nephrologists prescribe activated vitamin D (calcitriol) or vitamin D analogs but not vitamin D. Calcitriol and vitamin D analogs do nothing to prevent vitamin D deficiency. Renal failure patients need both vitamin D and a calcitriol-like drug. Moreover, 400 units a day of vitamin D will not correct their deficiencies. As you will see below, they need up to 4,000 units.

Am J Kidney Dis. 2005 Jun;45(6):1026-33.


P.S. If you think nephrologists know the difference between vitamin D and calcitriol, read this month's paper from some nephrologists at the University of Texas. They discuss the importance of vitamin D in preventing and treating heart disease. (I think adequate vitamin D nutrition may prevent more cardiovascular deaths than cancer deaths.) However, I read the Texas paper three times and still don't know if the authors know the difference between vitamin D and calcitriol. I hope they know the difference between cholesterol and testosterone. (Some cholesterol is metabolized into steroid hormones, vitamin D is a prehormone; testosterone is a steroid hormone, calcitriol is the most potent steroid hormone in the human body).

Kidney Int Suppl. 2005 Jun;(95):S37-42.


10. Professor Robert Heaney proved, again, that he is a gentleman and a scholar.

a) True

b) False

True. In the most important clinical paper published this month, Heaney gave the three best reasons why we should all maintain minimum levels of at least 32 ng/ml, the level that:


(a) Effectively suppresses PTH

(b) Maximizes calcium absorptio,

(c) Maximally improves glucose tolerance


Then he goes on to show that some of us, especially African Americans, will need to take 3,000 to 4,000 units every day to maintain healthy 25(OH)-vitamin D blood levels.

J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol. 2005 Jul 15.

He then defends the Institute of Medicine's (IOM) recommendation that we only take one-tenth that amount, as the best science that was available in 1997. I admire Dr. Heaney for trying to cover for the IOM. The truth is that both Dr. Heaney and Dr. Holick told the IOM that 2,000 units a day was not toxic and would prevent both adequate treatment and meaningful research. The IOM then proceeded to ignore the only two vitamin D experts on the panel.


Writing two years later, Professor Reinhold Vieth came up with dozens of studies the IOM overlooked. These studies conclusively showed 2,000 units a day could not be toxic. Furthermore, Vieth found the literature published before 1997 clearly showed 10,000 units a day was unlikely to be toxic. Vitamin D toxicity probably starts around 20,000 units a day, and then only if taken for months or even years.

Am J Clin Nutr. 1999 May;69(5):842-56.

Some of that information has been posted here before. Why not post information that hasn't been discussed. I do and why the new links as it's not the same information. For example, in one of those links it discusses

To assess vitamin D deficiency, serum levels of 25-OH vitamin D3 are usually tested. Unfortunately this is done without any consideration for thyroid status, although it has been known for more than 30 years that thyroid hormones control Vitamin D metabolism.

Hypothyroid children have higher serum levels of both calcium and 1,25-dihydroxy-vitamin D3, while having lower levels of osteocalcin (Lauffer et al, 1993; Verrotti et al, 1998), while the opposite is reported in hyperthyroidism (Saggese et al, 1990). These levels normalize after thyroid status is corrected (Verrotti et al, 1998; Saggeese et al, 1990).

Eventually people will start to \ realize the longterm complications but it's going to take many many years if not decades. History repeats itself. Information is ignored for a desired outcome. Reminds me of:

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

Arthur Schopenhauer, German philosopher (1788 – 1860)

At any rate, you can have the last word as I've seen your hall monitoring you've done with Jacob.

Similarly, when you don't get your way, you throw little bitty "tantrums." As such, my last line to him would apply to you as well.

Thank you for the links, jdp. Interesting material. . .

Honestly...are you being serious with those links...really?

Before the vitamin D scam was fed to consumers, the deadly “D” was fed to rodents as a means of eradicating the pesky creatures. In their report, “The Endocrine System,” the University of Colorado, reminds us, "Ingestion of milligram quantities of vitamin D over periods of weeks or months can be severely toxic to humans and animals. In fact, baits laced with vitamin D are used very effectively as rodenticides [rat poison]."

You are aware you can probably kill any animal with enough of any vitamin.....

thanks for posting jdp good info.

You're welcome Odysseus and valderama.

abc123,

What do you think will happen when your D3 receptors become plugged by lyme (which most have BTW but for most may be dormant waiting for low immune system, so to speak), or other L form bacteria.

Used in rat poison because

a mouse does not have D3 conversion mechanisms which get plugged up by D3 derivatives.
http://www.curezone.com/forums/fm.asp?i=1669870#i

There are other issues beyond this when VDR (Vitamin D receptor) gets plugged.

Using state of the art chemistry methods, dozens of these sunshine hormones have been identified and more are being characterized every day. Nobody is sure how many there are, or how they interact. But one thing is for certain; they work in orchestra-like unison to activate a host of positive actions in the body. There is no one single player as we have been led to believe.

About seven years ago, I began observing patients being tested before and after vitamin D. It was not in "fashion" then for most to be testing vitamin D at that time, but we did. Tens of thousands of patients later, using other therapies and adding vitamin D has not proved to be harmful.

The only folks who seem to be convinced by eliminating vitamin D are those within the Marshall group, and the suffering many endure is intolerable for most. They suffer from herxheimer reactions that are very uncomfortable for long periods of time.

Then there are others who treat Lyme and Fibromyalgia who do not use vitamin D restriction. Instead, they treat the Lyme itself or whatever is causing the Fibromyalgia.

Dr. David Brownstein believes that high dose iodine can kill what's causing fibromyalgia. Regarding Lyme there are several dozen culprits and when they are identified they can be treated with the correct antibiotic. Given a positive test for Lyme, it might be worth taper down on Vitamin D if iodine dosage is high (more info on this in a bit).

The medical literature does show that those on synthroid (synthetic T4) have been found to have their TSH rise (transiently) to high levels typically during the summer time (during regular sunbathing).

There are some doctors who flat out tell their patients to stop getting sun exposure. The real fix in such cases is to lower their synthetic dosage. Some will have this transient rise every summer and then later have to up their levels of thyroid hormone again in winter.

How D3 supplementation would be any different I do not know. At the same time, I do not recommend synthroid anyway. Better to be on Armour if it's even needed.

Also I mentioned on the last vitamin D thread something that I think is worth repeating:

This passage is taken from the link below. It suggests that taking lots of iodine may reduce the body's need for vitamin D, and hence reduce its conversion in the body.

That said if one is taking especially high doses of iodine, it could reduce the conversion rate.

If this is correct, it would make sense, and by the way--last year I wrote a long letter to Amy Proal, who is a Bob Marshall advocate and who is the author of [bacteriality(dot)com], explaining to her that she's not considering iodine. Unfortunately, I receive no response.

" have also noted an apparent connection between bringing sufficient iodine to a bromine plugged thyroid, and the vitamin D metabolism of the body. Although I am unaware of the exact mechanism, it seems clear that the calcitonin/parathyroid hormone/Vitamin D/calcium balance in the body changes as people on iodine loading programs often register as vitamin D deficient when they did not previously."

http://vickeryseaplantminerals.com/IodineandtheHalogenRevolution.html

jdp701 wrote:You're welcome Odysseus and valderama.

abc123,

What do you think will happen when your D3 receptors become plugged by lyme (which most have BTW but for most may be dormant waiting for low immune system, so to speak), or other L form bacteria.

Used in rat poison because

a mouse does not have D3 conversion mechanisms which get plugged up by D3 derivatives.
http://www.curezone.com/forums/fm.asp?i=1669870#i

There are other issues beyond this when VDR (Vitamin D receptor) gets plugged.

Using state of the art chemistry methods, dozens of these sunshine hormones have been identified and more are being characterized every day. Nobody is sure how many there are, or how they interact. But one thing is for certain; they work in orchestra-like unison to activate a host of positive actions in the body. There is no one single player as we have been led to believe.

No clue, why dont we make a computer model about it and then come up with a treatment for it?

Do you have any idea how many people become worse on that protocol? They just dont show them on the main forum because you need stage 2 access. My friend went on it briefly and I have seen the stage 2 forum, let me tell you it is not pretty.

CausticSymmetry wrote:The only folks who seem to be convinced by eliminating vitamin D are those within the Marshall group, and the suffering many endure is intolerable for most. They suffer from herxheimer reactions that are very uncomfortable for long periods of time.

Thanks for the info CS.

FWIW, there is another group at curezone... those that have access to Rife that have used Rife to convert the uncoverted Vitamin D that also echo this.

I really can't describe it beyond a much much better immune system, stronger, etc.. Mentioned before but can breath so much better. Last month didn't mention in case it wasn't true but the dirty brown color to my skin is going back to a healthy glow... not 100% yet but with enough time I believe it will. At first I thought I needed more carnosine or maybe mercury issue but turns out that that's not what the condition was. Turns out that the brown appearance that some have mentioned isn't entirely the increased blood oxygen that I pointed to before many months ago. Turns out the dirty brown color to skin is the uncoverted D building up "IMO/IME."

hope this helps

abc123,

I don't advocate the Marshall Protocol.

"Vitamin D3, cholecalciferol, is certainly toxic in excess...[it] is used as a rodent poison for this purpose. Animal data indicates signs of toxicity can occur with ingestion of 0.5 mg/kg (20,000 IU/kg ), while the oral LD50 (the dose it takes to kill half the animals) for cholecalciferol in dogs is about 88 mg/kg, or 3,520,000 IU/kg.

An Overview of Cholecalciferol Toxicosis. The American Board of Veterinary Toxicology (ABVT). This would be equivalent to a 110-pound adult taking 176,000,000 IU or 440,000 of the 400 unit cholecalciferol capsules."

JDP- How do we convert the unconverted vitamin d3 if one doesn't have access to a Rife??

UVB light, chanca piedra and iodine (or Iodide I forget which form) would be a good route.

Another option would be rife which is what I do which is said to be superior than above option.

I understand in CS's practice that tens of thousands of patients have been on D3 for past 7 years with no problems but it's the immunosuppresive effects that occured from D3 supplement that's the issue at hand. That's where the problem lies. It's not like any other supplement out there that once you start to develop problem you can quit D3 supplement and everything goes back to normal.

People are under the mistaken belief that D3 "supplement" kills the flu/cold without one getting sick. It's the other way around IMO. D3 supplement supresses immune function that the bug gets by the immune system without it attacking. Do this long enough and your body will be in poor health due to all the pathogens your body has accumulated. Reversing this is what's extremely hard.

jdp701 wrote:People are under the mistaken belief that D3 "supplement" kills the flu/cold without one getting sick. It's the other way around IMO. D3 supplement supresses immune function that the bug gets by the immune system without it attacking. Do this long enough and your body will be in poor health due to all the pathogens your body has accumulated. Reversing this is what's extremely hard.

It's interesting you mention long term supplemental D3 suppressing the immune system. Almost two years ago I was supplementing with 10,000 IU of D3 over the course of 6 months and that still didn't prevent me from getting the swine flew. In fact its more then likely the D3 contributed in helping me catch the swine flu. Now at the time I wasn't getting much sun, but I have the feeling I wasn't really that deficient regardless, as I had plenty of sun my whole life prior to this time.

After I was sick I intuitively felt the D3 wasn't helping and so I decided that the I needed to ditch the supplement and only focus on the sun being my only source (other then some food) for vitamin D. I work mostly out doors these days and I get plenty of sun from surfing. Personally (depending on your skin type) I believe 20min of sun is too little to have optimal levels of vitamin D. Sun from dawn till 10am, then sun from 2pm till dusk will give you optimal levels is your skin is olive or dark. Midday sun is will give you a massive dose of UVA/B but should only be used by people who can't get more then an hour of sun a day, otherwise it becomes too much (especially in summer).

I believe supplementation can be great for the short term for people, but ultimately long term use of a non food source of vitamin D or any synthetic vitamin is a bad idea IMO. The intelligence of nature has it way of catching up with us if we miss use it in anyway.

Well, during the winter season when there arent no sun, surely that count as short-term ..

cpio - If you have been getting adaquate sun prior to winter then getting your vitamin D from food sources would be much better. If you're not able to somehow get enough D through food sources in the winter months then maybe 2000 IU or more (depending on how deficient you are) of D3 would probably be suffice.

Basically the more deficient you are, the more the synthetic D3 would help "short term" till optimal levels are reached.

Right now there are a lot of studies currently evaluating vitamin D supplementation. Vitamin D improves the immune system because it raises glutathione and I've seen blood sugar stabilization. Also here are two recent studies discussing supplementation.

Isr Med Assoc J. 2010 Mar;12(3):136-9.

Vitamin D supplementation and regulatory T cells in apparently healthy subjects: vitamin D treatment for autoimmune diseases?Prietl B, Pilz S, Wolf M, Tomaschitz A, Obermayer-Pietsch B, Graninger W, Pieber TR.

Division of Endocrinology and Nuclear Medicine, Medical University of Graz, Austria.

Isr Med Assoc J. 2010 Mar;12(3):174-5.

BACKGROUND: Epidemiological data show significant associations of vitamin D deficiency and autoimmune diseases. Vitamin D may prevent autoimmunity by stimulating naturally occurring regulatory T cells.

OBJECTIVES: To elucidate whether vitamin D supplementation increases Tregs frequency (%Tregs) within circulating CD4+ T cells.

METHODS: We performed an uncontrolled vitamin D supplementation trial among 50 apparently healthy subjects including supplementation of 140,000 IU at baseline and after 4 weeks (visit 1). The final follow-up visit was performed 8 weeks after the baseline examination (visit 2). Blood was drawn at each study visit to determine 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels and %Tregs. Tregs were characterized as CD4+CD25++ T cells with expression of the transcription factor forkhead box P3 and low or absent expression of CD127.

RESULTS: Forty-six study participants (65% females, mean age +/- SD 31 +/- 8 years) completed the trial. 25(OH)D levels increased from 23.9 +/- 12.9 ng/ml at baseline to 45.9 +/- 14.0 ng/ml at visit 1 and 58.0 +/- 15.1 ng/ml at visit 2. %Tregs at baseline were 4.8 +/- 1.4. Compared to baseline levels we noticed a significant increase of %Tregs at study visit 1 (5.9 +/- 1.7, P < 0.001) and 2 (5.6 +/- 1.6, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS: Vitamin D supplementation was associated with significantly increased %Tregs in apparently healthy individuals. This immunomodulatory effect of vitamin D might underlie the associations of vitamin D deficiency and autoimmune diseases. Hence, our finding provides a rationale for further studies to investigate vitamin D effects on autoimmunological processes.


Osteoporos Int. 2010 Aug 4.

Sunlight exposure or vitamin D supplementation for vitamin D-deficient non-western immigrants: a randomized clinical trial.Wicherts IS, Boeke AJ, van der Meer IM, van Schoor NM, Knol DL, Lips P.

EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Vitamin D deficiency is very common in non-western immigrants. In this randomized clinical trial, vitamin D 800 IU/day or 100,000 IU/3 months were compared with advised sunlight exposure. Vitamin D supplementation was more effective than advised sunlight exposure in improving vitamin D status and lowering parathyroid hormone levels.

INTRODUCTION: Vitamin D deficiency (25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] < 25 nmol/l) is common among non-western immigrants. It can be treated with vitamin D supplementation or sunlight exposure.

METHODS: To determine whether the effect of vitamin D(3) supplementation (daily 800 IU or 100,000 IU/3 months) or sunlight exposure advice is similar with regard to serum 25(OH)D and parathyroid hormone (PTH) concentrations. Randomized clinical trial in 11 general practices in The Netherlands. Non-western immigrants, aged 18-65 years (n = 232) and serum 25(OH)D < 25 nmol/l were randomly assigned to supplementation (daily 800 IU or 100,000 IU/3 months) or advice for sunlight exposure for 6 months (March-September). Blood samples were collected at baseline, during treatment (3 months, 6 months), and at follow-up (12 months). Statistical analysis was performed with multilevel regression modelling.

RESULTS: The intention-to-treat analysis included 211 persons. Baseline serum 25(OH)D was 22.5 +/- 11.1 nmol/l. After 6 months, mean serum 25(OH)D increased to 53 nmol/l with 800 IU/day, to 50.5 nmol/l with 100,000 IU/3 months, and to 29.1 nmol/l with advised sunlight exposure (supplementation vs sunshine p < 0.001). Serum PTH decreased significantly in all groups after 3 months, more in the supplementation groups than in the advised sunlight group (p < 0.05). There was no significant effect on physical performance and functional limitations.

CONCLUSION: Vitamin D supplementation is more effective than advised sunlight exposure for treating vitamin D deficiency in non-western immigrants.