Throw away your Vitamin D3!

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

Thanks for the link CS.

Would bet Amy Proal has no idea regarding Iodine/SSKI.

Would also bet combining Iodine/SSKI with Chanca Piedra would be way more effective than long-term antibiotic use not to mention the safety.

jdp701 wrote:It's like talking about the downside of taking only tocopherols whereas TN counters with information about tocotrienols ----> two different subjects.

Last year, a poster at another forum suggested that we take tocopherols and tocotrienols separately. Forum members, like myself, who were taking tocotrienols together with tocopherols at that time, naturally wanted to know "why." So he, this poster, provided us with clinical papers and studies showing the degrading effect alpha-tocopherol can have on tocotrienols. After which, members thanked him for providing this important bit of information, and some even changed their brand of tocotrienol supplement.

Was referring to how after many years and many studies showing how great "Vitamin E" was that everybody jumped on the bandwagon. Wherever you turned everybody was talking about and taking "Vitamin E."

The problem was the overly simplified studies regarding "Vitamin E" which turned out was harmful how it was recommended.

You see, the "Vitamin E" that was being sold was tocopherols. Without the tocotrienols to balance was harmful.


It's just like the overly simplified "Vitamin D" studies going on now. Everybody is talking about how great "Vitamin D" is. The problem is nobody is talking about the interaction of 25 D and 1,25 D.

History repeats itself. Too bad I feel for both. Lesson learned take tocopherols/tocotrienols for Vitamin E and get sunlight instead of a supplement for Vitamin D. One day the information about the overly simplified "Vitamin D" studies will come out but will take years and not before everyone was hoodwinked. The worst part is how much worse taking "Vitamin D" in a supplement is over "Vitamin E."

But we have learned that just telling members they should balance tocopherols with tocotrienols, as you did, is simply not enough, as there are many vitamin E products out now that include both tocopherols and tocotrienols. The point was that to get the full benefits of tocotrienols, we should take them separately from tocopherols, at different times of the day. A poster provided the forum with clinical evidence to support this statement.

With respect to your claims about vitamin D3, the same rules apply: namely, provide this forum with evidence, other than the theoretical, if you desire a similar response from members. But you do understand that Dr. Mercola recommends vitamin D3 supplements for those who can not get adequate amounts from outdoor sunlight.

Already posted so just repeating myself. Here are two. Any further questions feel free to read posts in this thread especially on page 1



Here we show that dendritic cells (DCs) are major targets of 1,25(OH)2D3-induced immunosuppressive activity."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10679076

dendritic cells =

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dendritic_cell


"Evidence that 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 inhibits the hepatic production of 25-hydroxyvitamin D in man."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC425325/?tool=pmcentrez


So again, low 25 D levels are found in those unhealthy. Raising levels with D3 supplement that suppresses immune system will give great many benefits short-term---> vitamindcouncil. Guess where there money comes from, BTW?

If you post more irrelevant studies or random Vitamin D info like you have in thread that does not have to do with this info then this will be last time I respond back.

Does the Vitamin D council recommend taking D3 supplements for the short term only? Their website complains that they don't have enough money to post their research papers in journals. According to them, it cost a couple of thousand just to be included in medical journals.

The point that you are trying to make is that long term use of vitamin D3 supplements is determintal. Now, all you need are peer review studies (that examine the effects of vitamin D3 supplementation over an extended period) to support your guess (Trevor Marshall's theory).

At the present, you have none.

And you'd think that Dr. Mercola, who has access to all the information you do, would, himself, come to the same conclusion about vitamin D3 that you did. But he did not, as far as I know.

Probably a member of the vitamin D council, right.

Long-term vitamin D3 supplementation may have adverse
effects on serum lipids during postmenopausal hormone
replacement therapy


Anna-Mari Heikkinen1, Marjo T Tuppurainen1, Leo Niskanen2, Marja Komulainen1, Ilkka Penttila¨3 and
Seppo Saarikoski1
Departments of 1Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2Internal Medicine and 3Clinical Chemistry, University Hospital of Kuopio, 70210 Kuopio, Finland
(Correspondence should be addressed to A-M Heikkinen, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital of Kuopio,
70210 Kuopio, Finland)


Abstract
Objective: The positive short-term effects of postmenopausal hormone replacement therapy (HRT) on
serum lipids are well known, but it has been suggested that they vanish with time. Cholecalciferol
(vitamin D3) is widely used to prevent postmenopausal osteoporosis but the influence of vitamin D3 on
serum lipids is poorly known. The long-term effects of HRT and vitamin D3 on the concentrations of
serum lipids were studied in a population-based prospective 3-year study.
Design and methods: 464 women were randomized into four treatment groups: (i) HRT (sequential
combination of 2 mg estradiol valerate and 1 mg cyproterone acetate), (ii) Vit D3 (vitamin D3 300 IU/
day), (iii) HRT+Vit D3 (both as above), (iv) placebo (calcium lactate 500 mg/day).
Results: 320 women completed the study. After three years of treatment, serum concentrations of low
density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol decreased in the HRT group (10.1%, P<0.001) and the HRT+Vit
D3 group (5.9%, P=0.005), increased in the Vit D3 group (4.1%, P=0.035) but remained unchanged
in the placebo group. The concentrations of total cholesterol decreased by 5.8% in the HRT group
(P<0.001) and by 3.3% in the HRT+Vit D3 group (P=0.023), but did not change in the other two
groups. Serum concentrations of high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol decreased in the Vit D3
group (5.2%, P=0.001), HRT+Vit D3 group (3.7%, P=0.046), and the placebo group (4.5%, P=0.006)
but did not change significantly in the HRT group. The HDL/LDL ratio increased in the HRT group
(10.5%, P=0.006) and decreased in the Vit D3 group (10.5%, P<0.001) whereas no changes occurred
in the other two groups. In addition, serum triglycerides increased similarly in all groups (14.0–
18.8%, P<0.05–0.001).
Conclusions: Our results confirm the positive long-term effect of HRT with sequential estradiol valerate
and cyproterone acetate on serum lipid concentrations. In addition, the results suggest that vitamin D3
supplementation may have unfavorable effects on lipids in postmenopausal women. Pure vitamin D3
treatment was associated with increased serum LDL cholesterol. Furthermore, the beneficial effects of
HRT on serum LDL cholesterol content were reduced when estradiol valerate was combined with
vitamin D3. However, the relevance of these associations to cardiovascular morbidity remains to be
established.

http://www.eje-online.org/cgi/reprint/137/5/495.pdf

gregslater posted this early in the thread.

Also, "100nmol/L = 40ng/mL"

And as I've mentioned previously, I was on the fence regarding D3 supplementation for a couple months until my recent experience with Rife scripts trumped all information.



Am J Epidemiol. 2010 Jun 18. [Epub ahead of print]
Overview of the Cohort Consortium Vitamin D Pooling Project of Rarer Cancers.

Helzlsouer KJ; for the VDPP Steering Committee.
Abstract

The Cohort Consortium Vitamin D Pooling Project of Rarer Cancers (VDPP) brought together 10 cohorts to conduct a prospective study of the association between vitamin D status, measured as serum concentrations of 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D), and the development of 7 rarer cancer sites: endometrial, esophageal, gastric, kidney, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, ovarian, and pancreatic cancers. The cohorts come from 3 continents, with participants from a wide range of latitude who are racially diverse. Across each cancer site, there was no evidence of a protective association between higher concentrations of 25-hydroxyvitamin D (>75 nmol/L) and cancer outcome. An increased risk at very high levels (>/=100 nmol/L) was noted for pancreatic cancer, confirming previous reports. The articles included in this issue detail the overall design and governance of the project, correlates of vitamin D status, and results from the cancer site-specific investigations. The Vitamin D Pooling Project realizes a major goal of consortium efforts, namely, to rigorously test hypotheses for rarer cancer outcomes that may not be adequately addressed in any one prospective cohort study. The results of this study have application for the planning and conduct of intervention trials, especially in determining potential risks.

PMID: 20562193

If supplementing vitamin D3 is problematic over a *longterm* ..(according to jdp) then it makes sense to me atleast, to only supplement when there arent any sunshine. Dont mix sunshine and supplementing d3. And the body can sort it out proberly.

By the way, it can be said of all antioxidants that they are "immunosuppresive" (which sound like something from a drug description).

Modulating the immune system toward less activity in some tissues can be a very beneficial thing. "Immunosusppresive" is just a word.

Effects of a long-term vitamin D and calcium supplementation on falls and parameters of muscle function in community-dwelling older individuals.
Pfeifer M, Begerow B, Minne HW, Suppan K, Fahrleitner-Pammer A, Dobnig H.

Institute of Clinical Osteology Gustav Pommer and Clinic Der Fürstenhof, Bad Pyrmont, Germany. iko_pyrmont@t-online.de

Abstract
In 242 community-dwelling seniors, supplementation with either 1000 mg of calcium or 1000 mg of calcium plus vitamin D resulted in a decrease in the number of subjects with first falls of 27% at month 12 and 39% at month 20. Additionally, parameters of muscle function improved significantly. INTRODUCTION: The efficacy of vitamin D and calcium supplementation on risk of falling in the elderly is discussed controversially. Randomized controlled trials using falls as primary outcome are needed. We investigated long-term effects of calcium and vitamin D on falls and parameters of muscle function in community-dwelling elderly women and men. METHODS: Our study population consisted of 242 individuals recruited by advertisements and mailing list (mean [ +/- SD] age, 77 +/- 4 years). All serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25[OH]D) levels were below 78 nmol/l. Individuals received in a double blinded fashion either 1000 mg of calcium or 1000 mg of calcium plus 800 IU of vitamin D per day over a treatment period of 12 months, which was followed by a treatment-free but still blinded observation period of 8 months. Falls were documented using diaries. The study took place in Bad Pyrmont, Germany (latitude 52 degrees ) and Graz, Austria (latitude 46 degrees ). RESULTS: Compared to calcium mono, supplementation with calcium plus vitamin D resulted in a significant decrease in the number of subjects with first falls of 27% at month 12 (RR = 0.73; CI = 0.54-0.96) and 39% at month 20 (RR = 0.61; CI = 0.34-0.76). Concerning secondary endpoints, we observed significant improvements in quadriceps strength of 8%, a decrease in body sway of 28%, and a decrease in time needed to perform the TUG test of 11%. DISCUSSION: Combined calcium and vitamin D supplementation proved superior to calcium alone in reducing the number of falls and improving muscle function in community-dwelling older individuals.

Regarding the "hormone replacement" study above. Would like to mention that what the medical community refers to as "hormone replacement therapy" is not too accurate.

Instead, synthetic HRT is a gross misrepresentation of bio-identical hormones. Estradiol valerate and cyproterone acetate
are far from real hormones.

Back to the "Vitamin D discussion"

I've had my doubts about the immune suppression theory, and I still do.

1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 induce the expression of human cathelicidin antimicrobial peptide.

No question that having optimal D levels can guard against infections:

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0011088

What I do know is that many who have tried to correct their autoimmune dysfunction with a zero vitamin D protocol have failed. Yes, some have had success.

Of course, jdp710 is talking about something a little different than the Marshall Protocol, actually a lot different. They are anti-sun and anti-D in all forms, jdp710 is pro sun.

Perhaps the real question is, what is impede a proper conversion into active vitamin D? Does this apply to everyone?

All I know is that studies and clinical experiences have shown huge improvement in various patients on autoimmune diseases with higher D3 supplementation.

Vitamin D supplementation has been very successful with flu prevention. Also, in a study last year, when patients with chronic back pain took doses of around 2,000 to 4,000 IU of D3, their back pain resolved.

Finally, as mentioned before. Is there's something missing? All I could find so far, is that high dose iodine may be responsible for lowering vitamin D conversion.

Having being a long time user of D3, first in the form of high dose cod liver oil and then high dose D3 I've only noticed benefits.

That all said, listen to your body.

The Natural wrote:When a person exposes himself to outdoor sunlight, this ultra-violet B radiation is converted to vitamin D3 on the surface of the skin. And "it remains on the surface of the skin (according to Mercola) for 48 hours, before it is able to penetrate into the bloodstream." In other words, the body is unable to absorb this vitamin D3 for up to two days.

Now, during this time, if you were to say, wash your body with soap (i.e. take a shower or bath), you "will be eliminating (washing away) this vitamin D3 and its benefits from your body." It is advised that those of you who prefer to get your vitamin D3 from the sun, wash just "your armpits and private areas."

Oh, the inconvenience of it all!

Sorry if this has been covered somewhere else but it seems kinda important. If this is true doesn't it make trying to get vitamin D from sunlight utterly pointless? I usually shower twice a day.

Is Mercola saying that Vitamin D generated today will not be absorbed AT ALL for 48 hours? Or is he saying that it would not be absorbed FULLY?

What is it that happens during those 48 hours that allows the D to be absorbed?

JDP:

"Just wanted to end that all food based supplements are unconverted D3."

Emphasis on "food". Pharmaceutical-grade is far and away superior to any food-grade supplement. In the product that IH and I are making, it's pharmaceutical grade D3 and just as important, pharmaceutical-grade K2. 5,000 IU of one, 5mg of the latter.

30 minutes of sunshine = 10,000 IU of Vitamin D3, and we can tolerate safely up to 40,000 IU a day. Most folks don't get even 30 minutes in the sun on sunny days. They work, go home, stay indoors, etc.

scotty,

How long does it take for vitamin D3 (generated from sunlight or a tanning bed) to enter the bloodstream? Mercola states that it takes "a full two days before you will be able to absorb the majority of [this] vitamin D3."

TN

As far as vitamin D is concerned, I have discovered through a process of trial and error during the last 20 years or so that the vitamin D in multivitamins, sardines, and even sunlight, causes me extreme joint pain and muscle stiffness.

I have stopped taking multivitamins, avoid the sun, and stay away from any foods with vitamin D.

The result of vitamin D avoidance has been improved health. So far - no colds since stopping vitamin D. Back in my multivitamin days I would get several colds and other sicknesses every year.


Of course, vitamin D could be very beneficial to many people, just not me.

Mr. Clean wrote:As far as vitamin D is concerned, I have discovered through a process of trial and error during the last 20 years or so that the vitamin D in multivitamins, sardines, and even sunlight, causes me extreme joint pain and muscle stiffness.

I have stopped taking multivitamins, avoid the sun, and stay away from any foods with vitamin D.

The result of vitamin D avoidance has been improved health. So far - no colds since stopping vitamin D. Back in my multivitamin days I would get several colds and other sicknesses every year.


Of course, vitamin D could be very beneficial to many people, just not me.

How can you say the Sun aka God, the creator of life, has a negative effect on your health? That just doesn't make sense. Plants need sunlight, water and minerals to grow and just like plants this is what humans need. Whether they get their minerals/vitamins from digesting vegetation or animals.

elan164,

See quote in bold.

A bit more complicated than that. Oral administration of D is all unconverted and assumes that your receptors and conversion facilities work.
Because if they don't it works like an allergy pill that lowers your immune reaction to invading pathogens…

So the first set of “ra ra” news to push huge doses was shrinking of some tumors and less dead garbage in the blood. The question no one asked, and is stirred away from, is why? Did it cure cancer? Did it kill the pathogens?

What we find out now is that most people can't convert the oral D at all and it simply builds up lowering immunity.
Your best bet if unsure is still to get it from the sun since you body can and will turn off production of D. But some have gone beyond a mere build up and need to be completely removed from any D until better. These are people with underlying Lyme,which is also attempting to do what D does and that is mask any disease, that carry Rickettsia and or Sarcocystis which both produce\extract retro viruses that block these receptors.

As in the story of the person that had Ascaris and was pushed into taking Allergy pills by his well educated, well documented quack…those just made everything worse by both taxing the liver and stopping normal immune/inflammatory reactions.

I was well into the study of D by the time my News program was paying “specialists” to push multi thousand IU doses of D. This is because it red flagged in my Dad during bio-feedback and I actually watched his skin color change while using standard RSMF rife code on him.
http://curezone.com/forums/fm.asp?i=1506704

There may been underground dwellers, and their descendants dont feed on sunshine like we do

Or you can blame the US biowarfare labs for releasing lyme in '68.

Hmmm interesting, it seems like our bodies are so out of wack that it seems impossible to know where to start or what to do. You may think youre doing something good for your body but in reality it may be making things worse. Too bad there isn't a reset button on us haha.

elan164 wrote:Hmmm interesting, it seems like our bodies are so out of wack that it seems impossible to know where to start or what to do. You may think youre doing something good for your body but in reality it may be making things worse. Too bad there isn't a reset button on us haha.

I hope I don't piss anybody off by dragging this back up, but essentially... there is a reset button, is that safe to say jdp?

Sheep.