Throw away your Vitamin D3!

From Mercola:

"I’m not certain what type of vitamin D was studied in the report above, however the abstract mentions the vitamin D that’s added to milk and cereals. Well, the vitamin D that’s added to milk is synthetic vitamin D2 (ergocalciferol) and is not something that you should be taking anyway.

Only vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol), the type of vitamin D found naturally in foods like eggs, organ meats, animal fat, cod liver oil, and fish, is appropriate for supplementation. Do NOT use the highly inferior vitamin D2.

There have been no clinical trials to date demonstrating conclusively that D2 prevents fractures, yet every clinical trial of D3 has shown it does. Further, vitamin D2 has a shorter shelf life, and its metabolites bind with protein poorly, making it less effective.

Studies have even concluded that vitamin D2 should no longer be regarded as a nutrient appropriate for supplementation or fortification of foods (though it continues to be used).

So if you choose to use vitamin D supplements make sure it is in the form of vitamin D3. And remember that if you are relying on your “fortified” milk to supply you with vitamin D, it is NOT giving you the healthy type of vitamin D that has been associated with all the benefits that you read about on this site and in the media."

The Natural

one of the things i've learned in my life is not to concentrate on people behind the ideas but on the ideas. I haven't done a three month study on vit D3, i did a 3 seconds reflexion on vit D. And if you really want me to play the same game (and I prefer not to), I'd answer you that intelligence is often more than time dedicated.

If you want to do an empirical (orthomolecular) study on vit D x vit D3 1,25 x 25 etc 30 years might be not enough. To your word 'prove' - it's not my intention. I'm not obsessed with prooves, it's not my religion - I'm able to transgess the orthomolecular paradigm if i feel or reason it's not sufficient. I try to go beyond...

but to get back to the only real important question raised in your post: Prague, how are the two types of cholecalciferol (sunlight, supplements) processed differently by humans?

my answer won't satisfy you, i admit but since to prove anything is not my goal (and even less to a single person) it's ok. My answer is in the posts above, the fact you can't find it there doesn't mean it's not there. To complete it, I'd add that what makes A identical to B is that all the possible aspects/criteria are the same examined from all possible angles/perspectives. To start with the first one - stomach x skin - it's not identical. For me, end of story. (UVA/UVB and much more I (and you too) ignore would follow, jdp will surely drop some here and probably he already did). This is not vit C (btw is the one from lemon the same as the one in the pill? and is the one in lemon the same one as in kiwi? you surely know with all their implications, we're talking about secosteroids here. If a single criterion changes (bond, strucure, charge, weight, co-factors, ...) multitude of consequences change. This is a basic rule i've learned and it's enough for me to apply it - you need studies for that, i don't , the copmrehension of principles is of a higher importance. And this is no sophism; maybe you won't see nothing else but "incoherent musing" in what i write. Then i'm of no help.

Anyway good luck to you!

Prague

The Natural wrote:I am not "suggesting" anything. I asked for specific evidence that the two are processed differently. But what do I get instead? More thoughts and musings, this time from Mercola.

Once again, already covered in back posts! I'm not going to keep repeating myself and dilute this thread.

Not sure what you're even debating?

brandnew wrote:
Sure but as humans have evolved we now spend much less time outdoors, so we generally become deficient in Vit d.

brandnew,

The vitamin d3 in a supplement is not 100% the same as the sun. See previous posts as already covered.

The Natural,

You realize Mercola is talking about two different subjects. He even seperated the two subjects with a header in bold red as he always does!? Once again, you're changing the subject all over again to put your own spin on things.

To make clear for everyone else, the first subject Mercola talks about Vitamin D (e.g. D2/D3) not being found in breast milk and babies "were designed to get this from exposing their skin to natural sunlight." So again, Vitamin D3 is not found in breast milk?!

Mercola has made his opinions very clear in multipile articles that sunlight is the preferred way. He personally uses his UV bed over a D3 supplement. That should give a hint.

JDP-

I am also curious on how you overcame the shortness of breath from the vit D.. Also what helps with shortness of breath in general?

1...,

I posted previously in thread was rife. Posted script earlier as well for those who have access to one. It's a different world that's for sure regarding better immune system. The issue regarding too much unconverted D3 has a 48 hour cycle but only been confirmed by few so not 100% positive.

Regarding what could cause it, unfortunately there can be many many reasons for it. Regarding if it's too much unconverted D3 in system without enough co-factors and sunlight to convert takes several years for problem. Others can be decades. Studies will always show benefit for many many ailments when raising 25 D levels. Nobody disputes this. The problem is years for most and decades for the rest down the road.

Prague,

When someone comes here, and declaims things like, "throw away your vitamin D!" or "vitamin D3 is going to kill you!" people are naturally going to wonder, "why," and desire more than just a theory, mere speculation, or a script (hint, hint, jdp).

I, like others, want to know the truth, having no personal or financial gain either way. If I thought that vitamin D3 was dangerous, I would have no qualms about throwing away my Carlson's supplement bottle. None whatsoever. Nothing that I have read thus far has convinced me of doing so, though.

That notwithstanding, I wish you well in your endeavors,

TN

The Natural wrote:When someone comes here, and declaims things like, "throw away your vitamin D!" or "vitamin D3 is going to kill you!"

You realize that sentence is actually two seperate debates?!

That's what you've failed to grasp and what the whole thread is about!

That's why I keep asking what are you debating?

jdp, read this slowly:

Mercola states, "But you do have options to get the vitamin D your body needs: safe tanning beds that have harmful emissions shielded and high-quality vitamin D supplements." I am quoting him verbatim!

Does Mercola think that supplementing with vitamin D "will kill you" or is unhealthy? I don't think so. He doesn't state "throw away your vitamin D3" either.

Yes, there may be better sources, like the sun. But the very fact that you used Mercola to support your argument shows how little you know about him and about the effects of vitamin D3 on the body.

I know this thread has become a contested debate on Vitamin D3 but I just wanted to share an interesting quote from a book called The UltraMind Soluion:

"The key is sunlight. Most of us live and work outdoors, but 80 to 100 percent of our Vitamin D requirement comes from our exposure to sunlight. And concerns about skin cancer encourage use of sunblock, which stops 97 percent of the skin's production of Vitamin D...Supplementation is essential unless we are spending all our time at the beach, eating thirty ounces of wild salmon a day, or downing ten tablespoons of cod liver oil a day!"

This topic is very interesting, because is does raise a few good questions.

One of them I've been pondering with for some time is, beyond the lack of sun exposure, is there a reason why vitamin D deficient people become vitamin D deficient.

In other words, is there an enzyme shortage such as the the 25-hydroxyvitamin D3-1-hydroxylase enzyme?

Or is there a pathway in the liver that downregulates it? This has been shown in lung cancer.

Anyway, in the future we'll probably know the answer.

It may be worth applying the two great schools of modern (19/20th century) european thinking, to the this new episteme of health, nutrition and the human body: the empicists with emphasis on subjectivism, experience and perception .. the rationalists emphasising being, history and knowledge.

Hey CS,

You may already know this but just in case:

"Injury triggers a local increase in 1,25D3 signaling in skin."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1784003/?tool=pubmed

&

"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


also


"Black race, Hispanic ethnicity, lower ultraviolet exposure, hypertension, lack of exercise and efavirenz exposure were independently associated with insufficiency."

http://i-base.info/htb/10248

Regarding hypertension, there is a study showing low levels of 1,25 D in those with kidney problems but not sure where it is now. You already know this but for others

A quote

"Vitamin D3 is hydroxylated by the enzyme 25-hydroxylase into hydroxylated vitamin D, 25(OH)D, in the liver." ... "The hydroxylated vitamin D, 25(OH)D is then further hydroxylated in the kidneys to one-alpha-hydroxylated-vitamin D (1α-25(OH)2D)"

http://i-base.info/htb/10248

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!

Yes, that Mercola article was posted on this forum long time ago.

What's that have to do with this thread?

You're still posting stuff that doesn't have anything to do with this thread. Yes, there are VDR receptors on the skin. Also converted in kidneys and liver.

jdp701 wrote:What's that have to do with this thread?

1. Relying on the sun as a source of vitamin D3 is inconvenient at best; at worst, it is just plain impossible.
2. Accordingly, as Mercola, himself, stated unequivocally, "vitamin D3 supplements ARE an option."

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!

yes, jdp, it has to do sthg to do with this thread - that's the big argument

there's a reason for that - the body doesn't put the vit D to the bloodstream since it create a pool of vit D that it uses according to its needs and cofactors (s very very complex biochemical reactions - this mechanism is lacking when supplementing). This way also the body can turn the excess of vit D to unactive/safe metabolites. Again not the same with stomach vit D3

btw the thing with washing is one of the most ridiculous thing i've ever heard of (it might apply to chlorinated/sodium fluorinated water maybe) but swimming in the ocean surely doesn't wash your vit D - i swim every day now and get tanned and i can tell you my T goes ever the roof (because of the vit D), one doesn't need mercola papers for such an obvious thing

Prague wrote:yes, jdp, it has s[omething] to do with this thread - that's the big argument

Washing with soap will, in fact, remove this vitamin (and all of its potential benefits) from your skin, according to Dr. Mercola, an osteopathic physician.

Unfortunately, laying around a beach all day, without showering, is just not a feasible way for most people to get their vitamin D3.

Mercola recommends using soap on only groin and armpits (areas that smell the worst) to allow your skin to absorb the D3

The Natural wrote:

Prague wrote:yes, jdp, it has s[omething] to do with this thread - that's the big argument

Washing with soap will, in fact, remove this vitamin (and all of its potential benefits) from your skin, according to Dr. Mercola, an osteopathic physician.

Unfortunately, laying around a beach all day, without showering, is just not a feasible way for most people to get their vitamin D3.

TN

sorry, my mistake concerning the soap

kind of exaggerate to conclude that it's impossible to cover vit D needs from the sun (because of the soap) I never wash with a soap - i realised that odour depends on your mineral balance (a good one doesn't allow bacteria live in your armpits which means no smell)

but still the 'big argument' was not about the soap but the 3 day pool Wink

you'd be a great spokeperson (no sarcasm), choosing one word from a post to make comment about and put it in relation with sthg else, this needs some talent

TN

once again I reread your post, you're a genious of misinformation - you cut out one phrase from a post - that you link with a completely different argument, you base your argument on one word that you skip in the next phrase (soap). Trying to make idiots from others usually pays back with the same coin.

Prague wrote:TN

once again I reread your post, you're a genious of misinformation - you cut out one phrase from a post - that you link with a completely different argument, you base your argument on one word that you skip in the next phrase (soap). Trying to make idiots from others usually pays back with the same coin.

Then by all means Prague, have at it, as I am growing quite bored with you and your attempts to form a logical argument by way of anecdotal evidence.

Here is an excerpt from my first post about the subject (of washing). It is written in plain English. And your inability to comprehend the words does not change this fact:

"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.'"

Prague, everyone I know showers/bathes at least once a day, using a type of soap and water to do so. Is this not normal? I simply stated that: in doing so, you will remove vitamin D3 from your body.

This is not "misinformation." It is, perhaps, information that you willfully overlooked or did not care to read, for one reason or another. Pride, perhaps. But it is, nevertheless, true according to Dr. Mercola.

You are beginning to take this discussion a bit too personally. Settle down.

I have to say that both of you jdp and Prague are making your points in the most obnoxious way possible. TN seems to have some good counter-points and all you guys do is tell him that he doesn't get it. If this matter is so complicated, give some stronger evidence and not you gut feeling backed by pretty much nothing else. No disrespect.

You realize this thread is about taking an uncoverted D3 supplement is immunosuppresive and while there are short-term results from raising 25 D levels there are long-term consequences with the increased l-form bacteria that comes with taking a sectosteroid.

Instead, TN's posts lump taking a D3 supplement in with the benefits of sun exposure and post information regarding the short-term benefits.... none of which I disagree with. Is accurate.

So again, TN's posts are accurate and agree with but his posts doesn't have anything to do with this thread! CS knows what we are talking but disagrees, whereas TN is not even on the same wavelength of what's being talked about.

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