Group items tagged

Low vitamin D status despite abundant sun exposure. Binkley N, Novotny R, Krueger D, Kawahara T, Daida YG, Lensmeyer G, Hollis BW, Drezner MK. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2007 Jun;92(6):2130-5. Epub 2007 Apr 10. PMID: 17426097 doi:10.1210/jc.2006-2250 CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that variable responsiveness to UVB radiation is evident among individuals, causing some to have low vitamin D status despite abundant sun exposure. In addition, because the maximal 25(OH)D concentration produced by natural UV exposure appears to be approximately 60 ng/ml, it seems prudent to use this value as an upper limit when prescribing vitamin D supplementation.

High prevalence of vitamin D deficiency despite supplementation in premenopausal women with breast cancer undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy. Crew KD, Shane E, Cremers S, McMahon DJ, Irani D, Hershman DL. J Clin Oncol. 2009 May 1;27(13):2151-6. Epub 2009 Apr 6. PMID: 19349547 DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2008.19.6162 Conclusion Vitamin D deficiency is highly prevalent in women with breast cancer. The current recommended dietary allowance of vitamin D is too low to increase serum 25-OHD greater than 30 ng/mL. Optimal dosing for bone health and, possibly, improved survival has yet to be determined.

According to a study conducted by University of Wisconsin researchers, even people who are regularly exposed to sunlight can have low vitamin D levels. The study focused on subjects who lived in sunny Hawaii and spent an average of 11.1 hours in the sun each week. (None of the participants in the study used any type of sunscreen.) Despite the exposure, 51 percent of participants were found to be deficient in vitamin D.

Nutrients, endpoints, and the problem of proof. Heaney RP. 2008 W. O. Atwater Memorial Lecture J Nutr. 2008 Sep;138(9):1591-5. PMID: 18716155 To sum up, I think that there would be general agreement to the effect that nutrition is important, despite the fact that the still growing number of failed trials of individual nutrients might suggest that no nutrient actually made much of a difference, a conclusion that is absurd on its face and ought to have alerted us to the possibility that there was something wrong with how we were investigating the matter. To provide the proof needed to sustain revised intake recommendations, we shall have to find a design better suited to nutrients than the randomized controlled trial as currently implemented, and we need to develop a series of global indices, nutrient by nutrient, which better capture the polyvalent nature of most nutrients. Perhaps it would be useful for the ASN, in collaboration with concerned governmental entities such as the USDA, to convene a workshop to address these structural issues. Such deliberation may well be arduous and frustrating, but it is terribly important and, in my view, well worth the effort.

Vitamin D and type 2 diabetes: are we ready for a prevention trial? Scragg R. Diabetes. 2008 Oct;57(10):2565-6. PMID: 18820212 doi: 10.2337/db08-0879 Despite evidence from the current article (3) and the Finnish study (17), doubts still remain about whether low vitamin status is a cause of type 2 diabetes. Further cohort studies are required, assessing baseline vitamin D status using blood 25(OH)D to be sure that the Ely and Finnish studies are not false-positive results. Glucose clamp studies are also required because we are still not sure of the mechanism influenced by vitamin D-whether it is insulin resistance, secretion, or both. But most importantly, given that nearly three decades have passed since the first studies linking vitamin D with insulin metabolism (6,7), well-designed clinical trials of the effect of vitamin D supplementation on glycemia status and diabetes risk are urgently required to settle this question. And they need to prevent past mistakes. In particular, the vitamin D dose given in such trials needs to be high enough-above 2,000 IU per day (19)-to raise blood 25(OH)D levels above 80 nmol/l because diabetes risk is lowest at this level (9,20). If well-designed trials are carried out and confirm a protective effect from vitamin D, it could be used by the general population as a simple and cheap solution to help prevent the diabetes epidemic.

Low serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations and secondary hyperparathyroidism in middle-aged white strict vegetarians. Lamberg-Allardt C, Kärkkäinen M, Seppänen R, Biström H. Am J Clin Nutr. 1993 Nov;58(5):684-9. PMID: 8237875 In conclusion, white strict vegetarians are at risk of vitamin D deficiency, at least in the winter, primarily because of a low dietary vitamin D intake, despite a normal sunlight exposure in summer. Low serum 25(OH)D concentrations are accompanied by high S-iPTH concentrations, which also are affected by a low calcium intake. The effect of these changes on bone health remains to be evaluated.

Despite inadequacies in information concerning the minimum prophylactic requirement of vitamin D for all age groups beyond infancy, there is no doubt that a total intake of 400 I.U. per day is adequate to prevent vitamin D deficiency in substantially all normal children from birth through adolescence. Evidence derived from the study of idiopathic hypercalcemia suggests that certain infants excessively sensitive to the toxic action of vitamin D may, on rare occasions, be adversely affected by daily intakes of 3,000 to 4,000 I.U. and sometimes considerably less. Because of the prevalent practice of food fortification in the United States and Canada, there is now a definite possibility that the individual, even the young infant, may ingest considerably more than the recommended vitamin D allowance, and intakes of 2,000 to 3,500 I.U. per day are possible, particularly beyond infancy. Although there has been no specific evidence that intakes of this order produce deleterious effects beyond infancy, it is pointed out that the long-term consequences of this new nutritional situation on older children or adults are entirely unknown.

A Track Your Plaque member brough the following webcast to our attention: Prospects for Vitamin D Nutrition\nwhich can be found at http://tinyurl.com/f93vl (The above link no longer seems to work, use http://wildhorse.insinc.com/directms13oct2005/ instead) Despite the painfully dull title, the webcast is the best summary of data on the health benefits on vitamin D that I've seen. The presenter is Dr. Reinhold Vieth, who is among the handful of worldwide authorities on vitamin D. In 1999, Dr. Vieth authored the first review to concisely and persuasively argue that vitamin D nutrition was woefully neglected and that its potential for health was enormous.

The effect of vitamin D2 and vitamin D3 on intestinal calcium absorption in Nigerian children with rickets. Thacher TD, Obadofin MO, O'Brien KO, Abrams SA. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2009 Sep;94(9):3314-21. Epub 2009 Jun 30. PMID: 19567516 Conclusions: Despite similar increases in 25-hydroxyvitamin D and 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D with vitamin D2 or vitamin D3, fractional calcium absorption did not increase, indicating that rickets in Nigerian children is not primarily due to vitamin D-deficient calcium malabsorption

The Author The author of this site is the British writer, John Davidson. Please note that the author is neither a doctor, nor a qualified health practitioner. Every cancer patient should always consult his or her medical practitioner with regard to the use of complementary remedies or treatments, and nothing on this site should be construed in any way as medical or therapeutic advice. It is simply the result of one person's search for solutions. Please read our disclaimer. About This Site Internet searches trawl up vast amounts of information about cancer, from a broad spectrum of viewpoints. The information and internet links on this site are for those seeking to augment the treatment offered by their hospital oncology (cancer) unit. Of course, a great many other internet sites concerning cancer can be found by keying the requisite search words into any of the major search engines. The content of this site was initially prepared, at the request of medical and nursing staff and others, some weeks after I had had an emergency operation for the removal of a colon cancer, and while undergoing chemotherapy in case any cancer cells had gone AWOL. There had been some escape of cancer cells into associated lymph nodes (3 out of 17, including the most distal), but no other tumours had been picked up by a CT scan. When I returned home from hospital in September 2005, with the help of friends, I started doing some research on cancer. I was amazed to discover that despite the billions of pounds/euros/dollars etc. spent on cancer research, and the many advances in understanding the numerous variants of the disease, the standard treatment for my stage of colon cancer is still a drug (fluorouracil, also called 5FU) that has been in use for more than forty years, has uncomfortable side effects, and which only increases the chances of survival after five years by 5 to 10%.

Good Information