Group items tagged

Nutritional vitamin D status during pregnancy: reasons for concern. Hollis BW, Wagner CL. CMAJ. 2006 Apr 25;174(9):1287-90. PMID: 16636329 doi:10.1503/cmaj.060149.

Age-related changes in the 25-hydroxyvitamin D versus parathyroid hormone relationship suggest a different reason why older adults require more vitamin D. Vieth R, Ladak Y, Walfish PG. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2003 Jan;88(1):185-91. PMID: 12519850 This study shows that all age groups exhibit a high prevalence of 25(OH)D insufficiency and secondary hyperparathyroidism. Older adults are just as efficient in maintaining 25(OH)D, but they need more vitamin D to produce the higher 25(OH)D concentrations required to overcome the hyperparathyroidism associated with their diminishing renal function

The Truth About Vitamin D: Fourteen Reasons Why Misunderstanding Endures Author: Amy Proal

Life has no certainty, you never know, when your destiny will turn around and provides you unwanted health trouble. Today if we look into our lifestyle then we can realize it that we are so much busy in our day to day lives that we do not even have time for healthier food, and so the reason we somehow rely on the meals which are not excellent for our health. Perhaps our stressful lifetime don't let us a chance to take in, but still it is always essential that we should give main concerns to our health so that we can do our jobs nicely.

Effects of Atorvastatin on vitamin D levels in patients with acute ischemic heart disease. Pérez-Castrillón JL, Vega G, Abad L, Sanz A, Chaves J, Hernandez G, Dueñas A. Am J Cardiol. 2007 Apr 1;99(7):903-5. Epub 2007 Feb 8. PMID: 17398180 In conclusion, atorvastatin increases vitamin D levels. This increase could explain some of the beneficial effects of atorvastatin at the cardiovascular level that are unrelated to cholesterol levels. The mechanism by which atorvastatin increases vitamin D levels is related to inhibition of 3-hydroxy-3 methylglutaryl coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase. Cholesterol is synthesized from 7-dehydrocholesterol, which is also a precursor of vitamin D3. For this reason, we initially observed a statistically significant relation between total cholesterol and vitamin D. HMG-CoA enzyme reductase is key to the synthesis of cholesterol, whereas ultraviolet radiation causes the formation of 25-hydroxyvitamin D. Inhibition of the enzyme may increase levels of 7-dehydrocholesterol and increase the synthesis of 25-hydroxycholecalciferol, thereby increasing vitamin D levels,10 although we observed no relation between lower cholesterol and increased vitamin D. In addition, 25-hydroxyvitamin D has been shown to inhibit HMG-CoA enzyme reductase activity in in vitro studies.11 A greater concentration of vitamin D could increase enzymatic inhibition, acting in synergy with the statin in decreasing total cholesterol.

Circulating vitamin D3 and 25-hydroxyvitamin D in humans: An important tool to define adequate nutritional vitamin D status. Hollis BW, Wagner CL, Drezner MK, Binkley NC. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol. 2007 Mar;103(3-5):631-4. Epub 2007 Jan 10. PMID: 17218096 In the present study, we sought to investigate what circulating 25(OH)D levels would result in populations exhibiting no substrate limitations to the vitamin D-25-hydroxylase. To perform this, we chose two distinct populations. The first were individuals from a year-found sunny environment who spent a good deal of time outdoors. The second were a group of lactating women receiving a substantial daily oral dose of vitamin D3. Surprisingly, a study such as this previously had not been undertaken. There are several reasons for this. First, finding a group of sun-exposed individuals is not an easy task; in fact, we had to go to Hawaii to find them. Secondly, very few studies have been performed where subjects actually received adequate vitamin D3 supplementation to make them replete. Finally, it is very difficult and costly to measure circulating vitamin D3 and relate it to circulating 25(OH)D. The results of our study are far-reaching. This study also demonstrates that individuals can be vitamin D deficient with significant sun exposure if the skin area exposed is limited as was suggested several years ago (19). Finally, whether one receives their vitamin D3 orally or through UV exposure, the vitamin D-25-hydroxylase appears to handle it in an equivalent fashion with respect to maintaining circulating 25(OH)D levels. Thus, we believe that the relationship between circulating vitamin D and 25(OH)D may define adequate nutritional vitamin D status.

Current impediments to acceptance of the ultraviolet-B-vitamin D-cancer hypothesis. Grant WB, Boucher BJ. Anticancer Res. 2009 Sep;29(9):3597-604. PMID: 19667154 The ultraviolet-B (UVB)-vitamin D-cancer hypothesis was proposed in 1980. There have been numerous ecological, observational and other studies of the hypothesis. There are about 14 types of cancer for which it seems to apply: bladder, breast, colon, endometrial, esophageal, gallbladder, gastric, ovarian, pancreatic, rectal, renal and vulvar cancer and both Hodgkin's and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Nonetheless, the hypothesis has not yet been accepted by public health agencies. Some of the reasons for this include a distrust of ecological studies, some mistrust of observational studies, and the existence of just one positive randomized controlled trial, an analysis of a vitamin D and calcium supplementation study involving post-menopausal women in Nebraska. Paradigm shifts such as this generally take time, in part due to opposition from those content with the status quo. In this paper, results of ecological studies in the United States using summertime solar UVB as the index of vitamin D production, which is highly asymmetrical with respect to latitude, and indices for other cancer risk-modifying factors (air pollution, alcohol consumption, dietary iron and zinc, ethnic background, socioeconomic status, smoking and urban/rural residence) are discussed in terms of supporting the hypothesis. These studies were not considered while other ecological studies were examined in recent critiques of the hypothesis. While additional randomized controlled trials would, of course, be helpful, the current evidence seems to satisfy the criteria for causality as outlined by A. Bradford Hill.

Why is it that vitamin D deficiency can manifest in so many different ways in different people? One big reason is something called vitamin D receptor (VDR) genotypes, the variation in the receptor for vitamin D. Why is it that the dose of vitamin D necessary to reach a specific level differs so widely from one person to the next? VDR genotype, again. Variation in blood levels of 25-hydroxy vitamin D from a specific dose of vitamin D can vary three-fold, as shown by a University of Toronto study. In other words, a dose of 4000 units per day may yield a 25-hydroxy vitamin D blood level of 30 ng/ml in Mary, 60 ng/ml in Paul, and 90 ng/ml in Pete--same dose, different blood levels

Are statins analogues of vitamin D? Grimes DS. Lancet. 2006 Jul 1;368(9529):83-6. Review. PMID: 16815382 doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(06)68971-X There are many reasons why the dietary-heart-cholesterol hypothesis should be questioned, and why statins might be acting in some other way to reduce the risk of coronary heart disease. Here, I propose that rather than being cholesterol-lowering drugs per se, statins act as vitamin D analogues, and explain why. This proposition is based on published observations that the unexpected and unexplained clinical benefits produced by statins have also been shown to be properties of vitamin D. It seems likely that statins activate vitamin D receptors.

"From 1955 to 1990, all infants in East Germany received 600,000 IU of Vitamin D every three months for a total of 3,600,000 IU at age 18 months. With the 400 IU/day recommendation of the American Pediatric Association in mind, I ran across this amazing paper while surfing Medline for Vitamin D. According to this paper, all infants in the German Democratic Republic (East Germany) received dangerously high doses of Vitamin D every three months in their doctors office. The policy was in place for 35 years. The first 600,000 IU dose was given at three months and then every three months until the child was 18 months of age. This works out to an average of 6,000 IU per day (actually, for several technical reasons it is not equivalent) for 18 months. The authors collected blood before the dose and then 2 weeks after the quarterly dose to obtain 25(OH)D, 1,25(OH)D, and calcium levels on a total of 43 infants. Before the first dose, at 3 months of age, the average infant was extremely deficient (median 25(OH)D of 7 ng/ml). Two weeks after the first dose the average 25(OH)D level was 120 ng/ml, the second dose 170 ng/ml, the third dose, 180 ng/ml, the fourth dose, 144 ng/ml, the fifth dose, 110 ng/ml and after the sixth and final dose, 3.6 million total units, at age 18 months, the children had mean levels of 100 ng/ml. That is, by the 15 and 18 month doses, the children were beginning to effectively handle these massive doses. The highest level recorded in any of the 43 infants was 408 ng/ml at age 9 months, two weeks after the third 600,000 IU dose. Thirty-four percent of the infants had at least one episode of hypercalcemia but only 3 had an elevated serum 1,25(OH)D. The authors reported that all the infants appeared healthy, even the infant with a level of 408 ng/ml, that is, no clinical toxicity was noted in any of these infants."

"We are fond of grumbling about Britain's grey skies, but there may be a good medical reason for doing so. It seems the dreary weather is bad for our hearts - worse, even, than raised cholesterol and an unhealthy diet. That's the controversial claim being made by Dr David Grimes, a gastroenterologist from Blackburn. He's been gazing at the sky for 20 years for clues about why his patients get more sick than those in the south of the country. And what he's found turns key assumptions about heart disease on their head. 'It's not diet or cholesterol levels that raise your risk of heart disease,' he claims. 'It's where you live. People in the north are more likely to be ill because they get less sunshine Basically they are suffering from 'latitude' sickness. The link is vitamin D. While we get some from our diet, the main source is the sun - sunlight converts a compound in the skin into vitamin D, so the amount you make is directly related to the amount of sunshine you get. In a new book Dr Grimes argues the higher the level of vitamin D in your blood, the lower your risk of heart disease and a range of other illnesses. If he's right, what we need is not diet and lifestyle advice, but food fortified with vitamin D. For years the vitamin was thought to be useful only for preventing rickets. So how does he treat them? 'You can do it with diet,' he says 'One Bangladeshi woman eats oily fish every day and now has a vitamin D blood level of 40. 'We give supplements of 1,000 international units (IU) a day or we can give an injection of 300,000 IU that lasts for a year. 'The patients respond well,' says Grimes 'but what's needed is a proper controlled, long-term trial and who is going to fund that? Not a drug company.'"

Table of Contents Ch. I Is calcidiol an active hormone? 1 Ch. II Vitamin D as a neurosteroid hormone : from neurobiological effects to behavior 29 Ch. III Inhibitors of vitamin D hydroxylases : mechanistic tools and therapeutic aspects 67 Ch. IV Vitamin D analogues as anti-cancer therapies 145 Ch. V Paricalcitol : a vitamin D2 analog with anticancer effects with low calcemic activity 169 Ch. VI Vitamin D use among older adults in U.S. : results form national surveys 1997 to 2002 181 Ch VII Vitamin D deficiency in migrants 199 Vitamin D is a fat-soluble steroid hormone precursor that contributes to the maintenance of normal levels of calcium and phosphorus in the bloodstream. Strictly speaking, it is not a vitamin since human skin can manufacture it, but it is referred to as one for historical reasons. It is often known as calciferol. The major biologic function of vitamin D is to maintain normal blood levels of calcium and phosphorus. Vitamin D aids in the absorption of calcium, helping to form and maintain strong bones. It promotes bone mineralisation in concert with a number of other vitamins, minerals and hormones. Without vitamin D, bones can become thin, brittle, soft or misshapen. Vitamin D prevents rickets in children and osteomalacia in adults -- skeletal diseases that result in defects that weaken bones. This book gathers international research on the leading-edge of the scientific front.

sunlightD.org Grassroots Health and ZRT Labs are working together to help us all make sure we have enough vitamin D. Participate in understanding vitamin D. Visit grassrootshealth.net and join the research project. You'll get your D tested twice a year for five years. The cost is just $40 a test, $80 a year, more than reasonable for accurate D testing, and you'll help provide real answers, for yourself and for us all, about how much D we get and how much we need. Join now. Do commit to the full 5 years if you decide to sign on. If not joining for the full test period please use the testing links below.

After much consideration into this blog's new name in the light of my new direction, the decision has been made. "Free the Animal" Why? First, if you read that post linked above, you know that my health and fitness approach is perfectly in harmony with my philosophical approach; and hence, my approach to politics and all that. In other words, a big part of the reason I have discovered something that truly works; and moreover, is the simplest, most natural, downright fun way of living: that gets you lean and fit; gets you feeling and sleeping great; and gets you looking years and years younger is precisely because I don't believe in the gods of heaven or earth, we evolved over millions of years and are conditioned by survival pressures that in no way include all vegetable diets, gorging on bottled water all day, eating ground grass seeds (grains and derivatives) running on a treadmill or elliptical, or involving ourselves in social schemes and cons that leave us powerless, with no influence, and at the mercy of the crowd and collective (the cannibal pot). Some have a lot of the pieces and do good work. I have all of the major pieces, though acquiring all of the specifics is a lifelong and never-ending journey of discovery. I will focus on essentials and specifics that really matter to me and others living a normal life in pursuit of survival, prosperity and happiness. I will point to other sources that provide more depth in specific areas that are of interest to only some

"We are aware of substantial scientific evidence supporting the role of vitamin D in prevention of cancer. It has been reasonably established that adequate serum vitamin D metabolite levels are associated with substantially lower incidence rates of several types of cancer, including those of the breast, colon, and ovary, and other sites. We have concluded that the vitamin D status of most individuals in North America will need to be greatly improved for substantial reduction in incidence of cancer. Epidemiological studies have shown that higher vitamin D levels are also associated with lower risk of Type I diabetes in children and of multiple sclerosis. Several studies have found that markers of higher vitamin D levels are associated with lower incidence and severity of influenza and several other infectious diseases."

My plans to take vitamin D seemed well funded (lots of positive research these days about high vitamin D levels) and then I stumbled upon this article that promotes the views of Trevor Marshall. "The Truth About Vitamin D: Fourteen Reasons Why Misunderstanding Endures", by Amy Proal (a biologist), 15/09/2007 http://bacteriality.com/2007/09/15/vitamind/

"Maybe vitamin D isn't the answer after all. Not only does the above statement ring true, it's also the title of a recent post on "Dr. Len's Cancer Blog" - a website written by Dr. Len Lichtenfeld, Deputy Chief Medical Officer for the national office of the American Cancer Society, in order to facilitate communication with the public on important issues related to cancer. "

"For what reason I don't know, but this January 2009 editorial by William Faloon of the Life Extension Foundation is making the rounds. Perhaps it just came available on the web. It's a good read, particularly in light of the billions and trillions of dollars the thieves & thugs in DC are about to flush down the crapper on your behalf. Some notable excerpts. A large number of new vitamin D studies have appeared in the scientific literature since I wrote my plea to the federal government. These studies don't just confirm what we knew 16 months ago-they show that optimizing vitamin D intake will save even more lives than what we projected. For instance, a study published in June 2008 showed that men with low vitamin D levels suffer 2.42 times more heart attacks. Now look what this means in actual body counts. Each year, about 157,000 Americans die from coronary artery disease-related heart attacks. Based on this most recent study, if every American optimized their vitamin D status, the number of deaths prevented from this kind of heart attack would be 92,500. To put the number of lives saved in context, tens of millions of dollars are being spent to advertise that Lipitor® reduces heart attacks by 37%. This is certainly a decent number, but not when compared with how many lives could be saved by vitamin D. According to the latest study, men with the higher vitamin D levels had a 142% reduction in heart attacks."