Skip to content
vit D
 
avatar
engineerguy responded:
Hi jc,

Thanks for the interesting link.

Quite a lengthy article. It seemed like there was a lot of interesting stuff there, but I only scanned it.

It criticizes recommendations for high vitamin D doses (at least in the parts I scanned). Dr. Fuhrman does not recommend a high dose. In fact, he does not recommend any dose. He recommends a blood test, and based on the blood test, take a level of supplement (if any) to obtain 35 to 55 blood level. Some people need no supplement, most need about 2000IU, and a few people need much more. The studies that Dr. Fuhrman references, are quite valid.
 
avatar
jc3737 replied to engineerguy's response:
The article suggests that any level of vit D supplementation may be harmful since it is an artifical hormone(to the body).Its someting to keep an eye on.These guys writting the article are in the forefront of research on vit D and light years ahead of other doctors on vit D so I think their work is worthy of serious consideration.

Re-read the article carefully and see what you think.
 
avatar
engineerguy replied to jc3737's response:
Hi jc,

As you carefully read the article, are there any examples of harm done by vitamin D supplements, where the blood level is between 35 and 60?

There are examples of harm done by vitamin D overdoses, but I believe they all are accompanied by very high blood D levels.

In this study, 1100 IU of D supplement reduced cancer over 50%. Very significantly, after accounting for whether a person was in the 1100 IU supplementation group or not, the blood level of Vitamin D was still a statistically significant factor in cancer risk !! In other words, we vary so much, person to person, that our blood level of D is at least as important as whether we are taking a D supplement.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17556697


Best regards, EngineerGuy
 
avatar
jc3737 replied to engineerguy's response:
"When analysis was confined to cancers diagnosed after the first 12 mo, RR for"

The article warns of studies that are not long term,many years or decades.

Something we have to consider....As talented as Dr Fuhrman he is not an expert about vit D and the authors of this study are the experts.They would not have the expertise to challenge Dr Fuhrman's knowledge on diet anymore than Dr Fuhrman could challenge them on the topic of vitamin D supplementation.

Show this to Dr Fuhrman and see what he thinks.
 
avatar
engineerguy replied to jc3737's response:
Hi jc,

There have been many many anecdotal cases of terrific recoveries of people greatly improving their health, when they were tested severly vitamin D deficient, by blood level, and given D supplements.

I posed about 1 person, that I called "vomit man". He got some sun every day, for the healthful benefits of sunlight. He had a problem for 3 years, where he could not hold food down. He would vomit after eating anything other than a thin oatmeal gruel. He got very thin, but was otherwise healthy, since he did eat a good diet, for what stayed down.

He saw 3 gastro-enterologists. They gave him 3 totally different diagnoses, including cutting nerves that would cause him to vomit, or taking a drug that could cause permanent brain damage. He went to Dr. Fuhrman instead. Dr. Fuhrman started by testing his blood for "everything". It turned out he was severly vitamin D deficient. After taking supplements for a month, he was cured.

A case of juvenile rheumatoid arthritis were cured by vitamin D supplements.

That's just a couple things that come to mind, of this lay person.

Best regards, EngineerGuy
 
avatar
engineerguy replied to engineerguy's response:
Hi jc,

If you don't mind me mentioning, I think I recall about a year ago, you posted about experts "light years ahead" advocating very large doses of vitamin D.

Lengthy articles do not make an expert.

Best regards, EngineerGuy
 
avatar
jc3737 replied to engineerguy's response:
Science changes as does my opinion.New studies come on line all the time that we have to consider.Dr Fuhrman is not a vit D researcher so he has looked at the opinions of various experts and come to the conclusion(based on their research)that vitamin D is healthy.That opinion may be right but then again it may be wrong.

At first everyne jumped on the vit D bandwagon but newer research is saying "not so fast".I don't know what the final conclusions may be all I am saying is that this is something we need to consider and look into.

I'm sure you don't want to blindly follow any doctor and accept everything they say, so some questioning is in order.

I have not stopped taking my vit D yet but its something I'm looking at.

The only real important thing is change.We have to be willing to make constant changes as the research changes.Change is the only constant.
 
avatar
jc3737 replied to engineerguy's response:
Keep posting some good solid vit D research.I know you are in contact with Dr Furhman so show him the work of these researchers.
 
avatar
engineerguy replied to jc3737's response:
Hi jc,

Perhaps you sense that I am resisting reading that tome.

The piece was published in 2008, by Amy Proal. The piece sounded somewhat credible, but I have little time tonight. I apologize. I did see the following, for what it's worth. You could google the Marshall Protocol, if you wish. Amy's article used the results of the Marshall Protocol as a major argument.

http://curezone.com/forums/fm.asp?i=1617660

Oh god...here we go again...the slippery slope argument.

The fact remains that the MP [Marshall Protocol> is a very dangerous, risky protocol, a google search will confirm that. You won't ever hear that from the megalomaniacal Marshall, or his devoted Amy Proal however, as disagreement has never been allowed on the MP site.

Meanwhile, many desperate patients have had their health ruined, (some with near kidney failure) many of them former volunteers who had hoped their health would improve, yet are now banned from his site for telling the truth.

And finally, as mentioned above, their repeated description of vitamin d as being immunosuppressive, is a LIE.

It REGULATES the immune system.
 
avatar
jc3737 replied to engineerguy's response:
I have already read that.Cure zone is one of the places I read and post.

Which is why I said its something we need to consider(not take as fact) and its something many other researchers are currently considering and investigating further.

But,I will say that as usual you did a great job of investigating and uncovering some conflicting data.
 
avatar
jc3737 replied to jc3737's response:
One thing I need to make clear.Until the data is clear I plan to continue my daily multi vit which has 1000Mg of vit D.(Its Fuhrman's gentle care).

I am simply raising the possibility that vit D supplementation may be a problem.The overall bulk of the data supports vitamin D supplementation at this point in time.

This is a call to investigate and debate,not to take any action or to halt vitamin D supplementation.


Spotlight: Member Stories

I am a retired teacher and reading specialist. Love to travel! Enjoy volunteering with International English classes and activities. Family comes firs...More

Helpful Tips

Easy Fluoride Treatments for your teeth
Hi folks, Background info: ============ My dentist prescribed some prescription grade fluoride toothpaste. For about $8, I got the ... More
Was this Helpful?
11 of 22 found this helpful

Related News

There was an error with this newsfeed

Report Problems With Your Medications to the FDA

FDAYou are encouraged to report negative side effects of prescription drugs to the FDA. Visit the FDA MedWatch website or call 1-800-FDA-1088.