Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

DrDumDums t1_itwsjys wrote

Reply to comment by Wagamaga in Vitamin D deficiency linked to premature death. Over a 14-year follow up period, researchers found that the risk for death significantly decreased with increased vitamin D concentrations, with the strongest effects seen among those with severe deficiencies. by Wagamaga

For all the people in this thread saying they now need vitamin D supplements, please read:

“But it's not essential to take a supplement. And overall, aside from some high-risk groups, most people do not need a supplement. The high-risk groups include patients in nursing homes who may have restricted diets and limited time out of doors. For people with malabsorption conditions such as Crohn's disease, celiac disease, post–gastric bypass surgery, and those with osteoporosis who are on medications for osteoporosis, it's still quite reasonable to prescribe calcium and vitamin D. Recommendations for vitamin D in the generally healthy population really should focus on a healthy diet. The United States has a fortified food supply. Vitamin D is added to many foods, dairy products, and cereals, as well as beverages. Natural sources of vitamin D include fatty fish and wild mushrooms.”

source

17

merlinsbeers t1_ityapqp wrote

This is not something you can self diagnose.

The ability to absorb vitamin D from the sun and from food declines with age. Most people will need to take large amounts in supplements every day.

Next time you're at the doctor ask to have a vitamin panel done.

Being nutritionally deficient is a dumb way to live.

9

agovinoveritas t1_ityssbn wrote

I did. I was low and checked. Increased it and now I have just a bit on the higher side of normal after 6 months and steady. I have a health condition that limits my absorption and live north of the 25th, which is not the best if you are not white and you don't don't have a lot of sun where you live.

I take 4,000IU with some K2 as well, daily.

Doing a panel is something everyone should do. Since a high % of people are low these days. Ironically, some people may be low in hot weather because they spend most of their time indoors due to air conditioning.

5

DrDumDums t1_itzucni wrote

How does ability to absorb nutritional vitamin D decline with age? My understanding is that nutritional intake (older people eat less, and less varied foods) generally decreases with age but not absorptive capacity for fat soluble vitamins.

The article I linked specifically advises against large dose vitamin D supplements.

The article also mentions why widespread vitamin d monitoring without a diagnostic indication is a poor idea with limited benefit.

1

merlinsbeers t1_iu02ddo wrote

Not sure of why. It just stops being absorbed in the gut as much, and sunshine becomes less effective at producing it even with high exposure.

Doc gave me 10000-unit pills to take weekly for a few weeks then told me to keep taking 2-5000 units a day forever.

D is involved in the chickpea that produce energy, and if I miss several days I can feel it. When I'm on target the fog and malaise go away and I feel like a normal person.

Everyone past their early 40s should get their vitamin panel checked, especially if they feel like they're run-down for no good reason.

I'm not scaling the paywall to verify the article, but if it doesn't talk about the decline with age or it says these dosages are not the medicine for it, then it didn't do its homework.

1

DrDumDums t1_iu06x7e wrote

It’s not a paywall, signup is free. You should read the article, it’s the largest ever study conducted on vitamin D levels. Your opinion does not align with that of the physician researchers who conducted that study.

1

merlinsbeers t1_iu0or67 wrote

My time isn't free nor is my email address. They may have asked the wrong questions.

Feel free to use your access to the article to excerpt quotes from it that contradict what I've said.

In particular, they need to say that vitamin D absorption and creation do not decline with age, and that daily doses in the 2000 to 5000-IU range are too high to fix that.

If they don't say that, then my opinion does not conflict with their study, or you didn't understand the study.

And even if they do say that it doesn't mean that they're right and I'm wrong. My opinion conflicts with a lot of "physician researchers" on a lot of topics. Quacks publish, too.

1