Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbuna
|
Some of the viewer comments are so enlightening.
It takes usually around one generation, 30 years, before new standards and information from research find their way into routine medical praxis. Some doctors simply lag behind, are not up to date, learned outdated stuff when they were at university, studying medicine. Not all, but quite some. But the Vitamine-D ignorrants seem to become fewer and fewer. even my dentist checks for Vitamine D now. This substance is hard to overestimate, it is omnbipotent. Not many other agents are involved in so many metabolical functions and processes as Vitmaine D.
Same is true with Vitamine K2, which some even do not even correctly differentiate versus Vitamine K1, although K1 does very different things.
Want to reiterate again on the doses of Calcidiol in the blood, which is the metabolically active form of Vitamine D. I have read at some of the research luminaries that the human body is prepared to process and deal with up to 20 thousand I.E.s of Vitamine D per day. And that we have not seen convincing data at all that doses below but up to 40 thousand per day and over many months cause first signs of intoxication symptoms (that are completely temporary, and disappear again when you stop with Vit-D). The risk of Hypercalcemia also is misunderstood and is used to spread panic and demonise the use of this supplement. The blood saturation with calcidiol is recommended usally to be
minimum 30 nanograms per millilitre, better between 40 and 60. But these "optimums" imo are not really optimums, just a relatively safe first ground, they are still very cautious, careful recommendations.
We know from several examples with wild tribes living outdoors that they do not seem to form blood saturations in excess of rougly around 90-100 nanograms, which tends to roughly correspond with a maximum dosis of 20 thousand I.E.s of Vitamine D - which happens to be the maximum the skin of a human can produce at maximum per day under according conditions before the skin shuts down for this 24h interval and minimises any further production of the the sun vitamine (and destroying existing Vitamine-D reserves in equal ratios).
This all together is the reason why I say -
and more important: quite some doctors and research scientists knowing the matter much better than me - that you must not enslave yourself to a dose that gets your blood saturation exactly in the narrow margin of 40-60 nanograms per millilitre.
There is no argument against having it significantly higher, and there is strong indication that we do benefit form much higher levels indeed, for exmaple the number of genes vitamine-D does switch and infleunce in cells explode by several factors with higher doses than just 40-60, which is good. Several factors! So, really, do not be shy to push for higher values of 70, 80. From 100 on you likely do not gain any more benefits and from here on the chances grow that you start to feel (reversable) negative effects and symtpoms. Personally, I aim for the range of 70-80. Last time I blood-tested, I hit right the middle of it.
Your doc starts to frown the forehead when he reads in your blood test "calcidiol 80 nanograms"? Don't worry, but smile!
And explain it to him. If his mind locks down, dont waste your time with debates, and better start looking for a new doctor. If he listens, but asks you questions, that is fine. Scepticism is perfectly allowed if scepticism nevertheless asks for arguments. Fanatical denial is not, and any discussion with it is in vein.