Vitamin D3 from natural sources

[amandawood]

Hi there all you Vitamin D3 experts!

:help:

I've been reading all this stuff about Vit D3 and had started to read up about which kind of supplement is best, but I live in Germany and don't want to spend a fortune placing an overseas order for a few tablets.

And, then, I read in a German booklet that 5 mg daily is what an adult needs and this can be found in 2 eggs or 200g of fatty fish. I try to have 2 eggs for breakfast on a regular basis and I also love fatty fish like mackerel and salmon. I would say I eat fish about twice a week.

So, if I eat lots of fish and eggs (and maybe try out some beef liver, too), would I be getting "enough"? I'd rather eat fish and eggs than end up overdosing on supplements.

I do notice that my energy levels are much better when I start the day with eggs.

My search for anything such as "oil-based D3 only capsules" which I can obtain here in Germany has not been very fruitful. But eggs they got here :) aplenty!

Any input welcome!

Looking forward to eggs again for breakfast!
amanda

[Nancy LC]

There really isn't that much D3 in eggs. D3 is generally measure in IU's, not milligrams so I have no idea how those numbers translate. Salmon while a great food really doesn't that have much either in fact it looks negligible. You'd have to eat the liver of the salmon to get a good amount of D3. Are you sure you're not thinking of Omega-3 instead of D? Sounds like you might be confusing the two.

D3 is generally found in the livers of fish or on the fur in fur bearing animals. So you can either get your D3 from cod liver oil or another way is with capsules made from the stuff found in sheeps wool. Pretty natural if you ask me.

[Hutchinson]

I've been reading all this stuff about Vit D3 and had started to read up about which kind of supplement is best, but I live in Germany and don't want to spend a fortune placing an overseas order for a few tablets.I live in the UK and the only place I can buy EFFECTIVE STRENGTH Vitamin D3 is from the USA.
I use the 5000iu from bio-tech pharmacal inc
If you want a lower dose you should be able to buy Carlson, Vitamin D, 2000 IU, 360 Soft Gels for around $11.28 so they are cheap enough.
UK readers should be aware that imports over £18 are subject to VAT +handling charge collected on delivery so keeping your order below $36 should avoid that surcharge.

So, if I eat lots of fish and eggs (and maybe try out some beef liver, too), would I be getting "enough"? I'd rather eat fish and eggs than end up overdosing on supplements. if you readDiagnosis and treatment of Vitamin D Deficiency (http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/PDFs/diagnosis-vitdd.pdf) a new paper by four vitamin D experts
Heaney estimated that ∼ 3000 IU/day of vitamin D is required to assure that 97% of Americans obtain levels > 35 ng/ml Healthy adult men use between 3000-5000iu a day (http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/77/1/204) if it is available.

There is absolutely no way that effective amounts of vitamin d can be obtained from diet alone. Mackerel and Salmon may provide around 350iu a portion but you are not going to eat 10 portions of any oily fish each day.
Your egg contains 20iu so this is just a trivial drop in the ocean.

Take off your clothes and lay naked in the midday sun and in 20minutes your skin (providing you turn over regularly) will generate around 10,000iu. Your body deals with Vitamin d in huge quantities. If you read through the paper you will see how difficult it is to raise status even using effective strength capsules. I use 5000iu daily AND whenever possible I lay in the midday sun but even so I have not managed to raise my status above 147.5nmol/l 49ng/ml. Your body has a very good system for dealing with excess vitamin d3 and providing you keep your daily intake below 10,000iu/daily there is absolutely no possible danger of overdose (http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/85/1/6). (but most people can get above 40ng/ml 100nmol/l on around 4000iu/daily)

[jpatti]

Generally speaking, you get a lot of vitamin D3 in foods that are animal-based, if those animals are raised outdoors on pasture so they are out in the sun and therefore making the stuff. It is stored in their fat - so eggs, cream, butter, fatty meats, bone broths (because of the marrow) all contain decent amounts of vitamin D3. For this and a whole lot of other reasons (CLA, omega3s, etc.), these foods should be your primary source of protein.

Obviously, you get lots being out in the sun yourself too - with as much skin exposed as is possible for local mores. Just don't stay out long enough to sunburn.

Cod liver oil is the traditional way to supplement D3. I tried it, but found it beyond unpalatable, even though I researched and got a brand everyone said was good-tasting. I can't imagine taking the stuff regularly without being a child and having a parent hold me down and force me! If it were the Fountain of Youth and I'd live forever on the stuff, well... it wouldn't be worth it to me. Tried to give some to my cats and they wouldn't eat it either. But hey, maybe you'll like it - lots of folks seem to. I'd rather take a pill myself.

Personally, I buy Twinlab D3/K2 dots to supplement with. They have 1000 IU of D3 and 90 mcg of K2 per tiny pill. I had been ordering them online, but do not recommend the folks I bought them from as they've been spamming the heck out of me. I asked one of my local groceries to carry it, so can buy it locally now. If you Google, you can find lotsa places that sell it. Smartbomb are the spamming folks, avoid them.

These are NOT oil-based pills, but they do raise my serum D3 levels as per bloodwork my endocrinologist does for me. So I quit worrying about the oil-based thing.

I like them for the K2 which is difficult to find in food. It's in fermented cheese to some degree, but you don't get significant amounts short of eating something called "natto" which everyone says is disgusting.

Recent evidence seems to indicate that K2 is implicated in both bone and heart health - it may be the "activator" factor thingy that Weston Price postulated.

So I feel pretty confident recommending them as a good source of D3. Also, the pills are teeny-tiny, so even if you need a lot of D3, it's no biggie to take a few of them. They dissolve in your mouth, so get absorbed well and quickly too.

IMO, it's perfectly safe to take 1 or 2 a day even for children and even without bloodwork. Worse case scenario you aren't getting quite enough. But it's a lot better to get tested and take as much as needed to get to 50-60 ng/dL serum levels.

It's *critical* to take D3 if you take calcium - otherwise the calcium doesn't get into your bones and instead adds to coronary plaque.

[Nancy LC]

Hmmm... I disagree with the D3 from animal fat. They *add* D3 to dairy products to ensure people get at least some. I guess show me the data?

[Dodger]

An egg only has about 20 IUs of vitamin D. Fatty fish are the only foods that have significant amounts of vitamin D in them.

[Hutchinson]

The natural diet our bodies became fine tuned to deal with over 2 million years evolution did not include refined carbs or high fructose corn syrup and many other ingredients added to manufactured processed foods.

But we mustn't forget our bodies also became fine tuned to living a mainly OUTDOOR existence. If we want a NATURAL paleo type diet to work it will do so better in a body with NATURAL paleo levels of vitamin D3. We know from Hollis's work the level that the body naturally adopts and plateaus (http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pubmed&pubmedid=17218096) at given ample sunshine and we also know from his work with lactating mothers how much vitamin d3 is required to optimise the amount of Vitamin D3 that flows in Breast Milk.

There is absolutely NO WAY at all that anyone can reach OPTIMAL vitamin d3 status though diet alone. There is no diet that could possibly provide sufficient Vitamin D3 to meet the NATURAL needs of the body and attempting to use Cod Liver Oil to do so will lead to Vitamin A problems.
When tests have been done on the Vitamin D content of fortified milk they found most samples did not contain the stated amount and they generally contained much less than on the label, so please don't rely on fortified Vitamin D products as firstly they are unreliable and secondly they contain only a relatively trivial amount of Vitamin D3 compared to the actual amounts your body needs every day.

[jpatti]

Hmmm... I disagree with the D3 from animal fat. They *add* D3 to dairy products to ensure people get at least some. I guess show me the data?

Ummm... no they add D2 to dairy products, not D3. D2 is the "plant" form of the vitamin, not the "animal" form. People have varying abilities to convert D2 -> D3, so D2 in dairy is not nearly as bioavailable as D3 is.

The reason they do this is because most agriculture animals are *not* pasture-raised, do not spend significant time in the sun, and therefore do not manufacture much D3. So if they don't add some D2, even good little food-pyramid-following people will wind up with rickets in spite of the calcium in dairy products.

D2 makes the difference in being enough to prevent the specific deficiency disease, but not enough to maximize health.

The difference in what I said was that animals raised on *pasture* produce a lot of D3, which is then available in their fat. They need to be in the sun to do this. It doesn't happen when they're raised primarily in barns and cages indoors. Lots of other things don't happen either, like the omega3s in their fat, and the high percentage of CLA. They also produce a lot more of the "animal" form of vitamin A. In short, meat and dairy products from *healthy* animals is healthier for us, which really shouldn't be that surprising.

There's loads of info here: http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/ with lots of research and stuff on the specific D3 issue.

As an aside, while buying pasture-raised meats, organic vegetables, raw cheese and butter, coconut and avocado oils and such *seems* more expensive, it turns out it's not. I've been buying these expensive products for the past six months and our average grocery bill has not gone up. Since the products are more expensive, I can only conclude we're eating an awful lot less. I hypothesize that eating more nutrient-dense food satisfies appetite more readily.

[Hutchinson]

Fluid Milk Vitamin Fortification Compliance in New York State (http://jds.fass.org/cgi/content/abstract/84/12/2813) This report show that most fortified milk samples were underfortified and thus people should not rely on milk for Vitamin D. Given that a quart of fortified milk is supposed to contain 400 to 600 IU vitamin D and most people don't drink more than a half a pint glass daily the most vitamin d people could possibly get from milk is around 100iu.

This article Vitamin D and Milk (http://vitamind.ucr.edu/milk.html) provides more information that suggests D3 is the version of Vit d normally used to fortify milk.

Do not take any notice of the vitamin D requirements stated in that article.

There is a huge difference between the amounts of vitamin D needed to prevent ricketts and the NATURAL vitamin d status required to enable natural levels of Vitamin d to flow in human breast milk. If you want to be in the group with least breast-prostate cancer then you want to attain and maintain a year round 25(OH)D level 50ng/ml -60ng/ml 125-150nmol/l
and to achieve that requires considerably more vitamin d3 than stated by Prepared by Professor Anthony W. Norman; Department of Biochemistry & Biomedical Sciences University of California, Riverside CA 92521

UK readers should note our milk is NOT fortified. If you look on the UK Dairy Council website (download the nutrient pdf) (http://www.milk.co.uk/page.aspx?intPageID=194) you will see that a glass of milk contains only a trace of Vitamin D as they are able to measure 0.06mg of Thiamin 16mcg folate 5.9mcg biotin and 2mcg selenium it must be a very small trace of Vitamin D to be not measurable.

[amandawood]

Thanks for all the links and info etc!

I am still looking up info, just to be on the safe side!

As far as I can gather, the USA authorities are in the process of revising their guidelines on the RDA for Vit D3 and an article is due to come out in a journal (the AMJ, I think) soon. On the basis of the research reviewed in this article, new guidelines will be issued soon.

The trouble is, I really should get outside and work in my garden so I can catch some sun rather than sitting here at my PC indoors!!!

I have put out a Google Alert on Vit D3 and hope to be informed when this new info is out. I'll post it on the forum as soon as I get it.

amanda

[amandawood]

Generally speaking, you get a lot of vitamin D3 in foods that are animal-based, if those animals are raised outdoors on pasture so they are out in the sun and therefore making the stuff. It is stored in their fat - so eggs, cream, butter, fatty meats, bone broths (because of the marrow) all contain decent amounts of vitamin D3. For this and a whole lot of other reasons (CLA, omega3s, etc.), these foods should be your primary source of protein.

Obviously, you get lots being out in the sun yourself too - with as much skin exposed as is possible for local mores. Just don't stay out long enough to sunburn.

Cod liver oil is the traditional way to supplement D3. I tried it, but found it beyond unpalatable, even though I researched and got a brand everyone said was good-tasting. I can't imagine taking the stuff regularly without being a child and having a parent hold me down and force me! If it were the Fountain of Youth and I'd live forever on the stuff, well... it wouldn't be worth it to me. Tried to give some to my cats and they wouldn't eat it either. But hey, maybe you'll like it - lots of folks seem to. I'd rather take a pill myself.

Personally, I buy Twinlab D3/K2 dots to supplement with. They have 1000 IU of D3 and 90 mcg of K2 per tiny pill. I had been ordering them online, but do not recommend the folks I bought them from as they've been spamming the heck out of me. I asked one of my local groceries to carry it, so can buy it locally now. If you Google, you can find lotsa places that sell it. Smartbomb are the spamming folks, avoid them.

These are NOT oil-based pills, but they do raise my serum D3 levels as per bloodwork my endocrinologist does for me. So I quit worrying about the oil-based thing.

I like them for the K2 which is difficult to find in food. It's in fermented cheese to some degree, but you don't get significant amounts short of eating something called "natto" which everyone says is disgusting.

Recent evidence seems to indicate that K2 is implicated in both bone and heart health - it may be the "activator" factor thingy that Weston Price postulated.

So I feel pretty confident recommending them as a good source of D3. Also, the pills are teeny-tiny, so even if you need a lot of D3, it's no biggie to take a few of them. They dissolve in your mouth, so get absorbed well and quickly too.

IMO, it's perfectly safe to take 1 or 2 a day even for children and even without bloodwork. Worse case scenario you aren't getting quite enough. But it's a lot better to get tested and take as much as needed to get to 50-60 ng/dL serum levels.

It's *critical* to take D3 if you take calcium - otherwise the calcium doesn't get into your bones and instead adds to coronary plaque.

Thank you so much for all this info! I am a bit wary of the oily things, too.

I won't take any extra D3 now as spring is finally on its way and as a non-car owner and non-car driver, I am out and about quite a bit on my bike. Soon it'll be gardening season and I'll make sure I get out in my garden again soon, too!

Sometimes you wish you could have known about all these things sooner!!! I have just found out that D3 deficiency and deficiency in Coenzyme Q10 are linked to periodontal disease. I was diagnosed with this in my mid-30s and my gums have already receded quite badly - I am now 44 - but I shall certainly keep my kids informed about this stuff. My dentist assured me back then that the gum problem wasn't a result of poor dental hygiene but probably genetic (my paternal grandma had it too at an early age). I hope I can slow down the progress of this disease a little with taking CoQ10 supplements and watching my D3 intake.

You live and learn!

amanda

[Hutchinson]

I am still looking up info, just to be on the safe side!The safe side is the one which in the long run leads to longer, healthier, pain free lives and the latest research shows that having higher vitamin d status results in longer lives.
As far as I can gather, the USA authorities are in the process of revising their guidelines on the RDA for Vit D3 and an article is due to come out in a journal (the AMJ, I think) soon. The whole history of medicine (http://www.york.ac.uk/depts/hist/staff/wootton.shtml) shows that when given new scientific medical evidence it takes roughly 30 years for it to become common medical practice. It is almost inevitable that those sitting on the medical committees that decide RDA's will also have direct contacts, directorships, consultancy fees in Big Pharma. They will therefore take into account the impact of lower rates of cancer, cardiovasculardisease, hypertension, stroke, diabetes, multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis, inflammatory bowel disease, periodontal disease, macular degeneration, mental illness, propensity to fall and chronic pain on their profit margins. They will inevitably put the best interests of big pharma before the best interests of the general population.

Applying common sense has never been a strong point in the Health Professions. Current UK obesity policy is based on low fat and more exercise and we know this is against the wealth of scientific research showing gluttony and sloth (http://blog.wellnesstips.ca/blog/index.php/?p=169) are not the only cause of obesity. Just spend the time listening to Gary Taubes (http://webcast.berkeley.edu/event_details.php?webcastid=21216) talk and you will see how decisions like that get manipulated by commercial interests. Listen to Malcolm Kendrick on Utube (http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=malcolm+kendrick&search_type=) and you will understand why I am so skeptical that common sense will prevail.

It seems obvious to me that evolution would not have made the mistake of forgetting to put vitamin d in breast milk. Now we know the level of 25(OH)D that otimises the amount of Vitamin D in breast milk it seems obvious to me that this is the NATURAL level our bodies became fine tuned to. But I will almost guarantee that when the decision about raising the RDA and safe upper limit for vitamin d common sense will not apply. There are simply too many health professionals jobs and too much financial loss for Big Pharma for that to happen.

[Wifezilla]

While I am in the US, I just buy the plain D3 tablets because they are cheap. Since I get plenty of fat, I don't worry to much about not using the fat+d3 capsules.

I will almost guarantee that when the decision about raising the RDA and safe upper limit for vitamin d common sense will not apply. There are simply too many health professionals jobs and too much financial loss for Big Pharma for that to happen.

Unfortunately I think you are right. At least Canada recently raised their Vitamin D recommendations.

[Gostrydr]

As Nancy stated, sheep lanolin from their wool is used extensively as a raw material for D-3.

I would stay away from the Ergo form..which is derived from Yeast.

[Hutchinson]

I would stay away from the Ergo form..which is derived from Yeast.I agree with this. The case against ergocalciferol (vitamin D2) as a vitamin supplement (http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/84/4/694) explains the reasons. There has since been a paper from Holick (a prominent Vit d Expert) reporting on work he has done with a group of 68 people showing at 1000iu/daily D2 is as effective as D3. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18089691) BUT 68 people in 4 groups means only 17 people had D2 on it's own. With an everage age of 38. how many of these 17 were over 50yrs.

It's particularly the case that older people seem less capable at using D2 and converting it to D3. It could well be that Holick just didn't have in his handful of older people non responders but that is NOT EVIDENCE that non responders don't exist.

We know they do. (http://heartscanblog.blogspot.com/2007/11/vitamin-d2-rip-offs.html)

It also seems illogical and contrary to common sense to use a synthetic product that costs more and is known to be less effective (Holick trial only used a trivial amount of Vitamin D insufficient to raise levels to optimal) when there is a cheaper natural product readily available.

If we know the body has to convert D2 into D3 before it can utilise it why not use D3 in the first place as this will save time/energy and is most likely to work better.

The only reason to use D2 is to boost the profits of big pharma. D2 is the only form prescribed because as D3 is natural no one can patent it and therefore no one has any incentive to get a product licence and get approval for D3 to be prescribed. So we have situation where every doctor in the UK/USA who thinks their patients needs Vitamin D have either to prescibe D2, knowing it may not be effective at all, or tell their patients that they should buy effective strength D3 from online providers at a fraction of the prescription cost.

Naturally most health professionals put the best interests of big pharma ahead of the best interests of their patients.

[Nancy LC]

Be careful of D3 tablets as opposed to the oily capsule form. I think there are some out there that don't work. I've run into people using Source Naturals and they remained deficient in D even after supplementing.

Best way to find out is to get your blood tested. I believe the cautiously optimal blood value is 50-70 ng/ml nowadays.

[Hutchinson]

Be careful of D3 tablets as opposed to the oily capsule form. I think there are some out there that don't work. I've run into people using Source Naturals and they remained deficient in D even after supplementing.

Best way to find out is to get your blood tested. I believe the cautiously optimal blood value is 50-70 ng/ml nowadays.Dr Davis of the Heartscanblog recommends the Carlsons oil based 2000iu capsules (http://www.iherb.com/ProductDetails.aspx?c=1&pid=7255860309350762561&at=0). Vitaminlife, Vitaminshoppe, Vitacost do similar at similar prices.
I use these 5000iu (https://secure.bio-tech-pharm.com/detail.aspx?product_id=18&cat_id=2&subcat_id=0) and even though they are not oil based I know, because I've had my 25(OH)D tested, that these work for me.

That is not evidence either will work for you.

If you rememeber that Vitamin d is fat soluble and requires bile juices to be flowing in order to be absorbed, taking it before, during, or immediately after a meal, should mean that the bile juices will be activated and a non-oil based vit d taken up.

Anyone who hasn't used Iherb before can get a $5 introductory discount with the code WAB666, but do check first they are the cheapest, including P&P first, UK readers, don't order more than $36 or you may get caught for VAT+ Handling charge on delivery.

[amandawood]

Thanks for all this info!!! I'm feeling a little overwhelmed by it all, but I shall read it all through in due course. I was hoping to catch some real sun soon, but today it is SNOWING!!! So much for "Vit D3 from natural sources..."

I also wondered if I should try and get my dear husband to take mag/ca/Vit D3 supplements as he has had an operation on a smashed kneecap. Would supplementing with these things maybe help the bone in the knee to get stronger?

Anybody have any ideas or info?

amanda

[Hutchinson]

I also wondered if I should try and get my dear husband to take mag/ca/Vit D3 supplements as he has had an operation on a smashed kneecap. Would supplementing with these things maybe help the bone in the knee to get stronger?

Anybody have any ideas or info?

amandaThe uptake of Calcium and Magnesium is controlled by vitamin D3 status so correcting vitamin D3 insufficiency is the first priority and that means taking an effective amount (2000iu/d maybe more if you live further north) Dr McCleary of the Brain Trust Program (http://www.drmccleary.com/) suggests that 600mg of magnesium daily (preferably malate or taurinate forms) are ideal for optimum brain health so I expect that applies to other parts of the body as well. We find Dr Davis of the Heartscanblog (http://heartscanblog.blogspot.com/2007/03/dont-neglect-your-magnesium.html) suggesting 400mg daily of Magnesium Citrate (another form that is easily absorbed) for heart problems. So while I do think improving magnesium status would be a good idea I don't necessarily think a combined D3/Calcium/magnesium tablet is the answer. I suspect they will contain the least (cheapest) well absorbed form of magnesium.
I would also suggest vitamin K2 (http://www.iherb.com/ProductDetails.aspx?c=1&pid=6116) If you search google scholar (http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=vitamin+K2+BONE+STRENGTH&hl=en&lr=&start=10&sa=N) or pubmed (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez) you will find a lot of good research showing that K2 is beneficial.

[black57]

Thanks for all the links and info etc!

I am still looking up info, just to be on the safe side!

As far as I can gather, the USA authorities are in the process of revising their guidelines on the RDA for Vit D3 and an article is due to come out in a journal (the AMJ, I think) soon. On the basis of the research reviewed in this article, new guidelines will be issued soon.

The trouble is, I really should get outside and work in my garden so I can catch some sun rather than sitting here at my PC indoors!!!

I have put out a Google Alert on Vit D3 and hope to be informed when this new info is out. I'll post it on the forum as soon as I get it.

amanda

Amanda, I assume that you are white. If this is so, yes, an hour's worth of sunlight should be plenty. However, black people, like myself, do not get very much vitamin D from the sun because of their natural sunblock, and they really should supplement this with the D3 supplement. I will be 51 Thursday and I just learned this about a month ago. Anywhere where sunlight is regularly available, like it is here in So. California, provides a healthy dose of vitamin D. But again, you have to be able to absorb it.

[Hutchinson]

This sun exposure calculator makes it quite easy to adjust for latitude, weight, height, skin type and local UV index. (http://www.thevitamindcure.com/calculator)

[Gostrydr]

Hutchinson..
Those forms of magnesium you mentioned are good sources, but too expensive and they actually contain low amounts of elemental magnesium..the actual amount contained in these formulas.

This is a great article by the governing body of supplements and should clear up any myths regarding magnesium..as you can see Oxide is the cheapest source and has the highest amount of elemental magnesium and it is absorbed as well as the others...but at a lower price and less tablets.

This is in the same conversation as calcium..which one is better, which is abosrbed better..blah,blah.

That answer? The cheapest form of it..Calcium Carbonate..less price, less tablets and the highest amount of elemental calcium

I used to have a vitamin company and salesman would try and sell me these very high priced raw materials such as minerals..better absorption..over 600% better solubility...and twice the price!!

All nonsense..sometimes the cheapest and least synthesized raw materials are the best deal..price, amount of tablets and higher concentration of the mineral contained

But I do love magnesium malate and malic acid for fibromyalgia..that form of magnesium seems to be ideal for that condition

[Gostrydr]

oops here is the article

http://dietary-supplements.info.nih.gov/factsheets/magnesium.asp

[Squid]

This sun exposure calculator makes it quite easy to adjust for latitude, weight, height, skin type and local UV index. (http://www.thevitamindcure.com/calculator)

Cool link, Hutchinson. Only 10-15 minutes for me! That's not hard to do.

[Hutchinson]

But I do love magnesium malate and malic acid for fibromyalgia..that form of magnesium seems to be ideal for that conditionFor general magnesium information I repect the views/experience of Mrs Doubtfire (http://neurotalk.psychcentral.com/thread1138.html) This thread is well worth reading. If you really want a cheapo source of magnesium have you considered throwing a jugful of magnesium chloride salts in your bathwater (http://users.mrbean.net.au/~wlast/magnesiumchloride.html) (or Epsom Salts) and soaking for 20mins. May help some get a good nights sleep if they do it regularly enough to build up stores. In the UK you can buy a 25kg bag of magnesium chloride, Dead Sea Salt for around £7ish.

I think there is sufficient evidence (http://www.mgwater.com/) to suspect the "official" figures for magnesium requirement are far too low. In Dr McCleary's (http://www.drmccleary.com/) anti excitatory cocktail (http://swabymanor.googlepages.com/drmccleary'sbraintrustprogramsupplementl) he suggests 400mg magnesium twice daily.

[amandawood]

I think there is[ sufficient evidence to suspect the "official" figures for magnesium requirement are far too low. In Dr McCleary's (http://www.drmccleary.com/) anti excitatory cocktail (http://swabymanor.googlepages.com/drmccleary'sbraintrustprogramsupplementl) he suggests 400mg magnesium twice daily.

If I had that much magnesium twice a day, I'd have the raging runs!!!

I take a 300mg supplement more or less daily and that does the trick for me. On an another thread I read that you should tweak the amount of magnesium you take according to your weight, so at 63kg, I don't need that much, whereas people who are carrying more extra weight around with them than me might need to take a lot more. I think you have to experiment, with the cut-off being the level you take that has you running to the loo on a more-than-necessary basis!

amanda

[Hutchinson]

If I had that much magnesium twice a day, I'd have the raging runs!!!

I take a 300mg supplement more or less daily and that does the trick for me. On an another thread I read that you should tweak the amount of magnesium you take according to your weight, so at 63kg, I don't need that much, whereas people who are carrying more extra weight around with them than me might need to take a lot more. I think you have to experiment, with the cut-off being the level you take that has you running to the loo on a more-than-necessary basis!

amanda Magnesium attracts water, I think what causes loose stools is the unabsorbed magnesium remaining in the colon and absorbing water. Using the better absorbed forms means less is left to cause trouble.

[Gostrydr]

All forms of magnesium are not the culprits of loose stools..Magnesium Citrate is the real culprit. Like Hutchinson stated this form of magnesium draws water into the bowel making it the ideal form for constipation..

I also agree that magnesium recommendations are way too low, but in my experience I have never seen anyone have diarhea from 700mgs of magneisum from asporotate,malate,oxide or glycinate...but doesnt mean it hasnt happened, but some companies that I have talked with say the same thing in regards to their formulations..No diarrhea reported with 700mgs a day of magnesium..they did get reports with 800,but not 700

[eddiemcm]

15 minutes of sun a day will give sufficient vitamin D.
Of course,that's not always possible.D3 pills remains the
second best alternative-maybe 2000 IU minimum per day.
Cheers
Eddie

[Wyvrn]

Since I live in the Pacific NW of USA, I go to a tanning salon once or twice a week and take 4000IU D3 a few times a week. I use the regular "low pressure" lamp beds which are supposed to have more UVB (the vitamin D ray) than the "high pressure" lamps used in fast tanning beds and stand up units. The advantage of using a tanning bed over natural sunlight (beside the obvious logistical ones) is that you get exposure on all sides, not just the top, so presumably twice as much D3 synthesis for the time spent.

[Hutchinson]

Since I live in the Pacific NW of USA, I go to a tanning salon once or twice a week and take 4000IU D3 a few times a week. I use the regular "low pressure" lamp beds which are supposed to have more UVB (the vitamin D ray) than the "high pressure" lamps used in fast tanning beds and stand up units. The advantage of using a tanning bed over natural sunlight (beside the obvious logistical ones) is that you get exposure on all sides, not just the top, so presumably twice as much D3 synthesis for the time spent.Because tanning beds (depending on the number of tubes and the age of those tubes) may produce a more intensive light than natural sunlight they may be more damaging.

Providing you use them for at most only half the time recommended for tanning the advantages probably outweigh the potential disadvantages.

I prefer FREE natural sunlight. The hassle of turning over every 5 minutes to ensure all sides get evenly exposed really isn't a problem, it does after all give the body more time to absorb the vitamin d3 it has just created.

This calculator enables you to work out how long you need to lay in the sunshine (http://www.thevitamindcure.com/calculator) UK readers can use the BBC 5 DAY WEATHER FORECAST (http://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/) to obtain the current UV index to enter into the calculation.

To understand why it is so important to limit the time you are exposed to UVB (from both sun and lamp) spend some time reading the information here. (http://www.uvguide.co.uk/vitdpathway.htm) The Vit d process is the same for both lizard and human skin.

The point you need to gather is that further heat (uvb) applied to pre-vitamin D and actual D3 processes them on to substances the body does not use. Therefore once the D3 is created, further exposure to sunlight/tanning lamp simply destroys it leaving you unprotected when the skin is actually burnt.

This research explains how regular short sunlight exposures actually mobilise the skin's anti-cancer defence mechanism (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=pubmed&Cmd=ShowDetailView&TermToSearch=17259988). But of course, by the time you've got burnt you've already fried your protection mechanism, so KEEP SUN EXPOSURE and tanning lamp exposures SHORT and FREQUENT but NEVER EVER get sunburnt.

[Nancy LC]

Wow, it says I need 2-8 minutes outside. That doesn't seem like much. Is the UV Forecast the same all year?