Jane Brody is suddenly on the vitamin D wagon?

LOLOL



Anyone else laughing at the last sentence?

I'm chortling at it, but quite honestly, I find it encouraging that they're recommending that much! That's a HUGE step up from 200 to 400 IUs!

As an aside, I've found the past couple of years while taking up to 7,000 IU's per day, I don't burn when I'm out in the sun with unprotected skin and the sun doesn't feel nearly as harsh as it did a few years ago. All those years of blaming our human pollution for depleting the ozone layer and making the sun's rays more damaging, and it seems more likely now that it was just my vitamin D deficiency!

While I am aware of the photo-protective effect of vitamin D I think there is more to it that just vitamin D.
Stephan on Skin texture and dietary fat I think improving omega 3 status and eliminating omega 6 seed oil intake is as important.

and Richard Nikerly also has Melanoma, Sun, and Its Synthetic Defeat (Sunscreen) interesting points to make.

This shows what the average response to 5000iu/daily after 3~9months is for those wondering why some people find the idea of 1000iu/daily a sick joke.

25(OH)D postal testing is the way to check for yourself if your body has sufficient vitamin D3
40ng/ml meets your daily needs
60ng/ml means you have sufficent D3 stored to pass to your baby in breast milk or available for autocrinal production of calcitriol (the active hormone) anywhere in your body (not just relying on endocrinal production by the kidney flooding the whole body)

Relying on kidney production is a bit like using nuclear weapons to nuke a country to get rid of a few insurgents. Having properly armed and fully supplied troops at the scene of trouble keeps collateral damage localized.

Well, I know that I better get tested but I can tell you that the high doses of vitamin D, that I have been taking have been beneficial. Honestly, I am tempted to increase my dose because of some things going on in my system could use a little more...umpf. But until then I will look into starting a regimen of vitamin K2 and better forms of magnesium. I am going to have a bone density test done in a couple of weeks.

Hutchinson, firstly I'm right with you on the badness of excessives Omega-6. Which I think is anything more than the few grams a day you'd get from Grass-fed meat with a few fresh veggies.
I reckon corn and soya oils are probably way worse than the equivalent amount of carbs here and there.

On the Vit-D testing. Can you give a "consumer" report on the service.

1. Is the site easy to use. Does it look secure.
2. Do they demand much personal information.
3. How long does the test kit take to arrive.
4. How long does it take to debit your card and do they add many extras on the 60 dollars quoted for UK shipping/currency charges.
5. How long do the results take to return.
6. do you get spammed with junk mails afterwards?

I ask these questions because I see the following on the front page of their site:
********
# Testing of vitamin D levels
GrassrootsHealth is sponsoring the use of blood spot test kits (laboratory analysis done by ZRT Labs) for a $60.00 fee to each individual. The tests are to be done twice a year by each individual along with the submission of some basic health data. The kits are not available as a ‘stand alone’ without health data.
# A 5 year study will be done with the data
accumulated from the individuals tested to evaluate the results of the program in disease prevention and to help create a long term plan for public health.
********

Two things jump out. That they require submission of "basic health data", and that your data and results then become part of someone elses research/PR machine.
I don't like either.

Can you throw any light on the above.

I've been using them since they started and I've not had any problems

What they are trying to do is relate the 25(OH)D results they collect with the need for future medical interventions. That's why they want some basic information at the start of what they hope will be a series of tests. Eventually if they are able to build up a database of people who have kept 25(OH)D around 40ng/ml or say 60ng/ml they will be able to compare those numbers with the incidence of medical intervantions at lower.

I think it's less than a week. Depends on UK post office really.
I think they take the money before, or at the same time as, they post the test kit. I haven't ever noticed any extra charges. I am sure there are none.
After you have let your blood sample dry and put it in the envelope it depends on UK post office to get to USA, so within 7 days of posting you should get an email notifying you of the result. This link takes you to the Grassroots health website where you find your new results (and previous numbers) listed.
NO spam. I sometimes get emails from them but I think this is mainly because I post a lot about vitamin D and I've had reasons to wanted to email Carole Baggerly. I think it's a great organisation and I would like to help them as much as possible.

LEF issued an article based on the results their Vitamin D testing service provided
The only way we will know what the impact of different 25(OH)D levels produce will be when people get tested and their intakes/25(OH)D levels and basic health outcomes are compared.

I disagree profoundly. I think it's our duty to try to move science further and provide evidence that the NATURAL 25(OH)D levels the human body natural attains and maintains equilibrium is optimum and until we make that information available those who profit from the sale of drugs and medical interventions have a vested interest in keeping 25(OH)D levels such that profits are maximised and more lifelong medical interventions exist. When people generally have the natural level of immune function I believe vaccines will not be required and the incidence of many other conditions would be far lower.

I think we should be proud of the fact that Grassrootshealth are getting a large number of tests done and are collecting basic data to see what the impact of effective strength D3 supplementation results in.
Grassrootshealth have a very reputable body of scientists and scientific establishments helping them. I'm sure they are fully briefed on the responsibilities of collecting, securing and maintaining sensitive information.

I would hope that people thought not that Grassroots simply provided discounted 25(OH)D tests but rather this was a chance to sponsor vitamin D research using effective amounts of an effective form of vitamin D and to also help with the transmission of the knowledge of the latest vitamin D research directly to those who need to benefit from that knowledge. Those with a vested interest in profiting from ill health should not be the ones who restrict the knowledge enabling people to lead healthier lives.

It is sad but true that most of the information provided by Diabetes charities promotes diabetes diagnosis and ensures more people get diagnosed and maintained as diabetics and are not lead out of diabetes or enabled to prevent the condition or slow it's progress.

It's equally sad but true that those charities promoting heart disease awareness also give advice that promotes rather than prevents heart disease.

We know sufficient about cancer incidence to also condemn the leading cancer research charities as promoting rather than preventing cancer incidence.

Both with diet and vitamin d and omega 3 the public have got to say enough is enough. We have got to make the general public aware that it's safer and cheaper to eat naturally and maintain a natural vitamin D, omega 3 status than wait for the health authorities to intervene when things go wrong.

That will only happen if we support those who are trying to change matters by educating the public by making the results of latest scientific research available.