NB. The dosages for vitamin D mentioned in this first post are based on the best advice that was available in early 2009. However, during the following two years, recommended dosages were revised upwards several times by the scientific authorities on this vitamin in light of new data. See post number 6 below for the latest advice on dosage and on the importance of having one's blood level tested.

Vitamin D is a really hot topic in medical circles at the present time, and is being found to be able to prevent and ease many types of disease. It has been found to prevent infections, improve immunity, reduce fracture risk, reduce the risk of developing MS, lower death risk generally, improve heart health, relieve chronic pain, slow cognitive decline, improve wound healing, cut cancer risk and slow cancer development, and perform many other valuable functions... The medical journals are currently awash with vitamin D studies, and I can supply web references to research on any of the topics above, if anyone is interested - just post your request below.

The current recommended daily dose of vitamin D is 200 IU for people up to age 50, 400 IU for people aged 51 to 70, and 600 IU for people over age 70.

However, Boston University vitamin D expert Michael Holick, MD, PhD, recommends a dose of 1,000 International Units (IU) of vitamin D per day for both infants and adults - unless they're getting plenty of safe sun exposure.

And the US Vitamin D Council recommends that healthy adults take 2,000 IU of vitamin D daily - more if they get little or no sun exposure.

A simple blood test -- the 25(OH)D or calcidiol test -- can tell your doctor whether your vitamin D level is low. The Vitamin D Council recommends that 25(OH)D levels be between 40 and 65 ng/mL. The U.S. National Institutes of health notes that 25(OH)D levels over 30 ng/mL are optimal, and that there is "insufficient data" to support recommendations for higher levels.

For more detail, see:

http://www.webmd.com/osteoporosis/ne...e-of-vitamin-d

From what I have read, the general consensus amongst experts seems to be that 1,000 IU per day is a good dose to aim for from supplements.

Of particular interest at the moment, with the so-called 'swine flu' spreading around the world, is the fact that, if you maintain an optimum level of vitamin D, you shouldn't need to worry at all about flu or any other infection.

Vitamin D has profound effects on human immunity, increasing production of broad-spectrum antimicrobial peptides that rapidly destroy the cell walls of bacteria, fungi, and viruses, including the influenza virus.

If you are getting 2,000 IU of vitamin D per day, you are certainly unlikely to come down with flu, a fact demonstrated by the experience of a group of Dr Cannell's patients reported in a remarkable article at:

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/51913.php

If, however, you are unfortunate enough to get the flu, it can still be treated by taking 50,000 IU of vitamin D per day for three days. Start taking this dose as soon as you realise that you're coming down with flu, and follow Dr Mercola's general advice detailed at:

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/ar...Swine-Flu.aspx

On the question of which form of vitamin D is the best to take, there are two main forms used in supplements -- D2, or ergocalciferol, which is synthesized by plants, and D3, or cholecalciferol, which is synthesized by humans in the skin when exposed to ultraviolet-B (UVB) rays from sunlight.

The D2 form used in supplements is usually derived from irradiated fungus, and the D3 form from the fat of lambs' wool. The latter form, vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol), is generally considered to be the better form for human consumption, as this is the natural form of vitamin D that our bodies make from sunlight.

On a personal level, I have found vitamin D remarkably effective as a treatment for rhinitis. It relieves the dreadful congestion that one can get with this condition, without any of the side effects of pharmaceutical decongestants or steroids.

John

On another forum, Lizzie makes a very good point when she complains that doctors are not telling their patients about the importance of vitamin D, and Mike Adams offers a reason for this omission in a hard-hitting new article at Natural News. In this he says:

"We already know that vitamin D, all by itself, can prevent nearly 4 out of 5 cancers (http://www.naturalnews.com/021892.html). It also helps prevent heart disease, diabetes, depression, seasonal flu and kidney disease. Distribute free vitamin D supplements across the entire population and you solve the doctor shortage problem in one year as the public gets healthier and reduces doctor visits.

"It's a simple, cost-effective solution that any intelligent nation would embrace without a second thought: Invest a few pennies in the health of the population and save yourself many dollars in reduced health care costs. Regular vitamin D supplementation has no negative side effects and requires no prescriptions, no injections and no visits to the doctor. What's not to like about that?

"Except the sick care industry doesn't like it at all. Drug companies, hospitals, conventional doctors, med schools, medical journals and now even the mainstream media all generate extreme profits from the ongoing business of sickness and disease. Vitamin D would disrupt their profit agenda and send people home healthy and well instead of bringing them back into the hospital sick and diseased."

Anyone wanting the truth about the remarkable benefits of vitamin D will have to educate themselves, but at least they will no longer have to spend hours surfing the net, because all the science and best advice on this amazing nutrient is now available on the Vitamin D Council website. I recommend that everyone familiarize themselves with the entire contents of this site and sign up for the Council's newsletter, which will keep them up-to-date with all the latest developments as they occur.

There's a useful new wiki on vitamin D at

http://www.vitamindwiki.com/tiki-index.php

Easy to navigate, good graphics, and boasts the "Best Vit D information on the planet."

have you seen the revamped recipes formighty Muesli- with 20% of your RDA of vitmain D now added- vist their website to see

I'm sorry to pour cold water over your favourite breakfast product, BreakfastBaby, but 20% of the RDA for vitamin D is a very small amount indeed, as the RDA itself is woefully inadequate when considered against current research into our need for this vitamin.

You could argue that any amount is better than nothing, but the problem with this claim is that it makes consumers think they're getting 20% of something significant, and they're not.

Until the UK government and medical authorities wake up to the realities regarding vitamin D, we need to seize every opportunity to tell people that current research clearly shows that we each need to take 5,000 IU of vitamin D3 per day, in the case of an adult, and give approximately 1,000 IU per 25 pounds of body weight per day to a child.

The amount added to the breakfast product mentioned above will be around 40 IU - less than 1% of what is required by an adult. Based on this, I suggest taking a vitamin D supplement to ensure the optimum amount is obtained, and choosing breakfast products according to how they taste!

Vitamin D: why we need more, and how much to take.

A recent study showed that children and adolescents with low vitamin D levels had increased sensitivity to 11 out of 17 allergens that were tested, including both environmental and food allergens. So, for anyone with an allergic child, increasing their vitamin D level would seem to be a wise step, but how much should they take?

Another new study has shown that we need a significantly higher intake of vitamin D than was previously realised in order to achieve a blood serum level that is capable of preventing or markedly reducing several major diseases.

The researchers found that adults need a daily intake of between 4,000 and 8,000 IU of vitamin D to maintain blood levels of the vitamin's metabolites in the range needed to reduce by about half the risk of a number of diseases including breast cancer, colon cancer, multiple sclerosis and type 1 diabetes.

This latest study has confirmed what had previously been predicted: that much higher amounts are needed than the 400 IU per day of vitamin D that was required to defeat rickets in the 20th century, and also much higher than the current recommended daily allowance (RDA) of 600 IU, set only recently for the US by the Institute of Medicine (IOM).

Many of the scientists who are actively working with vitamin D now believe that a blood serum level of 40-60 ng/ml (100-150 nmol/L) is the appropriate target concentration of vitamin D and, in December of last year, a US National Academy of Sciences Institute of Medicine committee identified 4,000 IU per day of vitamin D as being safe for everyday use by adults and children of nine years and older, with 1,000-3,000 IU per day for infants and children up to age eight.

The Vitamin D Council recommends a slightly higher blood serum level of 50-80 ng/ml (125–200 nmol/L) and has set the minimum at 50 ng/ml (125 nmol/L) because it has been shown that the average person only begins to store vitamin D at 40 ng/ml (100 nmol/L) whereas, at 50 ng/ml (125 nmol/L), virtually everyone begins to store it for future use. That is, at levels below 50 ng/ml (125 nmol/L), the body uses up vitamin D as fast as it is made, or consumed.

In order to establish one's vitamin D level, one needs to have this checked by means of a 25-hydroxy vitamin D blood test, or or an in-home vitamin D test, these two being the most accurate measures of the amount of vitamin D in the body. The ideal time of year to have a test is in March, because this is when the blood level of this vitamin is at its lowest following the winter.

The level established by the test provides a baseline from which to calculate how much vitamin D will be required to reach at least the minimum of 50 ng/ml (125 nmol/L). Every 1,000 IU that is consumed or made by exposing the skin to the sun will raise the blood level a further 7-10 ng/ml.

Those who live in a warm climate and can spend 10-15 minutes each day moving around in the sun between 11.00 am and 1.00 pm, with 40% of their body exposed, and without sunscreen, will, if they have Caucasian skin, produce approximately 5,000 IU vitamin D in response to that 10-15 minutes exposure. (Those with dark skin need up to six times longer.) However, those who live in a cooler climate, or are confined indoors, will need to take a supplement, which should be the D3 form of the vitamin (cholecalciferol, obtained from sheep's wool), as this is the type that is made naturally by the skin. The plant-based alternative, vitamin D2, is best avoided, as this is not easily metabolized by the body.

The importance of having one's blood level measured was brought home to me recently when I had my own vitamin D status checked after a gap of 2 years, during which time I had taken 5,000 IU of vitamin D3 daily. Given this level of intake, I had expected to be well over the Vitamin D Council's minimum acceptable level but, in fact, I scored only 43.27 ng/ml (108 nmol/L). My GP was actually happy with this result, saying that it was well within the normal range but he, like the vast majority of medics, is clearly unaware that the body does not reliably begin to store vitamin D in fat and muscle tissue until the level gets above 50 ng/ml (125 nmol/L).

Anyone who is not able to get their vitamin D level checked immediately, but who wants to begin supplementation right away, could begin with the Vitamin D Council's recommended daily adult dose of 5,000 IU. Alternatively, a dose that is more accurately tailored to one's weight can be achieved by taking 1,000 IU per day for every 25 pounds of body weight. Had I used this calculation, I would have been taking at least 6,000 IU per day, which would have given me a minimum blood level of 50 ng/ml (125 nmol/L).

As there are other factors besides weight that influence one's need for vitamin D - age, gender, and skin colour, for example - getting tested and basing one's intake on the result of the test is undoubtedly the best course.

For those people who are more used to thinking in terms of the official RDAs for vitamins, and who may be concerned about the risk of toxicity from taking doses of vitamin D that are considerably higher than the RDA, there is reassurance in the IOM Committee Report, mentioned above. This considered 10,000 IU per day to be the lowest dose that could be associated with any risk. And many researchers go much further than this to state that there is no likelihood of any toxicity below a blood level of 200 ng/ml (500 nmol/L), which gives a very large margin of safety with all the doses quoted above.

In order to get the best value from vitamin D supplements, it is important to ensure an adequate supply of this nutrient's co-factors: magnesium (the most important co-factor), vitamin A (although this should not exceed 6,000 IU per day, at which point it begins to compete with, and reduce the uptake of vitamin D), vitamin K2 (the optimum amount of vitamin K2 is still under investigation, but it is likely that we need 100-200 micrograms of vitamin K2 for every 1,000 IU's of vitamin D that we take), zinc, and boron.

Obtaining an adequate supply of all the co-factors will particularly help anyone who has difficulty tolerating supplemental vitamin D. Additionally, there are intriguing reports that those with impaired tolerance for this nutrient who become users of helminthic therapy, find that their tolerance increases after treatment. One individual who was unable to tolerate vitamin D found that, after inoculating with hookworm and whipworm, he could take 10,000 IU of vitamin D per day without any problem. Someone else found that they were able to tolerate 2,000 IU per day while hosting helminths, after previously experiencing an exacerbation of their auto-immune problems with a dose of only 400 IU.

Not only is vitamin D tolerated more readily by people using helminthic therapy, but these two agents appear to be complementary in addressing allergic and autoimmune diseases, with considerable evidence showing the importance of vitamin D for both allergies and autoimmunity.

The science on vitamin D is now unequivocal, with literally hundreds of studies having shown the benefits of ensuring an optimal vitamin D intake, and researchers have uncovered up to 2,000 different genes - roughly one-sixth of the human genome - that are regulated by this nutrient.

Manufacturers are already starting to seek commercial advantage from this knowledge by introducing new vitamin D-enriched food products, but some of these, including the High Vitamin D loaf, use the less effective D2 form of the vitamin, and the amounts that are being added to foods are woefully inadequate and not to be relied upon to provide anything close to an optimum intake, as can be seen from the last post above.

As is almost always the case with new health research, governments and their medical advisers are dragging their feet over making this information available to the general public so, once again, it's up to individuals to look out for themselves. And, to help those who want more detail about all of this, here is an excellent video that explains the above issues in greater detail.

Fortunately, vitamin D is relatively cheap, so there is no reason why everyone should not be able to take the recommended amount, and gain the significant benefits to their health that will result.

Low levels of vitamin D are being linked to an increasing number of diseases
This particular study links low vitamin D in young girls with early menstruation, which is a risk factor for a host of health problems for teenage girls as well as women later in life.

The Role of Vitamin D in Human Health: A Paradigm Shift
This is a good review of the importance of vitamin D for a range of health issues.
(Click on the "Full Text (PDF)" link to download the full paper, and it's FREE!)

This is an eye-opener for everyone with kids. According to this study, children taking even low doses of Vitamin D3 are 42% less likely to get the flu!

http://gaia-health.com/gaia-blog/201...domized-trial/

Vitamin D deficiency common in elderly patients (5 Feb 2012)
The majority of geriatric patients in a German rehabilitation hospital had vitamin D deficiency: 89% had inadequate levels, and 67% had severe vitamin D deficiency.

Doctor wants to put vitamin D to work (1 Feb 2012)
A US doctor wants corporate America to recognise how a lack of vitamin D is costing billions in lost productivity and preventable health costs.

Memo to Paediatricians: Screen All Kids for Vitamin D Deficiency, Test Those at High Risk (22 Feb 2012)
Experts say paediatricians should screen all children for risk factors and order blood tests for those found to be at high risk.

How vitamin D inhibits inflammation
"This study goes beyond previous associations of vitamin D with various health outcomes. It outlines a clear chain of cellular events, from the binding of DNA, through a specific signalling pathway, to the reduction of proteins known to trigger inflammation..."
"... low levels of Vitamin D, comparable to levels found in millions of people, failed to inhibit the inflammatory cascade, while levels considered adequate did inhibit inflammatory signalling."

Scientists pinpoint how vitamin D may help clear amyloid plaques found in Alzheimer's (6 Mar 2012)
Researchers have identified the intracellular mechanisms regulated by vitamin D3 that may help the body clear the brain of amyloid beta, the main component of plaques associated with Alzheimer's disease.

Sunscreen use may lead to vitamin D deficiency (30 Apr 2012)
Researchers reported in the British Journal of Dermatology that when using sunscreen in accordance with what the World Health Organization (WHO) suggests, little to no vitamin D is produced.

Older adults may need more vitamin D to prevent mobility difficulties (29 May 2012)
Older adults who don't get enough vitamin D - either from diet, supplements or sun exposure - may be at increased risk of developing mobility limitations and disability, according to new research.

Treating vitamin D deficiency may improve depression (25 Jun 2012)
Women with moderate to severe depression had substantial improvement in their symptoms of depression after they received treatment for their vitamin D deficiency.

Two new vitamin D blood tests are often highly inaccurate, researchers say (25 Jun 2012)
Two new blood tests for vitamin D are inaccurate in at least 40 percent of laboratory specimens analysed.

Vitamin D revealed to be miracle anti-cancer 'drug' with astonishing chemical properties (26 Jul 2012)
Vitamin D3 (Calcitriol 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin) inhibits the growth of many kinds of cancerous cells, including breast cancer, indicating that vitamin D3 can be useful in treating and even preventing a variety of cancers.