Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Experts say "Add vitamin D to Scotland's food"

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Experts say "Add vitamin D to Scotland's food"

    Thought this might be of interest to some...

    Add vitamin D to Scotland's food

    excerpt:

    International experts are calling for food in Scotland to be fortified with vitamin D, in an attempt to cut the large numbers of people who develop multiple sclerosis at sunshine-deprived northern latitudes.

    MS levels in Scotland are some of the highest in the world, and many believe vitamin D deficiency, caused by lack of sunlight and poor weather which keeps people indoors, is partly to blame. For half the year, nobody living in Scotland gets enough UVB rays from the sun on their skin to make adequate amounts of vitamin D and many do not eat enough of the foods, such as oily fish, that contain it.

    Professor George Ebers of the Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences at Oxford University believes the evidence is now good enough to justify dosing the entire population with vitamin D. This month his team published evidence of a genetic link between a rare inability of the body to make vitamin D and MS.

    It is a piece of strong scientific evidence to back up theories based on the high numbers of people with MS in sun-deprived locations there are 10,000 with the disease in Scotland and very low numbers in countries with year-round sunshine.

    "Now the question is, can we finally persuade the public health authorities that they should supplement the population?" said Ebers.

  • #2
    You were right!
    Thanks.
    J.

    Comment


    • #3
      That is interesting. I should probably start taking it again!

      Comment


      • #4
        Interesting idea, but I don't think that the intake of the vitamin should be up to anyone but the individual. If people were made more aware about how Vitamin D can help prevent MS and improve mood throughout the darkest parts of the years etc, and supplements were available in a wide variety of locations (couldn't tell you if they are now), then people could take their health into their own hands, as they should be doing. I don't like the idea of some organization adding even more crap to food to try and control the populous.
        Depression Lies

        Comment


        • #5
          Stupid.

          It's like flouride in the water. Flouride does nada for your teeth, and may harm your thyroid function.

          While vitamin D hysteria is interesting and probably valid, the government needs to educate, not just blindly supplement the food source.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Trackhead View Post
            Stupid.

            It's like flouride in the water. Flouride does nada for your teeth, and may harm your thyroid function.

            While vitamin D hysteria is interesting and probably valid, the government needs to educate, not just blindly supplement the food source.
            There's no money for the government(and their constituents, I'll give you a guess, it's not us) to educate people or to nurture critical thinking. It's easier(and more profitable) to tell us what they think is best and then do.

            Comment


            • #7
              The big problems is that they will probably use the synthetic D2 to supplement, (which has to be converted to the active D3 in the body) like they do in the US because it is cheap. D2 is not converted well to D3 by everyone, plus it tends to cause spikes followed by significant drops in your circulating D3. Better to just let people test their D3 levels and supplement up to the healthy range.
              Using low lectin/nightshade free primal to control autoimmune arthritis. (And lost 50 lbs along the way )

              http://www.krispin.com/lectin.html

              Comment


              • #8
                (I lived in Scotland for 7 years.) Well, it actually does makes sense since the UK has socialized medicine and it could save the country millions of pounds in health care costs.
                Ancestral Nutrition Coaching
                Pregnancy Nutrition Coaching
                Primal Pregnancy Nutrition Article

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Dragonfly View Post
                  (I lived in Scotland for 7 years.) Well, it actually does makes sense since the UK has socialized medicine and it could save the country millions of pounds in health care costs.
                  This was gonna be my contribution.

                  For what it's worth, I tell literally anybody that will listen to supplement D, especially if they complain about being sick or even just "feeling down" about other things. Vit D is also the only supp I have been successful in getting my family to take, along with fish oil. Sickness in the house has gone down considerably.

                  I'd say, if you're not in a sunny location year-round (where presumably you soak up the rays as close to naked as you can for a decent amount of time) you're probably deficient in D.
                  I used to seriously post here, now I prefer to troll.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by namelesswonder View Post
                    Interesting idea, but I don't think that the intake of the vitamin should be up to anyone but the individual. If people were made more aware about how Vitamin D can help prevent MS and improve mood throughout the darkest parts of the years etc, and supplements were available in a wide variety of locations (couldn't tell you if they are now), then people could take their health into their own hands, as they should be doing. I don't like the idea of some organization adding even more crap to food to try and control the populous.
                    I completely agree with you. It's bad enough that the general Scottish diet is pretty bad, without medicating as well. Unfortunately too many people aren't interested in their own health and just follow government advice like sheep. It's no wonder there is so much depression and obesity here.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Dragonfly View Post
                      (I lived in Scotland for 7 years.) Well, it actually does makes sense since the UK has socialized medicine and it could save the country millions of pounds in health care costs.
                      The problem with this line of thinking is it paves the way for other things to be mass-medicated through food or water if it was deemed that it was for the greater good(who has the authority to decide that?). Things you don't necessarily want in your body. On the flip side of this you have taxes on saturated fat(Denmark) because everyone knows fat is bad for you.

                      The moral of the story... government needs to mind their own business, but that's unfortunately the main purpose of government, to poke their nose into everything and fuck up perfectly working shit.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Hardwarehank View Post
                        The moral of the story... government needs to mind their own business, but that's unfortunately the main purpose of government, to poke their nose into everything and fuck up perfectly working shit.
                        Why even have a gov if they should 'mind their own business' ?? I'm not a gov fanboy, by ANY means, but I don't really get when people say this. Why are we voting and bothering with all of it if we don't want them to make decisions for the masses? why appoint people then?

                        You probably mean they shouldn't meddle in things such as the topic at hand (personal nutrition) but if they're doing it with what they think is in the best interest of the people they govern then isn't that part of their job? I agree with you that I'd rather they didn't, and just took care of the political side of things and left what should be personal decisions up to the individuals but if we are trusting them to make other decisions that affect our lives, why should this one be different?

                        (I'm playing devil's advocate here, by the way)
                        I used to seriously post here, now I prefer to troll.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by iniQuity View Post
                          Why even have a gov if they should 'mind their own business' ?? I'm not a gov fanboy, by ANY means, but I don't really get when people say this. Why are we voting and bothering with all of it if we don't want them to make decisions for the masses? why appoint people then?

                          You probably mean they shouldn't meddle in things such as the topic at hand (personal nutrition) but if they're doing it with what they think is in the best interest of the people they govern then isn't that part of their job? I agree with you that I'd rather they didn't, and just took care of the political side of things and left what should be personal decisions up to the individuals but if we are trusting them to make other decisions that affect our lives, why should this one be different?

                          (I'm playing devil's advocate here, by the way)
                          I understand you're playing devil's advocate so anything I say after this try not to take offense as it's not directed at you.

                          I question why people bother with voting too. Democracy at the root of it is the greatest form of selfishness in my opinion. Just because the majority of people want something to be so, does not make it right. I prefer a live and let live approach to life and let the people govern themselves.

                          I'm of the opinion that our government has no business telling me what I can or can not put into my body. Most people would agree(I would hope). But that doesn't stop busybodies from petitioning government to get their way. Take alcohol prohibition in the past and the ongoing War on Drugs for example. These same people who support(ed) these policies would be crying from the mountaintops if the government decided to outlaw anything they cared about.

                          So let's say the issue of adding vitamin D to the US food supply is brought before Congress and they decide to pass legislation mandating that all processed food contain a certain percentage of vitamin D for the public good. Who decides how much should go in, what if they get it wrong, why can't I decide for myself how much vitamin D I should ingest or not? What's to stop Congress from doing similar things in the future? But wait they already do and have been for a long time. Things like fluoridation of our water supply, forced fortification of refined grains, banning of raw milk, allowing for life to be patented so Monsanto can control our food supply, allowing meat packers to place ammonia-bathed pink sludge into ground meat with no labeling, etc. All under the guise that it's for the public good. I spit on that.

                          For every ounce of good the government does us they crush us under a pound of bad.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            You brought up a good reason why government is important "allowing meat packers to place ammonia-bathed slude into ground meat". I think that is more what they should be focusing on instead of deciding what we can and cannot eat.

                            LAW that prevents corporation from taking advantage of the people by downright lying to them or providing unhealthy working condition or unfair laborer practices (and I'm so sick of the republicans saying...thats why we have a free market) Because work practices become a "standard" therefore not really allowing you to have a choice to get something better.

                            LAW that governs how people should live together when there are a lot of people living in a small area.. but this should be all local laws.. thats part of living in congested areas.. if you want more freedom then move to the country.

                            LAW that prevents chemicals from going into the air.. or cigarette smoke.

                            I dont think they should be controlling every aspect of our life though. That should be a personal decision (unless somehow those decisions can affect others..like texting and driving) but the seatbelt law is an example of one that doesnt effect others so it shouldnt be a law.
                            Primal since March 2011

                            Female/29 years old/5' 1"/130ish lbs

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by activia View Post
                              You brought up a good reason why government is important "allowing meat packers to place ammonia-bathed slude into ground meat". I think that is more what they should be focusing on instead of deciding what we can and cannot eat.
                              The government is fully aware of this going on. I certainly didn't find out about this from them.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X