Vitamin D test results... huh? page

[RedRocks]

So, had a physical recently and just got the blood work back:

Component Your Value Standard Range Units
VIT D, 25-HYDROXY 97 32 - 100 NG/ML

Reference Ranges:
< 10 ng/mL Deficiency
10 - 31 ng/mL Insufficient level
32 - 100 ng/mL Optimal level
> 100 ng/mL Possible toxicity

Given that I live in the midwest, it's the middle of winter, and I only recently started supplementing my Vitamin D... I find it hard to believe I'm testing at the high-end of the range.

What am I missing?

[uberbulldog]

Be thankful and have it retested in awhile to be sure it's not an anomaly.

[MightyAl]

I read recently that Vitamin D tests can be wildly inaccurate. I would just get tested again and confirm the number.

[jendoe]

Do you know which lab ran the test (Quest versus Labcorp)? You want labcorp - Quest values are not accurate if I remember correctly.

And, how much are you supplementing? Maybe double check the dose to make sure you're taking what you think you are? (And, how long have you been supplementing?)

[O_O]

Check all sources you take. Calcium supplements and multi vitamins normally contain vitamin D. Food sources such as egg yolks and canned salmon with the bones also contain vitamin D.

Vitamin D food list:
http://www.ars.usda.gov/SP2UserFiles...t/sr23w324.pdf

[ericfoster3]

So, had a physical recently and just got the blood work back:

Component Your Value Standard Range Units
VIT D, 25-HYDROXY 97 32 - 100 NG/ML

Reference Ranges:
< 10 ng/mL Deficiency
10 - 31 ng/mL Insufficient level
32 - 100 ng/mL Optimal level
> 100 ng/mL Possible toxicity

Here are more legitimate values:

❍ 32 ng/mL (80 nmol/L) is the bottom of the current reference range in the US.
This level leaves us in a state of substrate starvation which isn't good. And if
Quest** did your test - see note above - you need to divide by 1.3.

❍ 40 ng/mL (100 nmol/L) the minimum recommended by currently by
any major D researcher (see grassrootshealth.net).

❍ 50 ng/mL (125 nmol/L) is the point at which we have sufficient substrate
for managing calcium levels and have additional to use for other necessary
physiological functions - including gene expression (300+ other functions in our bodies)

❍ 60-70 ng/mL (150-175 nmol/L) is the 'middle of the current reference range
for the major US labs. European and canadian labs are behind the times on this
one and are still generally using a much lower range that accepts truly
deficient levels as normal.

❍ 80 ng/mL (200 nmol/L) is the higher end of normal but still within the physiological
range of what we could achieve from significant midday sun exposure.

❍ 100 ng/mL (250 nmol/L) a level still obtainable by extensive sun exposure -
think lifeguards in South Florida. That this levels can be achieved only through
sun exposure implies that this is still a physiologically appropriate level.

❍ 200 ng/mL (500 nmol/L) is the lowest blood level of 25(OH)D at which there
has been documented D toxicity. There has never been a case reported at levels
lower than 200.

[runnergal]

Count your blessings. I've been supplementing for two years and I run outdoors all the time (although I am too far north to get much D most of the year) and I have barely eeked mine to 37.

[Grizz]

RedRocks,

You didn't tell us how many IU's of Vitamin D3 you are taking daily. If you are taking multi-vitamins, include that number, too.
How long were you taking your dosage?

Grizz