Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Prevent 75% of breast and colon cancers with good Vitamin D blood levels page

  1. #1
    cillakat's Avatar
    cillakat is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    4,473

    Prevent 75% of breast and colon cancers with good Vitamin D blood levels

    Primal Fuel
    video link below....

    More specifically than D3 levels, would be the term"25(OH)D" (twentyfive hydroxy vitamin D) blood levels. Per the study and mathematical modeling from Dr. Garland, to see colon and breast cancer rates drop 75%, we need circulating 25(OH)D levels of 40-60 ng/mL using the US scales and 100-150 nmol/L using the 'rest of the worlds' scale.

    Also note that
    1)this doesn't match up to lab norms (lab norms still accept known deficient levels as normal- 32ng/mL in the US....and often 10-80 nmol/L in the rest of the world...note that even the top level is deficient there)
    2)Quest's D test is not reliable: use labcorp or ZRT
    3)even 40 ng/mL (100 nmol/L) is likely too low.....as substrate deficiency isn't resolved until about 50 ng/mL (125nmol/L).
    http://www.uctv.tv/search-details.aspx?showID=16454

    So what's holding you back? Push through the barriers and work on optimizing your 25(OH)D right now. Start today.

    http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AV...A0d3BjMw&hl=en

    Vitamin D Dosing and Levels

    nmoL - units used to measure D most places in the world
    ng/mL - units used in the US
    ** Please be sure to pay attention to the units given on your lab report.
    ** Quest Labs -problems remain. See the end of the paper for citations.



    What should my vitamin D level be?
    see below for information on various vitamin D levels........

    ❍ 32 ng/mL (80 nmoL) is the bottom of the current reference range. Still
    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) the minimum recommended by currently by
    any major D researcher (see grassrootshealth.net).

    ❍ 50 ng/mL (125 nmoL) 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)

    ❍ 60-65 ng/mL (150-162.5 nmoL) is reasonable number for which to aim.
    It's 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.

    ❍ 80 ng/mL (200 nmoL) is a target number for some researchers and is still
    within the range of a physiological range of what we could achieve from sun -
    ie a physiologically appropriate level.

    ❍ 100 ng/mL (250 nmoL) is a typical serum level of 25(OH)D obtained by lifeguards,
    in South Florida, from sun only, implying that this is a very physiologically normal -
    possibly optimal? - number for which to aim.

    ❍ 200 ng/mL (500 nmoL) 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 that.

    continued in next post

  2. #2
    cillakat's Avatar
    cillakat is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    4,473
    here's the rest of my post....had to split it up


    ☑ 1000 IU (25 mcg) per 25 lbs body weight per day is a very reasonable dose of
    D3 for someone who
    → works indoors midday
    → wears clothes midday
    → avoids sun midday
    → wears any sunscreen midday

    ☑ 10,000 IU-50,000 IU vitamin D3 is produced in the skin upon full body exposure
    to sunlight......with the average of the studies being about 20,000 IU. However,
    do not take more than 1000 IU per 25 lbs body weight per day without periodic
    testing of 25(OH)D levels.

    ☑ Don't be afraid to take as much D3 as is required to raise your serum 25(OH)D to
    50-100 ng/mL (125 nmoL to 250 nmoL) There is a 25-50% variation in serum
    vitamin d levels at 'x' amount of supplementation rate due to genetic variations
    in vitamin d binding protein.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19302999
    Clin Biochem. 2009 Jul;42(10-11):1174-7. Epub 2009 Mar 18.Common genetic variants of the
    vitamin D binding protein (DBP) predict differences in response of serum 25-hydroxyvitamin
    D [25(OH)D] to vitamin D supplementation.Fu L, Yun F, Oczak M, Wong BY, Vieth R, Cole DE.
    Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada M5G 1L5.

    ☑Testing: use LabCorp or ZRT
    →consider joining the D Action study, they use ZRT's home test
    details at grassrootshealth.org
    →or order ZRT's test from vitamindcouncil.org
    ZRT donates $10 to that worthy organzation when you order it through them
    →you can also order it directly through ZRT
    →Quest/LabCorp testing project. Test on the same day using Quest and LabCorp -
    get reimursed for up to $100 of your cost:
    http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/proje...-project.shtml

    ☑ Early AM and later afternoon sun exposure on face, hands and arms is not sufficient
    to raise vitamin D levels or maintain optimal vitamin D levels.

    ☑ Fall, Winter and Spring sun exposure is not generally sufficient to raise viamin D levels
    or to maintain optimal D levels.

    ☑ A tan does not necessarily indicate sufficient vitamin D levels. It's easy to tan from UVA
    without getting sufficient UVB to raise D levels.

    ☑ A person (tan or not) who's been getting
    →midday
    →unprotected
    →summer exposure
    →on most body skin to the point just before a burn occurs, may have optimal D levels during the summer.

    ☑ The Vitamin D Council (vitamindcouncil.org) has all of the D research, reference cites and links to peer reviewed journal articles that you'd ever want to read, plus several thousand extra

    ☑ Grassrootshealth.org has a tremendous amount of good information as well.

    ☑ Stanford and other major D research centers have podcasts in iTunes that are excellent resources.

    ☑Quest's test: What's the problem?
    http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/newsl...008-july.shtml
    excerpted from The Vitamin D Council's July '08 newsletter. Written by John Cannell, MD
    "The two most common are mass spectrometry and a chemiluminescence method, Liaison. The first, mass spectrometry, is highly accurate in the hands of experienced technicians given enough time to do the test properly. However, in the hands of a normally trained technician at a commercial reference lab overwhelmed with 25(OH)D tests, it may give falsely elevated readings, that is, it tells you are ok when in fact you are vitamin D deficient. The second method, Liaison, was recently developed and is the most accurate of the screening, high throughput, methods; LabCorp uses it. Quest Diagnostics reference lab uses mass spec. Again, both Quest and LabCorp are overwhelmed by 25(OH)D requests. The problem is that the faster the technicians do the mass spec test, the more inaccurate it is likely to be. If your 25(OH)D blood test says "Quest Diagnostics" on the top, do not believe you have an adequate level (> 50 ng/ml). You may or may not; the test may be falsely elevated. Let me give you an example. A doctor at my hospital had Quest Diagnostics do a 25(OH)D. It came back as 99 ng/ml of ergocalciferol. He is not taking ergocalciferol (D2), he has never taken ergocalciferol, only cholecalciferol (D3), and he is not taking enough to get a level of 99 ng/ml, 50 ng/ml at the most. His email to Dr. Brett Holmquist at Quest about why Quest Diagnostics identified a substance he was not taking went unanswered other than to say "any friend of Dr. Cannell's is a friend of ours."


    Long story short: if your lab report says "LabCorp" on the top, it is probably accurate; if it says Quest Diagnostics, it may be falsely elevated. While LabCorp has also been overwhelmed with 25(OH)D requests, the Liaison method they use is relatively easy to do and does not rely on technician skill as much as the mass spec methods do. I'm not saying this because I'm a consultant for DiaSorin, who makes Liaison, I'm saying it because it is true. If you don't believe me, get Quest to make me an offer to be their consultant at 10 times what DiaSorin is supposed to be paying me and see how fast I turn Quest down. If Quest fixes their test, I'd love to consult. The ironic thing: I've made both Quest and LabCorp lots of money via this newsletter, the website, and by repeatedly telling the press that people need to know their 25(OH)D level, which has contributed to the skyrocketing sales of 25(OH)D blood tests.


    note that the end, Cannell did not exercise his contract with LabCorp:
    http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/newsl...-disease.shtml
    "In the spirit of full disclosure, I used to be a paid consultant for DiaSorin but have decided not to exercise my contract."


    http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/newsletter/more-vitamin-d-questions-and-answers.shtml

    excerpted from The Vitamin D Council's July '08 newsletter. Answer written by John Cannell, MD
    Q: "I thought you got Quest to fix their Vitamin D test. On 3/12/09 my vitamin D,25 hydroxy test at Quest Labs came out as 62 ng/mL Whereas on 3/29 at Lab Corps the same test showed 44.2 ng/mL. What's up? Nancy, Rhode Island"
    Cannell answers "Remember, to compare the technique Quest uses to the technique Lab Corp uses you must divide Quest's result by 1.3. So your Quest result was really 48 ng/mL, which is close to Lab Corp's results."


    http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/newsl...-disease.shtml
    "One only has to look at the Wake Forest group's methods section. Unlike the Washington study, which used the gold standard to measure vitamin D (DiaSorin RIA), Wake Forest decided to send their samples out to, you guessed it, Quest Diagnostics. [Katherine's note: literally every research group studying vitamin D uses LabCorp's DiaSorin to test D - Wake Forest seriously missed the boat on this one. Huge misstep. ] For new readers, this newsletter was the first to report Quest's 25(OH)D results were suspicious, in a July 2008 newsletter. [see link and cite above] The New York Times picked up on the story six months later."

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/08/bu...08labtest.html
    "Dr. Binkley said that a few years ago he sent a sample of his blood to six laboratories and got results that ranged from 14 nanograms a milliliter, which would be a deficient level, to 41 nanograms — a level three times as high and considered adequate. While the tests’ consistency has improved since then, there can still be substantial variability, he said."

    "Quest’s problems with the vitamin D analysis arose after it shifted in 2006 and 2007 to a new test of its own design, replacing an older F.D.A.-approved test. The new test promised to be more accurate and offer more detailed information, Quest executives said. But the test relied on a sophisticated instrument called a mass spectrometer, which can be tricky to use, especially for high-volume testing."

  3. #3
    thebkon's Avatar
    thebkon Guest
    Now, when you say 1000IU/25lb body weight, do you mean total body weight or lean body weight? Just curious because that would mean that someone like myself who is 6'2" 275 (~220 lean) I would be taking 11 Vit D pills/day as opposed to 8-9.

  4. #4
    cillakat's Avatar
    cillakat is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    4,473
    It's very likely that you truly need 1000 IU per 25 lbs body total body weight though no one can say certainly. Fwiw, you can find pills that are 5,000 IU, 10,000IU and higher. You can also find drops that are 2,000 IU per drop.

    If testings not an option, personally, I would take the 11,000 IU per day (at your weight), every single day. Actually, based on your 53 latitude, I'd take 4x that daily for a month, then drop back down to 11,000 IU per day.

    Keep in mind that there have been studies giving 500,000 IU single doses via injection and other extreme doses.....with your size at 11,000 IU I'd bet the farm that you'll be be able to successfully achieve optimal levels and not more.

    Best,
    Katherine

  5. #5
    BugMan's Avatar
    BugMan is offline Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Lilburn
    Posts
    67
    Cliff Notes version?

  6. #6
    cillakat's Avatar
    cillakat is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    4,473
    Quote Originally Posted by BugMan View Post
    Cliff Notes version?
    Take 1000 IU vitamin D3 per 25 lbs body weight (ie 400 IU per 10 lbs body weigh) on days that you can't get all of the following
    1)midday
    2)summer
    3)full body
    4)unprotected sun exposure
    5)to the point just before a burn would occur

    Summer at 33 lat is 16 weeks: mid may-mid sept.
    Summer at 45 lat is 12 weeks: may, june, july
    Summer at 55 or above is irrelevant for most....take the D no matter what

    Remember that it's midday AND fullbody AND summer sun. If you're getting a lot of incidental summer exposure (ie am/pm exercise, midday sun but in clothes) then take 1/2 doses during the summer.

    Ideally, test vitamin D levels ever 3-4 months for a couple of years to get a feel for the amount of supplementation you need. ZRT is a reliable, accurate, precise home test for assessing D levels

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •