General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

Re: LDL Levels ?

Started by John Sankey · · Last activity · 10 posts · 308 views

← Back to General fitness, health and nutrition

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

01 / Original postRe: LDL Levels ?John Sankey · 2 Oct 2005 02 / This pagePosts 1–10Page 1 of 1 · chronological order 03 / Latest replyPost #10Juhana Harju · 3 Oct 2005

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
2 October 2005
Last activity
3 October 2005
Original author
John Sankey
Posts
10
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
308
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–10 of 10
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Original post
    John Sankey
    Archived post
    #1

    "The absorption of B12 deteriorates after 50 years and many older
    people are deficient because they do not absorb enough B12 from
    the diet. There is clearly a need for B12 supplementation in
    older people."

    That reduction of absorption is well documented, but I have only
    seen reductions by a factor of 2 or 3, not stopped. Just one 200g
    can of clams a month gives you 3x the RDA of B12!

    "The RDAs for vitamin D are far from being optimal."

    I submit that there is a great deal of disagreement, and very
    little hard data, on 'optimal' as opposed to 'sufficient' levels
    here. 5 ug/day is considered sufficient by virtually all
    authorities (and that includes a factor of two to cover 98% of
    the populace). The increase to 10 at age 50 and 15 at 70+ is very
    recent, based I believe solely upon bone breakage by nursing home
    residents, and is clearly intended to be a first attempt at
    optimal rather than merely sufficient. I read a lot of
    concerns that the fracture levels recorded depend as much upon
    calcium/phosphorus levels as upon Vitamin D.

    Report
  2. Email address hidden
    Archived post
    #2
    (John Sankey) said:
    Quoted message said:


    That reduction of absorption is well documented, but I have only
    seen reductions by a factor of 2 or 3, not stopped. Just one 200g
    can of clams a month gives you 3x the RDA of B12!

    Do you imply that using B12 once a month is sufficient?

    Ora

    Report
  3. Matti Narkia
    Archived post
    #3

    2 Oct 2005 21:51:18 GMT in article <[email hidden]>

    (John Sankey) said:


    "The absorption of B12 deteriorates after 50 years and many older
    people are deficient because they do not absorb enough B12 from
    the diet. There is clearly a need for B12 supplementation in
    older people."

    That reduction of absorption is well documented, but I have only
    seen reductions by a factor of 2 or 3, not stopped. Just one 200g
    can of clams a month gives you 3x the RDA of B12!

    "The RDAs for vitamin D are far from being optimal."

    I submit that there is a great deal of disagreement, and very
    little hard data, on 'optimal' as opposed to 'sufficient' levels
    here. 5 ug/day is considered sufficient by virtually all
    authorities

    But not by leading scientists. Leading D-vitamin researcher Vieth, Heaney
    and Holick agree that minimum of 20-25 µg/d is required for bone health
    alone and that all things considered the optimal dose may be about 100 µg/d.

    Outside 40th latitudes the sun's UVB radiation, which stimulates vitamin D
    production in the skin, must during the dark season travel so long distance
    through the atmosphere, that practically all of it is filtered out.
    Therefore humans are unable to synthetize any vitamin D during the dark
    season at those latitudes. Apart from fish and some vitamin D fortified food
    items, the intake of vitamin D from the diet is negligible. On the other
    hand 20 minutes full body exposure to the sunlight on a clear summer day
    causes 250 - 625 µg vitamin D to be synthetized in light skinned people.
    Therefore at least up to 250 µg/d must be considered a physiological dose
    and thus safe.

    Insufficient or suboptimal vitamin D intake or synthesis may be a risk
    factor for many chronical diseases such as osteoporosis, type 1 and 2
    diabetes, multiple sclerosis, cancer, arthritis and even congestive heart
    failure.

    --
    Matti Narkia

    Report
  4. Kamalakar Pasupuleti
    Archived post
    #4

    "Matti Narkia" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]

    Quoted message said:

    Insufficient or suboptimal vitamin D intake or synthesis may be a risk
    factor for many chronical diseases such as osteoporosis, type 1 and 2
    diabetes, multiple sclerosis, cancer, arthritis and even congestive heart
    failure.

    Does 400 mg of Vit D intake has any effect on diabetes - 2 .

    Kam

    --
    Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

    Report
  5. Juhana Harju
    Archived post
    #5

    Kamalakar Pasupuleti wrote:
    : "Matti Narkia" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    : news:[email hidden]
    :
    :
    :: Insufficient or suboptimal vitamin D intake or synthesis may be a
    :: risk factor for many chronical diseases such as osteoporosis, type 1
    :: and 2 diabetes, multiple sclerosis, cancer, arthritis and even
    :: congestive heart failure.
    :
    : Does 400 mg of Vit D intake has any effect on diabetes - 2 .

    Vitamin D enhances insulin sensitivity but you must have a confusion with
    the dose.

    --
    Juhana

    Report
  6. Matti Narkia
    Archived post
    #6

    Mon, 3 Oct 2005 01:02:36 +0000 (UTC) in article
    <[email hidden]> "Kamalakar

    Pasupuleti said:

    "Matti Narkia" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]

    Quoted message said:

    Insufficient or suboptimal vitamin D intake or synthesis may be a risk
    factor for many chronical diseases such as osteoporosis, type 1 and 2
    diabetes, multiple sclerosis, cancer, arthritis and even congestive heart
    failure.

    Does 400 mg of Vit D intake has any effect on diabetes - 2 .


    Vitamin D doses are given in micrograms (µg) or International Units (IU).
    The current official Upper Limit (UL) in most countries is 50 µg or 2000
    IU/d, but Vieth and Heaney have suggested it to be raised to about 250 µg or
    10000 IU/d. 400 mg (milligrams)/d is clearly a toxic dose. According to
    Vieth the smallest supplemental dose which can be expected to have a
    noticable effect is about 20 µg or 800 IU/d.

    --
    Matti Narkia

    Report
  7. Kamalakar Pasupuleti
    Archived post
    #7

    "Matti Narkia" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]

    Quoted message said:

    Vitamin D doses are given in micrograms (µg) or International Units (IU).
    The current official Upper Limit (UL) in most countries is 50 µg or 2000
    IU/d, but Vieth and Heaney have suggested it to be raised to about 250 µg or
    10000 IU/d. 400 mg (milligrams)/d is clearly a toxic dose. According to
    Vieth the smallest supplemental dose which can be expected to have a
    noticable effect is about 20 µg or 800 IU/d.

    Sorry for the error , I meant 400 iu . The effect on diabetes
    is what I am looking for .

    Kam

    --
    Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

    Report
  8. Matti Narkia
    Archived post
    #8

    Mon, 3 Oct 2005 11:03:59 +0000 (UTC) in article
    <[email hidden]> "Kamalakar

    Pasupuleti said:

    "Matti Narkia" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]

    Quoted message said:

    Vitamin D doses are given in micrograms (µg) or International Units (IU).
    The current official Upper Limit (UL) in most countries is 50 µg or 2000
    IU/d, but Vieth and Heaney have suggested it to be raised to about 250 µg or
    10000 IU/d. 400 mg (milligrams)/d is clearly a toxic dose. According to
    Vieth the smallest supplemental dose which can be expected to have a
    noticable effect is about 20 µg or 800 IU/d.

    Sorry for the error , I meant 400 iu . The effect on diabetes
    is what I am looking for .


    IMHO you cannot be sure the get any effect with 400 IU/d. I think that it is
    advisable to take at least 800-1000 IU/d in winter time. I've been taking
    2000-4000 IU/d for many years without any harmful effects, but my blood
    pressure, which previously was sometimes slightly elevated has stayed normal
    (insufficient vitamin D intake and synthesis may cause blood pressure to
    raise in some people).

    --
    Matti Narkia

    Report
  9. Matti Narkia
    Archived post
    #9

    Mon, 3 Oct 2005 11:03:59 +0000 (UTC) in article
    <[email hidden]> "Kamalakar

    Pasupuleti said:

    "Matti Narkia" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]

    Quoted message said:

    Vitamin D doses are given in micrograms (µg) or International Units (IU).
    The current official Upper Limit (UL) in most countries is 50 µg or 2000
    IU/d, but Vieth and Heaney have suggested it to be raised to about 250 µg or
    10000 IU/d. 400 mg (milligrams)/d is clearly a toxic dose. According to
    Vieth the smallest supplemental dose which can be expected to have a
    noticable effect is about 20 µg or 800 IU/d.

    Sorry for the error , I meant 400 iu . The effect on diabetes
    is what I am looking for .


    IMHO you cannot be sure the get any effect with 400 IU/d. I think that it is
    advisable to take at least 800-1000 IU/d in winter time. I've been taking
    2000-4000 IU/d for many years without any harmful effects, but my blood
    pressure, which previously was sometimes slightly elevated has stayed normal
    (insufficient vitamin D intake and synthesis may cause blood pressure to
    rise in some people).

    --
    Matti Narkia

    Report
  10. Juhana Harju
    Archived post
    #10

    Kamalakar Pasupuleti wrote:
    : "Matti Narkia" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    : news:[email hidden]
    :
    :: Vitamin D doses are given in micrograms (µg) or International Units
    :: (IU). The current official Upper Limit (UL) in most countries is 50
    :: µg or 2000 IU/d, but Vieth and Heaney have suggested it to be raised
    :: to about 250 µg or 10000 IU/d. 400 mg (milligrams)/d is clearly a
    :: toxic dose. According to Vieth the smallest supplemental dose which
    :: can be expected to have a noticable effect is about 20 µg or 800
    :: IU/d.
    :
    : Sorry for the error , I meant 400 iu . The effect on diabetes
    : is what I am looking for .

    It depends where you are living in. If you live south from latitude 40
    (Northern hemisphere) and you expose your skin regularly to sunshine, there
    is no need for supplements. However, if you live north from that latitude,
    supplementing with vitamin D in winter time is a good idea.

    Sunshine and vitamin D improve insulin sensitivity in people with low
    25(OH)D levels (form of vitamin D circulating in the body).

    --
    Juhana

    Report

Keep exploring

Browse the sectionGeneral fitness, health and nutrition Return to CyclingForumsStart at the home page Search discussionsFind another thread

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.