Seen Indigo�s thread but didn�t want to hijack it so��

I started taking Vitamin D3+K2 � 2,000iu/45mcg (daily) I�m also using a Magnesium Oil spray � about eight weeks later I had a blood test and the results came back 22 ng/ml. Hate to think what my levels were before starting! I live in Dorset, we do have quite a bit of sun but must admit I�m not one to sunbathe.

I�ve now increased the dosage to 5,000iu daily is this enough to get my levels up to where they should be? When should I be thinking about having another test?

I�m amazed at the difference it has made so far!! I�ve been able to come off what I call my �killer drugs�, Diclofenac, something I had tried prior to taking D3 and had to go back on them after a few days because I could hardly move!! I�ve now been off all medication for ten weeks, maybe more as I didn�t take note - and I have so much more energy, I couldn�t be more delighted!

Thanks

If you were just 22ng after taking 2000iu during the summer taking 5000iu during the winter is NOT going to be sufficient to RAISE your status during the winter.
If you want to get to between 55ng~65ng/ml you are going to need more.
I would suggest 10,000iu/daily for one month DECEMBER and then alternate 1 x 5000iu/ 2 x 5000iu so every 2 days to take 3 x 5000iu =15000 every 2 days =7500iu daily average.
I would stay on 7500iu through January and Febuary and only after you start getting some out into the sun in March reduce to 5000iu/daily through the summer, but if in the summer you get a run of cloudy days when you can't get out around midday you may have to go back to the 3 X 5000iu every 2 days.
Do remember if your shadow is longer than you are tall you won't be making vitamin D3.
UVA degrades vitamin D so it's best to expose skin that is normally covered to create vitamin D then COVER that skin to protect the newly made D3. If you only expose face and hands then the vitamin D made near the surface of the skin will be subject to degradation if you stay in sunlight or allow sunlight through car windows/ house windows to convert that newly made D3 into supra sterols the body doesn't use.

Increased UVA exposures and decreased cutaneous Vitamin D(3) levels may be responsible for the increasing incidence of melanoma.

You need NONBURNING, short, regular, full body, prone, midday sun exposure then cover up that skin/vitamin D to protect it from further UVA exposure but keeping 25(OH)D high with an effective strength daily supplement helps natural photoprotection. (as does omega 3 and lycopene)

Forgot about the retest date. Perhaps March/June to check you have attained and maintained around 60ng/ml on the 7500iu/daily average. If you are above 80ng/ml DON'T PANIC it's ONLY above 200ng/ml you should stop taking D3 but above 80ng/ml you could consider reducing daily average intake by 1000iu/d for each 10ng/ml above 60ng/ml.
If still below 60ng/ml then increase by the same amount.

I have found that mega doseing on vitamin D3 will cure some "immune issues" like psoriasis for some people.

50,000 IU up to 3 x day is sometimes indicated and to pull your levels up quickly you could do at least 50,000 IU once a day for a few days then level off at 5,000 or 10,000 IU.

You also have to make sure that the product you use is effective... How can you be sure that your level was not 20 when you started? Biotech D3 is a great brand and I have proven its effectiveness on a number of people though blood work.
You can get it here www.vitalady.com

__________________
"The nurse should be cheerful, orderly, punctual, patient, full of faith, - receptive to Truth and Love" Mary Baker Eddy
Visit www.HealthSalon.org

Although Vitalady are cheap for the USA their shipping to the UK is a bit pricey.
I usually phone my order to Biotech direct and explain the problem with duty on orders worth more than �18 and they declare the wholesale value to avoid the �8 post office handling fee for collecting the tax.
(there are cheap sources of phone calls to USA. Search for 1899 or 18185 or read MONEYSAVING EXPERT but remember the difference in time zone and bank holidays.


Indeed I've also heard of people taking huge doses for a short spell to see benefits in conditions like psoriasis.

Dr Cannell discusses the use of Stoss Therapy here Although the only time I tried it the symptoms of the cold I thought I may be developing cleared up so quickly I thought I must have imagined I was actually getting a cold.

Yep. Thats me.

I didn't think you were Vlad416 Posting at the active low carber forum. I always post in my own name wherever I post so no one gets confused.

No, that is not enough. I would double that for 3 months then get another blood test. I would also take some additional "good fat", such as olive oil or evening primrose oil, so you can absorb more of the D3, since D is fat soluable.

The Atkins diet does more harm than good, especially for people who stick with it for a long time. The biggest problem is that the body can't store large amounts of protein, thus, the liver is overworked, and eventually becomes very toxic. There are also serious issues with heart and blood vessels..

Atkins diet killed Bob Atkins, of that I have no doubt. They said he slipped on some ice and banged his head on the sidewalk but thats not true. He had a heart attack, which was actually his second one.

On a final note, I don't hate the man. He was one of the few doctors who believed in using ozone treatments, and for that I respect him..

__________________
Let Food Be Your Medicine And Medicine Be Your Food.(Hippocrates)

Have you read the New Atkins for a New You:
or considered how people who "Believe" they are following Atkins actually apply it?
The Battle of the Diets: Is Anyone Winning (At Losing?)

I think it is wrong to describe Atkins as a high protein diet. High fat is more accurate but those fats should be traditionally sourced so higher in anti inflammatory omega 3's.
I don't think your sources are reliable.

I don't think you have yet grasped that in modern USA/UK supermarkets the nutritional quality of available foods has declined.
See
Evidence of decreasing mineral density in wheat grain over the last 160 years.
Eating Your Veggies: Not As Good For You?

It is important therefore to cut out the crap, the pro inflammatory nutritionally poor junk that constitute most commercially prepared foods. Once have achieved a balanced omega 6<>omega 3 ratio, corrected vitamin D/magnesium deficiency and get back to eating real foods, made at home from locally sourced or fresh from the garden ingredients then the type of low refined carbohydrate diet I follow is sustainable and healthy over the long term.

Thank you everybody, there is a great deal here to assimilate! I think I shall stick to the average daily intake of 7,500iu and then get tested again next summer to see how things are panning out.

I just saw this report that came out today about taking too much vitamin D, so thought I would post it.

https://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101130/...beat_vitamin_d

I am personally only taking 1,000 and have no plans of increasing the dosage.

Funny how when people die, they tweak the circumstances to fit a theory.

But rather than placing the onus on proof on those who suggest natural 25(OH)D levels it should be those recommending low intakes to show those do not shorten life expectancy.
We know from
Demographic differences and trends of vitamin D insufficiency in the US population, 1988-2004. that year on year 25(OH)D levels are dropping.

Restoring 25(OH)D levels to those that were more common 50~100yrs ago should be no big deal. We know that ground level ozone in urban environments is blocking UVB penetration to ground level and reducing the potential for creating vitamin D from sunshine, we know also that modern intensive industrialized agriculture has the same effect creating low level ozone in summer when rural folk should be increasing vitamin D status naturally.

We know that human breast milk is only vitamin D replete if the mother has a 25(OH)D around 60ng/ml and living mainly outdoors easily achieves that natural level which provides adequate vitamin D storage for winter use.

The onus is on those proposing lower levels to show those historically unnaturally low levels are actually safe.

Until I see evidence that people with lower vitamin D levels have higher immune function than those with levels 50~60ng/ml I'll keep my levels around 60ng/ml with 5000+iu/daily D3 and get regular short non burning UVB exposure as available.

Snopes Atkins Death Myth there is other witness evidence supporting the claim that before his slip he was not obese or unhealthy.

I guess my question would be that if I'm a company sellings Vitamin D, wouldn't I want to get my customers to take as much as possible to make the most amount of money, if I felt it was healthy? Why would a bottle have a recommendation of 1,000 daily or 2,000 recommended daily on the bottle? Maybe other vitamin stores have higher dosage bottles, but swanson vitamins only has 1,000 and 2,000.

I've seen recommendation of up to 10,000 which is 10 times higher than what the bottle is recommending. Of course I'm no doctor, but it sounds dangerous when a company can make more money by recommending a higher dosage does not. It would be in the intrest of the vitamin company to recommend higher dosages as it would require you to spend more money. Unless this is a government regulation? I'm just asking as I really don't know

I can tell you that I've noticed a mood difference in just taking 1,000, but haven't had blood test done.

To be honest I don't take that much notice of what is written on the bottle. I go mainly on what actually works for me. I get 25(OH)D tested twice yearly and so can adjust my daily intake/uvb exposure to keep my levels at what I consider both natural and safe.

because they prefer to stay within the current medical consensus. The fact the current medical consensus has little basis in recent science or common sense doesn't matter to them. If people take ineffective amounts of vitamin D they will still get ill and feel poorly and will buy more different supplements thinking they have vitamin D covered. These people also sell ineffective forms of many supplements with no shame.

It's difficult to find effective strength D3 in the UK as well that's why I tell people to go to IHERB.

But 10,000iu/daily is an effective amount to raise status from being deficient. It's not usually necessary for more than 3 months but certainly I've no problems with people taking 10,000iu/daily for a short while.

It only sounds dangerous if you haven't read the evidence concerning The Risk of Additional Vitamin D common sense should be enough to work out that if human skin makes 10,000~20,000iu given short nonburning sun exposure of a biologically identical form of vitamin D we'd never have survived the evolutionary process if 10,000IU/D was dangerous.

Until such time as health professionals put the best interests of patients first I don't think you can trust anyone apart from your own common sense.

Well it depends a lot on the individual response but if you look at this graph
you can see more folk taking just 1000iu ended up below 40ng/ml than when taking 5000iu.
Being above 40ng/ml is associated with less illness than below 40ng/ml so I know where I'd rather be.

Swanson's do sell 5000iu vitamin D3. but are more expensive than IHERB.

@ Ted_Hutchinson
Thanks for all the helpful information