Vitamin D: Deficiency vs optimum level Saturday, December 18, 2010
Dr. James Dowd of the Vitamin D Cure posted his insightful comments regarding the Institute of Medicine's inane evaluation of vitamin D.
Dr. Dowd hits a bullseye with this remark:
The IOM is focusing on deficiency when it should be focusing on optimal health values for vitamin D. The scientific community continues to argue about the lower limit of normal when we now have definitive pathologic data showing that an optimal vitamin D level is at or above 30 ng/mL. Moreover, if no credible toxicity has been reported for vitamin D levels below 200 ng/mL, why are we obsessing over whether our vitamin D level should be 20 ng/mL or 30 ng/mL?
Yes, indeed. Have no doubts: Vitamin D deficiency is among the greatest public health problems of our age; correction of vitamin D (using the human form of vitamin D, i.e., D3 or cholecalciferol, not the invertebrate or plant form, D2 or ergocalciferol) is among the most powerful health solutions.
I have seen everything from relief from winter "blues," to reversal of arthritis, to stopping the progression of aortic valve disease, to partial reversal of dementia by achieving 25-hydroxy vitamin D levels of 50 ng/ml or greater. (I aim for 60-70 ng/ml.)
The IOM's definition of vitamin D adequacy rests on what level of 25-hydroxy vitamin D reverses hyperparathyroidism (high PTH levels) and rickets. Surely there is more to health than that.
Dr. Dowd and vocal vitamin D advocate, Dr. John Cannell, continue to champion the vitamin D cause that, like many health issues, conradicts the "wisdom" of official organizations like the IOM.
Showing posts with label National Academy of Sciences’ Institute of Medicine. Show all posts
Showing posts with label National Academy of Sciences’ Institute of Medicine. Show all posts
Saturday, December 18, 2010
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
Sunlight & Cancer
The Overwhelming Evidence That Sunlight Fights Cancer
A new paper analyses the case for vitamin D’s cancer-fighting power by looking at the well-known Hill criteria for examining causality in a biological system. The Hill criteria look at:
Strength of association
Consistency (repeated observation)
Specificity (one agent, one result)
Temporality (exposure precedes effect)
Biological gradient (dose-response relation)
Plausibility (e.g., mechanisms)
Coherency (no serious conflict with the generally known facts of the natural history and biology of the disease)
The theory that solar ultraviolet radiation -- and by extension, vitamin D, which is produced when such radiation strikes your skin -- is a potent cancer fighter satisfies most, if not all, of the criteria. From a scientific point of view, therefore, vitamin D reduces the risk of many forms of cancer and increases survival rates once cancer reaches a detectable stage.
However, public policy often lags behind scientific research. It is to be hoped that the acceptance of the beneficial nature of vitamin D will not have too much longer to wait. It is encouraging that the National Academy of Sciences’ Institute of Medicine is currently embarking on a two-year study of vitamin D, and is expected to issue a report in 2010.
from http://v.mercola.com/blogs/public_blog/The-Overwhelming-Evidence-That-Sunlight-Fights-Cancer-74475.aspx
A new paper analyses the case for vitamin D’s cancer-fighting power by looking at the well-known Hill criteria for examining causality in a biological system. The Hill criteria look at:
Strength of association
Consistency (repeated observation)
Specificity (one agent, one result)
Temporality (exposure precedes effect)
Biological gradient (dose-response relation)
Plausibility (e.g., mechanisms)
Coherency (no serious conflict with the generally known facts of the natural history and biology of the disease)
The theory that solar ultraviolet radiation -- and by extension, vitamin D, which is produced when such radiation strikes your skin -- is a potent cancer fighter satisfies most, if not all, of the criteria. From a scientific point of view, therefore, vitamin D reduces the risk of many forms of cancer and increases survival rates once cancer reaches a detectable stage.
However, public policy often lags behind scientific research. It is to be hoped that the acceptance of the beneficial nature of vitamin D will not have too much longer to wait. It is encouraging that the National Academy of Sciences’ Institute of Medicine is currently embarking on a two-year study of vitamin D, and is expected to issue a report in 2010.
from http://v.mercola.com/blogs/public_blog/The-Overwhelming-Evidence-That-Sunlight-Fights-Cancer-74475.aspx
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)