Vitamin D in the milk

76 posts in this topic

 

Well, here's a timely article:

NY Times: supplements not needed!

 

And I can find 10 articles that dispute those findings.

 

I was recently told by a Professor of Neurology that there is certainly a direct correlation between the body's ability to metabolize Vit D through natural sunlight exposure and the high numbers of MS sufferers in the North of Europe and Canada. Of course natural sunlight is a better way to get your vit D but if all else fails one has to fall back on foods high in this vitamin and then supplements.it is not a one stop cure but if you are genetically susceptible to MS then you'd do everything in your power to avoid it. Feeling unwell recently, I had my blood tested at a visit to a specialist and it was found to be extremely low in vitamin D and my Doctor advised me to have an injection immediately and then on a regular basis until levels were normalized. When my daughter who has MS, was tested at her recent Neuro visit, she too had extremely low vitamin D. I spent her whole childhood rubbing factor 50 into her fair skin to avoid skin cancer and it's a possibility that had she taken a Vitamin D supplement from birth she may have never contracted MS in the first place. As her advocate I've read hundreds of articles and medical research papers and a fair percentage indicate vitamin D and sunlight exposure as a reoccurring factor.

5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The flour isn't fortified here and there are no plans to change this.

 

The flour I buy, Diamant Weizenmehl Extra Type 405, has added vitamin B1, B2 and B6. I don't know if that would be considered fortified, though, or if those vitamins are lost in the processing and just added in again later.

 

I just finished a 12 week course of prednisone and was advised to take large amounts of calcium and vitamin D supplements every day during the treatment to avoid getting osteoporosis.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Flour is fortified here for conservation reasons. It seems that certain vitamines, i thought it was vitamin c in flour,serve as anti-oxidants.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I came to the conclusion that it wasn't my hormones because I saw about 7 seven different doctors and even paid a fortune to see a private hormone specialist when I went home to Austalia.

 

I was originally convinced that it was my hormones because I had experienced problems in the past. However, despite numerous blood tests all my hormone levels were fine including my thyroid.

 

I'm also pretty sure it's not the climate because I lived in England for 6 years and never experienced any problems. I also lived here for 2 years before I had my son. All of my problems started with the pregnancy and the birth. First I told myself it was the extra weight from being pregnant because I'm normally very thin. When the problems only got worse all the doctors assured me things would get back to normal but 18 months later it hadn't happened. Not only that but from all the tests I had done, my results for everything were all great. The doctors kept saying my results were almost too good.

 

I came up with the idea of a Vitamin d defiency because a friend of mine in Australia had similiar problems and she was diagnosed with one. Her level was also 11 which her doctor in Australia said was severly deficient. Plus my sister in law who is currently pregnant is being tested because her doctor thinks her levels may be too low.

 

I'm not saying that everyone should run out and take a massive dose of Vitamin D. I would never have taken one without consulting my doctor and finding out my level first. I'm just pointing out that some peolpe (such as myself) who avoid the sun might be at risk of having a deficiency and it's something to consider.

 

I have been on the supplements for nearly a month now and the difference is amazing. I'm definitely going to keep on with them and have my level tested again when the prescription ends in 2 months. I will also be keeping a closer eye on my levels in the future.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A report from a few years back (pdf) says ...

 

The main sources of vitamin D are skin synthesis under the influence of ultraviolet light (290–

315 nm) and dietary intake (especially sea fish, to less extent butter). Therefore, vitamin D supply

will be better in populations with regular consumption of sea fish and dairy products, such as Scandinavia

or The Netherlands. Supplementation of food with vitamin D is not common in Europe with the exception of some Scandinavian countries. This is in contrast to the U.S.A., where milk is fortified with vitamin D.

Skin synthesis of vitamin D cannot compensate for low nutritional intake, because Europe is

located at high latitude reaching from 40° N (Madrid, Spain) to 60° N (Oslo, Norway). Webb and

coworkers demonstrated, that photosynthesis of previtamin D is nearly impossible during the winter

months at this latitude [9]. From this it is obvious, that vitamin D deficiency may occur even in Southern Europe, but can present a severe problem in Northern Europe. ... The European population is at high risk for vitamin D insufficiency, because the continent is located at high latitude leading to restricted ultraviolet light exposure.

In addition, nutritional supply of vitamin is low in most countries and fortification of food is done only in few countries, mostly in Northern Europe. The intake of vitamin D supplements (which is higher in Northern

Europe compared to Southern Europe) seems to have an important impact on vitamin D status. In contrast to prevalent

opinions, vitamin D insufficiency is more prevalent in Southern Europe as compared to the

North.

 

This is a problem in the north of England, among other places. I heard a podcast from the BBC and they recommended taking vitamin supplements in the winter. Here's the programme.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

And I can find 10 articles that dispute those findings.

 

You're right, there are quite some studies about Vitamin D and MS. Some say this, some say that. Actually, one of the biggest and most recent studies didn't show any correlation: "In summary, in this large investigation, we observed no

association between total vitamin D intake during adolescence

and risk of MS in adulthood" Munger et al., J Neurol, "Dietary intake of vitamin D during adolescence and risk

of multiple sclerosis" http://www.springerlink.com/content/4152v42634851264/fulltext.pdf )

What they did find was, funnily, a correlation between milk and MS: "we did

observe an increased risk of MS with whole milk intake of

at least three servings/day during adolescence". (no need to panic though, "the association

with whole milk seen here should be interpreted cautiously

and needs confirmation in other populations.")

 

However, nearly all studies regarding Vitamin D intake are more or less bullshit, as they state:

"First and

foremost, vitamin D status is largely dependent on sun

exposure [24], and therefore, even if high vitamin D concentrations

reduced the risk of MS, only a modest association

would be expected with vitamin D intake. Even a

relatively large study has therefore only sub-optimal power."

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://ezinearticles...its?&id=5297806

 

 

In fact, from mid-October through mid-March, the sun will be at such an angle that all the UVB rays will be deflected and not even reach the surface. That translates into zero Vitamin D production from sunlight. To get any production, the UV Index needs to be at 3.0 or above.

 

You can find the UV Index for your area by looking at the EPA's UV Index website.An easy way to keep track of this...if you live above 42-degrees latitude, then during the winter months the UV Index will be below 3.0 and you will not be able to absorb any UVB rays for Vitamin D production, due to the angle of the sun.

That's a US website but much of the same applies I think. In winter you are only gonna be exposing probably face and hands at best in Winter. I think for Vitamin D production from sunlight you are pretty much stuffed here for 6 months of the year.

 

and I dunno if this is correct but sounds pretty scary:

 

http://www.naturalnews.com/003069.html

 

 

It is nearly impossible to get adequate amounts of vitamin D from your diet. Sunlight exposure is the only reliable way to generate vitamin D in your own body. <li> A person would have to drink ten tall glasses of vitamin D fortified milk each day just to get minimum levels of vitamin D into their diet.

 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, with the Vit. D fortified milk in the US, lots of sunshine in Fla. Cal. Texas, etc. why is the MS rate so high there? With all the sun in Australia, again, why is the MS rate so high there? Why is it low in Portugal and Spain?

 

I did take a look at those links that were posted, and they seem to contradict other findings. One, MS does often run in families, but it is not genetic. Common thought is that it may be a virus, possibly related to Chicken Pox. So, multiple family members may get it. My neuro told me a few months ago that recent studies have found that children from Africa, if they come to Europe or the US after puberty, they do not get MS, but if they come before puberty, they do get it. Talk about weird. This is truly one disease that has everyone puzzled.

 

For those that feel better with the Vit. D supplements, that is great, but I don't think it is the answer for many of us. Way too many different factors running around here.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nicole & countrychick, sorry to hear about the medical sufferings. You're right, this puts you in a fair position to know more about the subject than I do. But like you say, the reports don't necessarily mean that everybody should run out and start supplementing. In any case, I'm glad the researchers are researching the subject...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the NY Times article:

 

 

The 14-member expert committee was convened by the Institute of Medicine, an independent nonprofit scientific body, at the request of the United States and Canadian governments. It was asked to examine the available data — nearly 1,000 publications — to determine how much vitamin D and calcium people were getting, how much was needed for optimal health and how much was too much.

 

The two nutrients work together for bone health.

 

Bone health, though, is only one of the benefits that have been attributed to vitamin D, and there is not enough good evidence to support most other claims, the committee said.

Presumably, including any connection between Vitamin D and MS.

 

For those of you who claim you have been "tested for Vitamin D and found deficient," you might want to consider the following:

 

 

Some labs have started reporting levels of less than 30 nanograms of vitamin D per milliliter of blood as a deficiency. With that as a standard, 80 percent of the population would be deemed deficient of vitamin D, Dr. Rosen said. Most people need to take supplements to reach levels above 30 nanograms per milliliter, he added.

 

But, the committee concluded, a level of 20 to 30 nanograms is all that is needed for bone health, and nearly everyone is in that range.

In the US, the danger is that whenever a vitamin is considered a potential "super drug," people start taking loads of it on the assumption that "more is better."

 

There is a difference between an adult deciding to take thousands of micrograms of Vitamin D per day, and giving your baby/toddler the prescribed supplementation from his/her pediatrician.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except mine weren't, my D3 was under 20 and thyroid patients have specific D3 needs according to my endocrinologist, so that's why I take it on prescription.

 

And seeing as my thyroid function and symptom management has been improving, I'm going to stick with his advice. Which reminds me, I need a check-up.

5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My level was 11 which is a fair bit under 20, and my Vitamin D tablets are on prescription from my doctor, not over the counter.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This topic reminds me a little bit of a landlord from Kamyk on the Moldova river, who made for his summer visitors ferrous water by throwing old horseshoes into the well.

 

Naja, just my two cents.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll agree with mgaia ... better "latte" than never :)

 

Vitamin D and its apparent cancer-fighting benefits have become a huge deal in Canada and to a lesser degree in the US (because of their somewhat greater sunshine exposure in terms of UV intensity and number of warm days). So far, none of the news hype about major research into this has filtered through to Europe.

 

The underlying reason for the research is the suspicion that greater exposure to sunshine, and therefore greater Vit D blood levels, in third world countries might at least partly explain the dramatically lower cancer rates in those countries. Bear in mind that we first-worlders tend to spend almost all of our time fully clothed and indoors; our bodies were of course built for far more sun exposure and thus presumably the amounts of Vit D produced in the body by far more sun exposure.

 

By the way, there are some serious misapprehensions expressed further up in this thread about foods such as milk and cheese containing significant amounts of D. They don't! A few foods (eg. fish and in particular shell fish) contain significant amounts, but nothing like what proper sun exposure generates. Consider that 15 minutes of full-body sun exposure equates to 1000 IU of Vit D; a dinner portion of salmon, only about 400 IU. Bottom line: Unless you eat large amounts of fish daily, your only substantial source of Vit D is the sun. (The tiny amount of Vit D supplement in Canadian milk is only intended to ensure that children are getting enough to prevent childhood bone-related diseases.)

 

One major five-year study (3,000 women: 1000 IU of D daily for one group, 1000 IU of D plus magnesium for group two, and a placebo for group 3) undertaken by the University of Toronto and a uni in California (which one, I don't recall) found that those taking a gram of D a day had a cancer rate (a wide spectrum of cancer diagnoses monitored) that was 60%(!) lower than that of the placebo group.

 

Millions of Canadians are now following the researchers' conclusion that people in cold, developed countries should be taking at least a gram of D supplement a day. Sunshine in a medicine bottle. And no risk of skin cancer from too much UV ray exposure! The stuff is cheap to make (a year's supply in Canada costs about 15 euros) and must be taken with food, since it's fat- soluble. Coming to an Apotheke near you soon; but no doubt at European-style pharma prices...

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I've had my blood test today and make sure the Vitamin D check is on it. We'll discuss the findings Dec 22nd.

(I'm really hoping to come off my insulin-resistance meds...)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

those taking a gram of D a day had a cancer rate (a wide spectrum of cancer diagnoses monitored) that was 60%(!) lower than that of the placebo group.

 

What is "a gram of D"? I hope not a gram of Vitamin D per day? Cause that would be highly toxic.

 

edit:

additionally, there is even a study which reports higher pancreatic cancer risk after dietary Vitamin D uptake (as well as several studies which did not show any correlation of Vitamin D intake and cancer). Read Zablotska et al., 2010, Cancer causes & control journal: Vitamin D, calcium, and retinol intake, and pancreatic cancer in a population-based case–control study in the San Francisco Bay area. So at the moment is definitely not clear, how Vitamin D effects cancer and MS.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As mentioned above in a post Vitamin D can be fatal or have adverse effects on those with Thyroid Conditions, so seriously it just makes more sense to simple pick up your own D supplements if one so wishes and leave the general populaces Milk alone.

(Even think I will get more regular with my Multivitamins on that note... and skip them for my fiance who does have Thyroid issues.)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now