Evidence, What Evidence?

Now the article is brilliant on many levels but what I find most interesting and helpful is the way Dr. Cannell is using the word Evidence and the phrase, "Evidence Based Medicine". This phrase is a big deal these days in the medical profession. It really gives the impression that we are making great strides and by objectively making decisions based on evidence, we can confidently go forward and trust our doctors to give us the best preventive care and treatment for disease. But as this article points out so well, all this really means is more authoritarian measures taken to resist criticism and pander to whatever group is paying the most to get their ideas out there whatever the consequences.

Maybe I am being too harsh. Maybe it's not about just money and influence. I don't know. I am open to any body's theories on this. It would be easy to dismiss Cannell as just some cracked doc who's going over the deep end. But he is not selling anything. The web site and organization are not sponsored by any commercial entity. And with the Internet, anyone who is motivated can go to Google Scholar, Pubmed, or some other resource and look at the large body of evidence that is out there. Of course, you could also read all of the links which Cannell provides in his newsletters too.

[/health/vitamin_d]     0 comments     permalink

Opening Salvo of the Vitamin D Wars?

As an example of what constitutes healthy vitamin D intake as well as other vitamins, here's a news bulletin from the Orthomolecular News Service that came out this week (reproduced below). Compare with the current US FDA RDI which is 400 IU a day.

I also noticed this past weekend that you can get Vitamin D at Walmart. There are 1000 IU capsules of Vitamin D3 available.

Doctors Say, Raise the RDAs Now

(OMNS October 30, 2007) The US Recommended Daily Allowance/Daily Reference
Intakes are too low and most should be raised immediately, says an independent
panel of physicians, academics and researchers. In a statement this week, the
Independent Vitamin Safety Review Panel said: "Government-sponsored nutrient
recommendations, such as the US RDA/DRIs, are not keeping pace with recent
progress in nutrition research. While current official recommendations for
vitamin A, iron, calcium, and some other nutrients are generally adequate, the
public has been asked to consume far too little of many other key nutrients.
Inadequate intake, and inadequate standards to judge intake, have resulted in
widespread nutrient inadequacy, chronic disease, and an undernourished but
overweight population." Citing a large number of physician reports and clinical
studies, the IVSRP called for substantial increases in daily intake of the
B-vitamins, vitamins C, D and E, and the minerals selenium, zin! c, magnesium
and chromium. "Raising the RDA/DRI will save lives and improve health," the
Panel said. "Clinical and sub-clinical nutrient deficiencies are among the main
causes of our society's greatest healthcare problems. Cancer, cardiovascular
disease, mental illness, and other diseases are caused or aggravated by poor
nutrient intake. The good news is that scientific evidence shows that
adequately high consumption of nutrients helps prevent these diseases."

Specifically, the IVSRP called for a new standard, an Optimum Health
Requirement, recommending daily adult consumption of nutrients in the following
higher quantities:

Vitamins

B-1 Thiamine: 25 mg
B-2 Riboflavin: 25 mg
B-3 Niacinamide: 300 mg
B-6 Pyridoxine: 25 mg
Folic acid: 2,000 mcg
B-12 Cobalamin: 500 mcg
C: 2,000 mg
D3: 1,500 IU
E as natural mixed tocopherols: 200 IU

Minerals

Zinc: 25 mg
Magnesium: 500 mg
Selenium: 200 mcg
Chromium: 200 mcg

The Panel concluded by stating: "In the past, over-conservative
government-sponsored standards have encouraged dietary complacency. People have
been led to believe that they can get all the nutrients they need from a
'balanced diet' of processed foods. That is not true. For adequate vitamin and
mineral intake, a diet of unprocessed, whole foods, along with the intelligent
use of nutritional supplements, is more than just a good idea: it is
essential."

Independent Vitamin Safety Review Panelists are:

Abram Hoffer, MD
Michael Janson, MD
Thomas Levy, MD, JD
Erik Paterson, MD
Woody R. McGinnis, MD
Allan N. Spreen, MD
Bo H. Jonsson, MD, PhD
Chris M. Reading, MD
Bradford Weeks, MD
Karin Munsterhjelm-Ahumada, MD
Jerry Green, MD
Stephen Faulkner, MD
Klaus Wenzel, MD
Richard Huemer, MD
Peter H. Lauda, M.D.
Jonathan Prousky, ND
Michael Friedman, ND
William B. Grant, PhD
Harold Foster, PhD
H. H. Nehrlich, PhD
Steve Hickey, PhD
Gert E. Schuitemaker, PhD
Andrew W. Saul, PhD, Chair

Nutritional Medicine is Orthomolecular Medicine

Linus Pauling defined orthomolecular medicine as "the treatment of disease by
the provision of the optimum molecular environment, especially the optimum
concentrations of substances normally present in the human body."
Orthomolecular medicine uses safe, effective nutritional therapy to fight
illness. For more information: http://www.orthomolecular.org

The peer-reviewed Orthomolecular Medicine News Service is a non-profit and
non-commercial informational resource.

Andrew W. Saul, Ph.D., Editor and contact person. Email:
omns@orthomolecular.org

To Subscribe at no charge: http://www.orthomolecular.org/subscribe.html

[/health/vitamin_d]     0 comments     permalink

Vitamin D: All guns blazing!

If you remember the Vitamin D seminar around the first part of this year, Dr. Cannell mentioned that government agencies were encouraged to raise the level of both the RDI and max safe upper limit of Vitamin D. But to this day we have heard nothing along these lines. Some suggest that there is stalling taking place in order to give pharmaceutical companies more time to develop patentable analogs which could lead to bigger profits. I don't know if this is true. But I am beginning to wonder when the counter reports will start coming out. Meta studies that suggest harm or increased mortality. Perhaps we haven't reached critical mass yet where enough people are alerted to the issue and begin adjusting their supplement use by adding lots more vitamin D. Indeed, supplement manufacturers are still not providing products with more vitamin D. Multis still contain a measly 400 IU if at all. Since the safe upper limit is at 2k IU, that is the largest pill we will tend to see.

With fall nearly upon is, now is the time to order vitamin D. Make sure it is vitamin D3, not D2. The further north you live, the earlier you should start. Last winter, I took 4k every day. 2k in the morning and 2k at night. I don't know if this makes much difference (the timing that is) but in general, I think it's a good idea to try and spread out your supplements through the day.

How about some feed back? Are you persuaded by the information? Will you begin to supplement vitamin D in the fall and winter?

[/health/vitamin_d]     7 comments     permalink

Orthomed News Service on Vit D

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Orthomolecular Medicine News Service, October 2, 2007

Vitamin D Boosts Health, Cuts Cancer Risk in Half

(OMNS October 2, 2007) New research shows that getting plenty of vitamin D
prolongs life and improves health. Vitamin D deficiency plays a role in causing
seventeen varieties of cancer, as well as heart disease, stroke, hypertension,
autoimmune diseases, diabetes, depression, chronic pain, osteoarthritis,
osteoporosis, muscle weakness, muscle wasting, birth defects, and periodontal
disease. (1) This does not mean that vitamin D deficiency is the only cause of
these diseases. What it does mean is that vitamin D, and the many ways in which
it affects a person's health, must no longer be overlooked. 

Here is a very important example: Ample intake of vitamin D (about 2,000
IU/day) can cut breast cancer incidence by half. (2) If vitamin D levels were
increased worldwide, 600,000 cases of breast and other cancers could be
prevented each year. Nearly 150,000 cases of cancer could be prevented in the
United States alone. 

A four-year study of 1,179 healthy, postmenopausal women showed that taking
calcium, along with nearly three times the U.S. government's recommendation of
vitamin D3, showed a dramatic 60 percent or greater reduction in all forms of
cancer. (3) Additionally, there is growing evidence that maintaining vitamin D
levels in the body during the winter prevent the flu and other viral infections
by strengthening the immune system (4).

How much vitamin D does the average person need? In the summer, those with at
least 15 minutes of sun exposure on their skin most days should take 1,000 mg
of vitamin D3 each day. In the winter, those with dark skin, or those who have
little sun exposure on their skin, should take up to 4,000 mg each day. Suit
your vitamin D3 supplementation to your lifestyle: those who have darker skin,
are older, avoid sun exposure or live in the northern US should take the higher
amounts.

Vitamin D is remarkably safe; there have been no deaths caused by the vitamin.
(5) The best way to be sure you are getting the right amount is to have your
doctor give you a blood test for 25-hydroxyvitamin D. If your vitamin D intake
from all sources is maintaining your blood level at or near 50 ng/ml, you have
a good vitamin D status. If it is more than 10% below this level, supplemental
sources of vitamin D3 should be increased. 

People consuming only government-recommended levels of 200-400 IU/day often
have blood levels considerably below 50 ng/ml. This means the government¿s
recommendations are too low, and should be raised immediately.

1. The Vitamin D Council, http://www.vitamindcouncil.com

2. Garland CF, Gorham ED, Mohr SB, Grant WB, Giovannucci EL, Lipkin M, Newmark
H, Holick MF, Garland FC. Vitamin D and prevention of breast cancer: pooled
analysis. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol, 2007. Mar;103(3-5):708-11.  

3. Lappe JM, Travers-Gustafson D, Davies KM, Recker RR, Heaney RP. Vitamin D
and calcium supplementation reduces cancer risk: results of a randomized trial.
Amer J Clin Nutrition, 2007. Vol. 85, No. 6, 1586-1591, June.
http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/abstract/85/6/1586

4. Cannell JJ, Vieth R, Umhau JC, Holick MF, Grant WB, Madronich S, Garland CF,
Giovannucci E. Epidemic influenza and vitamin D. Epidemiol Infect, 2006.
Dec;134(6):1129-40. Epub 2006 Sep 7.
http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=469543  

5. Saul AW. Vitamin D: Deficiency, diversity and dosage. J Orthomolecular Med,
2003. Vol 18, No 3 and 4, p 194-204.
http://www.doctoryourself.com/dvitamin.htm 

Vitamins Are Safe

There is not even one death per year from vitamin supplementation.  (American
Journal of Emergency Medicine, Vol. 22, No. 5, September 2004.
http://www.aapcc.org/Annual%20Reports/03report/Annual%20Report%202003.pdf )

Nutritional Medicine is also known as Orthomolecular Medicine

Linus Pauling defined orthomolecular medicine as "the treatment of disease by
the provision of the optimum molecular environment, especially the optimum
concentrations of substances normally present in the human body."
Orthomolecular medicine uses safe, effective nutritional therapy to fight
illness. For more information: http://www.orthomolecular.org

The peer-reviewed Orthomolecular Medicine News Service is a non-profit and
non-commercial informational resource.

Editorial Review Board:

Abram Hoffer, M.D., Ph.D.
Harold D. Foster, Ph.D.
Bradford Weeks, M.D.
Carolyn Dean, M.D., N.D.
Erik Paterson, M.D.
Thomas Levy, M.D., J.D.
Steve Hickey, Ph.D.

Andrew W. Saul, Editor and contact person. email: drsaul@doctoryourself.com .

To Subscribe at no charge: http://orthomolecular.org/subscribe.html

[/health/vitamin_d]     0 comments     permalink

Michael Holick Receives Linus Pauling Award

There is a lot more that could be said about Holick and his work. But I encourage everyone to read the interview that I published on my blog last year. This was featured in the Doctor Yourself newsletter which is distributed by e-mail. I formatted it and made it available here so that more people could be exposed to it.

I haven't read Dr. Holick's book but it looks quite interesting and the supporting web site has other information on vitamin D and Holick's work.

[/health/vitamin_d]     0 comments     permalink

Let's Talk Nutrition Show on Vit D

[/health/vitamin_d]     0 comments     permalink

Vitamin D and Athletic Performance

[/health/vitamin_d]     4 comments     permalink

The Season for Vitamin D (Deficiency)

I had blogged recently about Dr. Cannell's theory of flu related to vitamin D deficiency. Scientific American has a recent feature on Cannell's theory and it describes what prompted him to hypothesize and a possible mechanism for how vitamin D might work to prevent virus infection. Definitely worth a read. Flu shots? Well, we covered that in the discussion previously. It seems, if I understood it, that flu shots only provide significant help to the elderly. But they might also be severally vitamin D deficient as well.

[/health/vitamin_d]     0 comments     permalink

Summing it all up (RE: Vitamin D)

I also tend to be swayed by people like Connell. His experience and enthusiasm are catching and the Vitamin D Council appears to be a valuable service which is doing a good job (despite some highly opinionated views at times) of getting the information on Vitamin D research out to us non scientist types (namely me) in my opinion.

A few more important links regarding Vitamin D:

• The interview with Andrew Saul and Doctor Michael Holick which I posted earlier this year is a very excellent overview of vitamin D and it's importance as well as some of the issues we face by staying in doors for so much time during the year.
• Holick also has written a book called, "The UV Advantage" and there is a supporting web site with news updates.
• Dr. Connell's organization is The Vitamin D council and there are many links to information regarding vitamin D at the web site. In particular, the news letters feature questions from readers and many recommendations.

[/health/vitamin_d]     2 comments     permalink

More On Vitamin D and Flu

Now why do you suppose this is? Why do American virologists put so much faith in "boosting acquired immunity?" If I say it's the influence of the Pharmaceutical industry or simply the profit motive, will you accuse me of subscribing to vast conspiracy theories? Then how do you explain it?

[/health/vitamin_d]     17 comments     permalink

Here Comes the Sun (vitamin)

The story of the sun vitamin is turning out to be nothing short of amazing. We are talking everything from cancer, heart disease and influenza as well as bone and muscle density are potentially effected by deficiencies of this vitamin. The problem is that us North Americans just don't get enough of it by a long shot (speaking from the knowledge gained from reading just a few of the newsletters mentioned above). Now for my cycling friends, it's less of a problem in the summer as we are out riding a fair amount (even if you are a wannabe like me) but for those cubicle trolls in the IT department, you might want to study this problem more closely.

But still, there is enough of a problem in the winter that I have decided to take some vitamin D (only cholecalciferol will due here) supplements myself during the winter months. I recently found that Carlson Labs makes a good 2000 IU pill that I have started to take daily. This is the amount suggested by the most recent news letter (pdf download). Toxicity? Not a problem. According to the council, you would have to sustain 40,000 IU over several days to get into trouble. And just spending 15 minutes in direct sunlight during the summer months will cause in the area of 10,000 IU or more of synthesis.

There's also another option which the Council mentions and that is using a sun lamp. This is a lamp which puts out UV-B rays which are the rays responsible for Vitamin D synthesis. Using a lamp like this would guarantee that you are not getting more than you need but there are drawbacks. It is the UV-B rays which also age our skin and effect our eyes (causing cataracts). So I am not convinced that a lamp is the way to go but it might be more cost effective over the long run.

[/health/vitamin_d]     0 comments     permalink

Vitamin D Levels and Athletic Performance

Dear Dr. Cannell: I noticed that my basketball game is a lot better
after I started taking vitamin D.  Have you heard anything like that?
Jason, Richmond, Virginia.
 
Dear Jason:  I've heard it from many other people; remember that
activated vitamin D is a potent steroid hormone.  I've never been a
good athlete - and I'm still not - but my tennis game is clearly
better since I've been maintaining my level at 50 ng/ml.  The
literature is actually quite convincing that vitamin D improves the
athletic abilities of older people who are vitamin D deficient.  That
is, vitamin D makes them fall less, and improves their choice
reaction time, muscle strength, percentage and area of type II (fast)
muscle fibers, and balance.  However, to date, no one has directly
tested the theory by giving physiological amounts of vitamin D (5,000
units a day) to young vitamin D deficient athletes.  I predict
whomever does that study will be all over the news.  Furthermore,
idiopathic (which means the doctors are too idiotic to know why) low
back pain is rampant among athletes, especially indoor athletes.
There is good reason to think that many of them are vitamin D
deficient.  I'm not going to cite the references to any of this
because I'm writing a paper.  However, it looks as if levels of about
50 ng/ml will optimize athletic ability.

Although my little accident hindered me from starting some of the early season races, all indications are that my capabilities are just as good or better than last year even though I also got a late start to training this year. One factor which could be helping is vitamin D intake. I spent almost 3 weeks in the Philippines in January and this probably brought my vit D levels up. Then, I started taking 2k iu of cholecalciferol every day which hopefully has kept those levels optimized. Difficult to draw any solid conclusions here I guess. It would be much better to get a 25-hydroxy-vitamin D test done in the winter to see where I'm at. I'm going to look into this.

[/health/vitamin_d]     0 comments     permalink

Stop Drinking Sunscreen!

Dr. Cannell, should I use sunscreens or cosmetics 
that contain sunscreens?

Hundreds of people have asked me this question. 
It's important to remember that many cosmetics 
contain sunscreens. My short answer is, "If you 
are comfortable drinking sunscreens, then you should 
feel comfortable putting them on your skin." At 
least three studies have found that the chemicals 
commonly used in sunscreens are absorbed through the 
skin and end up circulating in your blood stream. As 
they circulate in your blood, they go to your internal 
organs - where they do whatever those chemicals may do 
there. Then they are excreted in your urine. If you 
drink them the same thing would happen. Sunblocks that 
have old style zinc or titanium oxide as their only 
active ingredients are not absorbed by the skin. Zinc 
oxide used to be a gooey paste, now it is emulsified, 
and may, or may not, be absorbed systemically. It 
blocks light, just like clothes. I remember a beach 
in France where a beautiful young woman had carefully 
applied the old gooey red zinc oxide to her body in 
the shape of a tiny red bikini. She couldn't sit down 
because the sand would stick to her.  She was naked but 
you had to look twice (which I did) to see just how 
naked she was.

    * J Invest Dermatol. 2004 Jul;123(1):57-61.
    * J Chromatogr B Biomed Appl. 1996 Jun 28;682(1):137-45.
    * J Chromatogr B Analyt Technol Biomed Life Sci. 
      2004 Apr 25;803(2):225-31.

Furthermore, sunscreens facilitate the skin's absorption 
of pesticides. So, if you want pesticides to be readily 
absorbed through your skin, circulate in your blood, go 
to your internal organs, and be excreted in your urine, 
wear sunscreens. Or, you could take a swig of your 
Coppertone and chase it with a shot of Deepwoods Off.

    * Toxicol Ind Health. 2003 Feb;19(1):9-16.
    * Toxicol Ind Health. 2003 Feb;19(1):1-8.
    * Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 2004 Mar 15;195(3):348-54.
    * J Toxicol Clin Toxicol. 2002;40(7):827-32.

Finally, if you think your sunscreen is preventing your 
skin from turning red just by blocking solar radiation, 
think again. Sunscreens inhibit an enzyme in your skin 
that makes nitric acid and one of the functions of nitric 
acid is to inflame your skin. The inflammation then signals 
your immune system to start protecting your skin and tells 
you to get out of the sun. Sunscreens block nitric acid 
formation, the skin doesn't redden, the immune system isn't
notified, you stay longer in the sun, your skin is damaged, 
and you increase your risk of skin cancer and premature 
aging. Melanoma Res. 2005 Feb;15(1):3-6.

I call this combinations of events - drinking sunscreen and 
insecticides while blocking your immune system's ability to 
protect your skin - the "Gilchrest Phenomenon," named after 
the Chairwoman of Dermatology at Boston University who funds 
her department with grants from the sunscreen/cosmetic industry.

There's lots more in this newsletter including how to approach sun exposure and suntans. And also very interesting is a discussion of the cause of kidney stones. Connell appears to be reaching conclusions similar to Loran Cordain. This being the point about acid loading caused by western diets. I encourage you to read the whole newsletter when you have some time.

[/health/vitamin_d]     0 comments     permalink

Doctor Yourself Interviews Dr. Michael Holick

Lot's of very practical stuff here, particularly on sun exposure and supplement recommendations. Specific reference to colon cancer reduction is quite interesting.

"The population of the world has been brainwashed by the American
Academy of Dermatology and the sunscreen industry, for 30 years,
with the unrelenting message that you should never be exposed to
direct sunlight because it is going to cause serious skin cancer
and death." (Michael Holick, MD)

(Editor's Note: Born 60 years ago in Jersey City, New Jersey,
Michael Holick published his first scientific paper in 1970.
Hundreds would follow, and now, he is arguably the world's
leading authority on vitamin D. Yet Dr. Holick's advocacy of what
he calls "sensible sun exposure" is so controversial that he was
fired from Boston University Medical Center's dermatology
department. Controversy being no stranger to this Newsletter, we
were pleased when Dr. Holick agreed to an interview, which
follows in edited form below.)

DOCTOR YOURSELF NEWS: Dr. Holick, What are some of the
research-based benefits of more vitamin D?

DR. MICHAEL HOLICK: You can reduce cancer risk by 30 to 50% by
increasing vitamin D in the diet, or by sensible sun exposure. We
gave mice colon cancer, and followed them for 20 days. Tumor
growth was markedly reduced simply by having vitamin D in the
diet. There was a 40% reduction in tumor size. And, casual sun
exposure actually decreases your risk of melanoma. In Finland,
back in the 1960's, children that received 2,000 IU of vitamin D
each day reduced their risk of getting Type 1 diabetes by 80%.
Every tissue and every cell in your body has a receptor for
vitamin D. Every tissue and every cell of your body requires
vitamin D to function properly.

DY NEWS: Exactly how much vitamin D, and how much sun, do we
need?

HOLICK: Vitamin D deficiency is less than 400 IU per day along
with no sun exposure. If you take 400 IU daily, you would still
have an inadequate amount of vitamin D. Humans need 1,000 IU each
day, or to be exposed to sunlight. Five to ten minutes, arms and
legs, three times a week, is adequate.

DY NEWS: What is you opinion of the official US RDA/DRI
recommendations?

HOLICK: I was on the committee that set them (National Academy of
Sciences, Panel on Calcium and Related Nutrients, 1996-1997). We
have made some progress in increasing the recommendations. They
are now 200 IU/day for children and adults up to age 50; 400 IU
for adults over 50; and 600 IU/day for adults over 70.

DY NEWS: Would you have liked to have set the recommendations
higher?

HOLICK: Yes. At the time, we were obligated to base our
recommendations on the published literature before 1997. Based on
new evidence, I think infants, up to one year of age, need 400
IU/day. Canada recommends 400 IU already. Then, from age one, and
all through adulthood, I'd recommend 1,000 IU/day. Everyone needs
1,000 IU of vitamin D3 each day.

DY NEWS: And how are we doing?

HOLICK: In Boston, 50% of adolescent boys and girls are vitamin D
deficient. 70% of moms and 80% their babies are vitamin D
deficient at birth. These infants have no vitamin D stores, and
the moms have none to give them.

DY NEWS: And that means rickets?

HOLICK: Rickets is only the tip of the vitamin D deficiency
iceberg. If you are vitamin D deficient in childhood, you are 2.4
times more likely to develop Type 1 diabetes.

DY NEWS: And for people of color?

HOLICK: Skin pigment is a natural sunscreen. African American
children require two to three times as much sun exposure, without
sunscreen, to satisfy their requirement for vitamin D.

DY NEWS: What are the consequences of not getting enough
sunlight?

HOLICK: If you live above 35 degrees north latitude, you are
twice as likely to develop multiple sclerosis. Living in higher
latitudes also means higher risk for Crohn's disease, rheumatoid
arthritis, and high blood pressure.

DY NEWS: What are some examples of "high latitude" cities?

HOLICK: Anything above Atlanta, Georgia.

DY NEWS: I've been to Atlanta. To a Yankee like me, that's pretty
far south. Now you know I'm going to quote you on this. . .

HOLICK: That's fine. Anywhere above about 35 or 37 degrees
latitude, that is, anywhere north of Atlanta, Georgia, you
basically cannot make vitamin D in your skin during the
wintertime.

DY NEWS: And in the summer, should we tan?

HOLICK: I do not believe in tanning.

DY NEWS: That seems a rather moderate position.

HOLICK: I was fired from my position as Professor of Dermatology
at Boston University Medical Center because I have been promoting
sensible sun exposure, and had wrotten the book, "The UV
Advantage." I had held that position for nearly ten years.

DY NEWS: Who fired you, and when?

HOLICK: Dr. Barbara Gilchrest, BU Medical Center Chief of
Dermatology, in February 2004. She and I remain personal friends.
I'm still full Professor of Medicine, Physiology, and Biophysics,
and have been for 20 years. Dr. Gilchrest has been quoted as
saying that to suggest that vitamin D deficiency is a significant
health problem is "weak and absurd." She has also been quoted as
saying that linking vitamin D deficiency to medical illness is
"schlock science." I have never heard her rebut those statements.

DY NEWS: Were you fired entirely because of your stance on
vitamin D and for no other reason?

HOLICK: No question about it. The American Academy of Dermatology
is very uncomfortable about sensible sun exposure, and anyone who
recommends it.

DY NEWS: You're telling us that the American Academy of
Dermatology does not believe in sensible sun exposure?

HOLICK: That is correct. They are believers in abstinence from
all sun exposure. They have been pretty firm about this. In May
2004, three months after I was fired, I was asked to defend
myself in front of all the staff.

DY NEWS: How successful was it?

HOLICK: I got people's attention.

DY NEWS: Who is most opposed to you?

HOLICK: The "unenlightened" dermatologists of the American
Academy of Dermatology.

DY NEWS: Yet it seems to be particularly difficult to kill
yourself with vitamin D.

HOLICK: True. One man took 1,000,000 IU of vitamin D per day,
orally, for six months. Of course, he had the symptoms of severe
vitamin D intoxication.

DY NEWS: But he lived to tell the tale?

HOLICK: Yes. His treatment was hydration (lots of water), and no
more vitamin D or sunshine for a while. He's perfectly happy and
healthy. This was published in the New England Journal of
Medicine. (Koutkia P, Chen TC, Holick MF. Vitamin D intoxication
associated with an over-the-counter supplement. N Engl J Med.
2001 Jul 5;345(1):66-7.)

DY NEWS: How many people have died from vitamin D or other
vitamins?

HOLICK: I have no experience of anyone dying from vitamin
exposure. In thirty years, I've never seen it.

DY NEWS: And in the medical literature?

HOLICK: Not as far as I know.

DY NEWS: About how many people get too little vitamin D?

HOLICK: In the US and Canada, about 50%. About one billion
people, worldwide, are vitamin D deficient. This is true even in
sunny climates, because of lack of sun exposure.

DY NEWS: What advice do you wish to offer our readers?

HOLICK: The most important thing is to increase your vitamin D
intake.

DY NEWS: What's yours?

HOLICK: I take 1,100 IU of vitamin D every day.

DY NEWS: Do you use sunblock?

HOLICK: I do, but only after some sensible sun exposure.

DY NEWS: Do you wear a floppy hat?

HOLICK: Yes, after sensible sun exposure.

DY NEWS: You are one consistent person. So what's the bottom line?

HOLICK: The population of the world has been brainwashed by the
American Academy of Dermatology and the sunscreen industry, for
30 years, with the unrelenting message that you should never be
exposed to direct sunlight because it is going to cause serious
skin cancer and death. People are really quite surprised by the
new message that sensible sun exposure, in moderation, is very
important for good health. We should appreciate the sun for its
benefits, and not abuse it.

FOR FURTHER READING:

Holick, MF and Jenkins, M.  The UV Advantage, iBooks: New York,
2004.

[/health/vitamin_d]     0 comments     permalink

Contact Me:
bobber at kc0dxf dot net

Music Sites

Guitar Builders and Luthiers

Running

Frequented National Blogs

Internal

Columnists (political)

Columnists (technical)

Health and Nutrition

Big Shark Team Cyclists

Other Cyclists

Health Care Reform

Paleo (Hunter Gatherer) Diet (and related diets)

Christianity

Historic Christian Confessions

Classical Education

Routed Slot Car Tracks

Training With Power

Cycling

Ultrafit

Digital Cameras

Sporting Goods and Bike Shops

Technical

Transcendent Music

Utilities