What they got wrong about optimal Vitamin D levels
What they got wrong about optimal Vitamin D levels
This short video clip explains what the medical establishmet got wrong when they chose 20 ng/mL for adequate D.
I encourage you to watch this short video clip on vitamin D.
My Takeaways From the Video Clip Below
The vitamin D-US RDA was based on the Institute of Medicine’s (IOM) evaluation of studies looking at bone samples from autopsies examining mineralized bone. Based on this research, they concluded that 20 ng/mL to 30 ng/mL is an adequate vitamin D level.
The IOM determined that since most results fell around 20 ng/mL and only 1% around the 30 ng/mL range, the healthy vitamin D range should be kept at 20 ng/mL.
The issue is that vitamin D needs may differ for other health benefits, such as immune support.
Secondly, the researchers calculated incorrectly when determining that 20 ng/mL is sufficient. (They divided by the wrong number to draw their recommendations).
However, based on their incorrect calculation of 20 ng/mL, the IOM determined that 600 IUs daily is adequate to reach this number and that less intake will result in soft bones.
The IOM said that higher levels may pass the benefit threshold and result in health risks.
But that was incorrect, too.
When the raw data was examined (I posted recently on why having the raw data is critical), it was discovered that higher vitamin D levels were still better, with no toxicity concerns.
Six hundred IUs is not enough for some people since absorption is impacted, for example, by how much excess fat you have or your skin color.
Even for thinner, fairer people, 600 IUs is probably inadequate because 20 ng/mL is inadequate.
When healthy Africans’ vitamin D levels were analyzed, they found that they ranged from 40 ng/mL to 60 ng/mL and doubled during pregnancy.
The speaker concludes we need our D levels higher than 30 ng/mL for cancer prevention.
Bottom Line:
Cancer rates continue to rise. Ensure optimal D levels are greater than serum 30 ng/mL. My preference is right around 60 ng/mL for the average person.
Show my posts some love, please!
It is just me writing, reading, researching, and seeing clients!
I do not use mainstream social media, so please share my posts so that more people can get informed on how to get and stay healthy.
This is NOT information allopathic practitioners will share with you.
Is there a downside to keeping it anywhere from 60 to 100?