Vit D news

American Journal Clin Nutrition

American Journal Clin Nutrition

Most studies indicate they do, as do sunburns and intermittent sun exposure.  However, not all studies show such a relationship, if fact one of the largest studies showed sunbed use had a small protective effect against melanoma.  Individual factors, such as numbers of moles and skin type were the strongest risk indicators for melanoma, not UV exposure. In fact, the risk of melanoma from UV light appears small compare to risk factors such as skin type and mole counts. Ironically, sunscreens may increase the risk of melanoma. In one of the best studies, the factor most associated with increased melanoma risk was the use of sunscreens.  Subjects who often used sunscreens had triple the melanoma risk compared with subjects who never used sunscreens.  Skin color and higher numbers of sunbaths were significant protective factors.  Subjects who took more than 30 sunbaths per year were ten (10) times less (less) likely to have melanoma, compared with subjects who took less than 20 sunbaths per year.  However, sunbaths had no protective value when they were associated with sunburns. Other studies show the risk is increased only with intermittent UV exposure, and not with chronic exposure. This month, Dr. Dianne Godar, of the US Food and Drug Administration, published a fascinating paper indicating UVA light, even through window glass, is responsible for the melanoma epidemic.  She points out the melanoma epidemic began long before sunbeds; the dramatic increase is only in indoor workers not outdoor workers; low 25(OH)D levels predict melanoma; all-year tans protect against melanoma; and melanoma patients who expose themselves to the sun live longer than those who don t.  Of the 14 published studies, she reported only two found a positive association between solar UV exposure and melanoma; seven found no association; and five studies found an inverse association, that is, the more sun-exposure the less melanoma !! Ironically, sunscreens appear to dramatically increase the risk of melanoma, probably by increasing the amount of time one spends in the sun.  Until recently, sunscreens only blocked vitamin D producing UVB and let UVA through.  That is, the sunscreen-promoting dermatologists many be partially responsible for melanoma epidemic. (from Dr J Cannell newsletter. www.vitamindcouncil.com)

Dr. Cannell replies -Some may have a genetically determined predilection to low levels of Vit D3, that is, your body may break 25(OH)D down quickly or make it slowly.  Do you shower with soap after you sunbathe?  If so, you may be washing off the Vitamin D containing body oils (sebum).  Also, remember what I said about solar noon?  In some locations and times of year the sun is not high enough up in the sky to make much vitamin D, except for one or two hours on each side of solar noon.  While it is true that your shadow must be shorter than you are to make vitamin D, the shorter the shadow the more the D, and the relationship is not linear, that is, you really want the sun high up in the sky.  Air pollution also reduces UVB. So for some, simply shirtless MAY not do it; you need full body exposure. Also in winter, no UVB for four months, is another reason for Vit D depletion.   A commercial sun tan parlor is another option as is taking Vit D supplements.  Dr. Binkley and colleagues found low Vit D in Hawaii !? I suspect the surfers and skaters were washing off their Vitamin D.

"Some are claiming vitamin D is all that is needed to prevent the next influenza pandemic.  I believe that to be a dangerous belief.  Vitamin D will help the innate immune system, but other crucial factors in influenza pathology are the novelty, transmissibility, and virulence of the attacking virus. " He says "It would be a mistake to overestimate the role of innate immunity.  One does not have to go back to 1918 to discover evidence that highly transmissible novel virus can overwhelm innate immunity. Perhaps having a modest amount of vitamin D in your blood meant the innate immune system was able to mount protection while having very little Vitamin D may not have protected you from such a death, while high Vitamin D would.  I suspect, but cannot prove, that having levels around 120-170 nmol/li will help protect you against the next pandemic; the innate immune system will temper its self-attack and, in some cases, kill the virus at the same time.  I repeat Vitamin D will not protect the world from the next influenza pandemic.  But having high levels is likely to be an advantage for sure."

Some weak link to thyroid antibody levels (autoimmune activity). CoQ10 depletion side effects from statin drugs can be reversed with Vit D in 90% patients. Soem patients report clearing of brain fog and muscle ache with Vit D3 (when D3 levels very low). Sports performance can be enhanced with optimum VitD levels. Vit D and Autism - see the webpage on this site. Vit D is a strong requirement for children on the autism (ASD) spectrum.

Yes.  There were the press articles last autumn 08 about breast cancer, which showed afflicted women with the highest 25(OH)D levels were much less likely to die from breast cancer than women with the lowest levels?  It literally generated 1,500 press stories in English language publications.  Well, the same exact study, with even better results, was published last month, by Dr. Treti and colleagues, in the British Journal of Cancer.  This time, it was men with prostate cancer not women with breast cancer. The study showed that men with biopsy proven prostate cancer, who had the highest vitamin D levels, were up to six times less likely to die than men with the lowest levels over the four years of the study.  Six times!  That is a treatment effect, so yes you should take Vitamin D.  How much, I don't know.  If it was me, I'd take enough to get my levels up to 200-250 nmol/li and I'd do it quick.  Be prepared for your body to become a battlefield as the Vitamin D attacks and attempts to kill the cancer cells.  Also, check your serum calcium frequently, as the macrophages in the battlefield may start producing high amounts of activated Vitamin D and drive up your serum calcium. Tretli S, Hernes E, Berg JP, Hestvik UE, Robsahm TE. Association between serum 25(OH)D and death from prostate cancer. Br J Cancer. 2009 Feb 10;100(3):450-4. Do you know how many press articles Dr. Treti's prostate cancer study generated?  Not one, I (Dr. Cannel) Actually, as I have said before: "When I was young, I suspected conspiracy; as I grew older, I know it's incompetence."  The press simply did not see the publication, but it is not too late for them to correct their sexist mistake. 

We check for Vit D3 by measuring 25(OH)Vit D. In New Zealand certain laboratory senior staff have been campaigning against doctors who request Vit D as it is a little more expensive. They rationalise that simply looking at the person and their lifestyle can tell the doctor whether they may benefit from Vit D supplements. Sure we can do that guesswork. But - as more and more medical research seems to be indicating, OPTIMUM Vit D levels are worth striving for to get into the high end of prevention and treatment. Would I take a look at a patient and guess their cholesterol and prescribe a statin drug? No! It could be argued that Vit D may be actually MORE important than cholesterol levels. To see how important the actual blood levels are for disease prevention look at this. This is just a small example of burgeoning medical data on Vit D. It is the Vitamin of the decade! Actually its really a secosteroid.

Two studies raise the possibility that sunbathing or using UV lights may not produce much Vitamin D if you shower with soap after exposure.  Water cleans the body but does not destroy as much sebum, human body oil.  When you think about it, God made the perfect body oil for humans, sebum, but humans wash off their body oil and then apply body oils made by the petrochemical cosmetic industry. What would you rather absorb, Vit D or petrochemicals?

A research letter published in the October 26, 2009 issue of the American Medical Association Journal Archives of Internal Medicine revealed that treatment with 50,000 international units (IU) of vitamin D per week was safe and effective over an 8 week period, and could also be safe to use every other week as maintenance. Read more....