Re: Vitamin D Defficiency and Mobility Issues in Old People
Back on track . . .
An interesting article here
The Largest Ever Clinical Study on Vitamin D Shows We're Wrong About One of Its Main Benefits
"There is little agreement on what vitamin D deficiency is. Deficiency levels are arbitrary with no international consensus and confusion caused by different units in the US. A "normal" level can vary from 50 to 80 nanomole per litre of blood, but recent studies suggest 30nmol is quite enough."
"Patients with very high vitamin D blood levels (over 100nmol) are becoming routine in my clinic and elsewhere, and toxic overdoses are increasingly being reported. Several randomised trials have shown that patients with high blood levels or taking large doses of vitamin D (above 800IU) had an unexpected increased risk of falls and fractures. Vitamin D is far from safe."
"We have created another pseudo-disease that is encouraged by vitamin companies, patient groups, food manufacturers public health departments and charities. Everyone likes to believe in a miracle vitamin pill and feels "they are doing something".
Vitamin D, despite its star status, would not be called a vitamin today, as the doses needed are too large, the body can synthesise it from skin, and it is a steroid precursor. Instead of relying on this impostor, healthy people should get vitamin D from small doses of sunshine every day as well as from food, such as fish, oil, mushrooms and dairy products."
An interesting read imo. This seems to gel with the various posts of different members in this thread who had differing Vit D levels but were all told they were deficient or not deficient seemingly inconsistently.