Vitamin D Requirement

[dime]

Researchers Pinpoint Upper Safe Limit of Vitamin D Blood Levels

Researchers conducted a study of 422,000 people aged 45 years or older, who underwent vitamin D blood assays. They found for the first time that the safe range of vitamin D levels with respect to coronary morbidity lies between 20 to 36 ng/mL. (50 to 90 nmol/L) Vitamin D levels below and above this range adjusted rates of increased mortality and morbidity significantly.

More than 60 percent of the tested population had insufficient blood levels of vitamin D. Half of these subjects had severely low vitamin D levels which was associated with a 1.5 times increased risk of acute coronary morbidity or mortality. Three percent of those tested had elevated vitamin D levels above 36 ng/mL, which was associated with a 1.13 times elevated risk of coronary morbidity or death.

[RRM]

"They found for the first time that the safe range of vitamin D levels with respect to coronary morbidity lies between 20 to 36 ng/mL. (50 to 90 nmol/L) Vitamin D levels below and above this range adjusted rates of increased mortality and morbidity significantly."

I dont find this convincing at all, as they did not measure a whole range of other substances. Serum vitamin D may correlate with fish intake for example, so that the actual protective element may be very different (eg omega 3).

[Corinne]

After a routine blood test the other day my doctor said I was low on VitD and said I should supplement.
I will get the unit/value of the measurement when I get the paper from him, so far just got a call from the secretary letting me know
I'm at 24,3 (something) and the range is 30 to 100. So just under.

Advice is supplement with 10000units of D3 for 1 month then drop to 5000u for another month.

Thoughts? Advice from the forum?

[Corinne]

Oh and a friend tol me that if I supplement D I need to get one that is combined with Vit K/magnisium for proper absorption.
What's this?
Basically in the case of this D and B12 "deficiency" I'd like to know if I'm OK as I am, and just need to adjust the diet or if I need to do something else.
Perhaps book a few UV sessions at the "sun bank"...

[RRM]

You may be totally fine, or not.
Its impossible to judge from these numbers.
Half the world population is considered vitamin-D inadequate,
but there is no evidence that they are unhealthy.
I would try to increase your intake of food high in vitamin D and B12, such as salmon and tuna.
Then have another blood test in half a year to check the results.

[Corinne]

I have the numbers:
Vitamin D 25-Hydroxy: 24.3 ng/mL is my level and the "normal" range is : 30.0-100.0
So I'm just below the lowest.

I will follow this advice RRM and eat a bit more yolks, Salmon and tuna

[RRM]

the "normal" range is : 30.0-100.0 ng/ml

Actually, the 'normal range' is considered to be 30.0 to 74.0 ng/mL. National Institute of Health
But it is known that this 'normal range' widely varies, depending on age and on where you live.
Among Indian rural farmers, it was found that even with 5 hours of daily sunshine exposure, the majority had levels of lower than 20 ng/ml. Goswami R et al
Therefore, a reference range of 8 to 60 ng/ml has been suggested. (Bender, D. "Vitamin D". Nutritional biochemistry of the vitamins. ISBN 0-521-80388-8)

So, your level seems perfectly fine to me, but it never hurts to eat a bit more yolks and salmon.

(50 nmol/L = 20 ng/ml)