Vitamin D supplements

[winjim]

These guidelines from the Endocrine Society are the reference that the NHS cite for the limits quoted on the blood test results.
The normal range they're recommending is 40-250nmol/L, with deficient given as <30nmol/L.
Mine was 22nmol/L.

ITYFIABMCTT

 

[dan_bo]

ITYFIABMCTT

What

 

[Rocky]

What

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that.......or something like that

 

[winjim]

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that.......or something like that

Indeed. In the case of Vit D it's complicated because there is no 'normal range' as such and different guidelines and studies recommend different levels for deficiency, optimum levels and excess.

Do bear in mind that when I said it was 'fantastically difficult' to achieve toxic levels of Vit D, that's with normal supplementation and fortification. It's perfectly possible given therapeutic doses, and mandatory food fortification was abandoned in the mid 20th century after an outbreak of hypercalcaemia linked to food manufacturers overfortifying their products in order to prolong shelf life.





(Also it's... not a vitamin)




Edit: I've now read, albeit briefly, those guidelines and I can't find mention of the 'normal range' quoted by @presta above, nor of deficiency at 30nmol/l. Are you sure you have the units right and you're not confusing deficiency and insufficiency? The focus of the guidelines appears to be on maintaining a serum Vit D over 75nmol/l which is 30ng/ml. I note they acknowledge that 'The blood level of 25(OH)D that is defined as vitamin D deficiency remains somewhat controversial.'

 

[Ajax Bay]

I am surprised that there has not been more of a push by central agencies on (not a) Vitamin D. But I guess if you've nailed your policy to the mast with a daily 400IU recommendation then stepping up to a decent level (ie 2000IU or double) likely to have an effect takes institutional effort and more time than it takes to design, produce at scale and vaccinate billions. The current recommendation seems mainly focused on the benefit to bones (anti-rickets iirc).

Studies take a long time and there no financial dividend to incentivise industry. I'm not pushing any conspiracy theory here: at Easter 2020 we could be sure that one or (amazingly) many more would be part of the route out. Vit D is known to contribute to the normal function of one's immune system. But Vitamin D supplementation benefits to improve resistance to COVID-19 could be surmised but not assured. Longitudinal studies take time. And you'll get people rightly shouting correlation not causation until those studies report, into the knarly teeth of an endemic infectious disease.

Sunny this morning down here, but it'll be dark by the time I get out for a ride: so no natural synthesis of 'Vit' D today for me.