Vitamin D Prevents

Back in the "gold pepper" story we suggested, based on our experiences, that we all use Vitamin D in combination to make the effects more efficient. Today we found what we thought was the story concerning the effectiveness of Vitamin D in the prevention of breast cancer. The story wasn't from a well-known or respected news source, though we thought it was. We found the story but the research seemed to say something different and we got so excited we didn't know what to do:

"Serum Vitamin D and Cancer Mortality in the NHANES III Study (1988-2006) - Vitamin D has been hypothesized to protect against cancer. We followed 16,819 participants in NHANES III from 1988 through 2006, expanding upon an earlier NHANES III study (1988-2000). Using Cox proportional hazard regression models, we examined risk related to baseline serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) for total cancer mortality, in both sexes, and by racial/ethnic groups, as well as for site-specific cancers. Because serum was collected in the south in cooler months and the north in warmer months, we examined associations by collection season ("summer/higher latitude" and "winter/lower latitude"). We identified 884 cancer deaths during 225,212 person-years." - Cancer Research (OnlineFirst)

That's all we can afford, the free abstract, so we don't know the best part that works, for instance, how much worked or needed. The information that we would need to speculate might be in the parts of the research to which we didn't have access. We don't need to access the full research and we will admit that we sometimes miss crucial information that won't be found in the abstract. Which is why we often go to the source institution to find their plain English press releases on their research that often isn't in either the headlines or the story.

“Vitamin D Status Is Not Associated With Risk for Less Common Cancers - We did not see lower cancer risk in persons with high vitamin D blood concentrations compared to normal concentrations for any of these cancers,” said Demetrius Albanes, M.D., NCI, one of the study investigators. “And, at the other end of the vitamin D spectrum, we did not see higher cancer risk for participants with low levels.” - National Cancer Institute (News)

Its hard to ignore a thirty-three (33) year study even if it is from a US government agency. We don't generally question the National Cancer Institute (NCI) of the US National Institutes of Health. We don't also take their word at face value. We question. We doubt. We check and we verify. Consider it checked, doubted and verified.

"Researchers and clinicians have looked to the possibility that vitamin D might be used for cancer prevention. Some evidence indicates that higher levels of vitamin D are associated with a lower risk of colorectal cancer, though the evidence is inconsistent. Through the Vitamin D Pooling Project, researchers had access to a geographically and demographically diverse group of men and women, including participants from the United States, Finland, and China." - National Cancer Institute (News)

That's the doubting part that we talked about. The US found one results and the Chinese found another with a more diverse albeit smaller group. We think the difference is in the amount of Vitamin D used to achieve a different result than in America. We aren't scientists and we didn't have access to the full US results but we speculate that since the US minimums are substantially different than levels recommended by US doctors and even Canadian doctors that matters. It is speculation. We also admit that. We're not ready to dismiss the power of Vitamin D which is and has been shown to be effective.

"There appear to be many health benefits associated with adequate intake of vitamin D, including suggestive evidence with colorectal and breast cancers. While the available data are promising, we need to learn a lot more about vitamin D and its potential health effects. We plan continued study of this remarkable nutrient, which will help resolve the many remaining questions." - Nurses' Health Study Newsletter (2008)

Not our opinion but the opinions reached by those with more information and education that all of us combined. We know. This is for those who say the news says one thing one day and another thing the next - you just don't know what to believe. We say you can and you should know what to believe. The news can't give you the nuances that you need to be able to discern your beliefs. We says its in the math. Number of years, number of participants and amounts given thats the math you need to know to firm up your beliefs. If you want to be in the know.

"Randomized trial of vitamin D supplementation to prevent seasonal influenza A in schoolchildren - This study suggests that vitamin D3 supplementation during the winter may reduce the incidence of influenza A, especially in specific subgroups of schoolchildren." - American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (March 2010)

That's the power of vitamin D just in time for those with grandchildren or children, if you're so blessed, flu season and fears that the vaccine could harm them. We say don't be afraid and that your fears are largely unfounded - but we will admit what's true for the majority isn't true for everyone. You have to do what's right for you and your situation. Vitamin D seems to be, if you're not overly supplementing yourself and family now, the answer to vaccine fears.

The amounts given to the children exceed what the government says is the safe high limit for the vitamin. Though the amount given the children didn't exceed the government limits plus the "safe upper limit." While vitamin D can be toxic what the government considers recommended levels aren't the same amounts that professionals recommend.

"Can vitamin D be harmful? - Signs of toxicity include nausea, vomiting, poor appetite, constipation, weakness, and weight loss. And by raising blood levels of calcium, too much vitamin D can cause confusion, disorientation, and problems with heart rhythm. Excess vitamin D can also damage the kidneys. The safe upper limit for vitamin D is 1,000 IU/day for infants and 2,000 IU for children and adults. Vitamin D toxicity almost always occurs from overuse of supplements. Excessive sun exposure doesn't cause vitamin D poisoning because the body limits the amount of this vitamin it produces." - National Institutes of Health (Consumer Fact Sheet)

We're not comfortable recommending exceeding levels beyond what the researchers used in their research. We are curious as to their intentions of the researchers in exceeding the levels in trying to achieve their findings. Again since we can't afford to access the entire study we can't speculate as to what their motivations might have been. We can speculate that researchers don't expect government recommended levels to contribute to our overall health. That's what we'd like to see researched.

"Osteoporosis guide to help treat brittle bones - Take 400 to 1,000 IUs of vitamin D per day for those aged less than 50, and 800 to 2,000 IUs daily for those 50 and older." - CBCNews (Oct 12, 2010)

We weren't comfortable recommending exceeding the US government's levels but the Canadian government feels comfortable doing so for those older than 50. The research shows that illnesses and age can be a time where we get comfortable with what we eat which probably doesn't include a wide variety of fresh foods nor much sunlight all of which decreases our vitamin D levels. When we made our prior suggestions it was without full knowledge of the current research though there was plenty of prior studies that made the suggestion more than likely.

"A recent review article published by Loyola's nursing school researchers concluded that adequate intake of vitamin D may prevent or delay the onset of diabetes and reduce complications for those who have already been diagnosed." -  Loyola University Health System (Newswire)

When we buy vitamin D we go for the cheapest price rather than for any concern for its form. Until the most recent research we bought by the International Unit rather than whether its natural or synthetic. We didn't even realize until we made a recent purchase of the supplement that it was available in two (2) forms. When we sought information from the purchaser we discovered conflicting information than that available from our government.

"Vitamin D is found in supplements (and fortified foods) in two different forms: D2 (ergocalciferol) and D3 (cholecalciferol). Both increase vitamin D in the blood, but the D3 form may do it better and keep levels raised for a longer time. Many supplements now provide vitamin D3 instead of D2." - National Institutes of Health (Consumer Fact Sheet)

What excited us even further was that the vitamin was good at reducing children's chances of contracting the flu. We'd like to speculate that what would work with children would also work with teens and seniors. That isn't quite what the study says. The indication is that prior use might even work against you in the protection department.

"Vitamin D better than vaccines at preventing flu, report claims - Altogether 354 children took part in the trial, which took place during the winter of 2008-09, before the swine flu epidemic. Vitamin D was found to protect against influenza A, which caused last year's epidemic, but not against the less common influenza B." - The Sunday Times (March 15, 2010)

The same way we suggested adding Vitamin D to "gold pepper" to make its health effect work efficient and effective when it comes to the maximum amount of Vitamin D protection combining D with calcium has a more profound and health effect as well. We know you're going to tell us the headline that calcium use can hurt you but if you read the specifics you'll discover the following:

"Calcium pills may raise heart attack risk - A recent study suggested a link between calcium and heart attacks, so researchers from the University of Auckland, New Zealand, reviewed 11 studies of people taking calcium, without also taking vitamin D, which included almost 12,000 people." - CDCNews (July 30, 2010)

That's true that calcium is bad for your heart if you don't take it in combination. Would we speculate that you should add calcium to "gold pepper" and vitamin D? No, not just yet. We need more research to make us take that step. After all we aren't doctors and review the news on health and not the science as much as what's behind the science. Even if we were doctors its doubtful that we'd still be likely to make or take the step of making that speculation. We've been concerned about reactions from combinations and regardless of the source of the supplements they're still chemicals. Reactions are still a major concern.