18 ms·

A psychiatrist I saw multiple years ago told me to start taking Vitamin D. I went more or less blindly with 5,000 IU after reading some internet articles. I go

A psychiatrist I saw multiple years ago told me to start taking Vitamin D. I went more or less blindly with 5,000 IU after reading some internet articles. I got my blood checked last year and decided I should probably actually know if I'm doing too much or too little. I was within 5% of the middle of the healthy range for vitamin D levels. For reference, 5,000 IU is >800% the FDA daily recommended value. People with indoor jobs and hobbies are probably not getting enough.

ashtonkem 6y ago
Also, the absorption of it orally appears to be kind of finicky.
- hollander 6y ago
  Vitamin D intake via supplements (vitamin pills) results in vitamin D storage in fat in you body. The storage decays over time, and it appears that intake via supplements decays twice as fast as intake via sun exposure.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - csdreamer7 6y ago
    Do you have a source?
- jimmaswell 6y ago
  Some things like vitamin K and magneseum help absorbtion.
  - ashtonkem 6y ago
    Vitamin K (specifically K2) is personally on my short list of vitamins that I think Americans are short on.
simonsarris 6y ago
> For reference, 5,000 IU is >800% the FDA daily recommended value. Unfortunately the daily recommended value was established erroneously and should be much higher. Many research papers mention this. For example: > The Institute of Medicine recommendation for adults younger than 70 years of age is 600 IU of vitamin D daily. We are told that this would achieve a level of 50 nmol/L in greater than 97.5% of individuals.6 Regrettably, a statistical error has resulted in erroneous recommendations by the Institute of Medicine leading to this conclusion and it might actually take 8800 IU of vitamin D to achieve this level in 97.5% of the population.7 This is a serious public health blunder. From the 2015 paper, Vitamin D for influenza https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4463890/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4463890/
- lisper 6y ago
  The next paragraph is even more interesting: > A colleague of mine and I have introduced vitamin D at doses that have achieved greater than 100 nmol/L in most of our patients for the past number of years, and we now see very few patients in our clinics with the flu or influenzalike illness. In those patients who do have influenza, we have treated them with the vitamin D hammer, as coined by my colleague. This is a 1-time 50 000 IU dose of vitamin D3 or 10 000 IU 3 times daily for 2 to 3 days. The results are dramatic, with complete resolution of symptoms in 48 to 72 hours. One-time doses of vitamin D at this level have been used safely and have never been shown to be toxic.8 We urgently need a study of this intervention. The cost of vitamin D is about a penny for 1000 IU, so this treatment costs less than a dollar. Wow. Why isn't this more prominent on the covid radar?
  - londons_explore 6y ago
    Nobody makes any money if it turns out to be a good treatment, so nobody will fund the research
    - news_hacker 6y ago
      Sorry you're getting downvoted for having a healthy sense of cynicism.
Broken_Hippo 6y ago
To be fair: It isn't just folks with indoor jobs and hobbies. I've discussed this with my doctor after being severely low on vitamin D. It caused physical pain. I'm far enough north that it is impossible to get the sunlight needed during the winter. I still have days, but they are short without strong sun - not to mention that it is too cold to go without a jacket. So, supplements at least during the winter. During the summer, I have the option of getting at least 15 minutes of sunlight a day (May through August). Being outside isn't enough: I need to make sure that more than just my face is exposed. But then, on top of it all, I wound up taking a medicine that not only makes me sensitive to sun, but a bit more prone to a milder form of skin cancer. Sunscreen doesn't help with vitamin D production. The end result is that I wind up taking vitamin D all year and simply get my levels checked from time to time. Luckily, the over-the-counter stuff does the trick (there isn't the variety in vitamins here as there is in the US).
- sneak 6y ago
  Sunlight exposure is also bad for you; taking it orally is the way to go for most people. As pointed out upthread, most supplements are hilariously low-dose. I take 20k IU, 3 times per week. (most supplements are like 1000IU per pill, but 3000IU pills can be found)
  - nradov 6y ago
    There is no evidence that a little bit of daily sunlight exposure increases all-cause mortality.
  - catalogia 6y ago
    > Sunlight exposure is also bad for you Assuming 'linear no-threshold'? I find that pretty suspect.
  - Ididntdothis 6y ago
    Isn’t some sunlight exposure good in general? I think it’s going too far to declare sunlight as genealogy dangerous. It definitely helps me with my mood.
TheSpiceIsLife 6y ago
> People with indoor jobs and hobbies are probably not getting enough. I argue that if you go outside and wear the appropriate sun protection—long pants,long sleeves, neck covered, broad rim hat, and wear sunscreen on the exposed parts—you can't get enough sun exposure to produce enough Vitamin D.
- WWLink 6y ago
  If you do get enough sun exposure without the protective clothing you'll probably damage the shit out of your skin.
  - jakeogh 6y ago
    Fortunatly, its fine. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23024436 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23024436
    - TheSpiceIsLife 6y ago
      How much of the body must be exposed?
  - jriot 6y ago
    I live in south Louisiana and I am often outside without a shirt or sunscreen on, my skin is not damaged.
JPKab 6y ago
Okay now I'm wondering if I should go get tested for vitamin d deficiency. I live in Colorado and therefore we have a lot of ultraviolet light and I do get outside as much as possible. However I'm wondering if that's still not enough. Seems reasonable that it's not based on your experience.
- the_jeremy 6y ago
  I live in Colorado, though I definitely don't try to get outside as much as possible. If you have symptoms of deficiency, nothing wrong with asking for testing vitamin d levels when you get a blood test. If you don't have symptoms, nothing to fix.

ashtonkem 6y ago

Also, the absorption of it orally appears to be kind of finicky.

hollander 6y ago
Vitamin D intake via supplements (vitamin pills) results in vitamin D storage in fat in you body. The storage decays over time, and it appears that intake via supplements decays twice as fast as intake via sun exposure.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- csdreamer7 6y ago
  Do you have a source?
jimmaswell 6y ago
Some things like vitamin K and magneseum help absorbtion.
- ashtonkem 6y ago
  Vitamin K (specifically K2) is personally on my short list of vitamins that I think Americans are short on.

simonsarris 6y ago

> For reference, 5,000 IU is >800% the FDA daily recommended value. Unfortunately the daily recommended value was established erroneously and should be much higher. Many research papers mention this. For example: > The Institute of Medicine recommendation for adults younger than 70 years of age is 600 IU of vitamin D daily. We are told that this would achieve a level of 50 nmol/L in greater than 97.5% of individuals.6 Regrettably, a statistical error has resulted in erroneous recommendations by the Institute of Medicine leading to this conclusion and it might actually take 8800 IU of vitamin D to achieve this level in 97.5% of the population.7 This is a serious public health blunder. From the 2015 paper, Vitamin D for influenza https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4463890/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4463890/

lisper 6y ago
The next paragraph is even more interesting: > A colleague of mine and I have introduced vitamin D at doses that have achieved greater than 100 nmol/L in most of our patients for the past number of years, and we now see very few patients in our clinics with the flu or influenzalike illness. In those patients who do have influenza, we have treated them with the vitamin D hammer, as coined by my colleague. This is a 1-time 50 000 IU dose of vitamin D3 or 10 000 IU 3 times daily for 2 to 3 days. The results are dramatic, with complete resolution of symptoms in 48 to 72 hours. One-time doses of vitamin D at this level have been used safely and have never been shown to be toxic.8 We urgently need a study of this intervention. The cost of vitamin D is about a penny for 1000 IU, so this treatment costs less than a dollar. Wow. Why isn't this more prominent on the covid radar?
- londons_explore 6y ago
  Nobody makes any money if it turns out to be a good treatment, so nobody will fund the research
  - news_hacker 6y ago
    Sorry you're getting downvoted for having a healthy sense of cynicism.

Broken_Hippo 6y ago

To be fair: It isn't just folks with indoor jobs and hobbies. I've discussed this with my doctor after being severely low on vitamin D. It caused physical pain. I'm far enough north that it is impossible to get the sunlight needed during the winter. I still have days, but they are short without strong sun - not to mention that it is too cold to go without a jacket. So, supplements at least during the winter. During the summer, I have the option of getting at least 15 minutes of sunlight a day (May through August). Being outside isn't enough: I need to make sure that more than just my face is exposed. But then, on top of it all, I wound up taking a medicine that not only makes me sensitive to sun, but a bit more prone to a milder form of skin cancer. Sunscreen doesn't help with vitamin D production. The end result is that I wind up taking vitamin D all year and simply get my levels checked from time to time. Luckily, the over-the-counter stuff does the trick (there isn't the variety in vitamins here as there is in the US).

sneak 6y ago
Sunlight exposure is also bad for you; taking it orally is the way to go for most people. As pointed out upthread, most supplements are hilariously low-dose. I take 20k IU, 3 times per week. (most supplements are like 1000IU per pill, but 3000IU pills can be found)
- nradov 6y ago
  There is no evidence that a little bit of daily sunlight exposure increases all-cause mortality.
- catalogia 6y ago
  > Sunlight exposure is also bad for you Assuming 'linear no-threshold'? I find that pretty suspect.
- Ididntdothis 6y ago
  Isn’t some sunlight exposure good in general? I think it’s going too far to declare sunlight as genealogy dangerous. It definitely helps me with my mood.

TheSpiceIsLife 6y ago

> People with indoor jobs and hobbies are probably not getting enough. I argue that if you go outside and wear the appropriate sun protection—long pants,long sleeves, neck covered, broad rim hat, and wear sunscreen on the exposed parts—you can't get enough sun exposure to produce enough Vitamin D.

WWLink 6y ago
If you do get enough sun exposure without the protective clothing you'll probably damage the shit out of your skin.
- jakeogh 6y ago
  Fortunatly, its fine. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23024436 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23024436
  - TheSpiceIsLife 6y ago
    How much of the body must be exposed?
- jriot 6y ago
  I live in south Louisiana and I am often outside without a shirt or sunscreen on, my skin is not damaged.

JPKab 6y ago

Okay now I'm wondering if I should go get tested for vitamin d deficiency. I live in Colorado and therefore we have a lot of ultraviolet light and I do get outside as much as possible. However I'm wondering if that's still not enough. Seems reasonable that it's not based on your experience.

the_jeremy 6y ago
I live in Colorado, though I definitely don't try to get outside as much as possible. If you have symptoms of deficiency, nothing wrong with asking for testing vitamin d levels when you get a blood test. If you don't have symptoms, nothing to fix.