7 ms·

5000 IU is really too much. At best 2000, 2500 IU is good.

by tomatowurst 4y ago

dralley 4y ago
5000 isn't too much when you're catching up from a deficiency.
- BenjiWiebe 4y ago
  I took 15k IU daily (at the advice of my doctor) for several months at one point to get my levels back up. I don't remember the numbers, but my levels were extremely low.
Vecr 4y ago
No, 5000 IU per day is generally considered the highest non megadose. Make sure it is good quality (D3, USP in the US), and it should be fine. Some people say also to take K2 (also make sure it's USP in the US), but I'm not sure the exact supposed mechanism of protection from adverse effects from D3. Something about preventing calcium from leaching from the bones and accumulating in the blood, I think.
- pmoriarty 4y ago
  "Vitamin D controls the absorption of calcium into the blood. Vitamin K2 controls where that calcium ends up. "Over-supplementation of vitamin D3 without ample vitamin K2 leads to problems of excess calcium. "If calcium isn’t laid into bone, it will find itself in other tissues, like your arteries. Calcium in the arteries is BAD. It contributes to atherosclerosis and vessel stiffness." https://dralexrinehart.com/articles/the-vitamin-d-and-vitamin-k2-connection-understanding-the-mechanisms-what-to-test-and-how-much-d3-and-k2-to-take/ https://dralexrinehart.com/articles/the-vitamin-d-and-vitami...
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
mountainriver 4y ago
It really depends on the person. You just need to monitor your blood levels
LinuxBender 4y ago
I use 60,000 to 90,000 IU's per day and have been doing so for years. The most I have taken in a 24 hour period is 140,000 IU's. There is no way I could have started off at those levels however. It would have induced major hypercalcemia had I done that prior to mobilizing all the stored/misplaced calcium in my gut and vasculature. I am not suggesting anyone else do this. One must have a specific need when doing this. I only mention this to say that one can go well above the RDA/RDI that are highly contested to be far too low for modern diets, environmental inputs and lifestyles.
- TameAntelope 4y ago
  > Taking 60,000 international units (IU) a day of vitamin D for several months has been shown to cause toxicity. This level is many times higher than the U.S. Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA) for most adults of 600 IU of vitamin D a day. [0] I think you may be poisoning yourself. [0] https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/nutrition-and-healthy-eating/expert-answers/vitamin-d-toxicity/faq-20058108 https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/nutrition-and-h...
  - LinuxBender 4y ago
    That would certainly be true had I done that from day one as I had mentioned. Their documentation as with most medical documentation is based on the lowest common denominators. They will not risk explaining why one might do what I am doing.
    - TameAntelope 4y ago
      It seems true without qualification. What you're saying here has a lot in common with "woo", I hope you realize.
      - LinuxBender 4y ago
        I suppose time will tell. I've been doing this a number of years. I will check back in a few more years to see how things are going. Honestly the cholecalciferol levels are the least taboo of the biohacking I do with myself. The more risky testing I did was to see how high I could go on the tocotrienols, tocopherols and fibrinolytic enzymes before I ran into bleeding.
dragonwriter 4y ago
Unless you are a doctor that has been monitoring the poster, you have no idea if that is true. My blood levels are consistently deficient when I’m not taking 10,000 IU/day (and this is with a fair amount of daily sun exposure.) People have widely varying needs.

5000 IU is really too much. At best 2000, 2500 IU is good.

dralley 4y ago

5000 isn't too much when you're catching up from a deficiency.

BenjiWiebe 4y ago
I took 15k IU daily (at the advice of my doctor) for several months at one point to get my levels back up. I don't remember the numbers, but my levels were extremely low.

Vecr 4y ago

No, 5000 IU per day is generally considered the highest non megadose. Make sure it is good quality (D3, USP in the US), and it should be fine. Some people say also to take K2 (also make sure it's USP in the US), but I'm not sure the exact supposed mechanism of protection from adverse effects from D3. Something about preventing calcium from leaching from the bones and accumulating in the blood, I think.

pmoriarty 4y ago
"Vitamin D controls the absorption of calcium into the blood. Vitamin K2 controls where that calcium ends up. "Over-supplementation of vitamin D3 without ample vitamin K2 leads to problems of excess calcium. "If calcium isn’t laid into bone, it will find itself in other tissues, like your arteries. Calcium in the arteries is BAD. It contributes to atherosclerosis and vessel stiffness." https://dralexrinehart.com/articles/the-vitamin-d-and-vitamin-k2-connection-understanding-the-mechanisms-what-to-test-and-how-much-d3-and-k2-to-take/ https://dralexrinehart.com/articles/the-vitamin-d-and-vitami...
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

mountainriver 4y ago

It really depends on the person. You just need to monitor your blood levels

LinuxBender 4y ago

I use 60,000 to 90,000 IU's per day and have been doing so for years. The most I have taken in a 24 hour period is 140,000 IU's. There is no way I could have started off at those levels however. It would have induced major hypercalcemia had I done that prior to mobilizing all the stored/misplaced calcium in my gut and vasculature. I am not suggesting anyone else do this. One must have a specific need when doing this. I only mention this to say that one can go well above the RDA/RDI that are highly contested to be far too low for modern diets, environmental inputs and lifestyles.

TameAntelope 4y ago
> Taking 60,000 international units (IU) a day of vitamin D for several months has been shown to cause toxicity. This level is many times higher than the U.S. Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA) for most adults of 600 IU of vitamin D a day. [0] I think you may be poisoning yourself. [0] https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/nutrition-and-healthy-eating/expert-answers/vitamin-d-toxicity/faq-20058108 https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/nutrition-and-h...
- LinuxBender 4y ago
  That would certainly be true had I done that from day one as I had mentioned. Their documentation as with most medical documentation is based on the lowest common denominators. They will not risk explaining why one might do what I am doing.
  - TameAntelope 4y ago
    It seems true without qualification. What you're saying here has a lot in common with "woo", I hope you realize.
    - LinuxBender 4y ago
      I suppose time will tell. I've been doing this a number of years. I will check back in a few more years to see how things are going. Honestly the cholecalciferol levels are the least taboo of the biohacking I do with myself. The more risky testing I did was to see how high I could go on the tocotrienols, tocopherols and fibrinolytic enzymes before I ran into bleeding.

dragonwriter 4y ago

Unless you are a doctor that has been monitoring the poster, you have no idea if that is true. My blood levels are consistently deficient when I’m not taking 10,000 IU/day (and this is with a fair amount of daily sun exposure.) People have widely varying needs.