3 ms·
If I read this right, they’re increasing the maximum non-prescription dose of vitamin D from 1000 IU/day to 2500 IU/day. This seems to be the official dose on t
by AdamH12113 3y ago
If I read this right, they’re increasing the maximum non-prescription dose of vitamin D from 1000 IU/day to 2500 IU/day. This seems to be the official dose on the label; nothing prevents you from taking extra pills. There’s some discussion of methodology; the new limit seems to be a maximum known-safe dosage for someone in the 95th percentile of vitamin D intake. There’s a fairly large safety margin built into these numbers for risk tolerance.
- treeman79 3y agoI had horrific migraines. Would walk into a store, and the lights would leave me completely dysfunctional within 10 minutes. Tons of triggers. Spent 18-20 hours a day in bed unable to function. After about a year of 3000u daily vitamin D, my migraines were mostly gone. Lights and most other triggers didn’t bother me at all. I did get tested at beginning and levels were quite low.
- lesquivemeau 3y agoWhat is your point ? I don't doubt your story but how is it relevant ? There is no established causation here
- chrismeller 3y ago> The UL itself was set by adjusting for uncertainty from a "no observed adverse effect level" intake value of 10,000 IU (250 µg)/day. That’s a very large safety margin.
- sacnoradhq 3y agoThe flaw in this "science" is it's one-size-fits-all rather than µg/kg. In addition, it doesn't take into account absorption, genetics, epigenetics, or much of anything except an average guess by age and gender. Picking magic numbers and asking people to stupidly follow them isn't science, it's blowing smoke. Science would be routinely checking levels of all vitamins, minerals, and micronutrients and asking patients to adjust their intake accordingly.