5 ms·
The widely used daily recommended amounts of Vitamin D (600 IU in the US and Canada) are wrong, by a factor of 10, and based on a math typo that no one caught u
by hammock 3y ago
The widely used daily recommended amounts of Vitamin D (600 IU in the US and Canada) are wrong, by a factor of 10, and based on a math typo that no one caught until 2017: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5541280/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5541280/. I guess many still don't realize this fact.
"We call public health authorities to consider designating as the RDA ... around 8000 IU for adults"
- leesec 3y agoIncredible.
- readthenotes1 3y agohttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4210929/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4210929/ Is the article that talks about the miscalculation
- bitshiftfaced 3y agoInteresting that they found that to meet the target threshold, you'd need to take well over the "tolerable upper intake" or 4000 IU.
- Filligree 3y agoThat was ten years ago, so was the recommendation updated? If not, I must assume the error might be in the newer calculation.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- hombre_fatal 3y agoCan you corroborate their opinion with other sources? It’s not very evidence based.
- mettamage 3y agoThis should be its own HN submission. I want a discussion on this. Edit: nevermind, it was posted 2 times already [1, 2]. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24768721 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24768721 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15867918 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15867918
- DANmode 3y agoThat's if you don't count the other fifty health threads it came up in...
- voisin 3y agoIsn’t the issue made worse by the fact that Vitamin D absorption is way lower if not in conjunction with Vitamin K? Or is this a myth?
- pazimzadeh 3y agoVitamin K is needed so that calcium doesn't build up in the vessels but goes to the bones where it's supposed to be. But, taking D and K at the exact same time reduces the absorption of D.
- MichaelZuo 3y agoSo those combination vitamin D, and K products are scams?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- Modified3019 3y agoNot at all. Suboptimal, but far better than taking nothing at all. There are loads of nutrients that technically compete for absorption, but generally it isn’t a concern unless you are taking a huge dose of one. Even then, it’s not like little dog is completely blocked. I’d have to look at the studies the above comment is referencing to determine how much of a concern it actually would be. Even if taking both together was 30% less effective than taking them apart, in the context that getting people to take a single pill daily with regard to timing is hard enough, it’s still a overall win. That said, I would agree such a situation should be reflected on the label.
- MichaelZuo 3y agoEvery packaging label I’ve ever seen clearly claims how many IUs there are. Let’s say it is 30%, there’s no way potential buyers, when they see ‘1000 IUs Vitamin D’ for example, will realize it actually means ‘700 IUs’. So I don’t see how your comment makes sense.
- skybrian 3y agoI'm reminded of "a lot of engineering is ensuring that you made an even number of sign errors." (That is, if the original calculations are wrong, but the result usually works out, it might not be caught.)