3 ms·
That is actually a low dose.
by rapsey 10mo ago
That is actually a low dose.
- kylecazar 10mo agoYeah, I showed a really mild deficiency in my work so they just suggested adding a low daily dose for me. I wouldn't expect to have had any side effects.
- ltbarcly3 10mo agoI was very deficient and they gave me 50k UI per day prescription vitamin D3 for 60 days. Sure enough I was high-normal on my next test. 800ui is likely not enough to have any effect unless you consistently take it for years.
- kylecazar 10mo agoThat's wild. I've never heard of such a high dose being prescribed daily. Yes, I wouldn't expect to notice anything on my dose.
- seba_dos1 10mo agoIt was for 60 days. If they continued to take this much indefinitely it would surely cause troubles, but 60 days when starting from deep deficiency is reasonable.
- ltbarcly3 10mo agoI was very very low, googling my level 'risk of rickets' came up!
- Izkata 10mo agoEven that sounds extreme. The "Vitamin D Hammer" for people extremely deficient is 50k IU just once, not even for a temporary period.
- seba_dos1 10mo agoIt is high, but it's not extreme. 50k IU just once is an equivalent of about 7000 IU daily for a week, which won't really move the needle much if you're seriously deficient (in fact, it's still within what's considered a safe daily dose for healthy people - you can produce more than that from sunlight alone). You can feel free to take your "hammer" weekly, no deficiency required. When I took >5000 IU daily for three months, I only raised 25(OH) D level in my blood from 9 to 30 ng/ml, and there's no evidence of toxicity below 150 ng/ml. Of course, when dealing with high doses you need to keep your levels in check, as absorption can differ between individuals.