#1  
Old 06-13-2010, 06:39 AM
D Bergy D Bergy is offline
Enlightener
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 715
D Bergy is a jewel in the roughD Bergy is a jewel in the roughD Bergy is a jewel in the rough
Default Vitamin D supplements lack D

I think the supplement industry is its own worst enemy. How hard is it to test your products on occasion, to make sure they contain what is advertised?

This is what gives credence to the lack of regulation in this industry.

SAN ANTONIO -- Multiple sclerosis (MS) patients taking over-the-counter vitamin D aren't getting what they're paying for, or what their neurologists recommend, according to a study presented here. The mean vitamin D content from 10 OTC brands was only 33% of what the label claimed, with the actual content ranging from less than 1% to 82% of the advertised level. The study was presented at the meeting of the Joint Consortium of Multiple Sclerosis Centers and America's Committee on Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis.


http://www.medpagetoday.com/MeetingC...-ACTRIMS/20522



Dan
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 06-13-2010, 09:21 AM
Cookie's Avatar
Cookie Cookie is offline
Lovin' life~
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: JerSea
Posts: 1,964
Blog Entries: 10
Cookie has a spectacular aura aboutCookie has a spectacular aura about
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by D Bergy View Post
This is what gives credence to the lack of regulation in this industry.
Absolutely.

People invest alot of blind trust in supplements, and most don't even know where they're originally manufactured. Like me, up until recently.

Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06-13-2010, 11:51 AM
athletic dept's Avatar
athletic dept athletic dept is offline
Guide
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 343
athletic dept will become famous soon enough
Default

I wouldn't put any trust in any studies. They are all slanted to put the worst light on supplements, all to sway public opinion. Looks like it worked on you.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 06-14-2010, 06:43 PM
D Bergy D Bergy is offline
Enlightener
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 715
D Bergy is a jewel in the roughD Bergy is a jewel in the roughD Bergy is a jewel in the rough
Default

Whenever I hear the word "all" or "never" used, I can be pretty sure it is not true. Your statement assures us that there are no studies that point to benefits from supplements. That certainly is not the case, and I am not sure why you would make such an obviously false statement.

So what would be the motivation of doctors using vitamin D therapy for MS, to discredit the very supplements they are recommending to their patents?

Maybe they just want the labeled amount of D to be what is in the product? I realize that is a pretty boring explanation, but it does seem to be the most reasonable motive.

Dan
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 06-14-2010, 07:24 PM
athletic dept's Avatar
athletic dept athletic dept is offline
Guide
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 343
athletic dept will become famous soon enough
Default

Your faith in the medical profession is charming. You must realize that doctors want the vitamin D to fail and will say or do anything to discredit them. Their poisonous medications make them more money.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 06-15-2010, 08:16 AM
Ted_Hutchinson's Avatar
Ted_Hutchinson Ted_Hutchinson is offline
Lecturer
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,979
Blog Entries: 5
Ted_Hutchinson is a jewel in the roughTed_Hutchinson is a jewel in the roughTed_Hutchinson is a jewel in the rough
Default

While I agree that it is reasonable to expect supplements to contain the specified amount of the claimed active ingredient, we also have to remember that RX prescription vitamin D2 Ergocalciferol is at best only one third as good as Over the Counter Cholecalciferol. So If you buy 50,000iu of D3 and it contains only have the stated amount you are still getting more active vitamin D than if you used vitamin D on prescription from your doctor.

In the UK there has been a long history of prescription vitamin D2 suffering from batch variability so it's probably true that ergocalciferol is less stable than cholecalciferol and there is also the fact that no one can predict if you are one of those people whose bodies don't recognize D2 at all so it does no good (or harm) however much you take, I've had reports of people taking 200,000iu daily of Ergocaciferol with absolutely no change in 25(OH)D.
While there is a great range of response to different doses (and different makes of D3) we can see from the chart below that EFFECTIVE intakes generally raise status to 60ng/ml.


The only way you can be sure what you are doing is working for you is to get regular 25(OH)D tested.

Don't forget that in the same way you may not be safe relying on the potency of vitamin D supplements so you also cannot rely on the amount of UVB that reaches the ground from sunlight. It all depends on the amount of ozone in the atmosphere where you live. In the country, providing you are not under a flight path or in the lee of a factory then your skin will make more D3 because there is a higher UVB ratio than someone at the same latitude spending the same amount of time at the same time of day but who lives in town.

Bear in mind the response to D3 also varies with the fat content of the meal you consume with your D3. If you take it with the largest meal of the day and that meal has a good fat content ier butter/coconut oil/olive oil then it could be 50% more effective than the same D3 taken without food or with a low/no fat meal. It's worth always getting your D3 in an oil based gel to ensure it's starting off in fat. These Country Life, Vitamin D3, 5,000 IU, certainly work for me and my partner as both of us have 25(OH)D's in above 64ng/ml.
We also make sure we get plenty of sun exposure. I think there will be other benefits to health from sun exposure apart from the Vitamin D3 route. So by taking a basic amount to cover daily vitamin D3 needs and using sun exposure to raise the stored reserves of D3 you can be sure you won't get to toxicity status. (the amount of vitamin D your skin makes is regulated according to your 25(OH)D status. People with low vitamin D levels make more D3 given sun exposure than a person with a high vitamin D level spending the same time in the same sun at the same latitude. The higher your vitamin D status gets, the less your skin makes from sun exposure. Bear in mind it's the reverse for cholesterol. The higher your cholesterol level the more D3 your skin can produce the lower your cholesterol level the LESS vitamin D can be made. (UVB acts on cholesterol to convert it to D3)
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 06-15-2010, 08:31 AM
Ted_Hutchinson's Avatar
Ted_Hutchinson Ted_Hutchinson is offline
Lecturer
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,979
Blog Entries: 5
Ted_Hutchinson is a jewel in the roughTed_Hutchinson is a jewel in the roughTed_Hutchinson is a jewel in the rough
Default

The consumerlabs report found defects in those brands that also contained vitamin K or calcium.

I don't think anyone really needs to supplement with calcium, We should be getting that from food and water. Vitamin K2 is extremely important and if you aren't getting sufficient from your diet then a dedicated complex of vitamin k formsLife Extension, Super K, with Advanced K2 Complex, would be more effective.

Code WAB666 saves $5 at IHERB. I use IHERB because it's shipping to the UK is cheapest. You may find the same products at Amazon/vitacost/Swanson's cheaper depending on delivery charge locally.

If anyone knows the brands referred to in the MS study I'd be interested to know. Doctor Davis at Heartscanblog has been having a go at Nature Made for poor response in several of his patients

Another point that may be relevant is the fact that UVA light degrades vitamin D3. If you (or perhaps the shop selling D3) kept in in a shop window or on the windowsill at home then the UVA penetrating through the glass would be sufficient to lower the potency of the contents. Keep your D3 in a drawer. If you've a bulk supply then you can freeze it, it's also pretty robust to heat so you can also bake with it in with the butter content but leave your D3 in the UVA light and it's processed into suprasterols the body doesn't use.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 06-15-2010, 03:22 PM
Cookie's Avatar
Cookie Cookie is offline
Lovin' life~
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: JerSea
Posts: 1,964
Blog Entries: 10
Cookie has a spectacular aura aboutCookie has a spectacular aura about
Default

Great info, Ted_Hutchinson. Thank you.

I understand what you're saying about 'relying on the potency' and I would be inclined to chalk it up to poor storage if one brand tested under. The problem I have with this is the fact that there were 10 OTC brands tested and they ALL fell short.

Quote:
The mean vitamin D content from 10 OTC brands was only 33% of what the label claimed, with the actual content ranging from less than 1% to 82% of the advertised level.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 06-16-2010, 01:36 AM
Ted_Hutchinson's Avatar
Ted_Hutchinson Ted_Hutchinson is offline
Lecturer
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,979
Blog Entries: 5
Ted_Hutchinson is a jewel in the roughTed_Hutchinson is a jewel in the roughTed_Hutchinson is a jewel in the rough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cookie View Post
Great info, Ted_Hutchinson. Thank you.

I understand what you're saying about 'relying on the potency' and I would be inclined to chalk it up to poor storage if one brand tested under. The problem I have with this is the fact that there were 10 OTC brands tested and they ALL fell short.
Quote:
his group collected 10 bottles of OTC supplements from local and on-line retail pharmacies
This is hardly a comprehensive test of all brands. The idea that if you collected 10 samples of RX vitamin D DRISDOL or the equivalent you would not find exactly the same pattern of batch variability is frankly absurd when everyone knows that results from Ergocalciferol use are even more unpredictable than from OTC cholecalciferol. At least the cost of OTC vitamin D is minimal unlike the extortionate price the drug industry charges for prescription D2 which we know performs at best at only one third the potency of D3 AND MAY NOT be used by some people at all.

You stand a far better chance by buying D3 from an online store which has a high turnover and which doesn't have stock displayed in a shop window or near shelf lighting. Going for a higher rather than lower strength will also help counter the tendency to overstate the contents. But as we all need to check our 25(OH)D from time to time doing so will indicate if the brand you are using is effective or not.
Over the years I've used NOW FOODS 5000iu in olive oil
Healthy origins 5000iu and 10,000iu
and I'm now using
Country Life, Vitamin D3, 5,000 IU, 200 Softgels this uses MCT medium chain triglyceride oil (refined from coconut oil) Long shelf life, easily metabolized, although it does NOT contain omega 3 because it is well used by the body it tends to be omega 3 sparing so tends to help rather than hinder omega 3<> omega 6 ratio. It also tends to be calorie negative in that it speeds up base metabolic rate so using MCT tends to improve heart/lung/brain function by improving mitochondrial function.

From time to time I have also had availailable BIOTECH Pharmacal 50,000iu which I've used for STOSS therapy if I suspected I was getting a cold/flu or other infection. I haven't used these as a daily source of D3 though if you wanted ONE of these EACH WEEK may be a good idea.These are a dry powder in a capsule. If you wanted to add D3 to ice-cream or biscuit recipe to freeze/bake then it's very easy to pull the capsule shells apart and mix the fine white powder into some butter/oil as the recipe requires. Providing you mix well each portion will contain a roughly equal percentage of the total used. This may a route for those with elderly/Young family members who have difficulty taking tablets/capsules.

My 25(OH)D levels have always be consistent with the amount I take and the amount of sun/uvb I obtain.

If you lay naked in the midday sun your skin would not regulate to amounts below 2000iu. Your skin is in the business of maximizing D3 production and deals in 10~20,000iu at a time. I really don't see why anyone wastes time and money on piffling trivial amounts below 1000iu/daily.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 06-18-2010, 02:32 PM
Cookie's Avatar
Cookie Cookie is offline
Lovin' life~
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: JerSea
Posts: 1,964
Blog Entries: 10
Cookie has a spectacular aura aboutCookie has a spectacular aura about
Default

This is true, it wasn't a comprehensive test of all brands. However, these are 10 brands being offered to the general public with labels stating a specific strength. I get the whole 'consumer beware' warning, but this is false advertising unless it is specified on the bottle 'give or take 85% purity'...

It just isn't right. Which is why I would welcome regulation in some fashion in this instance.

And thank you again for the info. I will start buying cholecalciferol from online.




me *Ultraviolet-B for max D3
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 06-18-2010, 02:53 PM
Ted_Hutchinson's Avatar
Ted_Hutchinson Ted_Hutchinson is offline
Lecturer
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,979
Blog Entries: 5
Ted_Hutchinson is a jewel in the roughTed_Hutchinson is a jewel in the roughTed_Hutchinson is a jewel in the rough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cookie View Post
me *Ultraviolet-B for max D3
Vitamin D: UV The Original Source - How to Use It
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
vitamin d
Please reply to this thread with any new information or opinions.

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Vitamin D3 Supplements - Only Work If You Get Sunlight? limitme Vitamins & Supplements 22 09-20-2010 11:07 AM
My Theory on Nutrition...or Lack of! Kelly Thundercloud Nutrition 8 08-25-2010 06:45 AM
Vitamin supplements are largely a waste of money, says professor jw8725 Vitamins & Supplements 0 09-10-2009 08:35 PM
Lack of Vitamin D Linked to Depression in Elderly Harry Hirsute Mental Health 0 05-05-2008 02:55 PM
Vitamin E - Food Source vs. Supplements Harry Hirsute Vitamins & Supplements 0 11-25-2007 05:38 PM