HER2 Support Group Forums

HER2 Support Group Forums (https://her2support.org/vbulletin/index.php)
-   Diet and Nutrition (https://her2support.org/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=55)
-   -   Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info. (https://her2support.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=43711)

R.B. 08-07-2013 03:46 PM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
And another must watch Vitamin D lecture on breast cancer from Grass Roots Health

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=by-MMkep_Yw#at=21

R.B. 08-08-2013 03:40 AM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
Another must watch video, particularly for those with at interest in ER positive breast cancer.

Vitamin D may have estrogen inhibition qualities through a number of mechanisms

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2A9...e_gdata_player

roz123 08-08-2013 01:21 PM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
how much should we be taking? im on 2000iud daily
how often should our levels be tested?

R.B. 10-04-2013 02:31 PM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
HI all (-:

There is more information here http://her2support.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=58793

(I started this new / follow-on vitamin D thread on the main board in the hope it may get a wider audience, and over time a greater number of visitors)


roz123 hopefully the additional information of the thread above may help :)

R.B. 12-08-2013 05:18 AM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
The recent press comment on vitamin D made my heart sink. The summary is much more measured, and certainly the paper does not warrant the press headlines; maybe the author made statements . . . - I do not know.

The paper reports that many studies associate higher vitamin D with lower occurrence of many diseases.

They failed to manage to link fairly modest supplementation to change in disease profile, which is not altogether surprising for a variety of reasons, including that maybe the levels of supplementation tried were insufficient.

It is very clear that increasing numbers of people are vitamin D deficient; maybe increasing numbers have poor digestion too, but none of this alters the facts that there are only two way to get high level of vitamin D sunshine or supplementation, (even fish at every meal will not provide the sort of vitamin D levels achieved with modest sun exposure, without sunscreen when UVB can penetrate the atmosphere etc etc) and logically if you are not absorbing it or using more because the body is under stress, then surely the answer is more vitamin D, not less ?????? which brings us back to a choice between sunshine or supplementation - there is no other way - and for most the luxury of stripping off a good proportion of our clothes for a little siesta in the sun at midday is not in reality an option, even if the sun obliges and the skies are not too smogy . . . the reality is supplementation may not be optimal but other than sun it is the only "game in town".

Unfortunately I have not seen the full paper as yet as it is expensive to look at them on a regular basis.

5o micrograms=1000 iu is not going to have a huge effect on vitamin d levels as the table on the Grass Roots site shows. http://grassrootshealth.net/ (20 nanograms =50nmol/l), and according to the papers they drew together health benefits are not seen until blood levels get into the 40ng/l +

http://grassrootshealth.net/media/do...art_032310.pdf

An alternate conclusion might have been are there other reasons why people who are supplementing are unexpectedly low in vitamin D if that is what is being implied; do people have poor digestion and so are not absorbing properly / and or were participants taking the supplements regularly (according to Dr Holick by their own admission in one trial no) / and or are higher doses are needed to see significant effect / or is this in any was a reflection in part that the growing number who are obese have a higher vitamin D requirement / or that sun exposure sunscreen blocker use is rising / or dairy intake and or other foods that contain vitamin D is falling / and as mentioned in the paper might those who have illness sub-clinical or full blown illnesses may use more vitamin D . . .

There really does need to be a more measured way of communicating scientific reports to the public - no wonder people are confused - more importantly inaccurate communication will have subtle but important health consequences for a large number of people


Vitamin D status and ill health: a systematic review
Prof Philippe Autier MD a b Corresponding AuthorEmail Address, Prof Mathieu Boniol PhD a b, Cécile Pizot MSc a, Prof Patrick Mullie PhD a c
Summary
Low serum concentrations of 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25[OH]D) have been associated with many non-skeletal disorders. However, whether low 25(OH)D is the cause or result of ill health is not known. We did a systematic search of prospective and intervention studies that assessed the effect of 25(OH)D concentrations on non-skeletal health outcomes in individuals aged 18 years or older. We identified 290 prospective cohort studies (279 on disease occurrence or mortality, and 11 on cancer characteristics or survival), and 172 randomised trials of major health outcomes and of physiological parameters related to disease risk or inflammatory status. Investigators of most prospective studies reported moderate to strong inverse associations between 25(OH)D concentrations and cardiovascular diseases, serum lipid concentrations, inflammation, glucose metabolism disorders, weight gain, infectious diseases, multiple sclerosis, mood disorders, declining cognitive function, impaired physical functioning, and all-cause mortality. High 25(OH)D concentrations were not associated with a lower risk of cancer, except colorectal cancer. Results from intervention studies did not show an effect of vitamin D supplementation on disease occurrence, including colorectal cancer. In 34 intervention studies including 2805 individuals with mean 25(OH)D concentration lower than 50 nmol/L at baseline supplementation with 50 μg per day or more did not show better results. Supplementation in elderly people (mainly women) with 20 μg vitamin D per day seemed to slightly reduce all-cause mortality. The discrepancy between observational and intervention studies suggests that low 25(OH)D is a marker of ill health. Inflammatory processes involved in disease occurrence and clinical course would reduce 25(OH)D, which would explain why low vitamin D status is reported in a wide range of disorders. In elderly people, restoration of vitamin D deficits due to ageing and lifestyle changes induced by ill health could explain why low-dose supplementation leads to slight gains in survival.

R.B. 12-08-2013 05:22 AM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
It appears vitamin D helps muscle function too . . .


Vitamin D deficiency puts elite ballet dancers at risk of injury
Researchers say vitamin supplements can help ward off injuries caused by long hours inside with little exposure to sunlight

http://www.theguardian.com/science/2...dancers-injury

Vitamin D deficiency caused by their intensive indoor training regime is putting elite ballet dancers at increased risk of injury, a study has found.

Researchers at the Royal National Orthopaedic hospital (RNOH), University of Wolverhampton and the Jerwood Centre at Birmingham Royal Ballet have urged trainers and medical professionals to consider providing dancers with vitamin D supplements during the winter after results showed it had a significant influence on improving muscle function and reducing injury occurrence.

Dr Roger Wolman, consultant in rheumatology and sport and exercise medicine at the RNOH, said: "We know vitamin D [deficiency] can affect the bones. What's become clear … is vitamin D is also important for muscles.

. . .

The research, published on Friday in the Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, involved 24 dancers at the Birmingham Royal Ballet who dance between six and eight hours a day and a total of 38 hours a week, meaning they get little exposure to sunlight, the main natural source of vitamin D.

Before any were given supplements, all were found to be vitamin D deficient or insufficient (not as severe but still low) during winter and only 15% achieved normal levels during the summer. Subsequently, 17 of the dancers were given oral vitamin D3 and seven were not. Significant increases in muscle strength and vertical jump performance were found among the group taking vitamin D. They also suffered fewer injuries, with 12 reporting no injuries and five a single injury, compared to those not given the supplements, only one of whom suffered no injuries with five reporting one injury and one dancer reporting two.

Although the group assessed was relatively small, Wolman said the results were "still convincing. With years of experience of working with dancers in England, we do see a high number of them come to the clinic with low vitamin D levels". He said the findings could be extrapolated to cover other sports that take place indoors, although many involve at least some outdoor training.

R.B. 02-09-2014 11:57 AM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
^ Most modern cod liver oil has the vitamin D taken out as part of the refining process and only a small amount put back in viz 400iu per teaspoon as against sometimes the several thousand units present in unrefined oils.

Things are rarely straight forward!

R.B. 02-13-2014 02:28 PM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
http://www.vitamindwiki.com/dl2369&display&x=300&y=255

More on this later (-:

From an excellent vitamin D site and resource

http://www.vitamindwiki.com/VitaminDWiki

R.B. 04-06-2014 02:45 PM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
More from Vitamin D wiki :)

http://www.vitamindwiki.com/Cancer+-+Breast

R.B. 04-06-2014 03:01 PM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
^ and this belongs with the post and graph above.

It is hugely significant; it is the only measure I have seen so far of vitamin D levels of groups living as they have for thousands of years, and in dark skinned people who have the equivalent of a factor 15 or more sunscreen built into their skins.

Notwithstanding the very powerful natural sun screen their vitamin D level average 115nmol/l, (and from memory the levels in pregnant women were higher 149nmol/l - there must be another part to this paper, not referenced here).

This dispels the often cited view that people with dark skins do not need as much vitamin D, (and would have significant implications for levels in pregnancy - I will try and find the reference).


http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/blog/...abe-of-africa/

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22264449

Br J Nutr. 2012 Nov 14;108(9):1557-61. doi: 10.1017/S0007114511007161. Epub 2012 Jan 23.
Traditionally living populations in East Africa have a mean serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentration of 115 nmol/l.
Luxwolda MF1, Kuipers RS, Kema IP, Dijck-Brouwer DA, Muskiet FA.
Author information
Abstract

Cutaneous synthesis of vitamin D by exposure to UVB is the principal source of vitamin D in the human body. Our current clothing habits and reduced time spent outdoors put us at risk of many insufficiency-related diseases that are associated with calcaemic and non-calcaemic functions of vitamin D. Populations with traditional lifestyles having lifelong, year-round exposure to tropical sunlight might provide us with information on optimal vitamin D status from an evolutionary perspective. We measured the sum of serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D₂ and D₃ (25(OH)D) concentrations of thirty-five pastoral Maasai (34 (SD 10) years, 43 % male) and twenty-five Hadzabe hunter-gatherers (35 (SD 12) years, 84 % male) living in Tanzania. They have skin type VI, have a moderate degree of clothing, spend the major part of the day outdoors, but avoid direct exposure to sunlight when possible. Their 25(OH)D concentrations were measured by liquid chromatography-MS/MS. The mean serum 25(OH)D concentrations of Maasai and Hadzabe were 119 (range 58-167) and 109 (range 71-171) nmol/l, respectively. These concentrations were not related to age, sex or BMI. People with traditional lifestyles, living in the cradle of mankind, have a mean circulating 25(OH)D concentration of 115 nmol/l. Whether this concentration is optimal under the conditions of the current Western lifestyle is uncertain, and should as a possible target be investigated with concomitant appreciation of other important factors in Ca homeostasis that we have changed since the agricultural revolution.

R.B. 07-05-2014 09:00 AM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
"85 percent less risk of death from Breast Cancer when vitamin D levels higher than 30 ng – May 2012" (In post menopausal women)

http://www.vitamindwiki.com/85+perce...80%93+May+2012




Vitamin D status at breast cancer diagnosis: correlation with tumor characteristics, disease outcome and genetic determinants of vitamin D insufficiency

Carcinogenesis (2012), doi: 10.1093/carcin/bgs187; Received November 29, 2011; First published online: May 23, 2012
Sigrid Hatse*,1, Diether Lambrechts2, Annemieke Verstuyf3, Ann Smeets4, Barbara Brouwers1, Thijs Vandorpe4, Olivier Brouckaert4, Gilian Peuteman2, Annouschka Laenen5, Lieve Verlinden3, Carsten Kriebitzsch3, Anne-Sophie Dieudonné4, Robert Paridaens4, Patrick Neven4, Marie-Rose Christiaens4, Roger Bouillon3 and Hans Wildiers1
1 Catholic University Leuven and University Hospitals, Laboratory of Experimental Oncology and Department of General Medical Oncology, Leuven, Belgium
2 Catholic University of Leuven, Vesalius Research Center, Leuven, Belgium
3 Catholic University of Leuven, Laboratory of Experimental Medicine and Endocrinology, Leuven, Belgium
4 University Hospitals Leuven, Multidisciplinary Breast Center, Leuven, Belgium
5 Catholic University of Leuven, Interuniversity Centre for Biostatistics and Statistical Bioinformatics, Leuven, Belgium
*Corresponding author Sigrid Hatse Contact email: sigrid.hatse@med.kuleuven.be Catholic University Leuven and University Hospitals, Laboratory of Experimental Oncology and Department of General Medical Oncology, Leuven, Belgium

Introduction: We correlated serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 (25OHD) levels with tumor characteristics and clinical disease outcome in breast cancer patients and assessed the impact of genetic determinants of vitamin D insufficiency.

Methods: We collected serum from 1800 early breast cancer patients at diagnosis, measured 25OHD by radioimmunoassay and determined genetic variants in vitamin D-related genes by Sequenom. Multivariable regression models were used to correlate 25OHD levels with tumor characteristics. Cox proportional hazard models were used to assess overall survival (OS), disease-specific survival (DSS) and disease-free interval (DFI).

Results: Lower 25OHD serum levels significantly correlated with larger tumor size at diagnosis (p=0.0063) but not with lymph node invasion, receptor status, or tumor grade. Genetic variants in 25-hydroxylase (CYP2R1) and vitamin D-binding protein significantly determined serum 25OHD levels but did not affect the observed association between serum 25OHD and tumor size.

High serum 25OHD (>30 ng/mL) at diagnosis significantly correlated with improved OS (p=0.0101) and DSS (p=0.0192) and additionally had a modest effect on DFI, which only became apparent after at least 3 years of follow-up.

When considering menopausal status, serum 25OHD had a strong impact on breast cancer-specific outcome in postmenopausal patients (hazards ratios for 25OHD >30 ng/mL versus ?30 ng/mL were 0.15 [p=0.0097] and 0.43 [p=0.0172] for DSS and DFI, respectively), whereas no association could be demonstrated in premenopausal patients.

Conclusion: High vitamin D levels at early breast cancer diagnosis correlate with lower tumor size and better OS, and improve breast cancer-specific outcome, especially in postmenopausal patients.

R.B. 07-05-2014 09:03 AM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
More breast vitamin D and breast cancer related trials on Vitamin D wiki

http://www.vitamindwiki.com/Cancer+-+Breast

R.B. 07-07-2014 02:31 AM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
A vitamin D centric video looking at vitamin D intake and breast cancer.

There are clearly lots of other potential factors and mechanisms that are not examined here, such as low iodine and omega 3:6 imbalances, genetic differences etc. but it contains some interesting material, and I cannot disagree with the conclusion :).


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GG1U...ature=youtu.be

R.B. 08-14-2014 03:25 AM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
A great :) highly informative chapter on the photo biology of vitamin D by Holick in this book, most of which can be viewed.

It includes the pathways by which vitamin D itself can act as an antioxidant in the skin.

The book itself is in the medical text book price league, and too new for second hand copies


http://books.google.com/books?id=w7h...in%20d&f=false

sdstarfish 08-24-2014 02:42 AM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
Roz, my doctor has me on 5,000 iu daily.

R.B. 10-03-2014 06:02 AM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
If anybody is in the UK and interested I am speaking at a Royal Society of Medicine food section conference on hidden nutritional deficiencies in my new role as recently appointed Chair of the McCarrison Society, which is a venerable society with its own widely recognized Journal 'Nutrition and Health'.

The Society has a long illustrious history, but is in need of a bit of revamping including a new web site.

I will be looking in whistle-stop fashion at deficiencies in nutrients particularly Iodine, Vitamin D, minerals, and imbalances in Omega 3 and 6 set within the context of the shoreline diet which arguably provided the conditions for out existence.

I am hoping to make the McCarrison Society a forum to bring together the Food Agricultural and Health sectors to the same table, which they never are, to try and bring focus on deficiencies such as Vitamin D, Iodine and secure the implementation of strategies to address them.



This is the link to the conference.


http://www.rsm.ac.uk/events/fhf01

R.B. 11-13-2014 05:32 AM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
^ Very many thanks to anybody who attended. I understand the RSM copies of presentations to attendees, and I have given them permission to give out my slides. I hope at some point to do a longer presentation with a couple of additional slides that I hope to get put up on the web.


Why researchers keep using small amounts of vitamin D viz 400iu in expensive trials with the expectation of a significant change in outcome (except in groups that are seriously deficient) is somewhat of a puzzle to me.

What I then find most sad is a doctor saying to me (which happened yesterday) for example that they had seen a paper that looked at vitamin d in pregnancy and no effect was seen; I understand the amount trialled was 400iu,which is not in the scale of things going to produce a very significant change in vitamin D levels.

The conversation was fortuitous in so far as it fired me up and I found the papers below which contain very useful data which should be more widely available

R.B. 11-13-2014 05:37 AM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
This may be of interest to those thinking about supplementing with Vitamin D and wanting information to share with their doctors. Breast cancer is specifically referred to in the discussion part of which I copy below. I also copy some data in healthy populations as to intake and outcome.

The paper is free and in full at the link below:



http://www.nutritionj.com/content/9/1/60

Impact of oral vitamin D supplementation on serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels in oncology

Pankaj G Vashi, Kristen Trukova, Carolyn A Lammersfeld, Donald P Braun and Digant Gupta*

"Background

Serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] is the major circulating form of vitamin D and a standard indicator of vitamin D status. Emerging evidence in the literature suggests a high prevalence of suboptimal vitamin D (as defined by serum 25(OH)D levels of <32 ng/ml) as well as an association between lower serum levels and higher mortality in cancer. We investigated the effect of oral vitamin D supplementation as a means for restoring suboptimal levels to optimal levels in cancer. "

"In order to put our study in context, we review here 3 studies in breast cancer that have evaluated the impact of vitamin D supplementation on serum 25(OH)D levels. Crew et al. examined the effects of standard-dose vitamin D supplementation on serum 25(OH)D levels in breast cancer patients. They observed that cholecalciferol 400 IU daily for 1 year raised serum 25(OH)D levels only modestly, by less than 3 ng/mL in only a small percentage of premenopausal women (< 15%). Although the RDA of vitamin D in premenopausal women is only 200 IU daily, their study suggested that a dose of 400 IU daily was inadequate in breast cancer patients, even to maintain skeletal health, and was probably too low for meaningful anticancer effects [28]. "


"When comparing it with the vitamin D dose response in healthy individuals, the literature yielded the following results. Talwar et al. showed that supplementation with 800 IU/d vitamin D3 in postmenopausal African American women raised the mean serum 25(OH)D concentration from a baseline of 18.7+/-8.2 ng/mL to 28.5+/-8.6 ng/mL at a 3 month interval [46]. In another study, Barger-Lux et al. showed that in a relatively replete group of white subjects, 1000 IU vitamin D3/d resulted in an increase of 5.2 ng/mL from a mean of 26.8 to 32 ng/mL [45]. Likewise Heaney et al reported a dose response of 0.28 ng/mL per 1 μg/40IU oral vitamin D3 supplemented [47]. Furthermore, Aloia et al. undertook a dose-finding study in African American and white men and women with the objective of investigating an algorithm for raising 25(OH)D concentrations to between 32 and 56 ng/mL. They suggested a dose of 3800 IU for those above a 25(OH)D threshold of 22 ng/mL and a dose of 5000 IU for those below that threshold [16]. "

R.B. 11-13-2014 05:46 AM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
To convert nmol/l to ng/ml - divide by 2.5 (approx)

or 2.5nmol/l = 1ng/ml

Here is a link where they do it for you.


http://www.endmemo.com/medical/unitc...Vitamin__D.php

R.B. 11-13-2014 05:59 AM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
This is a highly thought provoking and unusually data rich and so exceptional paper looking at the issue of vitamin D.

The second link; a table looking at vitamin D falls in submariners is highly thought provoking, as are all of the tables.

A definite recommend for a quick scan or more if you have the time for the data it presents.




http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/69/5/842.full

Vitamin D supplementation, 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations, and safety1,2

Reinhold Vieth

Many arguments favoring higher intakes of calcium and other nutrients have been based on evidence about the diets of prehistoric humans (1). Likewise, the circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D; calcidiol] concentrations of early humans were surely far higher than what is now regarded as normal. Humans evolved as naked apes in tropical Africa. The full body surface of our ancestors was exposed to the sun almost daily. In contrast, we modern humans usually cover all except about 5% of our skin surface and it is rare for us to spend time in unshielded sunlight. Our evolution has effectively designed us to live in the presence of far more vitamin D (calciferol) than what most of us get now, yet there is no consensus about what vitamin D intakes are optimal or safe.

See corresponding editorial on page 825.

Unlike anything else used in the fortification of foods, the purpose of vitamin D is to correct for what is an environmental deficit (less ultraviolet exposure) and not to correct for lack due to classical nutritional reasons. With a few exceptions reviewed by Takeuchi et al (2), there is little or no vitamin D in the kind of foods that humans normally eat. Therefore, conclusions about the efficacy and safety of vitamin D must be in the context of the role of environmental factors.

Before 1997, the recommended dietary allowance of vitamin D (RDA; 3) for infants and children was 10 μg (400 IU). In essence, the scientific basis for this dose was that it approximated what was in a teaspoon (5 mL) of cod-liver oil and had long been considered safe and effective in preventing rickets (4). The basis for adult vitamin D recommendations has been even more arbitrary. Thirty-six years ago, an expert committee on vitamin D could provide only anecdotal support for what it referred to as “the hypothesis of a small requirement” for vitamin D in adults and it recommended one-half the infant dose, just to ensure that adults obtain some from the diet (5). In England, an adult requirement of only 2.5 μg (100 IU)/d was substantiated on the basis of 7 adult women with severe nutritional osteomalacia whose bones showed a response when given this amount (6). The adult RDA of 5 μg (200 IU)/d was described as a “generous allowance” in the 1989 version of American recommended intakes (3)—but why was this “generous” and in relation to what? It is remarkable that despite the widespread intake of 5 μg (200 IU) vitamin D/d, there is still no published data showing that this dose has any effect on the serum 25(OH)D concentration in adults.



http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/69...expansion.html

Decline in 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] concentrations under acutely sun-deprived living conditions

R.B. 12-12-2014 01:17 PM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hiGBVDcbFVk

Another great lecture from Michael Holick

Lucy 12-17-2014 02:53 AM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
This thread has a lot about vitamin D deficiencies and recurrence or spread of the cancer. A few years before I was diagnosed with cancer I found out I had a deficiency and I have been on supplements ever since. My levels are still low (although the last test had them in the normal range . . . barely) but we're still working on upping my numbers.

My question is, will upping my vitamin D numbers improve my odds or does the fact that I had a deficiency in the past handicap me for all time, if that makes sense?

Becky 12-17-2014 03:15 PM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
Upping your circulating D will improve your odds. D helps cells that aren't right go thru cell death as they are supposed to. Some cells that are not right won't and stay alive to further reproduce and mutate more. They can eventually become cancer. This process is called cell apoptosis.

Dakini52 12-27-2014 11:06 AM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
I have been taking vitamin D for several years now. My endocrinologist diagnosed me as having low vitamin D and suggested supplements. I take 1000 IU per day and this keeps my D level really good. It is true that many have low vitamin D and don't know it. There are also prescriptions for high level vitamin D is you are really low, however, I just take an over the counter vitamin D supplement and it works great.

Shar 12-27-2014 09:07 PM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
This is directed to Jackie, who mentioned she was taking a 6 week high dose Vitamin D protocol.. or anyone of you who would have information regarding high dose. I know this is years away from your post,.. but how did your body respond to 50,000 IU of Vitamin D for 6 weeks? I was on that dosage for several months, and then reduced to 30,000. I will be taking the 25OH test in May.

thank you,

Sharon

rhondalea 12-27-2014 09:51 PM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
My endo had me on 50,000 IU ergocalciferol (D2) several years ago. I think I stayed the course for three or four months, and then I switched to cholecalciferol (D3), which is what I currently take (10,000 IU/3 days + 6,000 IU/4 days for a total of 54,000 IU/week). Most people don't need that much forever, but I have a couple of wonks in my VDR gene.

I didn't notice much improvement on the D2, but my levels were pretty low at the start, and they didn't get high enough to help me even after several months. For a long time, I took just 5,000 IU/day, and that wasn't enough. An increase to 6000 IU/day didn't do it either. On my current dose, I no longer suffer from seasonal affective disorder. I have never had a deleterious side effect on any dose.

IMO, there are two advantages to ergocalciferol: 1) insurance pays for it, and 2) you only have to remember it once a week. Vitamin D3 is pretty cheap, though--probably not much more than the co-pay, and you can take it weekly in the higher dose if that works better for you.

Jackie07 12-28-2014 06:34 AM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
Hi Sharon,

Thanks for asking. I am pretty sure my number (of Vit D) has been normalized in recent years as the doctors have not said anything about it since then.

I think the cause of it was that I had had a very busy schedule from 2003 to 2008 and rarely had time to go outside to absorb the sunlight. That's why even though I live in the sunny South, I still developed the deficiency. Once I realized it, I made sure that I would spend time outdoors and take my daily vitamin.

I also remind myself to 'tap' my feet whenever I'm at the computer. Due to the problems caused by the brain tumors (unrelated to breast cancer), I don't 'exercise' or even walk very much these days. So tapping my feet while sitting has become a second nature.

R.B. 07-15-2015 02:08 PM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
I just watched this video again

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hiGBVDcbFVk

This excellent lecture by Dr Holick is A definitive must watch

R.B. 08-03-2015 02:03 PM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
Truly a quantum leap forward in terms of possible public policy changes . . .
:) :) :) :) :)


http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/1...D_supplements/

"Scots told to take vitamin D supplements

ALL Scots should take vitamin D supplements because of the health implications of a lack of bright sunshine, according to experts.

An advisory body set up by the UK Government said the bleak British weather is stopping much of the population from receiving healthy amounts of the essential vitamin from sunlight - and natural food sources alone are not enough to boost levels.

The independent Scientific Advisory Body on Nutrition (SACN) made the recommendation after studying the links between vitamin D levels and a range of health problems, including musculoskeletal health, heart disease, type 1 diabetes, cancer and multiple sclerosis.

Current government advice is that at-risk groups, including pregnant women, children up to the age of five, adults over 65, and people with darker skin as well those who do not expose their skin to sunlight, should take a daily vitamin D supplement.

However, if SACN's draft recommendations are adopted it could lead to new guidance affecting the whole population. " . . . MORE

R.B. 09-02-2015 06:07 AM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
Fat has an under appreciated role as a potential major storage site for fat soluble nutrients including vitamin D.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC291976/

Abstract

Deposition in and release of vitamin D3 from body fat: evidence for a storage site in the rat
Saul J. Rosenstreich, Clayton Rich, and Wade Volwiler
Author information ► Copyright and License information ►
This article has been cited by other articles in PMC.
Abstract

Vitamin D in all body tissues was radio-labeled by supplementing completely vitamin D-deficient weanling rats with oral vitamin D3-4-14C for 2 wk. All vitamin D was then withheld, and radioactivity and vitamin D content in a variety of organs and tissues were measured. Adipose tissue was found to contain by far the greatest quantity of radioactivity throughout the 3 month experimental period. Immediately after supplementation, half of the total radioactivity in adipose tissue corresponded to unaltered vitamin D3, and the other half to polar metabolites and esters of vitamin D3 and unidentified peak II. 1 month later there was approximately the same proportion but a decrease in the total quantity of each form. We conclude that adipose tissue is the major storage site for vitamin D3 in its several forms. Unaltered vitamin D3 was the principal storage form observed and presumably a source available for conversion to other metabolites during deprivation.

R.B. 01-01-2016 03:38 PM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26614548

Vitamin D and chemo.

ABSTRACT

"Breast. 2015 Nov 21. pii: S0960-9776(15)00230-1. doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2015.10.005. [Epub ahead of print]
Vitamin D (25-0H D3) status and pathological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in stage II/III breast cancer: Data from the NEOZOTAC trial (BOOG 10-01).
Charehbili A1, Hamdy NA2, Smit VT3, Kessels L4, van Bochove A5, van Laarhoven HW6, Putter H7, Meershoek-Klein Kranenbarg E8, van Leeuwen-Stok AE9, van der Hoeven JJ10, van de Velde CJ8, Nortier JW10, Kroep JR11; Dutch Breast Cancer Research Group (BOOG).
Author information
Abstract
BACKGROUND:

Serum levels of 25-OH vitamin D3 (vitamin D) have been shown to be prognostic for disease-free survival in patients with breast cancer. We investigated the predictive value of these levels for pathological response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer taking part in the NEOZOTAC phase-III trial. Additionally, the effect of chemotherapy on vitamin D levels was studied.
MATERIALS AND METHODS:

Serum vitamin D was measured at baseline and before the last cycle of chemotherapy. The relationship between these measurements and clinical outcome, as defined by pathological complete response in breast and lymph nodes (pCR) was examined.
RESULTS:

Baseline and end of treatment vitamin D data were available in 169 and 91 patients, respectively. Median baseline vitamin D values were 58.0 nmol/L. In patients treated with chemotherapy only, serum vitamin D levels decreased during neoadjuvant chemotherapy (median decrease of 16 nmol/L, P = 0.003). The prevalence of vitamin D levels < 50 nmol/L increased from 38.3% at baseline to 55.9% after chemotherapy. In the total population, baseline and end of therapy vitamin D levels were not related to pathological response. No associations were found between pCR and vitamin D level changes.
CONCLUSION:

The significant decrease in vitamin D post-neoadjuvant chemotherapy suggests that vitamin D levels should be monitored and in case of decrease of vitamin D levels, correction may be beneficial for skeletal health and possibly breast cancer outcome.

Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved."

R.B. 01-01-2016 03:40 PM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26554935

Low Vit D and triple negative

ABSTRACT


J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol. 2015 Nov 7. pii: S0960-0760(15)30129-1. doi: 10.1016/j.jsbmb.2015.11.003. [Epub ahead of print]
Vitamin D levels and breast cancer characteristics: Findings in patients from Saudi Arabia.
Abulkhair O1, Saadeddin A1, Makram O1, Gasmelseed A1, Pasha T1, Shehata H1, Fakhoury HM2.
Author information
Abstract

Inverse relationship between vitamin D status and risk of breast cancer has been previously reported in the literature. We conducted this study to determine the association between vitamin D levels and breast cancer characteristics in patients from Saudi Arabia. Newly diagnosed breast cancer patients (N=406) were recruited. Serum levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25 (OH) D] were measured at baseline. A significantly higher percentage of patients with triple negative status (18%) had 25 (OH) D levels ≤25nmol/L, compared to only 8% with 25 (OH) D levels >25nmol/L (p=0.009). Patients with 25 (OH) D levels ≤25nmol/L were 2.54 times more likely to present with triple negative status compared to those with 25 (OH) D levels >25nmol/L (p=0.02). Our findings suggest an association between low 25 (OH) D levels and increased risk of triple negative breast cancer.

Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

R.B. 01-01-2016 03:53 PM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26408720

Ketogenic diet plus vitamin D lowered HER2 marker,

Only one person, the diet is not specified,
and of course there could be other factors,
but intriguing nonetheless.


ABSTRACT

"Anticancer Res. 2015 Oct;35(10):5525-32.
Effects of Pre-surgical Vitamin D Supplementation and Ketogenic Diet in a Patient with Recurrent Breast Cancer.
Branca JJ1, Pacini S2, Ruggiero M3.
Author information
Abstract
BACKGROUND:

A woman, mother of one at the age of 19 years, was diagnosed with mammary adenocarcinoma in the right breast in 1985 at the age of 37 years. The patient underwent surgery (quadrantectomy), lymphadenectomy and radiotherapy. In 1999, an adenocarcinoma was diagnosed in the left breast, followed by adequate resection, radiotherapy and anti-oestrogen receptor treatment for 6 years. In March 2014, an infiltrating adenocarcinoma was diagnosed in the remaining part of the right breast that had been operated on and irradiated in 1985.
CASE REPORT:

The pre-surgical biopsy, showed weak positivity for progesterone receptor (PgR) (<1%), high positivity for oestrogen receptor (ER) (90%), high positivity for human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER2) (>10%, score 2+), and high positivity for the nuclear protein Ki67 (30%). In the three weeks between diagnosis and operation, when no other treatment had been planned, the patient decided to self-administer high doses of oral vitamin D3 (10,000 IU/day), and to follow a strict ketogenic diet.
RESULTS:

Following right mastectomy, analysis of the surgical specimen showed no positivity for HER2 expression (negative, score 0), and significant increase in positivity of PgR (20%). Positivity for ER and Ki67 were unaltered.

CONCLUSION:

This observation indicates that a combination of high-dose vitamin D3 and ketogenic diet leads to changes in some biological markers of breast cancer, i.e. negativization of HER2 expression and increased expression of PgR.

Copyright© 2015 International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. John G. Delinassios), All rights reserved."

R.B. 06-05-2016 04:01 PM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
I am not sure if I have posted this before but it not should have done.

Links to papers on Vitamin D by medical condition.

A fantastic resource set up by an Ex NASA member


http://www.vitamindwiki.com/VitaminDWiki


This McCarrison site below is only partly complete; I am chair of the Society; it is about 60 years old but in need of renewal, etc etc hence this new web site I am paying for having built and populating it. The web site will subject to internal discussions etc in due course hopefully go live at McCarrison.com and people will be able to join there, contribute to discussions etc.


https://mccarrison.com/ (work in progress)

Earlier version

http://mccarrison.alakmalak.org/reso...r/vitamin-d-2/



I post the link here for the 1920s and 1930 research on bone formation and vitamin D by the Mellanby's which I have scanned and uploaded; it would be hard to read it / see the images and not conclude vitamin D is important to bone formation.

We have for example lost sight of the role of vitamin D in preventing the bone related condition rickets.

There is also a nascent Facebook page.


https://www.facebook.com/McCarrisonSociety1/

Aim - to lobby for / promote better food and education / including through highlighting forgotten knowledge and observations

R.B. 06-29-2016 01:29 PM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
Keywords:

cigarette smoke;cohort study; CVD ;melanoma;mortality;public health

Abstract
Objective

Women with active sunlight exposure habits experience a lower mortality rate than women who avoid sun exposure; however, they are at an increased risk of skin cancer. We aimed to explore the differences in main causes of death according to sun exposure.
Methods

We assessed the differences in sun exposure as a risk factor for all-cause mortality in a competing risk scenario for 29 518 Swedish women in a prospective 20-year follow-up of the Melanoma in Southern Sweden (MISS) cohort. Women were recruited from 1990 to 1992 (aged 25–64 years at the start of the study). We obtained detailed information at baseline on sun exposure habits and potential confounders. The data were analysed using modern survival statistics.
Results

Women with active sun exposure habits were mainly at a lower risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and noncancer/non-CVD death as compared to those who avoided sun exposure. As a result of their increased survival, the relative contribution of cancer death increased in these women. Nonsmokers who avoided sun exposure had a life expectancy similar to smokers in the highest sun exposure group, indicating that avoidance of sun exposure is a risk factor for death of a similar magnitude as smoking. Compared to the highest sun exposure group, life expectancy of avoiders of sun exposure was reduced by 0.6–2.1 years.
Conclusion

The longer life expectancy amongst women with active sun exposure habits was related to a decrease in CVD and noncancer/non-CVD mortality, causing the relative contribution of death due to cancer to increase.


http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...12496/abstract

Jackie07 07-05-2016 11:36 PM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
Tumour Biol. 2016 May;37(5):6379-87. doi: 10.1007/s13277-015-4417-8. Epub 2015 Dec 2.
Genetic variation in vitamin D-related genes and risk of breast cancer among women of European and East Asian descent.
Shi J1, Grundy A2, Richardson H1, Burstyn I3, Schuetz JM4, Lohrisch CA5, SenGupta SK6, Lai AS7, Brooks-Wilson A4,8, Spinelli JJ7,9, Aronson KJ10,11.
Author information
Abstract
Studies of vitamin D-related genetic variants and breast cancer have been inconsistent. This study aimed to investigate associations of vitamin D-related polymorphisms and breast cancer risk among European and East Asian women and potential interactions with menopausal status and breast tumour subtypes. Data from a case-control study of breast cancer (1037 cases and 1050 controls) were used to assess relationships between 21 polymorphisms in two vitamin D-related genes (GC and VDR) and breast cancer risk. Odds ratios were calculated in stratified analyses of European and East Asian women, using logistic regression in an additive genetic model. An interaction term was used to explore modification by menopausal status. Polytomous regression was used to assess heterogeneity by breast tumour subtype. False discovery rate adjustments were conducted to account for multiple testing. No association was observed between GC or VDR polymorphisms and breast cancer risk. Modification of these relationships by menopausal status was observed for select polymorphisms in both Europeans (VDR rs4328262 and rs11168292) and East Asians (GC rs7041 and VDR rs11168287). Heterogeneity by tumour subtype was seen for three VDR polymorphisms (rs1544410, rs7967152 and rs2239186) among Europeans, in which associations with ER-/PR-/HER2+ tumours, but not with other subtypes, were observed. In conclusion, associations between vitamin D-related genetic variants and breast cancer were not observed overall, although the relationships between vitamin D pathway polymorphisms and breast cancer may be modified by menopausal status and breast tumour subtype.

hopingmind 08-25-2016 08:24 PM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
I appreciate the information above. Actually, I have read about recent studies reveal the relation of Vitamin D and the risk of breast cancer. It has been said that women with higher levels of vitamin D are more capable to survive breast cancer. Others have shown that this vitamin may help in protecting against such cancer because it makes the cells in the breast stronger.

R.B. 08-26-2016 12:16 PM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
HI Hopingmind,

Thank you for your thoughts and observations which lead me to revisit NCBI which I have not done for a while. There are heaps of papers which can be found including here.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/?ter...reast%20cancer

Is one of those you were referring to - clear benefits against recurrence - marginal benefits in terms of prevention

In respect of the occurrence risk conclusions the high intakes of vitamin D considered were 500IU which will not make a significant difference to plasma vitamin D and is well below the levels suggested to make a difference to risk of occurrence for example on the Grass Roots Health and VitaminDwiki sites.

However results of the risk v higher blood levels were mixed, and overall only just positive; further comment would need examination of all of the studies considered.

But there are lots of other reasons for attaining reasonable Vit D levels - see Grass Roots Health and VitaminDwiki
http://www.vitamindwiki.com/Proof+that+Vitamin+D+Works

Thanks again for your thoughts :)



Abstract


"Background:

Experimental studies suggest potential anti-carcinogenic properties of vitamin D against breast cancer risk, but the epidemiological evidence to date is inconsistent.

Methods:

We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE databases along with a hand search for eligible studies to examine the association between vitamin D status (based on diet and blood 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D)) and breast cancer risk or mortality in a meta-analysis. A random-effect model was used to calculate a pooled adjusted relative risk (RR).

Results:

A total of 30 prospective studies (nested case-control or cohort) were included for breast cancer incidence (n=24 studies; 31 867 cases) or mortality (n=6 studies; 870 deaths) among 6092 breast cancer patients. The pooled RRs of breast cancer incidence for the highest vs the lowest vitamin D intake and blood 25(OH)D levels were 0.95 (95% CI: 0.88–1.01) and 0.92 (95% CI: 0.83–1.02), respectively. Among breast cancer patients, high blood 25(OH)D levels were significantly associated with lower breast cancer mortality (pooled RR=0.58, 95% CI: 0.40–0.85) and overall mortality (pooled RR=0.61, 95% CI: 0.48–0.79). There was no evidence of heterogeneity and publication bias.

Conclusions:

Our findings suggest that high vitamin D status is weakly associated with low breast cancer risk but strongly associated with better breast cancer survival."

R.B. 09-26-2016 02:39 AM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
Just a quick post for the moment; this is what I have been up too for a while; having the honor of being asked to write some 6 chapters in a edited Springer Publication. (A university type reference book)

The chapters argue the physiological importance of plant based Omega 3 linolenic acid ALA and Omega 6 linoleic acid LA in evolutionary terms as well as on physiology and energetics.

There is a limited amount of material on cancer; the chapters look more widely at the impact of and implications of imbalances, and oxidation of LA and ALA, in the context of a western nutrient depleted diet, on the occurrence of western non-communicable diseases including cardiovascular, obesity dementia's, and more widely behavioral change, trends to aggression etc, set within an evolutionary framework.

Some of the ideas are new and arguably potentially of significant importance. As above the University Books are expensive, but may be found in some libraries. (just to be clear I and other contributors received no payment or reward beyond a free copy and the honor of contributing).

This thread http://www.her2support.org/vbulletin...=24410&page=22 that has been running since 2005 was in part the start of the journey that lead to these chapters being written. so thank you all very much for your interest and support over the years.



http://www.springer.com/br/book/9783319404561
Pages 321- 463

SoCalGal 09-26-2016 11:46 PM

Re: Vitamin D thread -Please use this for your Vit D info.
 
Thanks for the update RB :-)
Seeing my alternative medicine guru tomorrow - the first time in over a year. He first taught me about balancing the omega's, eliminating wheat and dairy and upping the vitamin D. It's been over 9 years of living with mets.
Nice to "read from you"!
A So Cal Gal


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:35 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright HER2 Support Group 2007 - 2021