691f120a3e7a1a036845d105d86c99a3
0

What's your Vitamin D blood level?

by (3651)
Updated October 30, 2014 at 3:07 AM
Created July 06, 2010 at 2:57 PM

I just had my Vitamin D blood level checked. I took about 10K of Vitamin D3 supplements during the Spring and Winter and sometimes now when I don't get enough midday sun. I try to get sun exposure for about 30 min to an hour a day at least, more on weekends during the mid day sun. I have a pretty serious farmers tan and then a less impressive torso tan. I don't do sunscreen. My Vitamin D, 25-Hydroxy blood level was 69.1 ng/mL. From what I understand that's pretty optimal. I am interested in how the rest of the paleosphere stacks up?

4310630972b25b6ed4fbd0fe7a7201d0
840 · September 16, 2010 at 1:27 PM

Oops, I forgot! My 25(OH)D at my last blood draw (7/6) was 91.4 ng/mL. http://paleodan.com/blood-work/

691f120a3e7a1a036845d105d86c99a3
3651 · September 09, 2010 at 1:04 PM

any update dan?

Cbf9ad6e645dc8d655259658fc972e58
321 · July 07, 2010 at 6:00 PM

I assume it's Jay. As for why, like this: http://xkcd.com/386/

15d23403fb836f2b506f4f3ad2c03356
1219 · July 07, 2010 at 3:03 PM

Dr. Davis of heartscanblog is not an expert. His claims are sometimes thought-provoking and sometimes nonsense. He, for instance, claims that saturated fat is bad for certain genetically predisposed people. That claim was roundly discredited by Peter from hyperlipid. 30-50ng/ml is optimal according to the actual data, not the opinion of bloggers. There are increases in mortality recorded at higher levels. Nobody knows if that is residual confounding or something real. Most people cannot raise their serum levels over 50-60ng/ml through synthesis on the skin. That should be a benchmark

691f120a3e7a1a036845d105d86c99a3
3651 · July 07, 2010 at 2:16 PM

whose giving these negatives and why?

691f120a3e7a1a036845d105d86c99a3
3651 · July 07, 2010 at 2:15 PM

I am not supplementing anymore because I can lay out in the sun at noon. I am guessing the Sun/body synthesis of Vit D would be self regulating?

691f120a3e7a1a036845d105d86c99a3
3651 · July 07, 2010 at 2:14 PM

i haven't been supplementing for a few months so i am guessing its just my natural level from the sun. i try not to buy in to the supplement industry--pissing vitamins and all that. what are the symptoms of tissue calcification? i hope i get vit k and magnesium from my paleo diet.

Cbf9ad6e645dc8d655259658fc972e58
321 · July 06, 2010 at 11:54 PM

"Optimal" according to whom? I can think of at least two experts who are well-regarded in the paleo community and who would emphatically recommend higher levels than 50 ng/ml.

3864f9a2af09b1b447c7963058650a34
3703 · July 06, 2010 at 9:58 PM

MaLa, you make an excellent point... I was referring to accumulation via exogenous intakes, e.g. supplements. Normally (though some genetic varitaion DOES exist) we endogenously produce vitamin D then shut off its synthesis, and even start turning vitamin D to inactive analogues when we dont' require as much. Does that help? Thank you Jay.

15d23403fb836f2b506f4f3ad2c03356
1219 · July 06, 2010 at 8:50 PM

Calling 69.1ng/ml optimal is fringe. Most people in the supplement world (already pretty far outside the mainstream) consider 30-50 ng/ml optimal. My guess is 40-45 is actually optimal. If you decide to stick with your levels, I would add vitamin K and magnesium to prevent soft-tissue calcification.

15d23403fb836f2b506f4f3ad2c03356
1219 · July 06, 2010 at 8:47 PM

The body uses D, so amounts will drift down if not renewed. That's different than saying it doesn't accumulate, which it does when intake is too high.

691f120a3e7a1a036845d105d86c99a3
3651 · July 06, 2010 at 3:22 PM

cool! it's crazy to see the fluctuation. funny that something as simple as a vitamin we make naturally from the sun is so difficult to get right!

Total Views
2.9K

Recent Activity
3864f9a2af09b1b447c7963058650a34

Last Activity
72D AGO

Followers
0

Get Free Paleo Recipes Instantly

11 Answers

3864f9a2af09b1b447c7963058650a34
4
3703 · July 06, 2010 at 6:13 PM

I love vitamin D, a potent hormone, but one has to be careful of exceeding biological thresholds that may not be sustained via evolutionary negative and positive feedback hormone loops... e.g. when we use supplements we can easily over do it. This can happen with creams such as bioidentical hormone therapy as well.

Here is a neat study in post-menopausal women with osteopenia/-porosis on vitamin D 5000 IU daily. It took nearly 6-12 mos to achieve a normal level -- gradual people can accumulate fat-soluble vitamin D.

(see end for study) http://drbganimalpharm.blogspot.com/2010/07/celebtchy-grrls-know-their-vitamin-d.html

There are a variety of factors that cause low vitamin D -- gut dysbiosis, gluten damage, gluten/lectins preventing P450 liver vitamin D activation, age-related decreased liver function, dark toned skin, northern latitudes, vitamin D SNP polymorphisms, etc. Perhaps why these women took so long to increase vitamin D from 20 to 50 ng/ml was because of the above factors.

Anyhow -- watch the D -- it accumulates over time. ZRT labs and grassroots.org sell self-home testing kits. Cheap and easy. Also most conscientious physicians/practitioners will order for you via insurance if you ask.

I bring this up because the signs and effects of toxicity are the signs and effects of hormone deficiency.

3aea514b680d01bfd7573d74517946a7
1
11986 · June 23, 2011 at 11:57 PM

I've been taking 10,000 IU/day for the last two months, and my blood level is 78 ng/mL. I'm 5'6", 150 pounds, female, 47 years old. I get almost no sun at all, even on weekends; my life pretty much unfolds in buildings, which is why I started taking such high doses.

One of the benefits seems to be that my severe asthma has gone into near total hiding; I've used my rescue inhaler a total of five times since I started taking the supps. (That may sound like a lot, but I had been using it several times a week, and sometimes daily -- sometimes even multiple times daily -- for many years before that.)

4310630972b25b6ed4fbd0fe7a7201d0
1
840 · July 06, 2010 at 3:19 PM

In January 2009, my 25(OH)D level was 8.3 ng/mL. Wowza! My doc had me supplement with a massive dose (800,000 IUs) of D2 and that got my level up to 35.3 ng/mL by May. Other than sun exposure over the summer, I did no D3 supplementation through September 2009 and my levels dipped to 24.4 ng/mL.

From September '09 to January '10, I took 10k IUs daily. This brought my level up to 115 ng/mL. At that point, I reduced my supplementation to 5k IUs daily regardless of sun exposure. I just had blood drawn this AM and will know what affect this level of supplementation will have on my 25(OH)D level.

Let me add: In previous years, I'd try to get some sun to tan, etc, but I'd burn pretty easily. This year? Not a drop of sunscreen or sunblock. I'm tanning easily and do not burn regardless of the amount of time I spend in the sun.

Edit Forgot to mention that I'm 6'1" and 240 pounds.

691f120a3e7a1a036845d105d86c99a3
3651 · July 06, 2010 at 3:22 PM

cool! it's crazy to see the fluctuation. funny that something as simple as a vitamin we make naturally from the sun is so difficult to get right!

691f120a3e7a1a036845d105d86c99a3
3651 · September 09, 2010 at 1:04 PM

any update dan?

4310630972b25b6ed4fbd0fe7a7201d0
840 · September 16, 2010 at 1:27 PM

Oops, I forgot! My 25(OH)D at my last blood draw (7/6) was 91.4 ng/mL. http://paleodan.com/blood-work/

29686e6867f73a7deee8bf0578cb2107
0
68 · June 24, 2011 at 12:13 AM

My level was at 49 before any supplementation (on a mostly-paleo regime with lots of dairy fat), and then after a year's worth of supplementing with roughly 2500IU/day (in oil-filled capsule form), the lab work from my recent physical came in at 68. I've been trying to decide whether to bother continuing to supplement regularly given what my number used to be, and given the recent uncertainty about levels higher than 50. Any thoughts?

As a side note, I've had huge success taking megadoses of D -- sometimes up to 40,000IU a day, spread out -- for a few days when I show symptoms of a cold. I can knock the minor symptoms out and end up not getting sick at all. Anyone else? I've had so much success with this, and it's so valuable to avoid catching a cold, that I really hope no one has evidence that this is truly bad for me. :-)

B4313b18cc03036a6147543d7b0872d6
0
566 · June 23, 2011 at 11:00 PM

At my last physical, my level was 39. I was surprised at first, because I spend time in the sun every day. After listening to a couple of Jimmy Moore podcasts (Art Ayers), I am no longer surprised: I am still struggling with inflammation and this, apparently, decreases the body's ability to make serum D levels.

I guess I'll be working on my inflammation problem.

(I realize I may have stated this wrongly, but my expertise is education, not medicine, etc. Be nice.)

17d3da519198c1c85265d08d4eadfd81
0
0 · June 23, 2011 at 8:07 PM

OMG my level is 10 ng/ml! I'm taking Supplemental D3 three times a day, but it's so hard! i tend to forget a lot, uhhh but i got to do it! My bones ache like crazy, i have bruises all over my legs(idk if it has to do with the Vitamin D deficiency to be honest), and i'm always tired! im 20yrs old! i should not be tired :). BTW: I'm 5'8 weight 130lbs, i'll be having my next Vitamin D labs in about 2 months. I hope i improve :)

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
0
78422 · September 09, 2010 at 6:53 AM

This is my level with no supplements, living in northern Canada half the year and Mexico during the winter months. I do not wear sunscreen.

Bone Markers Vitamin D, 25-Hydroxy 92 (Ideal range is 75-150 nmol/L) This is the test of choice to assess Vitamin D status when indicated. Testing asymptomatic patients at low risk of deficiency is not usually required in view of the safety and low cost of supplementation. <25: deficient 25-74: insufficient >200: toxic Total 25-OH Vitamin D represents the sum of 25-Hydroxylated Vitamin D2 and Vitamin D3 species. New reference range effective August 20, 2010****

42321851a87415b340d215f629e574dc
0
668 · July 07, 2010 at 1:43 AM

I am 5'8", 148 lbs. I supplement 2,000 IU once a week in the summer and a little more in the winter. I probably get 120 minutes of a direct sunlight a week. My current D levels are around 75 ng/mL.

15d23403fb836f2b506f4f3ad2c03356
0
1219 · July 06, 2010 at 8:46 PM

30-50ng/ml is optimal. Your number is well-above what is known to be optimal, though it is well-below any sort of toxicity (so don't be worried). I would reduce your intake sufficiently to get your levels below 50ng/ml.

691f120a3e7a1a036845d105d86c99a3
3651 · July 07, 2010 at 2:15 PM

I am not supplementing anymore because I can lay out in the sun at noon. I am guessing the Sun/body synthesis of Vit D would be self regulating?

Cbf9ad6e645dc8d655259658fc972e58
321 · July 06, 2010 at 11:54 PM

"Optimal" according to whom? I can think of at least two experts who are well-regarded in the paleo community and who would emphatically recommend higher levels than 50 ng/ml.

15d23403fb836f2b506f4f3ad2c03356
1219 · July 07, 2010 at 3:03 PM

Dr. Davis of heartscanblog is not an expert. His claims are sometimes thought-provoking and sometimes nonsense. He, for instance, claims that saturated fat is bad for certain genetically predisposed people. That claim was roundly discredited by Peter from hyperlipid. 30-50ng/ml is optimal according to the actual data, not the opinion of bloggers. There are increases in mortality recorded at higher levels. Nobody knows if that is residual confounding or something real. Most people cannot raise their serum levels over 50-60ng/ml through synthesis on the skin. That should be a benchmark

Cbf9ad6e645dc8d655259658fc972e58
0
321 · July 06, 2010 at 8:11 PM

6'0", 185 lb male, 5000 IU of D3 a day, was 67 ng/mL as of a few weeks ago. Note that I am fair-skinned, live well north, and sunburn easily; I probably get a lot less unprotected sun-time than many of you.

Cbf9ad6e645dc8d655259658fc972e58
321 · July 07, 2010 at 6:00 PM

I assume it's Jay. As for why, like this: http://xkcd.com/386/

691f120a3e7a1a036845d105d86c99a3
3651 · July 07, 2010 at 2:16 PM

whose giving these negatives and why?

0037d03799fbdf83d3edc63dab01ac5a
0
236 · July 06, 2010 at 7:57 PM

I am taking 2,000 IU of D3 5 to 6 times a week (yes, I forget once in a while) and after 6 or 8 months, my level was at about 48 ng/mL. I am 114lbs for 5"4.

To Grace, I do not believe that D (it's not like iron) accumulate with time, otherwise we wouldn't have seasonal fluctuations.

3864f9a2af09b1b447c7963058650a34
3703 · July 06, 2010 at 9:58 PM

MaLa, you make an excellent point... I was referring to accumulation via exogenous intakes, e.g. supplements. Normally (though some genetic varitaion DOES exist) we endogenously produce vitamin D then shut off its synthesis, and even start turning vitamin D to inactive analogues when we dont' require as much. Does that help? Thank you Jay.

15d23403fb836f2b506f4f3ad2c03356
1219 · July 06, 2010 at 8:47 PM

The body uses D, so amounts will drift down if not renewed. That's different than saying it doesn't accumulate, which it does when intake is too high.

Answer Question

Login to Your PaleoHacks Account

Get Free Paleo Recipes