More Vit D research

If it's on your mind and it has to do with multiple sclerosis in any way, post it here.

a tangled web

Postby jimmylegs » Thu Sep 21, 2006 1:28 am

i think it's all interconnected, lc!
jimmylegs
Volunteer Moderator
 
Posts: 9025
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 4:00 pm

Advertisement

Re: Still more reasons to take vitamin D

Postby NHE » Thu Sep 21, 2006 7:28 am

lyndacarol wrote:Now just today on our local NBC news I heard that other researchers had mapped out cases of kidney cancer and found...ta da...more cases occur in northern climates than near the equator, leading them to think that sunlight and the vitamin D made from it might play a role in lower incidence of kidney cancer!

Dr. Michael F. Roizen, author of You, The Owners Manual and The Real Age Makeover, has stated in his PBS talk that vitamin D is a critical factor necessary for the correct functioning of the "proof reading gene" which is responsible for checking DNA for errors during cell division. I'm a little rusty on my DNA knowledge but he could be referring to the DNA Polymerase III enzyme or to the mutL/mutS proteins. Hopefully, someone else more current in their understanding of vitamin D's role with DNA will comment. Even so, it does explain the association of vitamin D deficiency with cancer.

NHE
User avatar
NHE
Volunteer Moderator
 
Posts: 3361
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 4:00 pm

gooe one!

Postby jimmylegs » Sun Sep 24, 2006 10:14 pm

that is reeeeaaaally cool
jimmylegs
Volunteer Moderator
 
Posts: 9025
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 4:00 pm

Postby Nick » Mon Sep 25, 2006 10:54 am

My understanding of why vitamin D acts to prevent and inhibit cancerous cells stems from its influence on cell differentiation and death (apoptosis).

DIRECT-MS has, amoungst others, a collection of research articles regarding vitamin D and non-autoimmune diseases.

This is the abstract from one such article entitled Mechanisms implicated in the growth regulatory effects of vitamin D in breast cancer.

It is now well established that, in addition to its central role in the maintenance of extracellular calcium levels and bone mineralization, 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 (1,25(OH)2D3), the active form of vitamin D,
also acts as a modulator of cell growth and differentiation in a number of cell types, including breast cancer cells. The anti-proliferative effects of 1,25(OH)2D3 have been linked to suppression of growth stimulatory signals and potentiation of growth inhibitory signals, which lead to changes in cell cycle regulators such as p21WAF-1/CIP1 and p27kip1, cyclins and retinoblastoma protein as well as induction of apoptosis. Such studies have led to interest in the potential use of 1,25(OH)2D3 in the treatment or
prevention of certain cancers. Since this approach is limited by the tendency of 1,25(OH)2D3 to cause hypercalcaemia, synthetic vitamin D analogues have been developed which display separation of the
growth regulating effects from calcium mobilizing actions. This review examines mechanisms by which 1,25(OH)2D3 and its active analogues exert both anti-proliferative and pro-apoptotic effects and describes some of the synthetic analogues that have been shown to be of particular interest in relation to breast cancer.


Cheers
Nick
User avatar
Nick
Family Elder
 
Posts: 165
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 4:00 pm

Postby Muu » Mon Sep 25, 2006 3:15 pm

The article that Ian initially posted suggested that 15mins of exposure to the sun a day would do the trick. No chance that NICE would licence that on the NHS? - thought not.

I take 2 Calcichew D3 Forte daily (the prescribed dose on the pot) containing 1000mg of calcium and 20mg of D3. I'm unsure whether it helps the ms, but i understand it helps prevent oesteoporosis and as i'm off milk and dairy my calcium intake needs a boost.
Muu
User avatar
Muu
Family Elder
 
Posts: 185
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2006 3:00 pm
Location: London

Postby Lyon » Mon Sep 25, 2006 4:59 pm

oo
Last edited by Lyon on Sat May 07, 2011 9:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
Lyon
Family Elder
 
Posts: 6063
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:00 pm

vit d synthesis artificial light

Postby jimmylegs » Tue Sep 26, 2006 1:07 am

hi yes you can use a uv lamp. but not a uva (as in tanning bed). has to be the good ol uvb of a particular wavelength (yup the burning rays).
jimmylegs
Volunteer Moderator
 
Posts: 9025
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 4:00 pm

Another reason for Vitamin D

Postby lyndacarol » Fri Nov 17, 2006 6:56 pm

More research connecting Vitamin D to a cancer--ovarian this time:

<shortened url>

Let's see, how many does that make? Breast cancer, colon cancer, prostate cancer, kidney cancer, pancreatic cancer, now ovarian cancer. That should be reason enough for supplementation (4000IU per day). Then there is the MS connection!
User avatar
lyndacarol
Family Elder
 
Posts: 2311
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 4:00 pm

and in Newsweek, December 11, 2006

Postby lyndacarol » Sun Dec 10, 2006 8:04 pm

Although this article doesn't offer anything new to us, it is another case of Vitamin D in the media these days--on page 85 of Newsweek magazine, December 11, 2006 issue, "Vitamin D in the Spotlight" by Meir J. Stampfer, M.D., Dr.P.H. at Harvard Medical School. (I don't know if this is available online. You may have to find the publication if you wish to read this two-page article.)

The article ends with, "For more on vitamin D from Harvard, go to health.harvard.edu/newsweek " which I have not checked out yet.
User avatar
lyndacarol
Family Elder
 
Posts: 2311
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 4:00 pm

Re: Newsweek: Vitamin D in the Spotlight

Postby NHE » Sun Dec 10, 2006 10:30 pm

Thanks Lyndacarol. Here's the full article from newsweek...

Vitamin D in the Spotlight
This critical nutrient builds bones, helps fight infection and may protect against some cancers. Do we get enough?
By Meir J. Stampfer, M.D., DR. P.H. Newsweek

For many years, vitamin D was boring—even to doctors. Because it was considered good for bones and not much else, multitaskers like vitamin A, B vitamins and vitamin E hogged all the press. But recent studies have thrust this long-neglected nutrient into the spotlight. Scientists now think vitamin D may affect everything from diabetes to cancer. They're also finding that many people don't have enough of it.

When vitamin D was discovered a century ago, it solved a major public-health problem: rickets, a disease caused by vitamin D deficiency in which bone development is delayed and deformed. When a synthetic version of vitamin D was added to milk, rickets virtually disappeared, as did any concern about vitamin D deficiency. For most of the 20th century, scientists defined a person's daily requirement of vitamin D—called the recommended dietary allowance, or RDA—as the level needed to prevent rickets. Nearly everyone in the developed world was thought to be taking in a healthy amount.

But new research suggests that the RDA may not be sufficient to protect people against several diseases other than rickets. Studies link low blood levels of vitamin D to type 1 diabetes, multiple sclerosis, tuberculosis, colon cancer and even the flu. High levels of the vitamin may help fight HIV infection. And the vitamin's role in bones extends way beyond preventing rickets. Levels higher than the RDA offer older adults protection against fractures, through strengthening muscles as well as bones.

Many people living in this country and northern Europe have levels of vitamin D that are low, based on the latest evidence. Why is that? Unlike most other vitamins, vitamin D is found in only a few foods. Instead, we get most of it from the action of sunlight on our skin. In retrospect, we recognize that rickets became a problem in the early 20th century when increasing urbanization and air pollution in cities caused less sunlight to strike the skin.

A century later, almost every aspect of modern life seems designed to lower our ability to produce vitamin D. Compared with our ancestors, we spend a lot more time indoors, wear more clothes and use sunscreen. If applied adequately to protect against sun-induced skin damage and to reduce the risk of skin cancer, sunscreen lowers the skin's ability to form vitamin D by more than 95 percent. More of us are older and fatter; age and obesity also reduce the amount of vitamin D we produce. An average 70-year-old can produce only about a quarter of the vitamin D of a 20-year-old. Obese people generally have substantially lower blood levels of vitamin D.

No matter what your age or size, the time of sun exposure, the season and geography all affect how much vitamin D you produce. The closer it is to noon, the more vitamin D your skin makes. The angle of the sun is critical, and since that changes with the seasons, vitamin D levels fluctuate drastically. For example, in Boston between November and March, the ultraviolet radiation from the sun is insufficient to produce vitamin D, even with abundant skin exposure on a sunny day. The farther you go away from the equator, the greater the effect. One study found that among white girls in Maine, 48 percent had low vitamin D blood levels at the end of the winter, while only 17 percent were deficient at the end of the summer. Clothing can play a big role as well. Vitamin D deficiency is rampant among women in Saudi Arabia, despite the sunshine, because the traditional clothing nearly completely covers their skin.

Skin pigmentation also affects the way we process vitamin D. Melanin, the pigment that provides a darker tint, acts as a sunscreen, so darker-skinned individuals require at least five times as much sun exposure to form a given amount of vitamin D, compared with a very light-skinned person. Indeed, the majority of African-Americans have low levels of vitamin D.

Finding ways to counteract these barriers to getting enough vitamin D is the next challenge. We have only three ways of boosting our blood levels of the nutrient: increasing sun exposure, increasing our intake of vitamin D-rich foods or taking vitamin D supplements. Because of the risk of skin cancer, getting a lot more sun exposure is not a healthy way to raise blood levels of vitamin D. The only foods with high levels of vitamin D are fatty fish and certain kinds of mushrooms. The other main dietary source is fortified foods: dairy foods (milk has 100 IU per cup), some brands of orange juice and fortified breakfast cereals.

That's why there's growing agreement among experts that a daily vitamin D supplement makes good sense. Among nutritionists working on vitamin D, there is general agreement that the current recommended intake of 400 IU per day (600 for those over the age of 70) is too low, and should be re-evaluated. Most believe that 1,000 IU per day would be a reasonable dose for a typical adult in the United States, and I agree. Certain people might benefit from taking even more, such as those who avoid the sun or live in northern regions. The elderly and African-Americans are especially vulnerable to vitamin D deficiency, and I think supplementation (preferably with the natural form, vitamin D3, cholecalciferol) should be routine for these groups. And even though we need vitamin D, too much can be toxic. The current official upper limit is 2,000 IU, although many experts think this is too low and should be raised, perhaps to 4,000 IU. For comparison, a light-skinned person in a bathing suit can produce more than 10,000 IU with a half hour in the sun. So stay tuned: there is much more to be learned about how this once "boring" vitamin can protect our health.

Stampfer is professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and professor and chair of epidemiology at the Harvard School of Public Health. For more on vitamin D from Harvard, go to health.harvard.edu/NEWSWEEK.

URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15994150/site/newsweek/
User avatar
NHE
Volunteer Moderator
 
Posts: 3361
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 4:00 pm

Postby Nick » Tue Dec 12, 2006 1:06 pm

Dem Harvard folks seem smitten with vitamin D and for good reason.

In 2004, Munger et al found in 92,253 women that a protective effect of vitamin D intake on the risk of developing MS.

I'd like to get a plug of DIRECT-MS in here so I'll relate how Munger et al came to consider vitamin D in their study. The researchers originally had no intention of incorporating vitamin D in their questionnaire of the study group. However DIRECT-MS researcherAshton Embry initiated a rapport with the researchers upon catching wind of their oversight. After presenting the information regarding the virtues of vitamin D and immunoregulation the research team decided to include vitamin D in their assessments. Lo and behold if vitamin D turned out to be the only protective influence concluded from their research.

In their published paper the researchers also referenced this study published by Embry that correlated seasonal fluctuations of CNS lesions with seasonal concentrations of serum vitamin D.

A long-term study of 50,000 men by Giovannucci et al, a Harvard University professor of medicine and nutrition, demonstrated that higher vitamin D levels help protect against colon, prostate, and breast cancer. Specifically they found that men who consumed higher levels of vitamin D reduced their overall cancer risk by at least 30 percent.

At a major cancer research meeting in May, 2005 Giovannucci said "I would challenge anyone to find an area or nutrient or any factor that has such consistent anti-cancer benefits as vitamin D…the data are really quite remarkable."

Cheers
Nick
User avatar
Nick
Family Elder
 
Posts: 165
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 4:00 pm

Postby Nick » Fri Dec 15, 2006 2:00 pm

Stay tuned next week for the release of more significant research by the Harvard folks which essentially implicates MS as a long latency vitamin D deficiency disease.

Cheers
Nick
User avatar
Nick
Family Elder
 
Posts: 165
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 4:00 pm

Postby jimmylegs » Sat Dec 16, 2006 1:45 am

sweet i'm looking forward to reading that one nick!
jimmylegs
Volunteer Moderator
 
Posts: 9025
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 4:00 pm

Previous

Return to General Discussion

 


  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: jerrygallow


Contact us | Terms of Service