Today's Vitamin D study results

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

still here!

Postby jimmylegs » Sat Dec 23, 2006 3:16 pm

hehe thanks, ya just playin it a little more cool these days, less site - addicted :) i'm still checkin what's up tho!
jimmylegs
Volunteer Moderator
 
Posts: 8944
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 4:00 pm

Re: short answer: don't think so!

Postby CureOrBust » Sun Dec 24, 2006 4:45 am

jimmylegs wrote:i mean if you're heat sensitive then maybe australia in the sun isnt the best place for you, but if you want that "vitamin" d3, it should be perfect. and yet there is such a concern with ozone holes down there, i'm suprised they don't have crop dusters sweeping beachgoers with spf45.

No, instead they have advertising during prime time showing graphic video of cancers being cut from flesh. They talk of how skin cancer is OUR "countries disease". I truly cannot view the adds of recent. We have all media advertising the dangers of skin cancer, and we even have stores in shopping malls for the "cancer council" that are basically sunscreen shops.
User avatar
CureOrBust
Family Elder
 
Posts: 2897
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 3:00 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

aussie rules

Postby jimmylegs » Sun Dec 24, 2006 8:59 am

ya no kidding it is a huge issue - i did not see the skin cancer removal ads but i believe it for sure. when i was at surf camp they were really hard on any of us sunbaking after lesson, even though we were full on with the sunscreen.

like anything, i think uvb exposure's a case for moderation not complete abstinence, meanwhile the skin cancer issue has got ppl going for zero exposure when some is in fact necessary for optimal health. or adequate supplementation/dietary input. but then you can wonder... what other health benefits uv exposure might have other than vitamin d3? i gather in general it's best to get a little, make sure you don't burn, and then get out of the sun.

for the record, i haven't done the math about the 15 min hands/face exposure three times per week so don't know if that's equivalent to the recommendations suggesting 4000 IU/d, or if it relates more to a 1000IU dosage for example. some afternoon when it's not holiday madness time i'll have to devote some time to that!
jimmylegs
Volunteer Moderator
 
Posts: 8944
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 4:00 pm

for you HUTTO

Postby jimmylegs » Sun Dec 24, 2006 9:32 am

hey there hutto, sorry i missed your last post. my store is Nutrition House which may only be canadian, not sure. my product, the cal-mag-d3 liquid, is by LifeTime / Nutritional Specialties Inc USA. it comes in a bunch of flavours and the store where i get mine tells me blueberry sells quickly. i get strawberry myself. you'd have to take 10 tbsp to get 4000IU of cholecalciferol, so i take about three tbsp instead to get a good shot of the calcium and magnesium, and then i make up the D3 deficit with my prescription liquid cholecalciferol. you could get a similar liquid cholecalciferol prescription if you wanted (go to a compounding pharmacist). if you decide to skip the liquid option, you should be able to find 1000 or 2000IU cholecalciferol tablets by calling around to some pharmacies.

hey wicked vitaminlife.com sells that cal-mag-d3 liquid online, i got the link from the lifetime site, here ya go:
http://www.vitaminlife.com/category-exec/category_id/252/brand_id/740/CNAME/Calcium%20%20%20Magnesium

that's a kicking price, i pay $21.99 CDN for mine. maybe i'll start buying from them too!
jimmylegs
Volunteer Moderator
 
Posts: 8944
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: DrGeoff


Contact us | Terms of Service