This Is MS Multiple Sclerosis Knowledge & Support Community

According to these guys 10,000 IU per day is safe

http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/blog/hel ... h-project/

10ki.u. for some time. Heard that increasing to 15Kiu could solve bowel problems. Taking delivery of 5K caps this weekend.

PN

If I could do it over again, I would never, ever take the 5,000 iu - 10,000 iu of D3 that I took for about 1.5 years.
Doing so made my preexisting magnesium deficiency so much worse. Now I have bad muscle symptoms- spasticity, etc. that the doctors attribute to my ms. They can do very little to help because this is something that involves a nutrient - magnesium, and with the conventional doctors only having on average 23.9 hours of training in nutrition, they won't deal with the cause of the problem (me being too low in magnesium).

It turns out that all the enzymes metabolizing vitamin D require magnesium as a necessary co-factor.[2],[3] When you take high doses of Vitamin D and if you are already low in magnesium, the increased amount of metabolic work drains magnesium from its muscle storage sites. That's probably why muscles are the first to suffer magnesium deficiency symptoms -- twitching, leg cramps, restless legs and charlie horses. Angina and even heart attacks affecting the heart muscle are all magnesium deficiency symptoms.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/carolyn-d ... 40931.html

The underestimated problem of using serum magnesium measurements to exclude magnesium deficiency in adults; a health warning is needed for "normal" results.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20170394



THX1138

yea I did it without being aware of the need for balancing too. paid the price. still glad I ran into the right pharmacist back whenever it was

Supplementing heavily with Mg for past couple years. For spasticity.

PN

marcopolo wrote:According to these guys 10,000 IU per day is safe

http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/blog/hel ... h-project/

I agree on the 10,000 IU per day of Vit d3. See the below abstract ...

jackD

J Bone Miner Res. 2007 Dec;22 Suppl 2:V64-8. doi: 10.1359/jbmr.07s221.

Vitamin D toxicity, policy, and science.
Vieth R.

Abstract
The serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] concentration that is the threshold for vitamin D toxicity has not been established. Hypercalcemia is the hazard criterion for vitamin D. Past policy of the Institute of Medicine has set the tolerable upper intake level (UL) for vitamin D at 50 mug (2000 IU)/d, defining this as "the highest level of daily nutrient intake that is likely to pose no risks of adverse health effects to almost all individuals in the general population." However, because sunshine can provide an adult with vitamin D in an amount equivalent to daily oral consumption of 250 mug (10,000 IU)/d, this is intuitively a safe dose.

The incremental consumption of 1 mug (40 IU)/day of vitamin D(3) raises serum 25(OH)D by approximately 1 nM (0.4 ng/ml). Therefore, if sun-deprived adults are to maintain serum 25(OH)D concentrations >75 nM (30 ng/ml), they will require an intake of more than the UL for vitamin D. The mechanisms that limit vitamin D safety are the capacity of circulating vitamin D-binding protein and the ability to suppress 25(OH)D-1-alpha-hydroxylase.

Vitamin D causes hypercalcemia when the "free" concentration of 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D is inappropriately high. This displacement of 1,25(OH)(2)D becomes excessive as plasma 25(OH)D concentrations become higher than at least 600 nM (240 ng/ml). Plasma concentrations of unmetabolized vitamin D during the first days after an acute, large dose of vitamin D can reach the micromolar range and cause acute symptoms.

The clinical trial evidence shows that a prolonged intake of 250 mug (10,000 IU)/d of vitamin D(3) is likely to pose no risk of adverse effects in almost all individuals in the general population; this meets the criteria for a tolerable upper intake level.


PMID: 18290725 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

re safety, intuition doesn't quite do it for me. I use that vieth study to guide how much d3 i'll take in one dose, but i'll never again take high dose vit d3 without ensuring balanced magnesium status. I wish there were more studies that looked specifically at magnesium response to long term high dose vit d3.

There are a number of vitamins and minerals our bodies need in certain amounts. Our bodies were designed to get these nutrients from food. Our bodies were designed to get the vitamin D from the sun and do not think you can get enough vitamin D from the food. Best for everyone to have their vitamin D level checked. The article shows healthy people living in the tropic with good sun exposure have levels between 80-100ng/ml. I would like to believe this is the level our bodies were designed to have. My level is 78ng/ml with taking 5000IU a day and spending 10 minutes in front of a sun screen. I haven't had my magnesium level check but since I eat lots of fruits and vegetables every day and am not in any pain. Got to think my level is OK. Think the first step in treating all disease is changing the diet to reflect what we were design to eat. Natural whole foods which have not been processed. If that doesn't work then examine supplements.

http://www.naturalnews.com/027345_Vitam ... e_sun.html

http://www.healthaliciousness.com/artic ... nesium.php

Vitamin D status in Greenland – dermal and dietary donations
http://www.circumpolarhealthjournal.net ... 21225/html
"Decreasing ... plasma 25OHD levels and insufficient vitamin D status is seen with low intake of traditional Inuit [vitamin D-rich local food items]." suggests that higher intake of traditional foods is consistent with dietary d3 sufficiency.

marcopolo wrote:According to these guys 10,000 IU per day is safe

http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/blog/hel ... h-project/

I am not so sure the Vitamin D Council recommends 10,000 IU:

Where did the Vitamin D Council get its recommendation that adults take 5,000 IU/day of vitamin D3 for the rest of their life? The Institute of Medicine’s Food and Nutrition Board say 600 IU/day is enough for adults and the Endocrine Society says 2,000 IU/day is enough for most adults.

http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/blog/why ... mment-4002

THX1138

Okay then how much magnesium should one take to be 'balanced'

jimmylegs wrote:re safety, intuition doesn't quite do it for me. I use that vieth study to guide how much d3 i'll take in one dose, but i'll never again take high dose vit d3 without ensuring balanced magnesium status. I wish there were more studies that looked specifically at magnesium response to long term high dose vit d3.

A better authority for the same info.

jackD

Am J Clin Nutr. 2007 Jan;85(1):6-18.

Risk assessment for vitamin D.

Hathcock JN, Shao A, Vieth R, Heaney R.

Abstract
The objective of this review was to apply the risk assessment methodology used by the Food and Nutrition Board (FNB) to derive a revised safe Tolerable Upper Intake Level (UL) for vitamin D. New data continue to emerge regarding the health benefits of vitamin D beyond its role in bone. The intakes associated with those benefits suggest a need for levels of supplementation, food fortification, or both that are higher than current levels. A prevailing concern exists, however, regarding the potential for toxicity related to excessive vitamin D intakes. The UL established by the FNB for vitamin D (50 microg, or 2000 IU) is not based on current evidence and is viewed by many as being too restrictive, thus curtailing research, commercial development, and optimization of nutritional policy. Human clinical trial data published subsequent to the establishment of the FNB vitamin D UL published in 1997 support a significantly higher UL. We present a risk assessment based on relevant, well-designed human clinical trials of vitamin D.

Collectively, the absence of toxicity in trials conducted in healthy adults that used vitamin D dose > or = 250 microg/d (10,000 IU vitamin D3) supports the confident selection of this value as the UL.


PMID: 17209171 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] Free full text

yep I like that study too, it has lots of good info. but:

out of 21 studies reviewed, 14 used doses of 5000 IU or less.

most of the studies reviewed had a duration of 4 days to 6 months.

only 2 of 21 studies covered longer periods AND amounts above 2144 IU/d:
- one 5 yr study gave 100,000 IU doses once every 4 months. "not appropriate for use in identifying NOAEL"
- the other 5 yr study gave 18,000 IU of vit D2 daily, but they gave it at the same time as high dose sodium fluoride, which increases metabolic vit D requirement. "NOAEL would have significant uncertainty"

just 1 of 21 studies reviewed examined the use of 10,000 IU daily, over only 20 weeks.

overall, magnesium interactions are not considered in any way in this article.

contrast this more recent study which did look at d3 - mineral interactions over an 8 week period. the researchers tested effects of vit d3 at doses of 400 IU/d.

Effect of calcium phosphate and vitamin D3 supplementation on bone remodelling and metabolism of calcium, phosphorus, magnesium and iron
http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pd ... 1-13-6.pdf

I read with interest that " The mean [dietary] magnesium ... intakes were 277.8 ± 42.2 mg/d ..." not good enough for basic needs, never mind if you were going to start high dosing d3 over the long term...

also: "After vitamin D3 supplementation, the renal magnesium excretion significantly increased after eight weeks compared to four weeks and to placebo (p≤0.05)."

nonetheless, the authors conclude: "supplementation with ... vitamin D3 did not negatively influence the metabolism of magnesium."

however, looking at the plasma mag levels, you can see a negative impact after d3 intervention, even though it was only using a small dose for a relatively short time period:
placebo group 1.0 (+/- 0.1) mmol/L. intervention groups (4 week and 8 week) 0.90 (+/- 0) mmol/L

we know that the difference between serum mag of 1.1 mmol/L and 0.90 mmol/L can be a pretty big deal. i tend to disagree with the researchers' assertion that effects on mag are not significant, even at a measly dose of 400IU D3 per day over a paltry 8 weeks.

@marco - I would say consume enough mag to ensure a serum level in the top end of the normal range (above 0.90 mmol/L) at a bare minimum. higher if possible, as tolerated.
you need minimum 400mg of mag intake daily to prevent deficiency symptoms, never mind achieving optimal status. aim higher for best effect.
in my experience, when zinc is optimized you can get away with much lower doses of supplemental d3. so that's a good one to balance as well

This article talks about studies showing vitamin D is not good for you. Guess you can make a study show whatever you want.

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/artic ... =430032009