Vit D

[Elaine22]

My vitD is 6.5 how low is this. And what is the normal range

[helvella Administrator]

If it is the usual range then 6.5 is very low - and 50 is the typical "adequate".

How do you know the number? Did they not tell you the range and what to do about it?

Rod

[Elaine22 in reply to helvella]

I'm sure he said 6.5 and 7 was the range, I will get results from docs.

[Elaine22 in reply to Elaine22]

He told me to get some good multi vits with vit d in.

[Cassandra in reply to helvella]

Just had my vitD results back from Coperformance:

28.8 ng/ml which they say is sufficient - also on results I see 50 ng/ml recommended

States that calcium is raised 2.6 mmol but that can be because of squeezing finger too hard to get the blood out.

Has left me confused and the reason I went through these labs was because my gp thinks I am hypocondriac and I steer clear when I can. Does it mean if I supplement with VitD my calcium will increase further and become dangerous?

[Hidden in reply to Cassandra]

ng/ml is different to nmol/l - (maybe USA compared to UK measures)

Adequate is over 50 nmol/l (20 ng/ml) optimal is more like 80 nmol/L (32 ng/ml).

The normal test is a 25-hydroxy vit D test (as below 25 nmol/L is deficient)

vitamindtest.org.uk/vitamin...

grassrootshealth.net/

[Jackie]

Hi When I first saw my Endo she said to have the best vit and mineral tablets and fish oils too, . There are a lot of different ones so careful comparison is needed.However, if taking much vit D in any tablet form , it is important to have corrected calcium tested, Corrected calcium above range is very dangerous. Vit D puts it up anyway. Re test both after 3 months, D takes that long for optimum.As a hormone, surprising that your D is so good anyway.If that is the correct range. The 2 different tests I have do not resemble that. If corrected calcium high be sure to have a test for PTH ( parathyoird), If they are high. Then you need a specific test done AM together ( 3 tests) for PTH, Calcium and D. If all high , then a PTH nuclear scan and CT, done together at a large teaching hospital. If so then also an ultra sound of the thyroid.

Best wishes,

Jackie

[Elaine22 in reply to Jackie]

Thank you x

[snowstorm]

Hello, Vit D range can change --- often labs change the types of testing and how they do the measure, according to our senior nurse because I challenged one result against the other. 1st test came back range 50-250 : my result was 54; no recommendation to supplement so I did it myself. The next test range came back 30 - 150??? my result 97. This is confusing to us if we wish to keep a close check on what is going on. Question is? what is the OPTIMUM level? not told this are we? I will not be happy til Vt D is up to either 240/245 or 140/145 depending on how the lab decides to measure it.

Physicians should recommend supplementation AND advise as to the best suppliers AND get people up to the optimum level of whatever it is.

Ranges are necessary to tell you how close or how far away you are from the optimum level. Being within the range is simply NOT good enough. Rant over. Sorry.

[Elaine22 in reply to snowstorm]

Thank you

[Jackie in reply to snowstorm]

Hi Quite right, there are several different tests and even with the standard NHS one, different labs, different assay, so slightly different ranges. originally my NHS test showed Ok. However, rheumy would only use the expensive one done by TDl, private hospitals expensive, £55, same test with Blue Horizon, quote TUK 10. I sometimes have that as such a better test. The same week test from TDL showed extremely deficient.

Best wishes,

Jackie

[hashihoppo]

My Vit D was 18 - I was told 'normal range' is 75. I was initially put on 3000 units Vit D a day. At first I felt wonderful, almost on a 'high' - but then again Vitamin D is NOT a vitamin, it is a hormone! I then began to feel horrible, digestion problems, diarrhoea alternating with constipation, so my GP changed my meds to one itty, bitty pill a week of 20,000units Vit D, but these just didnt help. I then began to search the internet about any problems associated with taking Vitamin D - apparently it can be contra-indicated in thyroid disease, in fact after the initial 'high' it will make you feel worse, not better. This is called Vitamin D dysregulation. After reading several articles on this I decided not to take the actual vitamin, I found some Vitamin D cream I use on my skin after bathing and I try to get out in the sun as much as I can, I even resorted to (naughty, naughty) the sun bed, but you go on it for a much shorter time than you would to get a tan. By doing this I have managed to come out of winter with a Vitamin D level of 68, which I feel is good enough. So I guess what I am trying to say here is if you have thryoid disease be cautious with taking vitamin D, you will know probably within about a month if it starts to disagree with you after the initial high. Frustrating I know, but then there are people who live in other countries who have low D levels and they are not all riddled with illness and nasty diseases.

[snowstorm in reply to hashihoppo]

Well, thank you so very much for that. You learn something everyday. Why oh WHY then don't GPs & Endos know this? Why oh WHY are vitamin & mineral levels not checked as a matter of course BEFORE being perscribed any type of thyroid medication? Simply cannot understand it. Surely so much of what we all speak about is common sense. But perhaps common sense is not one of the requirements for a university majoring in any kind of physicianship.

[hashihoppo]

Hi snowstorm. Thing is, I did print a lot of articles out about Vitamin D dysregulation in people with thyroid disease and took it to my GP. He took it in his hand, didnt even really open it up, glanced at it and tossed to back at me, without so much as a comment. All he said was that perhaps I could just take it when I "feel my levels might be low" (?????) and then just use the cream and go out in the sun the rest of the time.......... I know perhaps I should change my GP - this is the guy who treated my son for "a virus" when all the time he had sarcoidosis! AND I had told him this is what I suspected my son had, AND I had printed out the Patient UK information sheet about it as my son's symptoms matched, but no my GP knew best. Clearly not in my son's case as I had diagnosed it a whole month before the GP finally got round to sending him for a chest x-ray (which I had repeatedly asked for), which showed lymphadenopathy in his chest and a shadow on his lung. Fortunately, he has improved but no thanks to my GP!