Vit D results

I have just received my Vit D results which I had done privately. I would appreciate any interpretation beyond "adequate" provided by the lab please:

D3: 112.1 nmol/L

D2: 2.8 nmol/L

Total Vit D: 114.9 nmol?L (range: Greater than 50 - adequate; Greater than 220 - High/toxic)

Deduct 50 from 220 = 170, divided by 2 = 85; 50 + 85 = 135 = midway within adequate-toxic range. So it seems to me that my level of total 114.9 is not even midway. Or is my "logic" misleading me?

16 Replies

  • Hi, that's actually a really good level of vitamin D, especially in the UK where sunshine is not so abundant. The general consensus amongst the experts seems to be that anywhere between 70-80 is the level needed for good health :)

  • ...yes 70/80 is good but doesn't that refer to test readings as ng/ml and not nmol/L....So the D3 of 112 nmol/L divided by 2.5 = 45 approx. illustrates the chart indicating dose required to reach the optimal level of 70.....

    My recent D3 result was 49 ng/ml which translates as 122 nmol/L....

  • Ah, there you are Marz! Yes of course, you're right

  • Actually, hang on - no. I'm talking about nmol/L - which is what the test was? In which case, according to my Rheumy and my reading 70-80 is ideal, 50 adequate.

  • Hi again, what I said originally - I stand by it, you appear to have had the same reference ranges as my Rheumy used

  • Hi both. Thank you for your input.

    Just to clarify, and having looked at the grassrootshealth link, it appears to say that 100-150 nmol/L is the recommended range, so therefore my D3 at 112 could stand a little bolstering?

  • It can't do any harm, I think it's one where you wee out what you don't use if you'll excuse my non-medical terminology! We are coming out of a wet winter though, your levels are expected to be higher in the summer months anyway

  • We can but hope :)

  • Thanks again Leamo. I'll start googling to see what's available. :-)

  • VitD is fat soluble ! B12 is the one that you pee out !

  • Sorry, Marz is right about it being fat soluble, I was getting it confused. Because it's fat soluble, it isn't expelled instead is stored in your liver (as I understand it...) which is how you can become become toxic. In which case, since you are within range and coming into the longer days with more sunshine (we hope), supplementing on top may be OTT unless you regularly monitor levels. 15 minutes of exposure (without barrier/UV protection) is supposed to be sufficient to maintain healthy levels. I had a reading of 9 at one stage and it only took a month of supplements at 400 units to get me to 86, so levels can change quickly. If you do decide to supplement, do keep monitoring to avoid becoming toxic.

  • Thank you. And glad to hear you got your levels up too.


    Scroll down till the end and you'd see how to convert your results from nmol/l to ng/ml (divide your results by 2.5)

    followed by a table with levels and ranges guidelines.

  • Thanks for the link Melanie

  • I cannot remember what my vit d test was but my GP said that my level was "adequate" but my private doctor, who organised the test, said that the nhs use too low a figure. Anyway, the upshot of this was that I have been taking 5000iu a day for some years and feel fine. (The private doc., said to take less if I'm spending a lot of time in the sun.)

    I've done some research on vit d and ms for a client and there is a school of thought that those with ms can take 10000-20000iu or more per day and that vit d only becomes toxic at 50000iu. (Low vit d is linked to ms.)

  • Thanks for that Penny. It's useful to have the private perspective. I'm gearing myself up to supplementing post-GP appointment.

You may also like...