Vitamin and mineral levels

[Abik]

Been told to stop vitamin D 2000iu. Thanks

Vitamin D 54.2 (50 - 75 suboptimal)

[ITYFIALMCTT]

Unless you've been given a clinical reason for that decision by your GP/endocrinologist, given that your result barely takes you into the 'adequate' range, do you agree that you need to stop the supplementation?

Or, have I misunderstood, and your GP/endocrinologist has suggested that you continue to supplement but at a lower level?

[Abik in reply to ITYFIALMCTT]

Thanks no I don't agree with the diagnosis. The GP wants me to go cold turkey. When I asked why she said 2000iu is a toxic dose.

[Saggyuk in reply to Abik]

It would only be a toxic dose if you were already nearing being over range. 800iu is classed as a maintenance dose - keeps you where you are so I can't see how 2000 would be toxic - unless you had high calcium? The blood test itself gives you the answer in the word "suboptimal" silly doc. You are also likely to go lower over the winter anyway so personally, I would keep taking for another couple of months and retest maybe?

[Abik in reply to Saggyuk]

Hi and thanks no my calcium is low.

[ITYFIALMCTT in reply to Abik]

Do you actually mean low (as in below the reference range) or low within the range?

[Abik in reply to ITYFIALMCTT]

Low within the range thanks. Used to be much higher.

Calcium 2.26 (2.20 - 2.60)

Calcium corrected 2.25 (2.20 - 2.60)

[ITYFIALMCTT in reply to Abik]

I wouldn't persist if this weren't potentially important.

When you say this: "Used to be much higher" - do you mean higher but still within the range or do you mean that it was above the range?

If it was high above the range then your GP may well have a good reason for suggesting that you stop the supplementation of vitamin D.

[Abik in reply to ITYFIALMCTT]

Sorry higher within the range, about 2.45 for calcium and same again for corrected calcium.

[Saggyuk in reply to Abik]

Well even more reason to stay on Vit D as required to absorb more calcium

[ITYFIALMCTT in reply to Abik]

If your GP hasn't said why she considers 2000u to be toxic (and there are some very odd reasons why that can be true but it's rare and I'd expect her to tell you) then it's difficult to understand her instruction or thinking.

You're barely into the 'adequate' range - I've no idea why she'd think that even your current level would be sustained for you over Winter without any supplementation, in fact you're quite likely to dip into the 'deficiency' range again.

If there is a sound reason behind her recommendation then it needs to be more explicit because the bald statement, "2000iu is a toxic dose" is plainly not true for most adults who have your level of vitamin D.

It is plausible that you ask for a further explanation or continue to supplement and test your levels yourself with City Assay until you are happy with your range and then establish the correct maintenance dosage to keep you in the range where you want to be.

ETA: x-posted with SaggyUK

[SeasideSusie Remembering in reply to Abik]

she said 2000iu is a toxic dose.

Oh jeez, I should be dead

I was taking 40,000iu daily for 2 weeks when I found out I was severely deficient, then I went onto 5000iu daily, now I'm at the recommended level of 100-150nmol/L my maintenance dose is 2000iu daily all year round.

[SlowDragon Administrator]

Your GP doesn't understand

You have Hashimotos, this badly affects gut function

Extremely common to be deficient in vitamin D and often to need much higher doses to get levels to rise

See SeasideSusie replies on detailed vitamin advice

And why magnesium and vitamin K2 are important

Personally I use vitamin D mouth spray by Better You as it avoids gut and need between 3000-6000iu to maintain levels