Healthcare practitioners are increasingly aware of the risks of low vitamin D levels, but many are not aware that high levels of vitamin D can have toxic effects. Read on to learn the risks of over-supplementation, what factors determine your optimal vitamin D level, and the many reasons to get sunlight exposure beyond just vitamin D.
Written by
RedApple
Administrator
To view profiles and participate in discussions please or .
In years past, there was considerable concern about people supplementing with an excess of vitamin D. But, more recently, the view seemed to shift such that there is much less concern.
According to your link the optimal level of vitamin D is 35 - 60 ng/mL, which is nice to know, because on this forum people are usually told that optimal is 40 - 60 ng/mL (100 - 150 nmol/L), so I think we can give ourselves a pat on the back.
Userotc, 'blood test every 3-4m difficult/impractical.'
If you mean through the NHS, then yes, difficult if not impossible for most of us. But easy enough if you are able to fund your own tests. A few little drips of blood is all that's needed. vitamindtest.org.uk
Understood but personally I think every few months unnecessary, at least once you get to more stable figures. I've been able to maintain 100-145 nmol/l over 2 years with 3 tests.
Grassroots Health also an informative website. The above link takes you to a page that assists with dose calculation. If your test result is UK pmol/L then ÷ by 2.5 for the US measurement ng/L
I have read that Dr Coimbra (founder of The Coimbra Protocol and professor of neuroscience) uses PTH tests to determine optimal doses of vitamin D for his patients; but then he uses doses of up to 250,000iu of vitamin D per day (sometimes more) to treat MS and other autoimmune conditions. Dr Coimbra considers that we should all be taking 10,000iu of vitamin D3 per day; I think that this is across the board but haven’t checked it. As far as I know he has not had adverse effects but a 95% success rate over 20 years.
If this doctor is using supplemental vitamin D to treat specific health issues, then that's a very different issue. And of course he will be doing very thorough testing and taking full responsibility for his patients.
Of course The Coimbra Protocol is only followed by those under a Coimbra-qualified medic., it is not a treatment for the general populace but for those with MS, RA, vitiligo, psoriasis and other autoimmune conditions.
As I have THR I wonder if some with autoimmune diseases are resistant to D3 and need higher doses.
It obviously helps to know ones baseline level of vitamin D to judge how much to supplement, some can take high doses without their levels rising very much. Like a lot of people I think that the recommended dosages are much too low.
Not as far as I know; I was not actually making a relationship between THR and Vit D3 resistance but, in the same way that some of us have THR, perhaps there are people who have vit D HR - no link.
A (medical) doctor in the US who was treating me recommended I work up to 1000iu. As we worked through the problem over the following months, my daily dose was increased to 5000iu.
I have maintained this since then - my (UK) blood test results continue to show my level as mid-range .
Perhaps this article is another example of how misleading general advice can be, as with T3.
Some issues, like haemochromatosis, are widely recognised. People end up with excess iron and have problems from that. Equally, iron deficiency is widespread and explained in several ways.
Why not assume that all nutrients can, potentially, be handled differently depending on the individual? Seems a fairly obvious step.
thank you; i have been posting about this on here for a while now. adverse effects, including increased incidence of all-cause mortality, start to appear above 35-40 ng/ml according to studies i’ve seen referenced from ConsumerLab. single moderately high doses have also been associated with negative health impacts. i think optimal levels may vary by individual and it’s possible that those with autoimmune issues may benefit from higher levels as has been posited by many. from what i’ve read, individuals in indigenous tribes have been found to have levels in the upper 40s, so I shoot for that and try to get my family to do the same.
edit: just realized there was more to the article than i saw originally and that differences in ethnicity were discussed; great info.
the article also raises the issue of adequate vitamin A in mediating possible toxicity of high D. this brings up another issue i’ve been wanting to raise on this board - the importance of keeping nutrients balanced and the fact that multivitamins are typically not recommended. with all due respect, i disagree with that. it is indeed difficult to find a high quality multi that works for hypos (low or no iodine, iron-free so as not to interfere with absorption of other nutrients, having the ideal/needed form of the various nutrients, etc etc) but i think with all the supplementing hypos do (b vitamins, d, sometimes zinc, sometimes iron, mag, etc) that a good multivitamin, perhaps with relatively low (e.g., 100% daily value) levels of nutrients is probably a very good idea in order to keep things balanced. for instance, we know that ongoing zinc supplementation can cause issues with low copper; high levels of iron supplementation can interfere with zinc absorption; that vitamins a, d, k and e compete for absorption when taken at high levels, as do mag and calcium; that adequate vitamin A or beta carotene is needed for the body to properly use iron; that there is an interaction between molybdenum, manganese, and iron, etc. i think the importance of nutrient balance cannot be underestimated.
i haven’t yet found a good multivitamin that meets the criteria i’m looking for (i haven’t had as much time as i’d like to look into it) and i’ve so far just been trying to ensure that i eat foods high in other nutrients that i know balance with the ones i’ve been supplementing with, but i don’t think people should be recommended against taking a good multi if they can find one. in fact, it would be great to share recommendations on this board. please feel free to push back if anyone has reason to feel differently.
Grassroots has been sponsoring research projects and have found that a level above 60 ng/ml can have an 80% reduction in breast cancer risk. That's the level I am aiming for.
Content on HealthUnlocked does not replace the relationship between you and doctors or other healthcare professionals nor the advice you receive from them.
Never delay seeking advice or dialling emergency services because of something that you have read on HealthUnlocked.
Where to get a vitamin D test? 
Ferritin and vitamin d
More on vitamin D
Iron, vitamin B12 and vitamin D
