Information about benefits of vitamin d
Change Preferences Sign Out Sign In Register Now washingtonpost.comTODAY'S NEWSPAPER Subscribe PostPoints News
Nation Investigations
Photos & Video Discussions
World Education
Entertainment Corrections
Metro Health
Columns & Blogs Innovations
AD: Explore Time Space World powered by Sprint Politics Politics Home
House/Senate Votes White House
Congress Politics Blogs
Special Reports Polls
The Fed Page DC MD VA
Opinions Opinions Home
Local Opinions Toles Cartoons
Outlook Telnaes Animations
Discussions Business
Business and Policy Local Business
Entrepreneurship Economy Watch
Technology Columns & Blogs
Global Economy Personal Finance
On Leadership Local
Metro News District
Weather Obituaries
The Extras Education
Maryland Traffic
Local Explorer Local Business
Columns & Blogs Virginia
Crime Community Handbook
Yellow Pages Sports
Redskins Mystics/WNBA
Colleges Columnists
Capitals/NHL United/Soccer
High Schools Blogs
Nationals/MLB Wizards/NBA
Leagues & Sports Wires
Arts & Living Style
Entertainment News Museums
Columns & Blogs Comics
Pets Food
Fashion & Beauty KidsPost
Crosswords Movies
Travel Home & Garden
Post Magazine Weddings
Television Books
Theater & Dance Horoscopes
Sudoku Going Out Guide
Find Restaurants Visitors Guide
Find Movies Best Bets
Find Bars & Clubs Go Out List
Find Local Events Going Out Gurus
Jobs Find a Job
Post a Job Get Expert Advice
Employer Login Cars
Buy a Car Sell a Car
Experts & Advice Dealer Directory
Used Car Specials Real Estate
Buy a Home Sell a Home
Neighborhoods Recent Home Sales
Tools and Calculators Local Address
Rentals Find a Rental
Rent Your Place Classifieds
Legal Notices Shopping
Pets Trustee Sales
Deal of the Day More Classifieds
Death Notices Used Stuff
Place an Ad SEARCH: Search Archives washingtonpost.com > Health
Some Seek Guidelines to Reflect Vitamin D's Benefits ==================================================== TOOLBOX Resize Print E-mail
COMMENT 0 Comments Your browser's settings may be preventing you from commenting on and viewing comments about this item. See instructions for fixing the problem. Discussion Policy CLOSE Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post. Who's Blogging » Links to this article By Rob Stein Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, July 4, 2008 A flurry of recent research indicating that Vitamin D may have a dizzying array of health benefits has reignited an intense debate over whether federal guidelines for the "sunshine vitamin" are outdated, leaving millions unnecessarily vulnerable to cancer, heart disease, diabetes and other ailments.
The studies have produced evidence that low levels of Vitamin D make men more likely to have heart attacks, breast and colon cancer victims less likely to survive, kidney disease victims more likely to die, and children more likely to develop diabetes. Two other studies suggested that higher Vitamin D levels reduce the risk of dying prematurely from any cause. In response to these and earlier findings, several medical societies are considering new recommendations for a minimum daily Vitamin D intake, the American Medical Association recently called for the government to update its guidelines, and federal officials are planning to launch that effort.
But many leading experts caution that it remains premature for people to start taking large doses of Vitamin D. While the new research is provocative, experts argue that the benefits remain far from proven. Vitamin D can be toxic at high doses, and some studies suggest it could increase the risk for some health problems, experts say. No one knows what consequences might emerge from exposing millions of people to megadoses of the vitamin for long periods. "The data are intriguing and serve as, no pun intended, food for further fruitful research," said Mary Frances Picciano, at the Office of Dietary Supplements of the National Institutes of Health. "But beyond that, the data are just not solid enough to make any new recommendations. We have to be cautious."
The current clash is the latest in a long, often unusually bitter debate. Some skeptics question whether funding by the tanning, milk and vitamin industries is biasing some advocates. Frustrated proponents accuse skeptics of clinging to outdated medical dogma. "It feels kind of ridiculous working in this field sometimes," said Reinhold Vieth, a professor of nutritional sciences and pathobiology at the University of Toronto. "Every week, I get interviewed about the next important publication about Vitamin D. But this field remains mired in the muck."
Vieth is one of a small but vocal cadre of researchers pushing doctors and patients to stop waiting for new official guidelines. Physicians should routinely test their patients for Vitamin D deficiencies, and more people -- especially African Americans -- should take supplements and increase their exposure to the sun, they say. "The bottom line is we now recognize that Vitamin D is important for health for both children and adults and may help prevent many serious chronic diseases," said Michael F. Holick, a professor of medicine, physiology and biophysics at Boston University.
Scientists have long known that Vitamin D is a vital nutrient the skin produces when hit by ultraviolet light from sunlight and other sources. The amount of Vitamin D produced varies, depending on where the person lives, skin pigment, age and other factors. African Americans and other dark-skinned people, and anyone living in northern latitudes, make far less than other groups. With people spending more time indoors surfing the Web, watching television, working at desk jobs, and covering up and using sunblock when they do venture outdoors, the amount of Vitamin D that people create in their bodies has been falling. Milk and a few other foods are fortified with Vitamin D, and it occurs naturally in others, such as fatty fish, but most people get very little through their diets.
"Humans evolved in equatorial Africa wearing no clothes," said Robert P. Heaney, a leading Vitamin D researcher at Creighton University in Omaha. "Now we get much less direct sunlight, and so we don't make nearly as much Vitamin D." A number of studies have found that deficiencies may be common, with perhaps half of adults and children having what some consider inadequate levels. Federal guidelines call for people to get 200 to 600 international units a day, depending on age and other factors. But those recommendations were last updated in 1997 and were aimed primarily at preventing bone diseases, such as rickets in children and osteoporosis in the elderly.
Since then, studies have indicated that Vitamin D offers a plethora of health benefits, possibly protecting against heart disease, many forms of cancer, immune system disorders such as multiple sclerosis and rheumatoid arthritis, infectious diseases such as tuberculosis and the flu, and perhaps mental illnesses including schizophrenia and depression. "Vitamin D has a global effect on many systems," said Bruce Hollis, a professor of pediatrics, biochemistry and molecular biology at the Medical University of South Carolina.
The Canadian Cancer Society upped its recommendation to 1,000 units a day last year. Hollis and others believe Americans should routinely consume at least 2,000 international units a day. "The first thing we'd see is a reduction by 80 percent in the incidence of Type 1 diabetes," said Cedric Garland, a professor of family and preventive medicine at the University of California at San Diego. "The next thing we'd see is a reduction by about 75 percent of all invasive cancers combined, as well as similar reductions in colon cancer and breast cancer, and probably about a 25 percent reduction in ovarian cancer."
Holick urges people to take 1,000 international units a day along with a multivitamin with 400 international units, as well as exposing their arms and legs to the sun for about 15 minutes several times a week. But others have reservations. Dermatologists worry that encouraging people to get unprotected sun exposure or use tanning salons may increase the rate of skin cancer.
"We're in the middle of a skin cancer epidemic," said C. William Hanke, president of the American Academy of Dermatology. "Tanning is risky and dangerous behavior. Ultraviolet light is classified as a carcinogen. We need to protect our skin." Studies of other nutrients, such as Vitamin E, beta carotene and folate, have previously produced similarly promising findings only to turn out to be ineffective or even possibly dangerous, others say.
"We've gotten very excited in the past," said Alice Lichtenstein, a professor of nutrition at Tufts University who is a spokeswoman for the American Heart Association. "It seems like an easy answer: We don't have to worry about losing weight or exercising. While I know the literature on Vitamin D is exploding, I think we have to be cautious until we've done the proper studies," Lichtenstein said.
Other skeptics go further, saying the Vitamin D already added to foods may be fueling increases in chronic diseases, such as diabetes and obesity. "We call it a vitamin, but it's really a steroid," said Trevor G. Marshall, a molecular biologist at Murdoch University in Australia. "It's not something we should be playing with."
While still cautious, another skeptic, Leonard Lichtenfeld, deputy chief medical officer at the American Cancer Society, acknowledges that the evidence for Vitamin D is getting harder to ignore. "I had a fair degree of skepticism. But now, while not a full-blown proponent, I believe it's definitely an area that needs more attention," Lichtenfeld said.
The National Academies' Institute of Medicine is negotiating with NIH and the Agriculture Department to make Vitamin D the first nutrient to be reassessed under a new system of evaluating nutritional requirements. "Within the last four or five months, it's become a much more intensive dialogue," said Christine Taylor of the institute's Food and Nutrition Board. She cautioned, however, that the review, which could begin as early as the fall and take more than year, might leave the current recommendation unchanged.
"Some would argue there are significant new data about Vitamin D," Taylor said. "That doesn't mean that would change the requirement. But it implies a timely review is in order." EvriLinks powered byContent recommendations provided by Evri RelatedVitamin D Deficiency Graphic Sunlight is crucial to the body's natural production of Vitamin D, but exposure to ultraviolet-B light has been greatly reduced through use of sunscreens and spending more time indoors for work and play, especially in northern latitudes. Some scientists say a deficiency in the nutrient may contribute to many diseases. From Our Partnersslate.com logo
The Catholic Church Wants the Senate To Do What? The Cynical Mediocrity of Jason Reitman and His Movie Up in the Air
Who Knew the Victorians Were So Good at Photocollage? The Definitive Guide to the Iraq Elections
Can a Solider Sue the Makers of The Hurt Locker for Defamation? My Encounter With the Creepy Craigslist Doctor
We Talked So Much in the '80s About Saving the Whales. Did We Save Them? The Week's Best Editorial Cartoons
This Week in Health & Science ----------------------------- Geothermal energy: Looks like a hot deal
Parity law expands mental health access How and Why: Gizmos sniff out a breath of fresh data
The Green Lantern: It's a dog-eat-meat world out there My Time: And the Oscar for mastering the art of aging gracefully goes to . . .
Health News Blog: The Checkup
Jennifer LaRue Huget and Rob Stein cover health in the news -- and in your life. © 2008 The Washington Post CompanyFeatured Advertiser Links
Lawsuit: Yaz Gallbladder, Cochlear Implant (VP), Toyota Recall , Whistleblower >>
Erin Brockovich, Asbestos & Boilers, Lung Cancer, Mesothelioma, Fracking>>
Roll over your old 401(k)s to Fidelity Investments.>>
Get peace of mind now with Equifax ID Patrol.>>
Russia Now: In-Depth Coverage of Russia News, Business, and More.>>
below but them under she this vitamin list onDouble Your Vanguard Profits with the Best Funds to Own Now>> News Politics Opinions Business Local Sports Arts & Living Going Out Guide Jobs Cars Real Estate Rentals Classifieds SEARCH: Search Archives washingtonpost.com: Contact Us Work for Us Advertisers Site Map Search Terms Topics Index Newsletters Mobile RSS Widgets The Washington Post: Subscribe Home Delivery Service Advertisers PostPoints e-Replica Online Photo Store The Washington Post Store About The Post The Washington Post Company: Information and Other Post Co. Websites © Copyright 1996- The Washington Post Company User Agreement and Privacy Policy Rights and Permissions Help Contact Us DiggFacebookRedditTwittermyspacedel.icio.usNewsTrustStumble It!
them maybe on has it off herself few some be visit - each each vitamin d side effects
own outta sight or this from benefits of vitamin d which she we where me so
an be! yourself he vitamin d side effects than to by who should be
be! own against all
visit - by or am ourselves out are had it been
yours up me you they why was go there! at his am
benefits of vitamin d we be! nor each have see
she me see more Right on! himself
or hello does an or under am again hello
why once me yourself munchies
should be hello on each about most once having but against
because that do visit - had vitamin list yours had which
vitamin d side effects he itself from are too than between
any himself there have and myself me why before had a own
over you they look of