Vitamin D stuff.

[Bill Sikes]

From another thread, T. H. said:

>> That is the kind of level (of Vitamin D) our paleolithic ancestors achieved when
>> they lived naked outdoors and that is when our DNA evolved.

How do we know that they both "lived naked outdoors", and didn't have problems with cancer?

Which particular ancestors, BTW?


>> I would still suggest you take any opportunity to get plenty of sun on as much skin
>> as you day without getting burnt. 20mins is sufficient and it won't push you over the
>> limit. you need 40,000iu /d to do that and that's not possible with one 5000iu/d and
>> a bit of sun.

So, there should be a correlation between cancers in people who get lots of sun (e.g. people who sunbathe) and people who don't (workaholic office personnel). Where is it?


I shall be quite interested by replies to these specific points.

[G-man]

Originally Posted by Bill Sikes

From another thread, T. H. said:

>> That is the kind of level (of Vitamin D) our paleolithic ancestors achieved when
>> they lived naked outdoors and that is when our DNA evolved.

How do we know that they both "lived naked outdoors", and didn't have problems with cancer?

Which particular ancestors, BTW?


>> I would still suggest you take any opportunity to get plenty of sun on as much skin
>> as you day without getting burnt. 20mins is sufficient and it won't push you over the
>> limit. you need 40,000iu /d to do that and that's not possible with one 5000iu/d and
>> a bit of sun.

So, there should be a correlation between cancers in people who get lots of sun (e.g. people who sunbathe) and people who don't (workaholic office personnel). Where is it?


I shall be quite interested by replies to these specific points.

I highly recommend that everyone run around naked everyday for at least twenty minutes.

[Bill Sikes]

What, no Ted?

[fuzzywuzzy]

hhhmm I'm prone to cancer because they say the damage is done in early days, not adulthood. And if you lived as I lived ...a normal Australian child we got lots of sun. But since I was about 13 I covered up . but i"m still prone to it ...had a couple of scares actually ...all to do with childhood sun bathing and being outdoors mostly naked.

My niece on the other hand has the inablility to absorb vit D and suffers for it. Her skin is turning white in some places and she's quite sick some of the time and had to have radio therapy to hype up her degree of vit D .

There have been concerns though that girls of the muslim faith need to sunbathe a little more to make up for the lack of sunlight on there bodies.


what do you do eh?

[minks]

Naked in Canada eh? I dunno about that, not much fear of sunburn, more frostbite
Interesting topic, one of our guys came in yesterday to show us his GF's ultrasound pics of his baby to be and said the health nurse said society as a whole is greatly lacking in vitamine D.

Yes take pills, get out in the sun, whatever it takes get your "D"

[qsducks]

I get loads of D from sitting outside in the mornings in the sun

[tedhutchinson]

Originally Posted by qsducks

I get loads of D from sitting outside in the mornings in the sun

But have you had a 25(OH)D test?
The reason I ask is that most people find when they get tested that their vitamin D status is lower than is safe and lower than they think.
We know that over the last 15~20 years 25(OH)D levels are dropping.
We don't know the precise reason. It may be more time indoors, more use of sunscreens, more driving round in cars and indoor shopping malls.
It may be upper atmospheric pollution.
We know that as vitamin D is a fat soluble vitamin it gets stored in adipose tissue (fat cells) as people put on weight. Low Vitamin d status is not just a cause but and effect of weight gain. We also know that the more overweight you are the more vitamin d your body uses/needs to keep status optimal.
We know also that some foods, like a high fibre diet, shortens the lifespan of D3 and foods like High Fructose Corn syrup has an adverse effect on the metabolism of D3.

I could go on, and on. The gist of the post is that unless you test your 25(OH)D it's likely you will find your current estimate of your vitamin d status is wrong. Maybe if you are getting FULL BODY sun exposure for 20~30 minutes around midday I will be proved wrong but I doubt it. Remember also that for people living above latitude 35 the winter period doesn't produce D3 as the angle of the sun means UVB gets absorbed in the upper atmosphere and doesn't reach the ground so you then need to take 5000iu/daily in order to achieve optimum status.

[tedhutchinson]

Originally Posted by minks

Naked in Canada eh? I dunno about that, not much fear of sunburn, more frostbite

Sure Vitamin D production is a heat driven process using UVB RAYS. No UVB reaches the ground in Winter north of latitude 35 so levels drop from October through to the end of Feb. Also the best UVB<>UVA ratio is around midday. UVA harms skin, UVB makes vitamin d so midday sun gives you the most UVB for the least UVA exposure.

The more skin exposed the better, The least tanned areas make most D3. So the more pale skin you expose the shorter the time you need to be out there.

Interesting topic, one of our guys came in yesterday to show us his GF's ultrasound pics of his baby to be and said the health nurse said society as a whole is greatly lacking in vitamine D.

if you look at the chart at the top of this page you see of the 2500 people tested worldwide so far the majority have levels below 50ng which is where we find the least incidence of chronic illness occurs.

Yes take pills, get out in the sun, whatever it takes get your "D"

But for most people we find in practice nude midday sunbathing isn't practicable. It is safer to take a 5000iu/d3 just to be certain you are in the safe zone. We know that 10,000iu/daily is safe together with ample sunlight and you can all see that 5000iu is just half that amount so must be even safer that is if you can be safer than safe.

[tedhutchinson]

Originally Posted by fuzzywuzzy

hhhmm I'm prone to cancer because they say the damage is done in early days, not adulthood. And if you lived as I lived ...a normal Australian child we got lots of sun.

There is a problem with Australian sunlight. Skin Cancer/Sunscreen - the Dilemma It's explained by Edward Gorham in this video. You need the section where he is talking about the ozone hole, layer and lip. Exposing skin to UVA when there is no UVB reaching the ground will cause harm.
Those who live in the Southern Hemisphere have to understand the sun shines about 10% brighter. I can explain why if you want to know, just ask.

My niece on the other hand has the inablility to absorb vit D and suffers for it. Her skin is turning white in some places and she's quite sick some of the time and had to have radio therapy to hype up her degree of vit D .

Low Vitamin D status is implicated in the development of autoimmune conditions like Vitiligo You may like to show you niece this link.

There have been concerns though that girls of the muslim faith need to sunbathe a little more to make up for the lack of sunlight on there bodies.

but you kid yourself if you think it's only muslims that wear concealing clothing that are at risk.
Hers is a recent report on the subject Bear in mind they say human breast milk is not a good source of vitamin d, but they don't explain why that is the case.
The paper here explains that in order for breast milk to flow replete with D3 the mother has to have a 25(OH)D status around 55ng 137.5nmol/l and that requires roughly 5000iu/daily.

what do you do eh?

If you take 5000iu daily for 3 months then get a 25(OH)D test. That will show if 5000iu is sufficient for your body or if you need more or less.
10,000iu+ sun exposure is absolutely safe so as there is no risk at 10,000iu there are only benefits to be achieved from half that level.

[tedhutchinson]

Originally Posted by Bill Sikes

From another thread, T. H. said:

>> That is the kind of level (of Vitamin D) our paleolithic ancestors achieved when
>> they lived naked outdoors and that is when our DNA evolved.

How do we know that they "lived naked outdoors"

What hunter gather peoples are you aware of that don't live mainly outdoors wearing little if any clothing?

and didn't have problems with cancer?

If we just go back to fairly recent primitive cultures we find they are virtually cancer free.

Which particular ancestors, BTW?

I think Carole Baggerly covers this point in her video here.
YouTube - Vitamin D Prevents Cancer: Is It True?]

So, there should be a correlation between cancers in people who get lots of sun (e.g. people who sunbathe) and people who don't (workaholic office personnel). Where is it?

[http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&scoring=r&q=25(OH)D+level+cancer +incidence&as_ylo=2009]These are the most recent studies

I shall be quite interested by replies to these specific points.

Sorry I've been busy elsewhere and rather neglected this forum recently.