Sunday, January 03, 2010
Dear Friends,
At the risk of sounding alarmist I am posting this piece of research done by Duke University which states very categorically that Vitamin D is responsible for brain lesions in the elderly. This is due to its immunosuppresive actions, while the bacteria that cause the brain inflammations run rampant.
http://bacteriality.com/2007/10/24/brain_lesions/
Please read this article and comment on whether any other research was done to contradict this. At a time when we have all been enthusiastically taking mega doses of Vit D this comes as quite a setback.
My personal experience:
I began taking 60,000 IU per week for the past 3 months and my brain and mind have been functioning clearer than ever before!!
Yours,
Priya
You can read for yourself the full text of the PAYNE research here.
Calcium and vitamin D intakes may be positively associated with brain lesions in depressed and non-depressed elders
Those of you who are able to use their common sense will be able to see how this research is fundamentally flawed.
There is an easy simple and cheap way to measure vitamin D3 status
So why use a Food Frequency Questionnaire?
It would have cost more in time and energy and less than 10% of vitamin D3 intake comes from diet. Even in elderly people those who get sun exposure have higher vitamin D status than can be acquired by diet alone. If you have the resources available to fund expensive MRI scanning you also have the resources (particularly as it would have saved time and money and provided accurate information) to do proper 25(OH)D3 testing.
The only reason anyone would want to use a more expensive, less reliable procedure to assess vitamin D3 status is that they had no intention of providing accurate information.
Proponents of Trevor Marshall should be aware that the idea that Vitamin D3 supplements block Vitamin D receptors has been shown to be flawed.
They have shown that at sufficient HIGH 25(OH)D3 status Calcidiol, previously thought to be a prohormone is actually able to activate Vitamin D receptors.
Dear Ted Hutchinson,
I certainly and certainly hope and wish you are right. Because this Duke University study definitely puts a scare into the habitual users of high doses of Vit D and Calcium. I wonder whether they carried out randomized clinical trials as they state in their conclusion.
In the meantime I shall be very grateful if you can let me know whether there is any evidence or research that shows that Vit D can act like a scavenging agent to clean out the calcium in calcified arteries? Should we reduce calcium below 1200 mg to 6000 mg to avoid calcification of the arteries -- and increase Vit D instead only to clean out the calcium from the arteries?
Since you appear so well-versed on the subject may be you can throw light on this puzzle!!
Thanking you for your interest and the great relief you have given us!
Yours,
Priya
Thanking you,
Yours,
Priya