Nutrition Health and Weight Loss News
Two new studies are out adding to the compelling amount of emerging research on vitamin D and cancer.
Researchers from the Creighton University School of Medicine, in the United States found during a study of 1,179 healthy, postmenopausal women that those taking large amounts of vitamin D3 in conjunction with calcium had a 60 per cent or higher chance of not getting cancer than their peers.
The women, from rural Nebraska, supplemented their diet for four years with calcium and a quantity of vitamin D3 nearly three times the US government's recommended daily amount (RDA) for middle-age adults.
"The findings are very exciting," said Joan Lappe, the study's lead researcher. "They confirm what a number of vitamin D proponents have suspected for some time but that, until now, have not been substantiated through clinical trial. Vitamin D is a critical tool in fighting cancer as well as many other diseases."
Then there's a report by researchers at Harvard Medical School that came out in the May 28 issue of the Archives of Internal Medicine. The researchers found that premenopausal women whose intake of vitamin D and calcium was high had about a 30 percent lower risk of developing breast cancer. (However, for reasons not yet clear, they didn't find this association for postmenopausal women.)
But here's what continues to frustrate me: Researchers who don't have the courage to actually embrace their own results. (You see this all the time in the diet studies every time a low-carb diet study shows that low-carb dieters have better blood lipids and no problems with cholesterol, and the researchers continue to almost apologize for their own results saying things like, 'well, gee, but it's still probably dangerous and we don't know the long term effects" blah blah. But that's another story.)
Anyway. The good Dr. Lin, being cautious and conservative, told the NY Times that- even after her study- she "still wouldn't recommend that women get more than the recommeded amount..... (of) vitamin D".
The "recommended amount" of vitamin D is currently 400 IU's and it's ridiculously low. It needs to be changed. It's out of date. Most of the integrative medicine docs I work with regularly do vitamin D tests on their patients and find woefully insufficient levels. I regularly take a supplement of 2000 IUs of vitamin D, though 1000 IU's would probably do fine.
Vitamin D not only has cancer-protective action, it's also one of the most important vitamins for bone health. And it's impossible to talk about it without talking about our widespread sun phobia. (Sun, after all, is the major source of most vitamin D.) While it's true that we probably shouldn't bake in the noonday sun for hours without sunscreen, it's also true that we don't need to slather on SPF 45 every time we take the dog for a walk. We need to get much wiser about both sun and vitamin D. I talk about this in a chapter called "Sensible Sunlight" on my CD set "23 Ways to Improve Your Life!".
And if you'd like a great book on the sun, vitamin D, and the health benefits of both, check out my friend Dr. Al Sear's new excellent downloadable e-book, "Your Best Health Under the Sun"
Researchers from the Creighton University School of Medicine, in the United States found during a study of 1,179 healthy, postmenopausal women that those taking large amounts of vitamin D3 in conjunction with calcium had a 60 per cent or higher chance of not getting cancer than their peers.
The women, from rural Nebraska, supplemented their diet for four years with calcium and a quantity of vitamin D3 nearly three times the US government's recommended daily amount (RDA) for middle-age adults.
"The findings are very exciting," said Joan Lappe, the study's lead researcher. "They confirm what a number of vitamin D proponents have suspected for some time but that, until now, have not been substantiated through clinical trial. Vitamin D is a critical tool in fighting cancer as well as many other diseases."
Then there's a report by researchers at Harvard Medical School that came out in the May 28 issue of the Archives of Internal Medicine. The researchers found that premenopausal women whose intake of vitamin D and calcium was high had about a 30 percent lower risk of developing breast cancer. (However, for reasons not yet clear, they didn't find this association for postmenopausal women.)
But here's what continues to frustrate me: Researchers who don't have the courage to actually embrace their own results. (You see this all the time in the diet studies every time a low-carb diet study shows that low-carb dieters have better blood lipids and no problems with cholesterol, and the researchers continue to almost apologize for their own results saying things like, 'well, gee, but it's still probably dangerous and we don't know the long term effects" blah blah. But that's another story.)
Anyway. The good Dr. Lin, being cautious and conservative, told the NY Times that- even after her study- she "still wouldn't recommend that women get more than the recommeded amount..... (of) vitamin D".
The "recommended amount" of vitamin D is currently 400 IU's and it's ridiculously low. It needs to be changed. It's out of date. Most of the integrative medicine docs I work with regularly do vitamin D tests on their patients and find woefully insufficient levels. I regularly take a supplement of 2000 IUs of vitamin D, though 1000 IU's would probably do fine.
Vitamin D not only has cancer-protective action, it's also one of the most important vitamins for bone health. And it's impossible to talk about it without talking about our widespread sun phobia. (Sun, after all, is the major source of most vitamin D.) While it's true that we probably shouldn't bake in the noonday sun for hours without sunscreen, it's also true that we don't need to slather on SPF 45 every time we take the dog for a walk. We need to get much wiser about both sun and vitamin D. I talk about this in a chapter called "Sensible Sunlight" on my CD set "23 Ways to Improve Your Life!".
And if you'd like a great book on the sun, vitamin D, and the health benefits of both, check out my friend Dr. Al Sear's new excellent downloadable e-book, "Your Best Health Under the Sun"
1 Comments:
Jonny,
I completely agree with you about the need to amend the recommended daily intake of Vitamin D (especially for us living on the East coast!)
I just finished reading 150 Healthiest Foods. It was truly enlightening and inspiring. I was hoping that you would publish an accompanying recipe book, full of healthful (and not weight-loss centered) recipes.
Thanks,
Leora
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home