GeneLadd.com

While thousands of health experts are reporting amazing results from increased consumption of Vitamin D, the Institute of Medicine’s Food and Nutrition Board acted in the expected manner in setting new RDAs (recommended daily allowances) for Vitamin D. The FNB approved only a slight increase: It found that infants under one year of age do not need any Vitamin D, all others including pregnant women need only 600 IUs until the age of 70 when the recommendation increases of 800 IU. Unfortunately, we see again that commercial interests can dominate the decisions that are supposed to be scientific. The members of the FNB panel maybe scientists, but their decisions can, and often do, reflect their monetary interests.

For example one member of the panel is tied to a pharmaceutical firm that is developing a synthetic Vitamin D. Other members have questionable experience with the vitamin. Many of the older members were bumped off in favor of the new members who set the standards for Vitamin D.  In fact the only benefit recognized for the vitamin is its importance for healthy bone mass. The FNB ignored the field experience and thousands of studies showing that Vitamin D is important for everything from cancer protection to healthy metabolism. It is as important as Vitamin C for protection from colds and flu. Is it possible that the increased consumption and supplementation of Vitamin D is reducing the need for harmful antibiotics and flu shots? Just asking.

I have counseled many people who are taking daily amounts of Vitamin D far in excess of the RDA and all report improvement. They take 2,000 IU daily year ‘round and many increase that amount during the winter months when they get less sunshine. The only negative for Vitamin D can be its source. If it comes from fish liver oil, it will contain loads of Vitamin A, 10 to 1. To get 1000 IU of D, you are saddled with 10,000 IU of A and that can be excessive. If the supplementary Vitamin D comes from the lanolin of lamb’s wool, there is no Vitamin A; and that makes the larger doses acceptable.

As a cancer survivor, I take at least 2,000 IU daily, and often more in the winter months. I know some people who take 10,000 IU daily without any negative side effects. Sorry FNB, life experience is still more convincing than your little box. Perhaps the bigger disappointment is that petro-pharma still runs Washington and the new guys are either part of it or simply unprepared to represent us. Either way we are betrayed.