Unknown illness, at bowel tolerance, effective Lypo-C dosage

This is where the best forum discussions are preserved for posterity.

Moderator: ofonorow

Posts: 9
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 11:27 pm

Re: Unknown illness, at bowel tolerance, effective Lypo-C do

Post Number:#16  Post by noxvg01 » Thu Oct 18, 2012 1:31 pm

Vitamins A and D cooperate with one another. They are not antagonists, but large doses of one may cause harm when not accompanied by the other.

This is why I am glad of the help found here! I read Dr. Cannell's piece and wasn't aware there was another side to the issue. Thank you for the article. It is interesting and very informative (though some is certainly over my head). It does seem that medical history—not to mention nature—favors the taking of A and D together. I will restart taking the A at 25,000 IU when I have the vitamin D.

ofonorow wrote:. . . there is a difference getting your vitamin D in pills and getting it from skin exposed to sun shine (UV/B light).

I do understand there is a general consensus among vitamin D experts that it is better to get your D from having your skin exposed to UVB light (which some say in turn is second best to sunshine?). However, with UVB, proximity to the bulb, duration of treatment, and amount of exposed skin are all factors that play into how much vitamin D is generated, right? On duration, the Vitamin D Wiki estimates that it takes over an hour-and-a-half just to get 2,000 IU from a UVB bulb (though they don't mention how much skin is exposed or how close you'd need to be). Is their guess way off?

It seems much simpler to just take a pill once daily, especially when I can get a hundred 50,000 IU capsules for just $20.

Though certainly, if this trial provides any benefit, I will want to get vitamin D in the best way possible. And I am interested in any reading you would recommend on UVB, specifically regarding the factors that affect how much IU is received, but also the benefits of UVB over supplementing (maybe less IU from UVB is still better than more received orally?).

Thank you again.

Ascorbate Wizard
Ascorbate Wizard
Posts: 12878
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2005 3:16 pm
Location: Lisle, IL

Re: Unknown illness, at bowel tolerance, effective Lypo-C do

Post Number:#17  Post by ofonorow » Fri Oct 19, 2012 7:37 am

When I first found this information at Weston-price, some years ago, the author claimed that 8000 iu of vitamin D was generated by sunlight on a person wearing a bathing suit -- in 20 minutes, between the hours of 10 a.m. and 2 p.m.

I notice that over the years, the article was revised, and the estimate of the amount of vitamin D generated was lowered - but not as low as the wiki you cite. (And apparently, there is a reaction on the skin, so showering after sunbathing/UVB light will diminish the amount of vitamin D that is made. (If anyone knows how long to wait before showering - I'd appreciate the info!)

Also, I take a sun bath every day between April and Sept (I live around Chicago) for 30 minutes (around noon) . ( I also take 2000 iu D3 pill during the summer - more during the winter.) Yet, when I had my vitamin D measured last summer, very tan, it was considered low by my alt. doc (I posted # here - about 1/3 in the range between low and high.)

For me, as long as I am not prone to infection - even a sniffle - I am happy and consider my intake close to optimal. (I take vitamin A and usually vitamin K also).
Owen R. Fonorow, Follow #OWENRFONOROW at twitter


Re: Unknown illness, at bowel tolerance, effective Lypo-C do

Post Number:#18  Post by VanCanada » Fri Nov 09, 2012 6:09 pm

ofonorow wrote:I believe that the Vitamin D Council (Dr. Cannell) has been wrong about vitamin A - focusing on gene expression. I agree with the Weston-Price Foundation on this issue.

Things aren't always so black and white. I think they both agree about many things and disagree about a few things. This article by Tim Boyd might shed further light on a few of the contrasting views of Dr. Cannell and the Weston A. Price Foundation:

I suggest reading the whole article (it's very short), but here is a representative sampling from it:
Tim Boyd wrote:The other glaring problem with his (Dr. Cannell's) reasoning in general is his insistence on taking a reductionist, fragmented view of nutrition. As Chris Masterjohn has made clear in several articles, all of the fat-soluble vitamins must be present, balanced and working together. Despite paying some lip service to this reality, Dr. Cannell keeps pulling isolated nutrients out of the line-up and examining how they might work by themselves. That’s the problem. They don’t. He managed to come up with sixteen experts who agreed with him, which apparently implies the case is closed. I continue to insist that the truth is not up to a vote.

Return to “Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest