It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Wheelchairs can be abandoned by supplementation.

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 06:16 AM
link   
researchers have found in at least a dozen studies the vitamin D supplementation can make wheel chair bound persons walk again after 6 weeks of supplementation of megadose vitamin d and calcium.

at least 1200 i.u and 1200 mg of calcium daily.

this treatment is cheap and very low risk.

you can take up to 50000 i.u of vitamin d daily.

also falls and hip fractures are reduced.

a lot of people are unaware of this and suffer.

i will quote just 2 of the studies.


the rest you can find yourself using vitamin d muscle strength in google.



and before someone or the food lobby starts talking about vitamin d in food and proper diets don't bother.

IT IS FAR TOO LOW A LEVEL.

look at any food packet label you will see 1,2 or 5 i.u. per serving which is pathetic.

You can only get proper amounts from sunshine by spending 1/2 an hour naked all over in the summer sun.

this will generate 10000 to 15000 i.u.

this is impractical.

for muslims girls/women in burkhas the effects are of vitamin d deficiency are severe leading to mental retardation in some cases.

supplementation of at least 1200 daily is recommended. preferably with 1200mg calcium if you are suffering muscle weakness.


www.nzma.org.nz...


"She was treated with oral vitamin D2 (ergocalciferol) 800 iu/day; and calcium 1.25 g/day.
By the third week, she was able to walk. After 1 week, serum 25-hydroxy vitamin D rose, but still reflected sub-clinical deficiency (20 nmol/L). After 3 weeks, serum 25-hydroxy vitamin D (90 nmol/L) and 1,25 dihydroxy vitamin D (168 pmol/L) returned to normal.
Ergocalciferol is cheap and rapidly effective by mouth in the elderly, allowing muscle strength to recover quickly with a commensurate rise of circulating active vitamin D levels to normal in a 3-week time interval."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
www.psoriasiscafe.org...


inexorable muscle wasting that begins by age 40 . So, she measured vitamin D blood concentrations in elderly men and women and found that individuals who had higher readings also had greater thigh strength.

Bischoff-Ferrari and her team at the University of Basel in
Switzerland then launched an intervention trial with 122 women in
their mid-80s. The researchers administered 1,200 milligrams of
calcium to all the participants, and another 1200 IU of vitamin D per
day to half of them. At At the end of 3 months, each woman was tested for leg strength and rated on how easily she could get up from a chair, walk around an object, and sit back down....




[edit on 9-4-2008 by esecallum]




posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 03:53 PM
link   
Vitamin D serum levels of greater than 90ng/ml do not increase your calcium aborption, as stated in numerous peer-reviewed and repeated studies. The tolerable upper limit for the average adult male is 2000 IU, not 50000. Past 2000 IU/day, you risk calcinosis, vomiting, mental status change, and disorientation.

Vitamin D does, indeed, aid in bone density, but it does not have the miraculous qualities you espouse. In the future, try searching PubMed for peer-reviewed studies rather than random dot coms. Published, peer-reviewed studies carry much more weight



posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 03:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Glukoza
Vitamin D serum levels of greater than 90ng/ml do not increase your calcium aborption, as stated in numerous peer-reviewed and repeated studies. The tolerable upper limit for the average adult male is 2000 IU, not 50000. Past 2000 IU/day, you risk calcinosis, vomiting, mental status change, and disorientation.

Vitamin D does, indeed, aid in bone density, but it does not have the miraculous qualities you espouse. In the future, try searching PubMed for peer-reviewed studies rather than random dot coms. Published, peer-reviewed studies carry much more weight


so you are saying everyone i quoted is a lier even though they are not peddling anything.

and your friends in big pharma are saints who peddle all the poisons at vast profit.

you must be working for them to spread disinformation.

you are out of date and talking rubbish when you say 2000 iu will cause
illness.


the poster cybertroy is taking more then that on his recent experiments on himself.


en.wikipedia.org...

i quote:-

The exact long-term safe dose of vitamin D is not entirely known, but dosages up to 250 micrograms (10,000 IU) /day in healthy adults are believed to be safe.[9], and all known cases of vitamin D toxicity with hypercalcemia have involved intake of or over 1,000 micrograms (40,000 IU)/day[33]. The U.S. Dietary Reference Intake Tolerable Upper Intake Level (UL) of vitamin D for children and adults is 50 micrograms/day (2,000 IU/day). In adults, sustained intake of 2500 micrograms/day (100,000 IU) can produce toxicity within a few months.[2] For infants (birth to 12 months) the tolerable UL is set at 25 micrograms/day (1000 IU/day), and vitamin D concentrations of 1000 micrograms/day (40,000 IU) in infants has been shown to produce toxicity within 1 to 4 months. In the United States, overdose exposure of vitamin D was reported by 284 individuals in 2004, leading to 1 death.[35] The Nutrition Desk Reference states "The threshold for toxicity is 500 to 600 micrograms [vitamin D] per kilogram body weight per day."[36]


do you wait for peer review before you eat your breakfast?

[edit on 10-4-2008 by esecallum]



posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 10:31 AM
link   
Why are you so aggressively against peer-reviewed research? Is it because you don't agree with the results and wish they were more inline with your fevered ideas?

And no, I don't work for "big pharma", I'm a graduate student at a university working in circadian biology.

Look, I understand that it would be wonderful if simply taking Vitamin D at insane concentrations could heal wounds and give you super-strong bones, but the research just doesn't support it. Vitamin D is certainly VERY important to your diet, and it would be silly to ignore it, but it's not a cure-all, as you've suggested. Daily exercise and a healthy, balanced diet are just as important, if not moreso, to your bone density.

And yes, I do think the people who authored the websites you listed are misinformed, much as you are.



posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 05:38 PM
link   
I never said it was a cure all.So why you are saying that?

The people on the website are misinformed by whom?

The doctors who did the trials?

I never said I was against peer review.


Any one with money can buy peer review to say what they want.

New Scientist reported how big pharma was giving $10000 to reviewers who said yeah to their drug research instead of nay and got repeat business in the form of more $10000 for further reviews.

Those who said nay were black listed and never got to do further reviews.

You got that?

If I gave you $10000 you would say what I wanted you to say.

You would be my puppet.

[edit on 10-4-2008 by esecallum]



posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 06:05 PM
link   
First, please stop with ad hominem attacks, as they are no conducive to ANY discussion.

Second, you are misquoting, or just misunderstanding, the New Scientist article. There is indeed a great deal of bribery going on between the pharmaceutical industry and level 1 clinical testers. There is no doubt of that. That is not peer-review, and those studies are not publishes.

What I mean by "peer-reviewed" are the thousands upon thousands of papers published every month by journals like "The Journal of Toxicology", "The Journal of Clinical Pharmacology". These papers are submitted by university researchers, and are then reviewed by other scientists those professors do no know. The reviewers must sign secrecy statements, and must divulge conflicts of interest, as do those submitting research.

The situation you are describing, that the pharmaceutical companies are somehow bribing all of the hundreds of nutritionists and physiology researchers in the world, is simply ludicrous. Another interesting point is that your websites provide no references whatsoever. Don't you feel that's a bit telling? I could publish a website that claims I have been to the moon, I am 20 feet tall, and have x-ray vision. There is no law against that, just like there is no law against publishing false information about Vitamin D and nutrition online. See my point? Without references to actual studies that have been reviewed and verified, all these statements on your sites you provided are worthless. Only your link to the abstract of a NZMJ study is worth noting, and even then it actually confirms what I've stated, that vitmain D in reasonable doses is helpful, but not in the amounts you've suggested.



posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 06:35 PM
link   
Really? Massive Vitamin D supplementation can get a 650 pound person up on their feet again and walking around? That, I would like to see.




posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 07:06 PM
link   
I think the Nobel committee would be interested in seeing it, too. They may even have a nice prize for you



posted on Nov, 27 2008 @ 09:07 AM
link   
Yes, I was disappointed to see the "link" to "studies" in the first post was not a link to anything...if you think your vitamin D level is low, or if you do have muscle weakness, have your doctor check your 25-hydroxy-vitamin d level, and if it's low, you MIGHT get some strength back with a supplement (1,000 IU a day is reasonable). Of course, there are many other reasons why one might have weakness, but Vitamin D deficiency is becoming a more commonly recognized issue.

When in doubt, check a level -- if it's under 30, you probably need a supplement.

From what I am aware, there is no difference between D2 and D3, but I usually advise people to use D3 -- it's available over the counter, not very expensive.

A repeat level in a couple of months can confirm it's working.



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join