Long term toxicity of high dose D-Dr Holick

[Phyllis2010]

Dr Holick has answered my question about the longterm toxicity of high doses of vitamin D:

Can taking high doses of vitamin D3 (5000 IUs-10,000 IUs) on a long term basis for D deficiency damage the kidneys, particularly in persons over 60 years?

Reply
admin
Posted June 21, 2011 at 2:40 pm | Permalink
Dear Frances,
I recommend that adults take 2000-3000 IU of vitamin D a day. Although it has been shown that adults can take up to 10,000 IU of vitamin D a day for up to five months without any toxicity we do not know whether continuing to take 10,000 IU of vitamin D a day for more than five months will cause toxicity including damaging the kidneys. Therefore unless you are obese I do not believe that you need to be taking 5000-10,000 IU of vitamin D a day.

[Phyllis2010]

Well said. I was taking 4000 IUs hit 41 then plummeted down to 28 so now I plan to take 5000 IUs and keep testing. Thanks for providing me with a clinical rationale for taking 5000 IUs indefinitely (Mercola and Vitamin D Council). I cannot go in the sun at all, so I'm viewing my need for vitamin D supplementation as long term, lifelong. You're correct to point out the importance of continual monitoring of D levels. since I experienced severe deficiency symptoms, I believe it's appropriate that I'm monitored as regularly as anyone with a deficiency disease would be. Thanks again for your thoughtful posting.

[FurballsMom]

Mercola suggests much the same as Dr. Cannell, which is actually where he got his information.  And, actually, the important part is to just keep monitoring your vitamin D levels.  What Mercola suggests is to take the dose you've been taking for about six months, then test your vitamin D levels again.  You will know if it's too little or too much.  I'm still taking the 5,000 iu per day myself and believe it's how much I need just to maintain the level I'm at.  I really don't want to take a nose dive down to 8 again.  That nearly killed me--literally.

If you're able to get out in the sun, Mercola says that is the best way.  In fact, during the very hours that the skin cancer specialists keep saying to stay out of the sun.  Mercola isn't really talking about anything too radical--just a minimum of 20 minutes to an hour, depending on your level of sensitivity and how fair or dark your skin's complexion is.  I'm one who is especially sensitive, so I definitely need to supplement even in the summertime, so I know about the objections some would have to spending much time in the direct sunlight during the peak intensity of the day.  You definitely don't want to get burned.  Just use discretion.  If you can't be in the sun, you obviously can't spend much time getting natural vitamin D that way, but if you can, try to utilize this method.  Your body knows when to stop synthesizing vitamin D from the sun, as we are made with a self regulator.  Your body won't make too much from the sun.  Then, too, if you live in an area that doesn't see a lot of sun the majority of the year, you will still need to keep supplementing.  The Vitamin D Council and Dr. Mercola keep saying that 5,000 iu is the right dose for most people.  Only people who are intolerant of oral vitamin D should take less.  I know someone with an autoimmune issue who is barely able to even take the 400 iu.  She has symptoms if she takes more than this, so it is understandable for her to not take as much as a person needs to take.  She was shocked to hear about 5,000 iu, as is the majority of the public due to the continuing misinformation.  The RDA is still too low, even though it was raised.  Since vitamin D deficiency literally nearly killed me, I'm not about to listen to the too low recommendations of the FDA.  The Vitamin D Council was very disappointed that the FDA didn't raise the recommendations up high enough.  The new RDA was made in reference to bone health, but not in reference to immune and overall health.

[Phyllis2010]

Yes, definitely pose 9na's question about long term high dose therapy in a person with deficiency who cannot maintain adequate levels on lower doses. Can't wait to hear what he says...I was very disappointed with his answer is he worried about lawsuits or something if he says something other than the recommendations of the endocrine society?

[Gary3243]

Dr. Cannell of the Vit D Council states that 5,000iu/day is fine.

[Seattleanne]

Wow. I'm stunned. Did he understand that you were deficient? I'll go pose the question, since I've been taking 10 for 7 months now.

[Phyllis2010]

Agreed -- Holick is adhering totally to the party line.I'm definitely not obese and can't get my levels raised with a lower dose. I should ask him your question about being d deficient and unresponsive to lower doses...Visit his site and ask questions, he does get back to you.

[9na]

"Therefore unless you are obese I do not believe that you need to be taking 5000-10,000 IU of vitamin D a day."

That's kind of strange - what if you are D-deficient and can't get your level raised on a lower dosage? I think this is a very 'safe' answer to your question, but I can't say I find it very informative...