<p>Im impressed Bunsen. I have been on the prescribed level ( 50,000 once a week) of the supplement for three months & I am still low- plus I am outside most of the time. ( well not lately- I am not liking the wet)</p>
<p>Has anyone had any particular symptoms from a Vitamin D deficiency? According to my doctor, my recent lab results show that I have a level that’s a bit below the bottom of normal range, which I think is 25-40 whatevers per whatevers – my level is 17. I guess I didn’t spend enough time in the sun this summer! Although it surprises me a little, because I take a calcium supplement twice a day (caltrate), and that has vitamin D already in it. </p>
<p>Anyway, I also started noticing a while back that I’ve had pretty severe pains in the front of my legs that felt like bone pain (especially the femur area), while walking down stairs – not all the time, but enough that I noticed. Which makes it difficult to race down the stairs to catch the subway when I’m running late in the morning! Coincidence? Who knows? I guess I’ll find out; I just started taking 2000/mg in vitamin D supplements every day. Of course, the deficiency could just be a long term side effect of one of the medications I take every day for Crohn’s Disease; that’s one of the reasons I started taking calcium supplements in the first place. But that medication has helped keep me in remission for some time, so the last thing I’d want to do is stop taking it.</p>
<p>Great for the MOOD!</p>
<p>I take it once a week. About 40,000 IDU.</p>
<p>
What was the number?</p>
<p>My doctor considers the “normal” range to be far too low. He wants me at 50 ng/mL (125 nmol/L if you use the other units).</p>
<p>I take 4000-6000 per day and have trouble keeping my level that high.</p>
<p>I have noticed I am much less likely to catch a cold or bronchitis in the winter. Bronchitis used to be a yearly event for me until I started supplementing and got my levels up. For the last three years I have not gotten sick at all in the winter.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>[Low</a> Vitamin D Levels Associated With Chronic Pain In Women](<a href=“http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/117886.php]Low”>Low Vitamin D Levels Associated With Chronic Pain In Women)</p>
<p>I would also note there is a synergy between D3, K2, magnesium, and calcium. Many many people are also deficient in magnesium. If you get enough D3, K2, and Mg you can take much less calcium and may not need it at all if you eat dairy.</p>
<p>I was a little low the last time I was tested, so am supposed to take an additional 1000 IU per day. Was already taking calcium/D3 supplements, so this is in addition to that.</p>
<p>Hope this is not hijacking this thread, but had a follow up question to OP:
I started taking D3 from Costco as well, after being told by my physician that my levels were too low. A friend told me that I should have gotten the vitamins from the health food store, as the ones from Costco are inferior and I may not be getting what I think I am. Is this true? Any health/nutrition folks out there who can shed some light on this?
Thanks!</p>
<p>I see no reason why you should pay more.</p>
<p>But if you want to get the most bang for your buck, take your vitamin D supplement with a meal, and make sure that it’s a meal that includes some fat. Vitamin D is a fat-soluble substance that is best absorbed from the digestive tract into the bloodstream if there’s some fat present.</p>
<p>I take 1000 IU per day, on my doctor’s advice. But I have osteoporosis, and I also take a prescription drug and calcium. I’m not sure whether my doctor would have advised a vitamin D supplement if I didn’t have a bone health issue.</p>
<p>With D3, it matters far more that you take it dissolved in oil in gelcap form (as opposed to powder in a capsule), rather than where you get it from.</p>
<p>That said, for something like a multi-vitamin, many if not most of the ones you find in stores are poorly formulated, with poor combinations of ingredients or inferior but cheap forms of the vitamins. But this can be true of the ones you find in health food stores as well.</p>
<p>For example - there are 8 forms of vitamin E. Most vitamins contain only one form. Each form does different things and all are important. It can be difficult to find a something that contains all 8 forms.</p>
<p>I’m skeptical. Sorry - all of a sudden we are virtually ALL low in vitamin D? [:eek:] There have been so many fads of vitamins and minerals that we are all told will cure us of all ills and that we desperately need, only to later be told that mistakes were made… 
Remember “iron poor blood?” Never hear about it now! Vitamin C? We all took lots, then practically developed scurvy backing off it. Vitamin E? Turns out that it is not so good for you…
I’m going to take some Calcitrate with VitD, but no more than that.</p>
<p>
We are not generally low enough for it to be a primary cause of diseases such as rickets (although many people have such a fear of sunlight and put so much sunscreen on their kids that rickets is now showing up [<a href=“http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/8128781/Middle-class-children-suffering-rickets.html][/url]”>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/8128781/Middle-class-children-suffering-rickets.html]</a>), but that doesn’t mean the levels we have are optimal.</p>
<p>I personally believe that I have received tangible benefits from supplementing D3, and although anecdotal evidence does not have a lot of value, there are many vitamin D studies coming out now that show a positive benefit - way more than I ever remember seeing for other vitamins. I haven’t seen a negative one yet, “negative” meaning it can be harmful.</p>
<p>Humans were not designed to be sheltered from sunlight 24/7, which we now all are with our sunscreens, sunblocking car windows, indoor tennis and swim facilities, office cubes, etc. therefore I do believe that Vit D deficiency is a real deal.</p>
<p>My endo says that the old Vit D guidelines were based on what BABIES need in their formula! It was also so conservatively low due to the fear of fat-soluble vitamins harming the liver, etc…</p>
<p>I am noticing that for most it takes a LOT of Vit D to push up the levels we can measure in blood tests, so that second fear seems to be misplaced.</p>
<p>“Update: got my bloodwork results, my Vit D levels came back right in the middle of the normal range! My gyn says “stay the course” with the supplement. Now I need to give H’s a kick so he re-checks his Vit D levels.”</p>
<p>Question is, Bunsen, what is the normal range they are specifying? You should aim to be in the optimal range. My clinic says the normal range is 33.0-100.0, with the ideal range of 60-90. I am taking 5000iu, and I’m still only at 46. When I told my clinic doctor that my family physician had recommended 400iu for low Vitamin D, they laughed heartily and said that would do nothing.</p>