Vitamin D in depresija
Pa si naredila test, sploh imaš pomanjkanje vitamina D? Ker če ga nimaš, gre lahko za kaj drugega.
Če ga imaš pa zelo malo, je pa 1000 iu čisto premajhna doza in morda zato ni učinka.
Tudi 1 šumečka Magnesola je ob pomanjkanju magnezija premalo, poleg tega ta ni v najboljši oblki.
Pomanjkanje vitamina D je lahko vzrok mnogim težavam, ni pa nujno. Zato je krvni test smiseln.
V bistvu je vseeno. Dobro se obnesejo spreji, predvsem pri tistih, ki imajo težave s tabletami, ali pa jim te povzročajo slabost.
Se pa absorpcija D vitamina od posameznika do posameznika zelo razlikuje, tudi do 8-krat. Vzroke, zakaj tako, pa še raziskujejo.
Zato je res fajn, da se naredi krvni test in potem spremlja na recimo 3 mesece kaj se dogaja, da se prilagodi dozo.
Tukaj si lahko marsikaj preberete.
Jemati bi morala vitamin D3, zdravnica bo povedala koliko, npr. 30 kapljic 1x tedensko nakapane na kos kruha z maslom in čezkožno magnezij kot sol, magnezijev klorid, ker se edino na ta način zares magnezij absorbira v telo.
Najbolje je plavati v morju.
Oralno ga telo lepo izloči.
Šumečke so blažev žegen.
Magnezijev klorid, kristali, z nekaj malega vode in mazanje direktno na limfe, torej pazduhi in dimlje.
Za tiste, ki so zakrčeni, trdih mišic in nesproščeni, utrujeni, brez energije, z mišičnimi krči, kot nožne kopeli, v kadi, masaža telesa, po želji.
Pa si naredila test, sploh imaš pomanjkanje vitamina D? Ker če ga nimaš, gre lahko za kaj drugega.
Če ga imaš pa zelo malo, je pa 1000 iu čisto premajhna doza in morda zato ni učinka.
Tudi 1 šumečka Magnesola je ob pomanjkanju magnezija premalo, poleg tega ta ni v najboljši oblki.
Pomanjkanje vitamina D je lahko vzrok mnogim težavam, ni pa nujno. Zato je krvni test smiseln.
[/quote]
Ja, seveda s krvnim testom, pa nisem se tega sama spomnila. Šla sem na predlog osebne zdravnice, ki mi je dala napotnico za odvzem krvi na D vitamin zaradi moje utrudljivosti in namesto mejnih vsaj 25 enot sem na testiranju imela 15 enot D vitamina. Saj drugače tega ne bi nikoli izvedela. Železa pa imam kar dovolj. Sprva sem jemala D3 kapljice od Krke, potem prekinila. Zdaj pa imam pršilo. Zadostuje za 70 doziranj.
No, po najnovejši raziskavi lahko pretiravanje s sintetičnimi vitamini vodi celo v raka. Dejstvo je, da so posledice dolgotrajnega jemanja vitaminov še premalo raziskane in se bodo šele pokazale. Oziroma bodo izsledki šele opravljeni. Jaz se s tem res ne bi igrala. Razlogov za utrujenost in depresijo je ogromno. Doslej so raziskovali samo posledice pomanjkanja, šele zdaj prehajajo tudi na raziskave o overdosih. Overdose pa je, če ti vitamina D sploh ne primanjkuje, pa ga jemlješ. Ne igrajte se s svojim zdravjem, sploh pa ne na priporočila forumašev.
Ja, seveda s krvnim testom, pa nisem se tega sama spomnila. Šla sem na predlog osebne zdravnice, ki mi je dala napotnico za odvzem krvi na D vitamin zaradi moje utrudljivosti in namesto mejnih vsaj 25 enot sem na testiranju imela 15 enot D vitamina. Saj drugače tega ne bi nikoli izvedela. Železa pa imam kar dovolj. Sprva sem jemala D3 kapljice od Krke, potem prekinila. Zdaj pa imam pršilo. Zadostuje za 70 doziranj.
[/quote]
Koliko časa že jemlješ vitamin D in ali si šla na ponovno na test?
Ob pomanjkanju je 1000 iu res premalo, to je vzdrževalna doza. Da pa napolniš zaloge, je pa treba jemati tam okoli 4000, lahko tudi več. Pa po parih mesecih ponoviti test in prilagoditi dozo.
“Testiranje” na sebi nima nobene znanstvene* podlage, preprosto zato, ker ne veste, kaj bi se zgodilo, če ne bi storili ničesar.
Imate pa na TV SLO oddajo BBCja, kjer so znanstveno* preverili delovanje prehranskih dopolnil. Nobeno ne deluje, nekatera celo škodujejo (antioksidanti).
Pogojno deluje le Omega maščobe – kjer je še vedno bolje vsak petek jesti ribe (je merljiva razlika).
Vitamin D pa telo samo tvori, če smo dovolj izpostavljeni sončni svetlobi (tudi skozi oblake). Alternativa je čokolada 🙂
* Znanstveno pomeni, da gre za reprezentativni vzorec nekaj sto ali tisoč ljudi (najbolje na enojajčnih dvojčkih, kjer eden prejema dopolnila, drugi ne). Način potega raziskave, število udeleženih itd. Metodologija, izračuni.. vse javno objavljeno in lahko neka druga skupina znanstvenikov to ponovi.. in ko dobi enak razlutat, temu pravimo: preverjeno znanstveno.
[/quote]
Đabe ti to razlagaš, čreda bo še vedno verjela čudežnim zdravilom, vedeževalcem, duhovnim gurujem, itn. In dokler ne škodujejo drugim, predvsem ljudem v hudi bolezni in stiski, nič narobe s tem, le bedak denar, kramar bogat in vse štima.
No tole je spet kar nekaj na pamet. O kateri najnovejši raziskavi je govora (kdo jo je naredil in kje) in za katere vitamine oz. dodatke.
More may not always be better when it comes to vitamin D.
Gugl vse ve, veš, samo skozi reklame in strani s kvazi znanostjo se je treba prebit in poiskat dejanske podatke.
A new study from Denmark finds that high levels of vitamin D in the blood are linked with an increased risk of some cancers — but a decreased risk of others.
Specifically, the researchers found that high vitamin D levels were linked with an increased risk of skin, prostate and blood cancers, and a decreased risk of lung cancer.
The study found only an association; it cannot prove that high vitamin D levels cause or prevent certain cancers. Nor can the study determine the precise reason for these seemingly contradictory effects on cancer risk.
But the researchers hope the findings draw attention to the possibility that high vitamin D levels aren’t always a good thing. Until now, much of the research on vitamin D and cancer has been focused on the effects of low vitamin D levels, said study lead author Dr. Fie Juhl Vojdeman, of the Department of Clinical Biochemistry at Bispebjerg Frederiksberg Hospital in Copenhagen, Denmark. [10 Do’s and Don’ts to Reduce Your Risk of Cancer]
People “have the impression that they can eat all the [vitamin D supplements] they want without any concerns,” Vojdeman told Live Science. “However, we actually don’t know whether it could be harmful in the long run to use heavy doses of [vitamin D supplements] if you do not have a critically low level in the blood.”
Vojdeman said more research is needed on the links between high vitamin D levels and cancer.
The findings were presented Monday (April 16) at the American Association for Cancer Research meeting in Chicago and have not yet been published in a peer-reviewed journal.
For the study, the researchers analyzed data from more than 200,000 people living in the Capital Region of Denmark (a region in eastern Denmark) who had their blood vitamin D levels measured between April 2004 and January 2010. (Specifically, the researchers looked at the levels of 25OH vitamin D, or 25-hydroxyvitamin D, a metabolite of the vitamin that’s used as a measure of its levels in the body.) None of the participants had been diagnosed with cancer prior to their vitamin D test. The participants were followed for up to 10 years.
The average vitamin D measurement was about 50 nanomoles per liter (nmol/L). Normal levels are between 50 and 125 nmol/L (or 20 to 50 nanograms/milliliter), according to the National Institutes of Health’s Office of Dietary Supplements.
During the study follow-up period, more than 18,000 people in the study were diagnosed with cancer. The study found that every 10 nmol/L increase in blood vitamin D was associated with a 9-percent increase in the risk of nonmelanoma skin cancer, a 10-percent increase in the risk of melanoma, a 5-percent increase in the risk of prostate cancer and a 3-percent increase in the risk of blood cancers.
But every 10 nmol/L increase in blood vitamin D was also linked with a 5-percent decrease in the risk of lung cancer.
The study was not designed to examine the mechanism behind these links, Vojdeman noted. One possibility, however, is that the higher risk of skin cancer is related to people’s sun exposure. (People’s bodies make vitamin D when exposed to sunlight, but too much sun exposure can lead to skin cancer.) However, Vojdeman said the study did not have data on the participants’ sun protection.
Some studies have also found that the active metabolite of vitamin D, called calcitriol, has an immune suppressive effect that’s also seen in some cancers, Vojdeman said.
So, “theoretically, the higher level of vitamin D could reflect a more suppressive immune regulatory environment” that’s linked with cancer, Vojdeman said. However, she stressed that this idea is “purely speculative at the moment.”
In contrast, in studies in lab dishes, calcitriol has also been shown to counteract the effects of smoking on a type of lung cell, which might possibly explain the link with a reduced risk of lung cancer. But again, this idea needs more research.
Ultimately, “there is a need for more studies on the effects of high levels of … vitamin D on cancer at the mechanistic level,” Vojdeman said.
Original article on Live Science.
More may not always be better when it comes to vitamin D.
Gugl vse ve, veš, samo skozi reklame in strani s kvazi znanostjo se je treba prebit in poiskat dejanske podatke.
A new study from Denmark finds that high levels of vitamin D in the blood are linked with an increased risk of some cancers — but a decreased risk of others.
Specifically, the researchers found that high vitamin D levels were linked with an increased risk of skin, prostate and blood cancers, and a decreased risk of lung cancer.
The study found only an association; it cannot prove that high vitamin D levels cause or prevent certain cancers. Nor can the study determine the precise reason for these seemingly contradictory effects on cancer risk.
But the researchers hope the findings draw attention to the possibility that high vitamin D levels aren’t always a good thing. Until now, much of the research on vitamin D and cancer has been focused on the effects of low vitamin D levels, said study lead author Dr. Fie Juhl Vojdeman, of the Department of Clinical Biochemistry at Bispebjerg Frederiksberg Hospital in Copenhagen, Denmark. [10 Do’s and Don’ts to Reduce Your Risk of Cancer]
People “have the impression that they can eat all the [vitamin D supplements] they want without any concerns,” Vojdeman told Live Science. “However, we actually don’t know whether it could be harmful in the long run to use heavy doses of [vitamin D supplements] if you do not have a critically low level in the blood.”
Vojdeman said more research is needed on the links between high vitamin D levels and cancer.
The findings were presented Monday (April 16) at the American Association for Cancer Research meeting in Chicago and have not yet been published in a peer-reviewed journal.
For the study, the researchers analyzed data from more than 200,000 people living in the Capital Region of Denmark (a region in eastern Denmark) who had their blood vitamin D levels measured between April 2004 and January 2010. (Specifically, the researchers looked at the levels of 25OH vitamin D, or 25-hydroxyvitamin D, a metabolite of the vitamin that’s used as a measure of its levels in the body.) None of the participants had been diagnosed with cancer prior to their vitamin D test. The participants were followed for up to 10 years.
The average vitamin D measurement was about 50 nanomoles per liter (nmol/L). Normal levels are between 50 and 125 nmol/L (or 20 to 50 nanograms/milliliter), according to the National Institutes of Health’s Office of Dietary Supplements.
During the study follow-up period, more than 18,000 people in the study were diagnosed with cancer. The study found that every 10 nmol/L increase in blood vitamin D was associated with a 9-percent increase in the risk of nonmelanoma skin cancer, a 10-percent increase in the risk of melanoma, a 5-percent increase in the risk of prostate cancer and a 3-percent increase in the risk of blood cancers.
But every 10 nmol/L increase in blood vitamin D was also linked with a 5-percent decrease in the risk of lung cancer.
The study was not designed to examine the mechanism behind these links, Vojdeman noted. One possibility, however, is that the higher risk of skin cancer is related to people’s sun exposure. (People’s bodies make vitamin D when exposed to sunlight, but too much sun exposure can lead to skin cancer.) However, Vojdeman said the study did not have data on the participants’ sun protection.
Some studies have also found that the active metabolite of vitamin D, called calcitriol, has an immune suppressive effect that’s also seen in some cancers, Vojdeman said.
So, “theoretically, the higher level of vitamin D could reflect a more suppressive immune regulatory environment” that’s linked with cancer, Vojdeman said. However, she stressed that this idea is “purely speculative at the moment.”
In contrast, in studies in lab dishes, calcitriol has also been shown to counteract the effects of smoking on a type of lung cell, which might possibly explain the link with a reduced risk of lung cancer. But again, this idea needs more research.
Ultimately, “there is a need for more studies on the effects of high levels of … vitamin D on cancer at the mechanistic level,” Vojdeman said.
Original article on Live Science.
Govora je o pomanjkanju, dokazanem v krvi. Ce pravi avtorica teme, da ima vrednost 15, spodnja meja pa je 25, je absolutno smiselno dodajanje.
Moz je imal vrednost 16 in po pol leta dodajanja nekje 3000 enot na dan so prisle vrednosti na skoraj 40. Sprememba pocutja pa kot noc in dan.
Na pamet dodajanje brez preiskav pa ja, vedno bolj ugotavljajo, da je vsega prevec in je vse en velik biznis.
Ce si podrobno tole prebrala, ni cisto nic dokazano, niti ni dokazani, da ga povecuje tveganje za raka, niti ga ne zmanjsuje.
Potem recimo pise, da naj bi dodajanje D vitamina oz. vecje vrednosti bile povezane z koznim.rakom. Hkrati pa ugotavljajo, da je pa lahko to povezano s pretiranim soncenjem, kjer seveda dobis vit.D, ampak istocasno izpostavljas kozo mocnim soncnim zarkom. In da ni kozni rak posledica D vitamina, ki ga seveda s soncenjem dobis, ampak pretiranega soncenja..Itd.. Vzrok- posledica..?
Tudi pise, da naj bi vecje doze po drugi strani zmanjsale verjetnost za raka na pljucih..Ampak tudi tu niso nic konkretnega ugotovili..
V glavnem cisto nic konkretnega in da so potrebne se nadaljne preiskave..
Njihova utemeljitev je na tem, da so pri vecjih dozah d vitamina pri ljudeh zaznali imunski odziv( imunosupressive), zaviranje imunskega sistema..isto kot pri bolnikih z rakom. Ampak hkrati pa ugotavljajo, da je to lahko zato, ker imunski sistem ob pomoci d vitamina ” ima manjse delo”…
Je pa res, da ne razumemo delovanja telesa in nobeno pretiravanje ni dobro, ker se porusi naravno ravnovesje. Umetno dodajanje ni nikoli isto kot naravno tvorjenje in kar je za nekaj dobro je za drugo slabo.
Ce si podrobno tole prebrala, ni cisto nic dokazano, niti ni dokazani, da ga povecuje tveganje za raka, niti ga ne zmanjsuje.
Potem recimo pise, da naj bi dodajanje D vitamina oz. vecje vrednosti bile povezane z koznim.rakom. Hkrati pa ugotavljajo, da je pa lahko to povezano s pretiranim soncenjem, kjer seveda dobis vit.D, ampak istocasno izpostavljas kozo mocnim soncnim zarkom. In da ni kozni rak posledica D vitamina, ki ga seveda s soncenjem dobis, ampak pretiranega soncenja..Itd.. Vzrok- posledica..?
Tudi pise, da naj bi vecje doze po drugi strani zmanjsale verjetnost za raka na pljucih..Ampak tudi tu niso nic konkretnega ugotovili..
V glavnem cisto nic konkretnega in da so potrebne se nadaljne preiskave..
Njihova utemeljitev je na tem, da so pri vecjih dozah d vitamina pri ljudeh zaznali imunski odziv( imunosupressive), zaviranje imunskega sistema..isto kot pri bolnikih z rakom. Ampak hkrati pa ugotavljajo, da je to lahko zato, ker imunski sistem ob pomoci d vitamina ” ima manjse delo”…
Je pa res, da ne razumemo delovanja telesa in nobeno pretiravanje ni dobro, ker se porusi naravno ravnovesje. Umetno dodajanje ni nikoli isto kot naravno tvorjenje in kar je za nekaj dobro je za drugo slabo.
[/quote]
Če si ti podrobno prebrala, sem jaz prva napisala, da zadeve šele zdaj raziskujejo. Rezultati spodbudni sigurno niso. Če nič drugega, številne raziskave ugotavljajo, da ob nedokazanem pomanjkanju D vitamina od jemanja tega ni nobene koristi. In D vitamin se v telesu nalaga. Zakaj torej jemati nekaj, česar mogoče ne potrebuješ in je mogoče 0,006 {04cafd300e351bb1d9a83f892db1e3554c9d84ea116c03e72cda9c700c854465} možnosti, da si s tem škodiš? Ker si rad poskusni zajec?
Dodajanje vitaminov ja – ampak samo ob dokazanem pomanjkanju, ne na suho. Zdaj pa je moda, da naj bi se z vitaminom D kar vsi filali. Morebitne posledice se bodo pokazale šele čez desetletja, ko bo za marsikoga že prepozno.
Koliko časa že jemlješ vitamin D in ali si šla na ponovno na test?
Ob pomanjkanju je 1000 iu res premalo, to je vzdrževalna doza. Da pa napolniš zaloge, je pa treba jemati tam okoli 4000, lahko tudi več. Pa po parih mesecih ponoviti test in prilagoditi dozo.
[/quote]
Jemala sem ga 2 meseca, zdravilo od Krke D3 kapljice. In nehala.
Zdaj pa jemljem najdražjega v prosti prodaji v spreju okoli tedna.
Jemala sem ga 2 meseca, zdravilo od Krke D3 kapljice. In nehala.
Zdaj pa jemljem najdražjega v prosti prodaji v spreju okoli tedna.
[/quote]
Koliko iu pa je bila doza kapljic? Valensov je D3 je OK, ampak kot sem že napisala, meni se zdi doza 1000 iu preniska. Ne vem, pojdi še enkrat na test, da vidiš, kje si zdaj.
In če ga imaš še vedno premalo, bi jaz pojačala dozo.
Pozameznki D3 namreč izredno različno apsorbirajo.
Če si ti podrobno prebrala, sem jaz prva napisala, da zadeve šele zdaj raziskujejo. Rezultati spodbudni sigurno niso. Če nič drugega, številne raziskave ugotavljajo, da ob nedokazanem pomanjkanju D vitamina od jemanja tega ni nobene koristi. In D vitamin se v telesu nalaga. Zakaj torej jemati nekaj, česar mogoče ne potrebuješ in je mogoče 0,006 {04cafd300e351bb1d9a83f892db1e3554c9d84ea116c03e72cda9c700c854465} možnosti, da si s tem škodiš? Ker si rad poskusni zajec?
Dodajanje vitaminov ja – ampak samo ob dokazanem pomanjkanju, ne na suho. Zdaj pa je moda, da naj bi se z vitaminom D kar vsi filali. Morebitne posledice se bodo pokazale šele čez desetletja, ko bo za marsikoga že prepozno.
[/quote]
Tole je tema o pomanjkanju D vitamina in res ne vem, kje si prebrala, da zagovarjamo jemanje kar počez?
Koliko iu pa je bila doza kapljic? Valensov je D3 je OK, ampak kot sem že napisala, meni se zdi doza 1000 iu preniska. Ne vem, pojdi še enkrat na test, da vidiš, kje si zdaj.
In če ga imaš še vedno premalo, bi jaz pojačala dozo.
Pozameznki D3 namreč izredno različno apsorbirajo.
[/quote]
Kje se lahko testira za vitamine, minerale v krvi?
Forum je zaprt za komentiranje.