Doctors in the USA often prescribe Drisdol (vitamin D2) for vitamin D deficiency, giving 50,000 IU every week or two for 8-12 weeks. Then, a few give it every month.
Too many forget about their patient’s vitamin D deficiency, thinking the Drisdol has cured it forever. There are two problems with this approach:
You need to be logged in to read the rest of this post. Please log in or become a member.
Rather than suggesting that each person take 5,000iu of D3 per day, perhaps it might serve more people to adopt an approach based on weight – say, “5,000iu of D3 daily for each 100 pounds of weight”.
Ron, obviously it’s a most accurate approach to recommend based on weight, absorption, blood levels, sun exposure habits etc…
Counter to that, however, is that research shows time and time again, that people/patients often follow directions that are nice and simple and have fewest amount of steps.
What we need is a controlled trial that compares approaches, and see what actually works best, so we can be evidence-based in how we recommend vitamin D. In such trial, you would communicate a simple “take 5,000 IU/day” in one group, and then communicate the “evaluate your habits/body, and take X amount/day based on YZ” to the other group. Then you can measure vitamin D levels before and after, and actually see what approach is “better”.
For the time being, my guess is that a simple, “take 5,000 IU” results in more people taking vitamin D than a more personalized message. But who knows?
Veterinarians around thw world ceased giving vitamin D2 to mammals about 10 years ago. There have been >30 reports showing problems with giving vitamin D2 to humans during the past decade, yet the practice continues. Several studies found that the vitamin D blood levels actually DECREASED when taking vitamin D2.
Be sure to have D3, not D2.
See all of the reports and some graphs at http://is.gd/vitd3d2