# Experiment with vitamin D



## TexARC (Mar 5, 2003)

At the end of the winter, the percentage of the US population with a severe (often chronically so) deficiency in cholecalciferol aka vitamin D3 borders on 80%. You, an athlete archer, are lower in D at this time unless you've been taking it as a supplement, since the only truly effective ways to get to a therapeutic blood level is either taking it orally as an over-the-counter capsule, or by selecting the right type of suntanning bed that emits only UV-B wavelength, or, by laying in the sun with as much skin exposed as possible AND with no sunscreen on your skin, for a specific amount of time. Time? However long it takes for your skin to be obviously getting pink. It varies by skin type, by your vitamin D level, and obviously by how far from the equator you live. And this is true for every population in Europe, Great Britain, Australia, Canada, etc....our aversion to the sun seems to be pretty universal these days, and I believe it has lead to a greater number of prescriptions.

Why am I boring you with this?

MEDICAL PRECAUTION: Provided you can check with your doctor and he/she tells you that your health conditions do not contradict doing this, 
*I propose* a general, relatively unscientific yet significant test of as many of you as can afford around $200 (two blood tests plus a years' supply of vitamin D) to participate. I want the scientifically curious, the archers that are pushing themselves to be better, the best, they can be. There are no other criteria, and there is no danger or risk of adverse effects, to the best of my well-informed knowledge as a pharmacist who has been recommending D supplementation for some 4 years). Taking vitamin D from either Purity or HiTech mfrs is WADA-safe, I've talked with the president of HiTech, for example, and he assured me they do not make/mfr. any steroids or other such prohibited chemicals. For those that are sincerely at risk for winning a place on the Oly team, I'd suggest sun or tanning bed exposure to raise your level, get tested now, and then again in 3 weeks or so of "sun training" if you don't want to take the vitamin D3. 

Why? 
I get kind of wordy on this, so if you are interested in being a part of an informal test/study/evaluation group to see if you will improve your athletic performance by simply taking vitamin D, please go to this page: 
http://www.arcarmichael.com/study.htm


----------



## Bean Burrito (Apr 20, 2011)

This reads a little bit like spam, keep that in mind


----------



## Flehrad (Oct 27, 2009)

US Milk products have Vit D added to it to combat the deficiency from the modern lifestyle and working in office buildings. You only need 30minutes of direct sun exposure to your skin (generally arms, neck and face is sufficient) to generate enough daily levels, so I've been informed by my sources.


----------



## pinkfletch (Sep 16, 2002)

2 years ago my Vit D levels were well below normal on my annual physical blood test. My Dr. put me on 2000iu of Vitamin D3 a day. It took 6 months to bring it up to normal levels and has stayed there with the continued taking of the 2000iu of D3. Hs basically said what you have said...that with the increased awareness of sun damage and protection and being so far north of the equator, most people were not getting enough sunlight anymore. I haven't noticed feeling any difference since taking the supplement, but will continue.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Ron's enthusiasm for using smart supplements to help us live a more healthy and competitive lifestyle is unparalleled in this sport. And no doubt he has the medical background to back up his assertions. 

Knowing Ron personally, I can tell you that his greatest concern is always the well being of those he cares about, and he cares a great deal about his archery "family." 

While I've always chosen to forego any supplements - aside, of course, from my morning coffee! - I've also taken everything he's said about diet, vitamins and supplements very seriously. 

Having lived in Southern Illinois for 6 years - where we rarely saw the sun all winter long - I believe there is something to this vitamin D deficiency. Late winter and early spring there were always very difficult times of the year for me to deal with and I'm sure that was the reason. Now that I'm back home in Texas, I get plenty of sunshine and haven't experienced the same symptoms. But for those who do, I would seriously consider learning more about this.

John


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

FWIW, a friend of mine spent most of his life in medical research, with much of the last 10 years specifically in Vitamin D research, and his advice to me, regarding Vitamin D, was "Load up".


----------



## TexARC (Mar 5, 2003)

pinkfletch said:


> ...It took 6 months to bring it up to normal levels and has stayed there with the continued taking of the 2000iu of D3. ...


 Yet he could have made you therapeutic in a week instead (several days of 50,000iu of D3), and the chances are good 2000iu is inadequate for you in the winter, where you don't have a contributing component of D production from the sun. Again, one must get the number from the doctor and don't stop til it is 50 ng/ml at least. Only at around 50 will your body, for example, be able to produce cathelicidin (google it<G>)...


----------



## TexARC (Mar 5, 2003)

Bean Burrito said:


> This reads a little bit like spam, keep that in mind


 You have a point, but does it appear that I am trying to make anything from this? Aside from making a point that other coaches/athletes can benefit from, I don't think I am...and frankly, if I had not already had a number of years of positive feedback from a variety of people regarding their health changes subsequent to doing what I suggested some dedicated athletes try, I wouldn't have made that post. Not spam. Thanks.


----------



## TexARC (Mar 5, 2003)

Flehrad said:


> US Milk products have Vit D added to it to combat ....


 You would have to drink literally hundreds of glasses of milk per day in order to achieve 50 ng/ml blood level. Better start soon


----------



## Bean Burrito (Apr 20, 2011)

TexARC said:


> You have a point, but does it appear that I am trying to make anything from this? Aside from making a point that other coaches/athletes can benefit from, I don't think I am...and frankly, if I had not already had a number of years of positive feedback from a variety of people regarding their health changes subsequent to doing what I suggested some dedicated athletes try, I wouldn't have made that post. Not spam. Thanks.


Wasn't having a dig mate, I was just saying that's how it looks if you see it in the subforum and skim through it. 

I don't think I'm an ideal test subject, but your site certainly is an interesting read. Guess it wouldn't hurt me to buy some tablets and see what results it yields.


----------



## TexARC (Mar 5, 2003)

Thanks, John. 

1978 1 in 100,000 1986 1 in 88 0 

1. The year I graduated pharmacy.
2. The estimated frequency of autism in American births at that time. (though it was NOT part of the lexicon in school)
3. The year the cosmetic industry bribed the medical profession to adopt a "fear the sun; use sunscreen" policy to ostensibly stop 1500 deaths a year from melanomas but was actually just a way to sell a new-fangled chemical called sunscreen. ps, melanomas are UP, way UP, thanks to the D deficiency!
4. The latest estimate of autism incidence, just a few weeks ago.
5. The chance this is NOT related at least in part to decades of chronic deficiency of vitamin D 

Look, D is not the magical silver bullet unless you do have a pathology arising from a lack of it. It is a critical component to health and perhaps athletic performance, and if you correct a deficiency who knows what will happen? I guess I am curious.

Whoops, forgot: 1990
The year that autism became prevalent enough for a shyster doctor from England to point the wrong finger at mercury in vaccines as the cause for autism, thereby causing decades to be wasted and many thousands to be born autistic....


----------



## TexARC (Mar 5, 2003)

No worries - I have a great admiration for Aussies and Kiwis and such 
and thanks, my primary efforts these day, such as they are both weak and waning, go into this website, which I have built up over the last 14 or so years:
Texas State Archery Association

For archery information, I hope it is useful, it's all completely free. Many of the archery vids on youtube came from this site, where I had put them with the owner's permission, prior to there being a youtube in the realverse. At least, since the vids on youtube have the same description and file name, I make a conclusion that might be correct  . There are also some 50k photos I have taken of archers shooting, and posted in the form of albums on this and also this site, which in theory will be replaced at some point in the near future since I have retired from the role of recordskeeper...I have archived a number of items there from the NAA's history. More to come....


----------



## titanium man (Mar 5, 2005)

Great Info!! Thanks!!


----------



## pinkfletch (Sep 16, 2002)

TexARC said:


> Yet he could have made you therapeutic in a week instead (several days of 50,000iu of D3), and the chances are good 2000iu is inadequate for you in the winter, where you don't have a contributing component of D production from the sun. Again, one must get the number from the doctor and don't stop til it is 50 ng/ml at least. Only at around 50 will your body, for example, be able to produce cathelicidin (google it<G>)...


I will print the article and your reply and take it to my Dr. at my next appt. He is a wholistic Dr. and I am sure he willnot be offended...thanks


----------



## TexARC (Mar 5, 2003)

You might want to also google "Vieth Vitamin D" for a benchmark study on D, as well as this one.


----------



## Flehrad (Oct 27, 2009)

I don't live in the US, our milk doesn't have VitD added anyway lol.... we just have an ozone hole nearby, and one of the higher melanoma rates around, so I think I get plenty of sun on my skin when I'm out and about being on the field 10+hrs/week.


----------



## Colin.W (Apr 29, 2012)

I work in the construction industry. and even in the damp dismal weather we are experiencing here in the UK at the moment I think my daily exposure is enough so I would not be a very viable test subject although the theory sounds solid enough. Many years ago I was in the Royal Navy working shifts in the engine rooms and boiler rooms on board ship, often going days on end without seeing daylight not even a commute to work to get a daily dose of sunshine, it was noticible but at the time it was put down as tedium and disrupted sleep patterns, we were never tested to see if there was a lack of vit D


----------



## edgerat (Dec 14, 2011)

Tex, are you advocating against sunscreen altogether or....? Just curious as I typically load up with 100spf when fishing and archery'ing....  

Thank you for the food for thought.
Isaac


----------



## hdracer (Aug 8, 2007)

Interesting topic. 

What blood test result am I looking for specifically to point to a D deficiency? I recently had a multitude of tests done and was told my D level is very low. So I started taking a D supplement. But what exactly points to a low D level?


----------



## TheAncientOne (Feb 14, 2007)

Flehrad said:


> US Milk products have Vit D added to it to combat the deficiency from the modern lifestyle and working in office buildings. You only need 30minutes of direct sun exposure to your skin (generally arms, neck and face is sufficient) to generate enough daily levels, so I've been informed by my sources.


Sunlight interacts with the oils on your skin to create vitimin D, the skin absorbs it and then it is processed by the liver. However most of us shower the first thing in the morning and wash away all of that oil. Hence the epidemic of vitimin D deficiencies (my doctor's words). 

I found out a few years ago that I had low vitimin D levels and was placed on 50,000 units once a week for a few months to correct it.
I am still slightly low even though I work ouside frequently. Most doctors don't routinely check for this, you should ask the next time you go for your yearly check-up. It's easily fixed with a prescription from a licensed physcian. 

TAO


----------



## edgerat (Dec 14, 2011)

TTT to get my question answered


----------



## Mulcade (Aug 31, 2007)

From the conversations I've had with Ron, he's not saying to forgo sunscreen altogether. Just leave it off until the skin just starts to pink up. Once you've gotten to that point, go ahead and slather on the sunscreen. As far as I know, he's always held with the warnings of getting serious sunburns so do still protect yourself from getting burned. 15-30 minutes should be all it takes for the skin to start turning pink and for you to generate all the VitD that you'll need for the day.


----------



## bobdvm (Jul 5, 2009)

Take it. It is very important!


----------



## Monumental11 (Jul 26, 2012)

I read the whole thing and needed a beer. But TexArc is right on actually. Very informative!!!!


----------



## Festivus (Oct 9, 2009)

What does vitamin D deficeincy do?


----------



## Not Sure (May 25, 2007)

Just got my bottle of D3 today thanks to this article. I'm not even close to a pro archer but am eager to see if there are any results. BTW, I work in a cubicle all day so I know I don't get enough sunlight.


----------



## Unclegus (May 27, 2003)

Festivus said:


> What does vitamin D deficeincy do?


Vitamin D deficiency will give you all the classic symptoms of chronic depression. I know. I lived with it for years and had no clue what was going on. Went from 530 field finger shooter to barely being able to break 400. muscle and joint aches, weakness, stiffness, inability to concentrate, anxiety. I got down to where I could barely shoot a field round on a 36# round wheel bow.... Mine was off the chart low. I even went to a shrink for ten years and was put on antidepressants. In the winter, I was as mad as a hatter and showed all the classic symptoms of seasonal affective disorder... It was a nightmare...I thought it was just part of getting old. I finally went to my doctor and told him to check and test me for everything and anything because I couldn't take it anymore...That's when he found the low D. I now take 50,000 units once a week, and that really turned me around, but my level is still low. My body just won't absorb it. And lastly.....This is not something you can just take like eating M&M's either. Taking too much can be toxic.


----------



## swbuckmaster (Dec 20, 2005)

I also have been diagnosed with D deficiencies. I go crazy in the winter and can often get depressed. I often have to go to england for a few weeks every year in nov-feb. I always wanted to throw myself out of the cab while it was moving. England sucks that time of year with tons of rain and you never see the sun because its so low in the horizon. It always feels like im living in a black and white movie when im over there.

I have been taking vitimn D and it does help with the anxiety. I have also noted I seldom ever get burned in the sun. My job requires me to be outside most of the day. I actually feel better working outside every day then when I get home and am stuck in the office. 

ive always thought I was a lizard in a way because i like it hot and dry.


----------



## bfoot (Dec 30, 2009)

Well, you never see a rabbit wearing glasses and carrots have ton of D . So, good for eyesight also. One of the reasons we have D deficiency is that the body makes D when exposed to sunlight if the skin is oily. Westerners being so compulsive about bathing daily wash the oil off their skin and even if exposed to sunlight, do not produce D.

Seasonal Affective Disorder is not related to D deficiency as I understand, it is assumed that it relates to neurotransmitter production. I was a psychologist before retiring so while not an expert on SAD, have some knowledge. They make specific lights to sit under in winter and this is not for D production and studies show these work.

Vitamin D deficiency is very rare now since they started putting it in milk decades ago. Being a fat soluble Vitamin like A, E, and K, you body does store these in your liver and can be toxic if you have liver disease especially (cirrhosis, hepatitis)


----------



## Trailerdog (Jul 24, 2008)

Had blood work done 4 weeks ago and my D level was at 21. I believe 32-34 is on the low side. I was taking 2400iu daily and that was making no difference. Symptoms were major joint/bone pain, weakness, extreme fatigue, lack of concentration, and insomnia to boot. In short, I felt like crap and seriously thought I may have arthritis. Could not shoot for very long periods, and hitting baseballs with my kids was brutal on my hips. Dr. put me on 50,000iu twice a week and in 2 short weeks I can feel a major difference in my body. Physically and mentally. Even with my regular daily doses and all the sun we have down here in south Texas wasn't near enough to do me any good. Not enough Dr.'s discuss this with their patients and they really should be. Guys, have your D levels checked...................it can make a difference.


----------



## Unclegus (May 27, 2003)

Trailerdog said:


> Had blood work done 4 weeks ago and my D level was at 21. I believe 32-34 is on the low side. I was taking 2400iu daily and that was making no difference. Symptoms were major joint/bone pain, weakness, extreme fatigue, lack of concentration, and insomnia to boot. In short, I felt like crap and seriously thought I may have arthritis. Could not shoot for very long periods, and hitting baseballs with my kids was brutal on my hips. Dr. put me on 50,000iu twice a week and in 2 short weeks I can feel a major difference in my body. Physically and mentally. Even with my regular daily doses and all the sun we have down here in south Texas wasn't near enough to do me any good. Not enough Dr.'s discuss this with their patients and they really should be. Guys, have your D levels checked...................it can make a difference.


Good Post. I lost about ten year of my life with this. It's no Joke if you've ever had it and thinking you can get all you need from just milk or dairy products is total BS. 21 Huh? Mine was less than 10....


----------



## Scott.Barrett (Oct 26, 2008)

Is there an OTC version available that will do the job? Any recommendations?


----------



## Mulcade (Aug 31, 2007)

You can get D3 at your local supermarket in the vitamin aisle in several different sizes. 100iu, 1000iu, 2000iu, and 5000iu are the ones that come to mind. I personally take one 5000iu twice a day.


----------



## Trailerdog (Jul 24, 2008)

Unclegus said:


> Good Post. I lost about ten year of my life with this. It's no Joke if you've ever had it and thinking you can get all you need from just milk or dairy products is total BS. 21 Huh? Mine was less than 10....


10 years? My hats off to you sir. You are one tough SOB. This can be a brutal ordeal on your body as you know. Hope life is getting better for you.


----------



## Unclegus (May 27, 2003)

Trailerdog said:


> 10 years? My hats off to you sir. You are one tough SOB. This can be a brutal ordeal on your body as you know. Hope life is getting better for you.


You have no clue. I thought for sure it was arthritis and I just fought it until I couldn't take anymore. I couldn't hardly get out of bed. Stupid is as stupid does. It's all good now. retired and shooting in the mid thirties.


----------



## rossing6 (Jun 7, 2008)

Had blood work done, had virtually no D left, took 50,000 units a day per my doc for two months to get back to normal levels....think it takes about twice that to have too much and be toxic, but I maintain my Vitamin D every day as a Lieutenant Firefighter, and it is amazing the difference...kind of like iron deficiency, you don't realize how bad off you are until you get fixed. Vitamin D does a whole lot of things for a whole lot of reasons...Up here in the NW it rains a ton like where I lived in Alaska, and it is a systemic problem all around...FYI it would appear my coffee intake also wears off Vitamin D so I've cut that way back as well...


----------



## TexARC (Mar 5, 2003)

edgerat said:


> Tex, are you advocating against sunscreen altogether or....? Just curious as I typically load up with 100spf when fishing and archery'ing....  Thank you for the food for thought.
> Isaac


Forgive me, but I paraphrase another physician (I steal quotes from the best If you do not mind DRINKING sunscreen, then by all means, apply it liberally to your skin. You will absorb so much into your bloodstream by topical use that it is similar to DRINKING it. Does it harm you? There are virtually no studies on this question. 
I have found personally, by accidental notice, that I do not sunburn under normal exposure since I got right with my own blood level (> 60 ng/ml). In 4 years I have burned my skin ONCE, when I fell asleep on the beach in Galveston during spring break and did not turn over from 9am to 2pm. Yikes. My burn was mild, no pain, no fever, but lots of red.  I also "snaked" a week later. However. I have freely exposed myself to sun while working outside for years with not a single burn, and for a son of south Texas, I can tell you that is jest plain weerd.  
Vitamin D in therapeutic levels protects from sunburn. If you do burn, it is essentially and primarily mother natures' way of allowing you to generate HUGE amounts of vitamin D as an emergency response to UVB-A exposure, I am certain at this point. 
I have nothing in particular against sunscreen, lacking studies telling me to be concerned. But I am against it in that it prevents one from making natural amounts of vitamin D3 - some 20,000iu per day in central Texas, yee ha!

http://www.vitamind.arcarmichael.com


----------



## TexARC (Mar 5, 2003)

bfoot said:


> Well, you never see a rabbit wearing glasses and carrots have ton of D . So, good for eyesight also. One of the reasons we have D deficiency is that the body makes D when exposed to sunlight if the skin is oily. Westerners being so compulsive about bathing daily wash the oil off their skin and even if exposed to sunlight, do not produce D.
> 
> Seasonal Affective Disorder is not related to D deficiency as I understand, it is assumed that it relates to neurotransmitter production. I was a psychologist before retiring so while not an expert on SAD, have some knowledge. They make specific lights to sit under in winter and this is not for D production and studies show these work.
> 
> Vitamin D deficiency is very rare now since they started putting it in milk decades ago. Being a fat soluble Vitamin like A, E, and K, you body does store these in your liver and can be toxic if you have liver disease especially (cirrhosis, hepatitis)


Your assumptions/statements are based on incorrect science. It is NOT, repeat NOT, a vitamin. It is a pre-hormone, on a par in power with testosterone and estrogen, being synthesized in the body from the same substrate, cholesterol. As in "sterol", ie, STEROID... Vitamin A actually antagonizes the function of vitamin D. Vitamin D is not, can not, be toxic in any amount of sun exposure generating endogenous vitamin D. Even the most strident literature searches reveals only a few non-permanent toxicity citations, when the patient is exposed to chronic doses of MILLIONS OF UNITS PER DAY FOR MONTHS!!!!

You are somewhat correct that vitamin D is formed in the epidermis (uv-b rays do not penetrate deeply, google "blood irradiation" for fascinating evidence about this and the power of vitamin D as an antibiotic during the 20's, 30's, and 40's., and even today in Europe and Russia). Swimming after sun exposure is HYPOTHESIZED (not proven as far as I can find studies on) to wash some vitamin D off prior to absorption into the blood stream.
Ever wonder why cats lick their fur? Why birds preen their feathers? It has to do with the fact that mammals create vitamin D with whatever tissue they have that is exposed to uv-b light. Put olive oil in the sun, eggs in the sun, guess what they produce? yep. even olive oil makes vitamin D in the presence of uv-B rays. 
As for SAD. Studies are mixed, as I would expect with any topic revolving around human depression. My recommendation is, if you are subject to SAD symptoms no matter whether you are in Antarctica or San Antone, TAKE SOME FRACKIN' VITAMIN D since they are CHEEEEP, devoid of danger as long as you don't take 100 caps of D3 5000 iu per day for a couple of months, and just MIGHT hep. And report here if you test it out and have negative or positive observations. 
Incidentally, since I posted this, there have been literally HUNDREDS of more studies in 2012 reporting favorably on a diversity of effects from either Vitamin D3 (NOT D2) or controlled sun exposure. Depression, MS, bone pain, myalgias, the list goes on and on. Don't take my word for it - go to http://www.vitamindcouncil.org and to vitamindwiki.com for compilations, evaluations, and critiques. Especially if you wish to reach potentiation as an athlete flingin' arrows...


----------



## TexARC (Mar 5, 2003)

rossing6 said:


> Had blood work done, had virtually no D left, took 50,000 units a day per my doc for two months to get back to normal levels....think it takes about twice that to have too much and be toxic, but I maintain my Vitamin D every day as a Lieutenant Firefighter, and it is amazing the difference...kind of like iron deficiency, you don't realize how bad off you are until you get fixed. Vitamin D does a whole lot of things for a whole lot of reasons...Up here in the NW it rains a ton like where I lived in Alaska, and it is a systemic problem all around...FYI it would appear my coffee intake also wears off Vitamin D so I've cut that way back as well...


If your doctor prescribed the vitamin D, you probably got screwed. Dr.s reach for the Physician's Desk Reference, aka PDR, and the only thing listed is an expensive product made by irradiating either mushrooms or mush, creating ergocalciferol, aka vitamin D2. D2 has been shown in recent, reliably constructed studies, to actually CLOG the metabolic pathways thereby blocking the creation of the only active form of D3. Yes, D2 actually can LOWER 25(OH)D, leading to a defeat of intention. D2 is toxic and therefore a prescription item. As a pharmacist, when the doctor is naive enough to prescribe to wit: "vitamin D 50,000iu per week", I am free to dispense 50,000iu of D3 instead of D2, thereby rendering a profound benefit to the patient in purpose with what the (ill-informed) physician intended: to wit a therapeutic dosage of beneficial vitamin D! If dr. says, vitamin D2 or says, ergocaciferol, or Drisdol(the brand name of the abomination), I must be precise and render unto the patient a deficient medicament. 
If you had taken 50,000iu of D3 for a week, chances are you would have been therapeutic within the week, and even if you took that dose for 6 moths, your body would have "tailed off" in activation of the D3 into the active form of 25(OH)D, calcitriol, so that you would NOT have been at much risk of "toxicity". I will be first to say that it is possible you might have gotten "too much", but I have no honest idea of what manifestation such a minor amount would have had. Seriously. google "vitamin D" toxicity and only accept those hits which have a legitimate, peer-reviewed and published STUDY of any kind. AND come up here and kick me around with the citations, because I can only find a couple involving MILLIONS of UNITS per DAY for MONTHS, all completely reversible upon cessation of the mega-dose. Always interested in scientific evidence in either direction, such is learning! Coffee? Drink all you want, just take another 5 cent capsule of 5,000iu D3 available OTC.  and stay the heck away from any prescribed vitamin D2, it is totally counterproductive, as is VITAMIN A. AVOID AT ALL COSTS. Take some beta carotene if you are concerned, or better yet, take 25 raw fruits, vegetables, and berries every morning in 30 seconds like I do and no longer worry about whether your nutritional needs are being met.


----------



## TexARC (Mar 5, 2003)

Unclegus said:


> You have no clue. I thought for sure it was arthritis and I just fought it until I couldn't take anymore. I couldn't hardly get out of bed. Stupid is as stupid does. It's all good now. retired and shooting in the mid thirties.


Praises. 
I have had patients taking neurontin(gabapentin) and Lyrica under a life sentence of "nerve pain" aka myalgias because the doctor was too blindered to think of causes rather than "treatment". Women unable to wear long sleeved blouses due to skin nerve sensitivity. A woman with migraines arising from a temporal myalgia. parents of autistics 20+ years old with testimonies totally unscientific in nature but profound none-the-less. Patients "coming down with a bug" who, didn't. I have no way of assessing just how many people are no longer taking a chronic prescription med, because they got right with gawd and vitamin D. I do know of a number of patients who came in and told me, Yay. I've actually had customers checking out on one register, chime in to confirm what I was teaching to a customer on the other register, about specifics to them. Really. I would so much rather have someone NOT get a prescription for a chronic health deficiency if I can help it "go away for good" at a cost of $15 per year, or free if they can lay out in the sun for 30 minutes 3 times or 4 times a week. It's a no brainer for me. As I have said before, I know of no other way to improve one's over all health than to insure a therapeutic level (ie, ~50 ng/ml, 50 billionths of a gram per milliliter) of 25(OH)D, achieved by taking from 5,000 to 10,000iu of vitamin D3 daily for most adults. OR, get enough sun daily to the point of beginning to "pink up" - never burn, but you'll discover the "time to pink" gets longer and longer as your D levels improve!
Once D is done, you need to look at your fundamental intake of raw fruits, vegetables, and berries. Red meat? I LOVE IT. CHICKEN FRIED STEAK WITH GRAVY(white gravy, of course), bring it AWN. but I always compensate with a double dose of veggies.  Google C-RP, Homocysteine for a couple of indicators of your independent markers for death. Veggies, Fruits, and Berries will bring both of those DOWN. Studies are there. And I haven't begun to re-beat the drum about the benefits to the nervous system and the muscular performance of athletes, getting adequate nutrition and vitamin D. 
Next time. And Unclegus, good on ya', good on yew!


----------



## TexARC (Mar 5, 2003)

https://www.vitamindcouncil.org/blog/new-review-on-vitamin-d-and-athletic-performance/

Great summary on the science. (joining the council is free and you do not get spammed)


----------



## Secant (Mar 29, 2013)

Wow, I am not sure I have never seen so many concentrated fallacies in one place regarding Vit D and sunscreen, topped with advice for improving sports performance by getting a sunburn.

First off let me say I am a fan of Vitamin D supplementation and think it can help energy levels and alertness. Now for some facts:

-The normal range of vitamin D was shifted higher about 6-7 years ago at the behest and lobbying of a major lab corp (no names) that held a patent on the new test and a Dr. Wolfe who happens to be a head lobbyist for the tanning bed industry (oops, no conflict of interest there)
-This resulted in the increased number of Americans being "deficient" based on the arbitrarily changed new "normal"
-No major effects of "deficiency" in the old normal has been shown, though there definitely is true Vit D deficiency (and overdose, including liver failure and your hair falling out, so moderation probably best)
-melanoma kills close to 10,000 Americans a year or 1 every hour if that makes the impact more real
-doctors do not get one red penny from the sale of sunscreens. In fact removing skin cancers is a multimillion dollar bill for Medicare every year, so advising people to get less skin cancer would not make $ sense
-and before someone proposes this fallacious argument: "a study showed that people who use sunscreen get more skin cancer". True in one study, but it compared outdoor daily athletes using sunscreen to desk bound pale golem like folks not using. The conclusion should have been on the effect of sun exposure and not sunscreen or that sunscreen is not enough with excessive sun exposure. Comparing equal sun exposure individuals shows significant reduction in skin cancers with sunscreen use. Talk to our Aussie archers about that if you like.
-studies done on Hawaiian beach bum surfers did not show that there Vit D level was anywhere outside of/above normal range and children with xeroderma pigmentosa (grow skin cancers in childhood from minimal sun exposure) were within normal limits with normal diet with vit D supplementation and ZERO sun exposure
-tanning beds have been declared carcinogenic the world health organization and a host of other regulatory bodies, with the FDA requiring carcinogen danger labeling on them
-7 tanning bed sessions double your risk of cancer. The above advise is like recommending a cigarette to calm your nerves before a competition. Even if it helps, it is not very responsible.
-turning pink (or reaching minimal erythrodermic dose of Uv radiation) means you have caused DNA damage, aka on your way to skin cancer
-Vitamin D is metabolized by UV IN the skin and has nothing to do with oils and cannot be washed off
-Vitamin D "deficiency" and autism have never been shown in any serious scientific study to have any association so the numbers thrown out above are senseless (in fact study out this last month about genetic predisposition with epigenetic environmental triggers seems to make a whole lot more sense), though I agree that the fear of immunizations caused by the (now recalled for falsified data) article in Lancet was unfounded

Everyone is entitled to their personal health beliefs and I am all for seeing if vitamin D helps athletic performance (though the "study methods" above would not support any conclusion), but advocating tanning bed use to improve your archery skills is akin to the advice given in Russia to pregnant women to help have smaller babies and to their retired professional athletes to increase vascular tone in the 70s: take up smoking!

Vitamin D undoubtedly helps energy levels, mood, performance, immune system and other cell functions, but please use supplements as directed by your PHYCISIAN, do not use tanning beds and PLEASE wear sunscreen at archery competitions.

I took off 6 skin cancers from people today at it was my average day at work and have that many more procedures scheduled for tomorrow and the next day.

Credentials: Associate clinical professor of dermatology, fellow of the American Board of Dermatology and an OK archer that wears sun screen, hat and sun shirts whenever shooting outdoors. Helps protect my bow arm as well and I shoot better on day two without searing pain in my neck and back.

I've seen people dying of melanoma this month, but not one person in my career dying from vit D deficiency. Please don't risk melanoma on misguided advice.


----------



## Secant (Mar 29, 2013)

And by the way the Vitamin D Council is the advertising and lobbying arm of the tanning bed industry, so the great summary of science is akin to the tobacco companies testifying before congress that their "scientific" research has never showed evidence of nicotine addiction. It was that last post that made it my professional responsibility to speak out. 
For another view:
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/780508_2

Message brought to you by those same doctors that say smoking is bad for you. And yes, I totally agree to take Vitamin D3 supplements for all your archery needs and please stick with evidence based science (large controlled studies) and not "my friend's aunt's neighbor told me this helped" when considering supplements and health choices.

I am completely done and will not argue back any "facts" and wish the best to all on their health choices and will proceed with questions about archery on this forum.


----------



## LoveMyHoyt (Nov 29, 2008)

Last year, my Dr. put me on Vit D2 - twice a week. I thought - how can I be low? I live in FL and am outside all the time (I also shower in the evenings- not mornings ;-)
When I asked about getting a refill of the prescription - she said my levels were back to normal and I didn't need it any more. 
My question is --- I was on Vit. D2 which is a prescription. My husband takes D3 which can be bought at any grocery or drug store. What is the difference between the two?
BTW - I was always a huge milk drinker all my life - and then became lactose intolerant in my 50's -- go figure!!!


----------



## TexARC (Mar 5, 2003)

Your doctor apparently has no clue about what vitamin D is, nor what it does... For one thing she was prescribing D2, which is less efficient and actually must be converted to D3 before your body can use it. I think it is best to stick with the over the counter version which is known as D3. (Yes, the same chemical your body makes) As we age, our bodies lose some of the ability to make vitamin D. And the best time to get the right kind of UV wavelengths is between 10 a.m. And 4 p.m. Especially during the summer you do not want to overdo it and burn, but you also must "take your sun" when your shadow is shorter than you are. More than 80% of all Americans are deficient in this particular steroidal hormone... d3, good. D2, bad.


----------



## hoytshooter15 (Aug 13, 2012)

Have a bottle of vitamin D3 capsules in my kitchen, take one everyday but I didn't know until just now that it could actually help my shooting


----------



## Dacer (Jun 10, 2013)

or -- people can just go outside.


----------



## montigre (Oct 13, 2008)

Thanks for bringing this to the top again. As a field shooter, during the spring and summer, I'm out in the sun for several hours a day practicing or competing, but now that the weather has started to turn colder and the shooting has moved indoors, I'm not getting out for that length of time nearly as much and I have noticed my mood starting to sour a bit. Going to start popping the D3 through the winter to see if it helps to keep me in "summer spirits" Who knows, without the usual winter doldrums, I might find that I actually like shooting indoor spots.... :wink:


----------



## TexARC (Mar 5, 2003)

montigre said:


> Thanks for bringing this to the top again. ...


For some weird reason, Tapatalk on my cell phone brought this thread to me, and I responded to the last post without realizing how old it was. And I was astonished when I started reading back in the thread - at the post just prior, from one of the dermatologists apparently involved in the world-wide conspiracy to kill off 3/4 of the population through chronic vitamin D deprivation by spreading misinformation and lies! <chuckle>. He's much like the dermatologist I fired, except that she didn't shoot arrows. oh well.


----------



## TexARC (Mar 5, 2003)

*a ng/ml is the same as a billionth of a gram /ml - powerful medicine*



montigre said:


> Thanks for bringing this to the top again. ...


For some weird reason, Tapatalk on my cell phone brought this thread to me, and I responded to the last post without realizing how old it was. And I was astonished when I started reading back in the thread - at the post just prior, from one of the dermatologists apparently involved in the world-wide conspiracy to kill off 3/4 of the population through chronic vitamin D deprivation by spreading misinformation and lies! <chuckle - just kidding, kind of>. He's much like the dermatologist I fired, except that she didn't shoot arrows. oh well. 
Speaking belatedlly to that post:
Suggesting that tanning beds are addictive is like saying that running is addictive. Hello? ANYTHING can be addictive. The fact is that your body rewards you for lying out in the sun by generating a host of chemicals, including a steroidal hormone called cholecalciferol (aka vitamin D3) as well as some endorphins that stimulate the pleasure centers in the brain. Yes, people make like whales in the sun in part because it literally makes them feel good - mother nature is pretty darn clever... <G> That chemical then goes on to help your body do countless other things, including defeat infection, deal with inflammation, lay down/retain bone strength, have stronger muscle performance, enhance balance, avoid diseases, decrease the triad of A in children, and I won't itemize the list of things for which the evidence is mounting are mitigated for.

The current (pathetic) recommendation in the US for daily vitamin D intake is the same for a hundred pound, 20 year old woman as it is for a 300 pound, 30 year old NFL linebacker: 600iu . This was set with NO consideration as to what contribution this amount has to maintaining the "mother-nature" blood level of vitamin D. That is to say, the blood level which evolution has determined to be optimal for those peoples who are routinely exposed to sun. Fascinatingly, those very people are not decimated by melanomas, nor are they immune to them. I believe that the worst skin cancers strike a variety of people, often appearing in areas on the body where they have *never* gotten sun exposure. hmmm. 

The falsehood that the tanning bed industry in any way controls the Vitamin D Council is just that, a base lie and canard. I specifically asked the Council about that, and the non-profit Council receives a whole $10,000 per year from that group. Yes, that industry has a business/profit motive in promoting business by contributing to raising awareness about the many diseases that are in some degree related to chronic D deficiency.(CDD). But they have no say in the operation of the council nor in how that donation gets used. 
Yes, there are tanning beds that are predominantly UV-A in emissions and are to be avoided at all costs. But those beds that are mainly UV-B can serve as a valid and safe way to raise the body's level of not only vitamin D but also the other as-yet-poorly-understood chemicals the body produces. If someone acts like an addict with excessive sunbed exposure, that is FAR more likely a disease of psychological origin and should be treated as such, much like anorexia, bulimia, bi-polar, etc...and not by blaming the running shoes for facilitating the addiction. sheesh.

There is a huge and ever increasing number of studies being peer-reviewed/ published where the authors do not set out to prove that D is useless. Anytime I see a study where the authors failed to achieve and/or document a mother-nature level of near 50ng/ml (125nmol/l) I know that the results are limited in truthfulness and accuracy. Recently the press trumpeted a study where "vitamin D did not prevent osteoporosis". The headline should have read, "Giving a Pathetically Low Dose (600iu) of Vitamin D Daily Does Bupkus". 
So I urge anyone "on the fence" about whether to follow the dermatologists that created the "fear the sun" campaign or the pharmacist that says, "dance with that whut brung you", get your own information, read as much as you can, GOOGLE your particular disease concern and the phrase "vitamin D" , and choose for yourself. And yes, one of the best places where physicians with open minds cite and review specific studies relative to the topic, and are willing to discuss them with laypersons, is the Vitamin D Council . The blog and the news links off the main page WILL provide useful information. 
As for the "fear the sun" campaign, started in the late '80s-early '90s by, I believe, a foundation created by the L'Oreal and in league with specific elements of the medical profession - I personally am convinced that nothing has done as much harm to American health as this, if you consider all the different diseases in which Chronic D Deficiency (CDD) appears to play a part, and especially all of the diseases like autism and MS that have BLOSSOMED since around 1990.

Yes, a specific number of people small percentage of the American population, will develop fatal skin cancers, and yes, I believe that some small percentage of THAT small percentage will be due to UV-A skin damage. BUT, far more people suffer (and die in far greater numbers each year) due to chronic deficiency of cholecalciferol. The numbers dying from skin cancer are dwarfed by those from CDD-associated diseases.

Let's look at just one disease, MS - Multiple Sclerosis. One of the wonders of the modern era with computerization in such a widespread way is that we have begun to see "the big picture" worldwide with regard to disease incidences in various patient populations. For example, melanomas have GONE UP despite the documented aversion to sun exposure our medical profession-driven awareness now shares. Not down. UP. 

Back to MS: It is a well-documented fact that the further you live from the equator, the more likely you are to develop MS. In other words, getting LESS sun over a lifetime has a consequence. So in my mind, that the medical profession has convinced people to FEAR the sun, has lead to far more cases of MS (pain, suffering, and death) than resulting in less cases of melanoma. Hello?

As a pharmacist, I am uniquely positioned relative to a dermatologist to see also a growing number of people that are prescribed medications that will have to be taken "forever". The meds do not CURE anything, because the prescriber cannot divine the actual root cause, and must therefore prescribe "something" to treat the merely the symptom. Stop the med and the patient is right back where he started, only far more poorer and possibly suffering from a lifetime-duration side effect. The prescribed "something" comes with high cost, serious side effects, or both. Take Fibromyalgia, for example. Painful. Debilitating for many. Lifestyle-altering. Appears often later in life, as opposed to teens, due to the nature of CDD. Continues to increase in numbers throughout life, as much as 8% by age 80 or so (CDD accelerates as we age due to a diminished ability to make D). Hits more women than men, and often clusters in families, but the actual cause is "unknown" according to the National Fibromyalgia Association. Yet time and again, I persuade a patient to simply take a daily dose of D designed to rapidly correct CDD to "mother-nature" (I like that term, it is apt and accurate) levels, and that person gives me anecdotal-but-real-for-her feedback AND is able to work with her dr. to get the hell off of Lyrica or Gabapentin, something I applaud. I think there are genetic predispositions that magnify the impact of CDD, and there is definitely an interplay between the hormones of gender and the steroidal hormone that is called erroneously a vitamin (vitamin D). By definition a vitamin is necessary for health but the body cannot make it. SO vitamin D ain't a vitamin. And "anecdotal" may not be the penultimate of scientific reliability to anyone BUT that poor patient who comes to me with tears of happiness because her cure was anecdotal. Gawd, I love that.

Quoting from a physician on the D council's website: "Best pieces of evidence for vitamin D are the seasonality of autism and the fact that immigrants have much higher incidence when they move away from equator." (My supporting suggestion: google "Somalia American Disease Swedish" and then read with mounting horror.)

"UV does increase risk of melanoma and squamous cell (it’s relationship to basal is a little more ambiguous). We don’t dispute or avoid this. Our argument is and always has been, the risk/benefit analysis of getting UV shows that you need to get some moderate UV. If you’re just looking at skin cancer, then it’s an obvious argument: you don’t need any. But if we look at all conditions affected by UV, it’s pretty obvious you need some UV. And there are UV devices out there that mimic sun exposure, some intensity, same wavelengths.

We stand behind our UV exposure recommendation. Look no further than this study of the entire Danish population that found skin cancer was associated with a decreased risk of mortality: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24038635 ."

Wait a minute?! If you get skin cancer of the most common types, you might actually LIVE LONGER than otherwise? Wow, who saw that one coming? Could it be that ...naw, I won't go there....

Bottom Line Time: I have been actively studying the effects of CDD, dosing D3, in an up-close and personal way in my role as a community pharmacist and as an archery coach for perhaps 5 years now. I have yet to have a single patient related any adverse effects of D dosing. I often have patients with chronic infections react positively to improving D status aggressively - for UTIs there may be nothing as wonderful (google cathelicidin.  I do not have to worry about athletes ripping a tendon because of a side effect of certain antibiotics (flouroquinolones for you coaches out there!). I believe it is a fundamentally wise thing for anyone, healthy or not, athletic or not, to do - take the nutrients necessary to promote baseline good health. That's a very simple, safe, and cost-effective way to improve your quality of life. Read the studies yourself. Decide for yourself. Talk it over with your doctor, but if she/he thinks that a blood level of 10 ng/ml or a daily dose of 600iu, is "ok", then perhaps you are talking to someone who has other interests foremost in his practice. Also, based on a common practice - never let a doctor withhold the actual blood level number from you, do not accept "your level is ok" because his OK and Your OK might not be even remotely similar! I am amazed at how many people approach me regarding their vitamin D level, not knowing what it actually is, because the doctor simply withheld it, saying instead "it's ok" rather than sharing the fact that he believes a pathetic 10 ng/ml is "ok". If physicians were taught to establish that the patient was getting proper nutrition across the board as part of the initial exam, many prescriptions would never have to be written.

Set as your goal to get right with mother nature. And consider the anecdotal/practical results other archers might share up here. Google "muscle vitamin D" , read the studies, and decide if you can safely extrapolate those inferences to your own training program. Lastly - vitamin D3 is literally safer than water - more people are injured by water each year than are documented to have been injured in *any* way by vitamin D3. If you can afford it, get your blood level tested, and then begin taking vitamin D3 (over the counter) at a dose of about 1000iu per 25 pounds of body weight. In around 2 months, get your blood level checked again (best time is the dead of winter where you are at most risk of being deficient), and adjust accordingly to keep yourself near the mother-nature (there's that phrase again!) level of 50 ng/ml (125nmol/l) to 60ng/ml. I have not seen where going above 70 ng/ml has been beneficial except to certain children suffering from severe autism, and I cannot ethically recommend that. But get to 50 or 60 ng/ml? Heck yes. Do it with the sun if possible. Sun beds if of the UV-B or "full balanced spectrum" in moderation, and of course, resort to the D3 capsules as needed. For me the benefits far outweigh the risks. Obviously for dermatologists, not so much...:wink:


----------



## toj (Aug 22, 2012)

Wow, what does D3 do for paranoia?


----------



## TexARC (Mar 5, 2003)

toj said:


> Wow, what does D3 do for paranoia?


Heh heh - quite a lot if Fox News is to be believed: http://www.foxnews.com/health/2011/...in-d-linked-to-teen-delusions-hallucinations/


----------



## Alpha Burnt (Sep 12, 2005)

subscribed..,.


----------

