Is it or isn't it vitamin D?

Jackie takes 10,000 units of vitamin D(3) per day as a gelcap.

Her starting 25-hydroxy vitamin D blood level was 18.1 ng/ml. Severe deficiency, no surprise.

On her 10,000 units per day, Vitamin Shoppe brand, her 25-hydroxy vitamin D level was 76.2 ng/ml--perfect. It stayed in this range for about two years.

She then changed to the Nature Made brand gelcaps she picked up at Walgreen's. Repeat 25-hydroxy vitamin D level: 23 ng/ml.

This has now happened with five different people, all taking the Nature Made brand.

If you are taking this brand of vitamin D, please be on the alert. You might consider a 25-hydroxy vitamin D blood level to be sure it actually has the vitamin D it's supposed to have.

Or, change brands.

Comments (63) -

  • Lou

    4/6/2010 6:47:14 PM |

    I often wondered about the one from Wal-Mart. i'm not sure if it's same as the one from Wal-green. The name brand rung a bell. My wife ended up with a little cold while on it. Needless to say, we went back to the old one. I also got a little cold but was over it quickly. I'll have to go there and see which brand. It was very cheap too. hmm...

  • Anonymous

    4/6/2010 7:20:50 PM |

    Wow, goodbye Nature Made!  Has anyone tried and had luck with the Trader Joe's brand?

  • sdkidsbooks

    4/6/2010 8:08:47 PM |

    Just called NatureMade Co and they told me their D3-2000 softgels are also sold under the Kirkland brand by Costco.  I have been taking those for 6 mos. and will now get my level checked. I'll be switching if it's not where it's been for the past year.

    Thanks.

    Jan

  • tom

    4/6/2010 9:43:32 PM |

    Dr. Davis:
    This is excellent and important  information; thank you for reporting it.

    Question:  has Nature Made been made aware of this?  I'm not defending them by any strtch, but is it possible that something they're not aware of has occurred?  They've always seemed to be a reputable company.
    Also, I've never seen them offer a 10,000 unit single dose.

  • Thomas

    4/6/2010 11:31:24 PM |

    Just want to make sure you mean Nature Made and not Nature's Bounty, both of which are sold by Walgreens.

  • pmpctek

    4/7/2010 12:36:24 AM |

    I have been taking 6,000 IU NOW Foods (brand) vitamin D3 gelcaps/day for the last three years.

    My 25-hydroxy vitamin D blood level has been ~60 ng/ml after two tests in those three years.  So far, so good.

  • Rick

    4/7/2010 1:37:19 AM |

    Does anyone have experience with the Country Life brand gelcaps?

    By the way, Dr Davis, when you say "You might consider a 25-hydroxy vitamin D blood level", do you mean that we might consider having our 25-hydroxy vitamin D blood level measured?

  • Anonymous

    4/7/2010 1:59:02 AM |

    can you comment the same on niacin

  • Sharan Virk

    4/7/2010 2:46:13 AM |

    Thanks Dr. Davis, I have personally learned so much from reading your blog..... I wanted to know how much I appreciate you taking time from your schedule to give us such valuable advice. My father is a open heart surgery patient and the food in hospital up to his surgery was appalling and his cardiologists standard low fat recommendations is stupendous. However my parents are of the age where doctor is = GOD. I am the nutcase for advocating D3, and salmon oil, & coconut oil.... THANKS AGAIN!!!! Sharan from Ontario, Canada

  • Helena

    4/7/2010 3:50:18 AM |

    Wow, that is worrying news but I am not surprised either.. there is a lot of scams out there.. but you would have thought they would be more unfamiliar brands than something we can pick up everywhere, or maybe that is just why. No one is questioning them because the brand is so known! I wonder if this goes for their other supplements too? I will for sure send this information along.

  • Eloise

    4/7/2010 11:05:14 AM |

    Last september 25-0H-lab 20. I started with 10000/d dried pills. March lab 140!Really surprised that the resorption of ordinary pills can be that high. Luckily no toxic "side effects". Sure I´ll pause now till next winter.

  • Adolfo David

    4/7/2010 1:47:36 PM |

    I have developed hypervitaminosis of vitamin D only taking 3000 IU daily of D3 during 5 months. I have removed all vitamin D3 of my supplements until I have levels under 50-60 ng/ml or even below.

    My experience has told me that some doctors/scientists are prescribing megadoses of vitamin D to population. Probably no more than 1000 IU daily of D3 to general population is a good dose.

  • Dr. William Davis

    4/7/2010 2:28:39 PM |

    The comments from several people highlight the absolute need to monitor 25-hydroxy vitamin D blood levels. We have our patients' levels checked every 6 months. Only then can you truly know what your status is.

  • Dr. William Davis

    4/7/2010 2:34:18 PM |

    My email to Nature Made:

    "I am a practicing cardiologist who monitors vitamin D blood levels in all my patients every 6 months.

    The Nature Made vitamin D is yielding no increase in 25-hydroxy vitamin D blood levels, despite prior full restoration with other brands.

    This suggests that there is either little or no vitamin D in the capsule.

    I'd appreciate your response."

    We'll see what happens. Don't expect them to say much. The chain of communication in these companies is often not open to our scrutiny, nor will they say anthing that makes them legally liable in any way.

  • Lou

    4/7/2010 2:58:16 PM |

    Adolfo David,

    your statement doesn't even make sense. Did you spend a lot of time outside during warm season?

    1,000 IU a day is very low for most people during the winter. That being said, I'd stick with 2,000 IU a day at the most during the summer and 5,000 IU during the winter. We easily make 20,000 IU of vitamin D in the skin just being outside at midday in the summer with the body mostly exposed after 20-30 minutes so I don't see how doctors are giving megadose when they say to take only 400 IU a day. We do not routinely get tested for it unless we request for it.

  • Larry

    4/7/2010 3:47:34 PM |

    If you can't get to a reputable vitamin/supplement store, head over on the Internet to Vitacost.com.
    I've been buying from them for years now.
    They sell hundreds of name brands at discounted prices.
    I've been using Carlson's VitD3 during the winter months here in Fla.
    I then get a blood test going back into the winter months.

  • Anonymous

    4/7/2010 3:51:55 PM |

    Anyone have any experience with Sam's Club's Member's Mark brand?

    http://www.samsclub.com/shopping/na

    vigate.do?dest=5&item=412704&pCatg=

    11017

  • Adolfo David

    4/7/2010 4:07:20 PM |

    Huhu, it would be interesting to see if they answer and what answer. It is so important to choose brands of high quality when you buy supplements like Life Extension, NOW, Nordic Naturals, New Chapter..to name only a few I think are in the top quality.

    Eloise, its strange that you have not felt any side effect with 140 ng/ml of vitamin D, it is almost a toxic level!

  • Lou

    4/7/2010 4:49:45 PM |

    Adolfo,

    I see that you're from Spain. I wonder if the testing lab is doing it right or the dosing is way off the mark.

    1,000 IU isn't very much when it comes to keeping vitamin D level in the optimal range during the winter. During the summer, we (except for elderly people) can produce as much as 20,000 IU in the skin at midday with most of the body exposed to the sun after 20-30 minutes (for light skin). Much longer for dark skin. That's why your statement doesn't make sense.

  • Elizabeth Miller

    4/7/2010 4:56:53 PM |

    My husband and I have been using the Costco Kirkland D3 (2000 IU per gel cap) and have had wonderful results. Recently I measured in at 81 ng/mL and my husband's measured level was 53 ng/mL -- note, I am more religious about taking my vitamins everyday than he is.

  • Anonymous

    4/7/2010 6:16:00 PM |

    Dr D.

    I had been taking the NOW brand of Niacin.  I also tried the "pharma" Niaspan.  The impact on my trigs was the same (35% reduction).  recently there was a package change here in Canada. Unfortunately the contents lable indicated niacinamide.  NOW said it was a lable error and the contents were niacin.  We have not seen a new packet yet.

    I have tired rexall and wallmart brands, niether produce a flush that gives me the comforting feeling there is niacin at the strength I need for trigs reduction.

    If you have a resource recommendation to find quality suppliments for D3,K2 and Niacin, it would be much appreciated

  • DrStrange

    4/7/2010 7:43:16 PM |

    One other "D" issue is that quite a high number of people do not absorb the dry form (even of D3) well if at all.  Many, like Eloise, obviously do but many can take fairly high doses of it for some time w/ no change in blood level, switch to the oil base and bring it right up.

  • Anonymous

    4/7/2010 8:35:05 PM |

    Dr Davis:

    The subject of Vitamin D supplementation is a confusing one for me. I have been following the various postings on this blog and other news articles pointing out all the benefits of Vitamin D3. However, there seems to be vast disagreement on what constitutes a deficiency across ethnic/racial groups.To quote from wikipedia's page:

    "Recommendations stemming for a single standard for optimal serum 25(OH)D concentrations ignores the differing genetically mediated determinates of serum 25(OH)D and may result in ethnic minorities in Western countries having the results of studies done with subjects not representative of ethnic diversity applied to them. Vitamin D levels vary for genetically mediated reasons as well as environmental ones.[30][31][32][33]  Among descent groups with heavy sun exposure during their evolution, taking supplemental vitamin D to attain the 25(OH)D level associated with optimal health in studies done with mainly European populations may have deleterious outcomes.[11]

    I'm of South Asian(Indian) descent and my 25(OH)D levels on a recent test were 31.3 ng/ml.

    What level would you say is safe for someone like me ? I take a 1000 IU supplement a day now but am more than a little concerned as what is safe.

  • Tom

    4/7/2010 9:03:41 PM |

    Thank you Dr. Davis for following up with Nature Made.  While they may not want to make any comments that might be self-incriminating, the evidence is in the gel caps themselves; they either contain the amount of D3 claimed, or they don't.  I think  the salient issue is the amount of D3 in the gelcap.  An argument can be made that the company is not responsible for guaranteeing patient D3 levels because of individual biology.
      If the users of the NM product have any of the original capsules remaining, they might want to hold onto them, and even purchase an unopened bottle for possible future action.

  • Anonymous

    4/7/2010 9:08:25 PM |

    Thank You Dr Davis for your excellent blog and your easy, straight-to-the-point posts!

    After discovering you back in the Fall, I joined the Grassroots program and tested for Vit D at a low level of 12.

    I took 5000-10000iu of Vit D3 daily since Nov 20th and recently retested (with ZRT again).

    Although the searing, scorching pain in my joints has nearly all faded (thyroid/fibro?), and I was hoping for an optimal level, my lab results were only 19 last week Frown


    Curious after reading this though - I was taking Natures Bounty from Walgreens (5000iu max strength soft gel with soybean oil).

    Does anyone know if Natures Bounty is the same as Nature Made?

    As always, I appreciate the time you take to relate your stories and experience with us.

  • Daniel

    4/7/2010 10:09:31 PM |

    Somebody asked about Country Life.  I use their 2500 IU non-fish oil gelcap and my levels are 45ng/ml, which seems about right.  Thus, I think that company is indeed selling D3.

  • DataPro

    4/8/2010 12:37:50 AM |

    Your advertising Glucosan? A supplement that's banned in countries like Australia? Thats stuff put me in the emergency room last year. It absorbs moisture and swells in your gut. I am very surprised to see you advertising this.

  • DataPro

    4/8/2010 12:43:38 AM |

    OK might have spoke too soon. I've written the company and asked them if their product contains any glucosan and if not, why they would name their product after it.

    Thanks

  • Anonymous

    4/8/2010 2:43:49 AM |

    I would expect you'll hear from them.  It's probably the most damaging publicity their brand will receive this year.

  • Mat

    4/8/2010 7:21:59 AM |

    Dr. Davis

    Thanks for the information.  8000iu of Walgreen's "Finest Natural" D3 gelcaps had raised my HDL's from 23 to 60.  I will test my HDL's ASAP.

    William Faloon at Lef.org likes Metformin to keep appetite under control,  potential disease prevention, anti-aging benefits,  correcting "metabolic syndrome" and anti-cancer effects.
    I am having problems getting under 18% body fat and am wondering if you have had good results?

  • moblogs

    4/8/2010 9:34:28 AM |

    This is interesting. I've been taking high dose Bio-Tech capsules which get to me 56.4ng/ml at 10,000IU, so maybe gel caps of a different brand require a smaller amount (or more)? I guess if 10,000IU of Bio-Tech works for me I'll just stick with that - just hope they don't stop selling vitamin D.
    That said I think Bio-Tech's value is probably fine (and I consume it with yogurt) as my first attempt at supplementation a few years ago was 400IU D2 in gelcap which didn't do much for raising levels at all, albeit also being D2.

  • Dr. William Davis

    4/8/2010 12:10:25 PM |

    Here are some brands that have yielded predictable and consistent increases in vitamin D blood levels:

    Vitamin Shoppe brand
    NOW
    Sam's Club Members Mark
    Nature's Life

    There are surely more, but insufficient numbers of people in my population have been repeatedly tested. Also, all of the above have been GELCAPS. Tablets are not worth it, since they are so inconsistently absorbed. Oddly, the capsules filled with powder are better absorbed, perhaps equivalent to gelcaps.

  • Dr. William Davis

    4/8/2010 12:15:06 PM |

    I forgot to mention Carlson.

    While, in general, I've had good experiences with Carlson preparations, we've seen some inconsistent blood results with their vitamin D. This has applied to about 3 people, so it may be premature to raise a stink. However, if you are taking Carlson, it may be wise to check a blood level.

    I believe the brands at Walmart also seem to work fine, though the high-dose 5000 unit capsule has not been around long enough to allow repeated testing.

  • Adolfo David

    4/8/2010 12:49:53 PM |

    Lou, I take care a lot of my skin, I use everyday all year a UVA-UVB sun protector in all my skin exposed to sun, at least SPF 15-20 in the winter and SPF 30-40 in the spring-summer. I tend to avoid sun rays directly over my skin.

    Taking 3000-4000 IU everyday during 5 months has produced to me 110 ng/ml of vitamin D. It has perfect sense in people like me who are probably vitamin D3 senstive. Also I am young, so I absorb so well vitamin D3.

    If you dont get a blood test I never recommend more than 2000 IU of vitamin D3 daily.

    Lou, I have read a lot about Vitamin D, I am health journalist very concerned about Vitamin D deficiency and I have read many articles and papers of John Cannell and Michael Holick.

    About sun and vitamin D: you produce 10.000 UI of vitamin D with sun exposure if your body needs this amount. If not, sun does not produce more vitamin D. For this reason, you cannot reach a hypervitaminosis level with sun exposure.

    My diet is mainly organic, much of this also paleo, with eggs, fish and some wild fish, some organic cheese... All these have vitamin D3.

  • Kelly A.

    4/8/2010 1:30:29 PM |

    I had great results with the Bio-Tech D3 powdered capsules, 50,000 IU once per week. My D3 last month was at 79.  

    For the previous year and a half I'd been taking D3 emulsion drops with my numbers in the 40s-50s at 4000 IU/day. I think the drop size was too inconsistent.

  • Anonymous

    4/8/2010 2:49:07 PM |

    Thank you for posting this information.  I recently had my levels tested after taking 5000 IU of the Healthy Origins brand D3 gelcaps for 6 months.  Levels had only gone from 37 to 39.  I'll be switching to Vitamin Shoppe or Now brands!

  • Ned Kock

    4/8/2010 3:47:49 PM |

    Or, you can increase your pre-sunburn exposure to sunlight, which yields about 10,000 IU. With no risk of overdosing, due to down-regulatory mechanisms with the "battery is full".

    Dr. Davis, I recall seeing a post in this blog about people over 40 not producing vitamin D from sunlight exposure. Do you still believe that to be the case?

    I ask because empirical research with elderly patients (65 and older) suggests that people in this category (i.e., the elderly) produce only a little less (80 percent or so) than 20 and 30-year olds:

    http://healthcorrelator.blogspot.com/2010/02/vitamin-d-levels-sunlight-age-and.html

  • Tom

    4/8/2010 4:46:20 PM |

    Dr Davis --

    Are there any simple tests for crudely estimating one's level of arterial plaque which can be performed at home?

    Thank you,

    -- Tom Robinson

  • Helena

    4/8/2010 5:09:18 PM |

    Adolfo,
    I am also a little confused about what you are saying, but this might help you since we often measure Vitamin D as micro gram (mcg) in Europe.
    5000IU of Vitamin D is (from what I understand) 125 mcg. (1 mcg = 40IU)

    At the moment I am taking 2 different kinds of Vitamin D, Nature's Bounty gelcaps and one in a liquid form with arginine. I am unsure of the result from each. But last time I checked I was at 76ng/ml.

    I wish there was an easy way to test this at home like the sugar levels in your blood! I hate going to the doc to do this cause they always gives me the lecture that I am eating too much vitamins, and even questions why I do it - they say I should get enough from a normal diet. And when that happens I just want ask 'what the heck is a normal diet' I am pretty sure his and mine idea of a normal diet is different.

    Dr Davis - you should have a test right here on your blog for different Vitamin D products!! I would do it! Tell us what brand we should eat and for how long... test our levels, and then let us switch to another - do another test, and so forth... Each person could probably test 3 different brands in a year, or?? Just a thought.

  • tom

    4/8/2010 6:43:34 PM |

    For those asking about experience with different brands, here are my results:

    Niacin - Neutraceutical Brand (Vitacost online) - 1,000 mg. capsules, 1 daily:  noticable flush, even after 1 year.  Trigs went from 178 to 87.

    Vit. D3 - NOW Brand, 5000 IU gelcap, 1 daily.  Measured D3 in February was 74.

    I'm now going to try the Neutraceutical 10,000 iu capsule, every other day and see what happens with test results.

  • Anonymous

    4/8/2010 9:16:15 PM |

    I am glad to hear that the capsules filled with powder are absorbed effectively.  I mistakenly ordered Vitamin Shoppe Source Naturals D-3 Bioactive Form 2000 IU capsules thinking I was ordering gelcaps.  It turned out to be capsules filled with power.

  • TedHutchinson

    4/9/2010 3:41:48 PM |

    My partner and I have had our Grassrootshealth results back today, We take Country Life 5000iu softgels in MCT oil and use UVB from sunbed in winter and sun, when available, in summer.
    Mine was 64ng/ml and she is 74ng/ml.
    She is weighs less than me.

  • Amy Alkon

    4/9/2010 4:13:20 PM |

    Eades (who led me to your blog through a tweet of this and past tweets) recommended Biotech to me. I tested at 64 taking 5,000 iu and living like a bat (if I leave the house during daylight hours I wear the finest French sunblock, Anthelios #50/60, pour la visage - for the face). Many thanks for your post. Very important, knowing this. Retweeted.

  • Amy Alkon

    4/9/2010 4:13:20 PM |

    Eades (who led me to your blog through a tweet of this and past tweets) recommended Biotech to me. I tested at 64 taking 5,000 iu and living like a bat (if I leave the house during daylight hours I wear the finest French sunblock, Anthelios #50/60, pour la visage - for the face). Many thanks for your post. Very important, knowing this. Retweeted.

  • Dr. William Davis

    4/9/2010 5:06:47 PM |

    Several people commented on sun and vitamin D.

    Despite the media's repeated claim that 10 minutes of sun will provide 10,000 units of vitamin D, this does NOT apply to the majority of us.

    This tends to apply only to young people, generally younger than 30 years old. Over 40, and most (but not all) have lost much of the ability to activate vitamin D in the skin with sun exposure.

    Ignore the "talking heads" who tell you that 10 minutes of sun provides sufficient vitamin D. They probably read about it in a website last evening, then speak as "authorities."

  • Anne

    4/9/2010 6:29:14 PM |

    I am like Adolfo I think. When I took 4,000 IU D3 per day for just four months over the winter a couple of years ago my 25(OH)D level reached 154 ng/ml. I am not young, I am in my mid 50s but I am slim. I cut down to 2,000 IUs per day and my levels have stabilized between 60 and 80 ng/ml. I get tested every four months or so. I do not go in the sun, but I did when I was in France last year and my 25(OH)D level actually fell ! I too eat a Paleo diet with lots of oily fish which contains D and I think this helps keep my 25(OH)D level up despite only taking 2,000 IU D3. I take Carlsons.

  • Ned Kock

    4/10/2010 1:35:41 AM |

    Dr. Davis, I was not referring to anything said by "talking heads", but to research done or reviewed by Reinhold Vieth.

  • dextery

    4/10/2010 3:26:35 AM |

    For the Anonymous person that asked about Niacin...I take the brand name Slo-Niacin I get at Walmart or Sam's Club...2000mg
    per day to raise my HDL.  If I spread the 4 tablets out over a couple of hours I get no flushing.

    HDL went from 42 to 85mg/dL in a matter of 3 months.

    Other "no flush" products for me
    severe flushing.

    TYP uses Slo-Nicain brand.

  • Anonymous

    4/10/2010 4:17:16 AM |

    Anyone have any experience with Sam's Club's Member's Mark brand?

    That's what I take. One 5,000 units capsule every other day (plus there supposed to be 600 IU in the multi I take daily).

    Definitely a good stuff. It is so ridiculously cheap, it's hard to believe it's good. How do I know? First, a test a year ago. Second, I get two weird side effects of taking vitamin D: 1) a low grade acne that I used to get once in a while disappears completely, 2) two small wart-like tumors on my wrist shrink and become very flat, barely visible.
    How do I know it's vitamin D that does it? - Just for kicks, I once stopped taking it for 3 months and both effects reverted.

  • Dr. William Davis

    4/10/2010 12:24:21 PM |

    Here's the response from Nature Made. It's the usual corporate-speak nonsense that says nothing.

    Unfortunately, because the experiences I have are from patients, not my own vitamin D, I do not have the bottles nor lot numbers to supply them. In past, when I have gone to the trouble of getting them, it never came to anything. You provide it, the information goes into the company, you never hear anything more.

    So, given the difficulties, I would suggest that we all avoid Nature Made vitamin D. By the way, their fish oil is not a very good product, either. Nature Made is one of the brands we consistently see stomach upset with.



    Date:     April  9,  2010
    From:     Marissa Reyes, Consumer Affairs Department
    Subject:  Reference #346236

    Dear William Davis, MD:

    We recently received your e-mail regarding Nature Made products.  We regret to hear that the quality standards of our company. [?]

    Our company is called Pharmavite, and we manufacture Nature Made nutritional supplements.  We have been in business since 1971.  We are committed to quality control, and have very high quality standards.  Our Quality Control personnel sample and test all raw materials as they enter our plant, and again assay the finished product, before final packaging.  

    Dietary Supplements are regulated under the FDA through DSHEA (Dietary Supplement Health & Education Act of 1994). The United States Pharmacopoeia (USP) establishes standards for the composition of drugs and nutritional supplements.  This voluntary non governmental organization was set up in 1820 and has officially been recognized by federal law since 1906.  Standards established by USP for products are legally enforceable by the FDA.  At Pharmavite we participate in the USP Dietary Supplement Verification Program (DSVP).  Many of our products have earned the DSVP seal and additional products are currently being evaluated.  Our DSVP certified products will have the DSVP seal on the product label.

    Our Nature Made Vitamin D 400 IU tablets have been reviewed by the USP and bears the DSVP symbol on the label. Although the USP has not reviewed all of the Nature Made Vitamin D supplements, all of our products go through the same rigorous quality testing at Pharmavite. The products which have earned the seal help us to demonstrate the high quality of our products.

    We would like to look into the product(s) your patients have been using. If you could provide the UPC and lot numbers of the product(s), we will be happy to review our records. In addition, if you would like us to test the product(s) that you currently have, we will be pleased to send a prepaid postage mailer so you may return the product(s) to us so that our Quality Control Department can
    examine it. Please let us know if you would like us to send you the prepaid postage mailer.

    We thank you for contacting us and hope that you will continue to use and enjoy Nature Made products with complete confidence.

    Sincerely,
    Marissa Reyes
    Consumer Affairs Coordinator
    Pharmavite, LLC
    MR:346236-10

  • mongander

    4/11/2010 1:10:16 AM |

    I use 5,000 iu/day from WalMart and Sam's Club and my last test result was 79 ng/ml.  I use their fish oil also.

  • GHG

    4/12/2010 7:06:49 PM |

    I have taken the Biotech D3-50, 50,000 IU powder caps for about 3-4 years now.  Have not found a good source of oil caps that strong. I have not been sick in 8 years, first 4 from colloidal silver, and last 4 from D3. My 25-OH-vitaminD has been around 62-64 ng/ml.. take two 50,000 IU per week.  Now, after reading Dr Davis on powder D3 "may have erratic absorbtion", I started chewing up a gelcap with a teaspoon of coconut oil.  6 weeks later, my D3 level went from 62 to 80! on the same dose. Six weeks is probably not enough time to stabilize. I bet I may go to 90-100 when I retest next month.

    Dr Cannell (www.vitamindcouncil.org) reccommends 25 IU per pound of body weight per day long term for starts and then test.  My dose works out to be 14,286 IU/day and my weight is around 300lbs.. pretty close.  No wonder skinny people build up too much D3 in their blood, no fat to store/buffer it.  Also had a couple of warts/moles, and they went away after high dose D3. I think they are caused by viruses and D3 builds up the immune system enough to fight off most viruses
    --ghg

  • H. Ghr

    4/21/2010 6:08:35 PM |

    I had been taking the NOW brand of Niacin. I also tried the "pharma" Niaspan. The impact on my trigs was the same (35% reduction). recently there was a package change here in Canada. Unfortunately the contents lable indicated niacinamide. NOW said it was a lable error and the contents were niacin. We have not seen a new packet yet.

  • kristen

    5/13/2010 9:25:03 PM |

    I began supplementing a total of 4,000 iu of vit d at the beginning of January. (2,000 from my multivitamin and 2,000 from Sam's Club gelcaps).  My vit d level on Feb 1 was 32.

    Upon receiving these results in the middle of February, I began taking 2 drops (4000 iu) of vitacost's brand of vit d (in addition to the 2000 in my multi).  So a total of 6,000 iu per day.  

    I received the results yesterday of my vit d level taken 2 weeks ago-- 94.8!

    My hdl went from 38 in February to 31 two weeks ago.  
    I have also been following a higher fat, lower carb (30-75g/day) diet for the past 2 months.
    My triglycerides, overall cholesterol, and LDL levels have all dropped by 30-40 points.
    I've cut back to 4,000 iu of vit d.

    I can't seem to lose weight, however, even with the low carbs.  I am a T2 diabetic.  (AIC of 6.7 in February).

  • Anonymous

    7/27/2010 12:31:24 PM |

    hello,i live in islamabad,pakistan.last year i ws diagnosed having osteopenia then my dr also asked me for d3 n calcium tests both came very low.since last nov i hav been taking 500IU d3 alongwith osteocare syrup.but after 7,8mnths my result was  still  the same vit d3 being 16 (here in our labs normal range is considered above 30)and calcium came 8.4,(normal range starts from 8.8)please do suggest me something really useful and effective.i want to concieve too but i think might be being so defiecient i am suffering from hormonal imbalance too.my age is 32,i have  a son 4yrs old,am quite slim 5.3height with 110pounds.thnx

  • josephmoss

    8/2/2010 12:23:55 PM |

    Vitamin D3 2000 Iu:

    NOW Vitamin D softgels supply this key vitamin in a highly-absorbable liquid softgel form. Vitamin D is normally obtained from the diet or produced by the skin from the ultraviolet energy of the sun. However, it is not abundant in food. As more people avoid sun exposure, Vitamin D supplementation becomes even more necessary to ensure that your body receives an adequate supply. Vitamin D3 2000 Iu on discount at NutroVita.com.

    For more details please visit:
    http://www.nutrovita.com/32760/now-foods/vitamin-d-3-2-000-iu.htm

  • Trem papers

    8/16/2010 10:23:55 AM |

    You have done a marvelous job by exploring this subject with such an honesty and depth. Thanks for sharing it with us!
    termpapers99@gmail.com

  • Piper

    8/24/2010 7:06:48 AM |

    Dr. Davis, I agree that consumers should be cautious of their medicine intake. I've heard of various over the counter vitamins and food supplements being sold even in stores like Wal-Mart and elsewhere. Although, they have the same content like vitamin D, there can be some problems with the percentage in each capsule. That's why they need to be guarded of the brands that they would patronize.

    Aside from vitamin D, a lot of people today wanted to buy resveratrol too. They consult online resources and friends on where to buy resveratrol. Like in most drugs, experts advise to check the label, before purchasing any product to be sure of its content and effectiveness.

    Thanks for sharing.

  • mavicity

    9/2/2010 12:11:26 PM |

    Gee, makes me want to check my medicine cabinet and the brands I have in there.
    Not because it's well known means it works well.
    Mavic
    vitamin supplement industry

  • Anonymous

    10/21/2010 6:14:07 AM |

    I've been taking Source Naturals 2000 IU vitamin D3.

    My vitamin d is 85 ng/mL.

    Is that too high? when to stop supplementing? I highly recommend this brand for increasing your vitamin D level, and it's pretty easy to get.

    The costco brand was also fine - increased the level as well.

  • TedHutchinson

    10/21/2010 8:21:14 AM |

    25(0H)D levels decline from Sept though to March above latitude 30N. So continuing to take 2000iu/daily will (for you as you appear to be a high responder) maintain your status above the 60~70ng/ml that provides a good reserve of D3.
    Adverse events may be expected above 200ng/ml and you nowhere near that level.
    Most readers require 6000iu/d to attain and maintain 60~70ng/ml through the winter.
    Depending on the amount of time you spend outdoors next year it may be worth considering supplementing  alternate days or with perhaps 3 x 2000iu a week during midsummer if being above 80ng/ml bothers you. Personally I'd only reduce intake if I was repeatedly above 100ng/ml. Some test methods are slightly more variable than others and so your current level may be simply a

  • Anonymous

    2/10/2011 5:19:47 AM |

    i'm taking 2 gms of prescription niaspan but flush very bad.  any tips on limiting this effect?

  • Karamjeet

    6/9/2011 8:38:05 PM |

    I have been taking 2000 IU daily dosage of vitamin D3 for several months with marginal improvement in level - went from 10 to 15.  Visiting this blog-post revelaed thwe reason - I have been using the NatureMade brand.

    Kaiser's doctors recommended 50,000 iu weekly which initially had side effects - but I learnt it was perhaps because I was not taking it with heavy meals.

    I have now been recommemded 5000 iu daily, and I thingk I will go with Carlson or Now brand. But a quick question; Isn't the 50,000 IU prescription dosage prepared by the Kaiser Lab more reliable than any leading brands? I mean - can't we trust the in-the-lab prepared prescription more than the over-the-counter branded pills?

    Would appreciate if someone throes some light on this.

Loading

Calling all super-duper weight losers!






Have you lost at least 1/2 your weight, e.g., 300 lbs down to 150 lbs? If you have, I have a major national magazine editor looking to talk to you.

If you have gone wheat-free and/or followed the dietary advice offered here in The Heart Scan Blog or through the Track Your Plaque program and would be willing to share your story, please let me know by commenting below. While losing half your body weight is not necessarily a requirement for health, it makes an incredibly inspiring story for others.

If we use your story, I will set aside a copy of my soon-to-be-released book, Wheat Belly.

Lp(a): Be patient with fish oil

High-dose omega-3 fatty acids from fish oil has become the number one strategy for reduction of lipoprotein(a), Lp(a), in the Track Your Plaque program for gaining control over coronary plaque and heart disease risk.

The original observations made in Tanzanian Bantus in the Lugalawa Study by Marcovina et al first suggested that higher dietary exposure to fish and perhaps omega-3 fatty acids from fish were associated with 40% lower levels of Lp(a). Interestingly, higher omega-3 exposure was also associated with having the longer apo(a) "tails" on Lp(a) molecules, a characteristic associated with more benign, less aggressive plaque-causing behavior.

Of course, the 600+ fish- consuming Bantus in the study consumed fish over a lifetime, from infancy on up through adulthood. So what is the time course of response if us non-Bantus take higher doses of fish oil to reduce Lp(a)?

We have been applying this approach in the Track Your Plaque program and in my office practice for the past few years. To my surprise, the majority of people taking 6000 mg per day of omega-3 fatty acids, EPA and DHA, will drop Lp(a) after one year.  Some have required two years.  Therefore checking Lp(a) after, say, 3 or 6 months, is nearly useless. (An early response does, however, appear to predict a very vigorous 1-2 year response.)

I'm sure that there is an insightful lesson to be learned from the incredibly slow response, but I don't currently know what it is.  But this strategy has become so powerful, despite its slow nature, that it has allowed many people to back down on niacin.

Baby your pancreas

There it is, sitting quietly tucked under your diaphragm, nestled beneath layers of stomach and intestines, doing its job of monitoring blood sugar, producing insulin, and secreting the digestive enzymes that allow you to convert a fried egg, tomato, or dill pickle into the components that compose you.

But, if you've lived the life of most Americans, your pancreas has had a hard life. Starting as a child, it was forced into the equivalent of hard labor by your eating carbohydrate-rich foods like Lucky Charms, Cocoa Puffs, Hoho's, Ding Dongs, Scooter Pies, and macaroni and cheese. Into adolescent years and college, it was whipped into subservient labor with pizza, beer, pretzels, and ramen noodles. As an adult, the USDA, Surgeon General's office and other assorted purveyors of nutritional advice urged us to cut our fat, cholesterol, and eat more "healthy whole grains"; you complied, exposing your overworked pancreas to keep up its relentless work pace, spewing out insulin to accommodate the endless flow of carbohydrate-rich foods.

So here we are, middle aged or so, with pancreases that are beaten, worn, hobbling around with a walker, heaving and gasping due to having lost 50% or more of its insulin-producing beta cells. If continued to be forced to work overtime, it will fail, breathing its last breath as you and your doctor come to its rescue with metformin, Actos, Januvia, shots of Byetta, and eventually insulin, all aimed at corralling the blood sugar that your failed pancreas was meant to contain.

What if you don't want to rescue your flagging pancreas with drugs? What if you want to salvage your poor, wrinkled, exhausted pancreas, eaking out whatever is left out of the few beta cells you have left?

Well, then, baby your pancreas. If this were a car with 90,000 miles on it, but you want it to last 100,000, then change the oil frequently, keep it tuned, and otherwise baby your car, not subjecting it to extremes and neglect to accelerate its demise. Same with your pancreas: Allow it to rest, not subjecting it to the extremes of insulin production required by carbohydrate consumption. Don't expose it to foods like wheat flour, cornstarch, oats, rice starch, potatoes, and sucrose that demand overtime and hard labor out of your poor pancreas. Go after the foods that allow your pancreas to sleep through a meal like eggs, spinach, cucumbers, olive oil, and walnuts. Give your pancreas a nice back massage and steer clear of "healthy whole grains," the nutritional equivalent of a 26-mile marathon. Pay your pancreas a compliment or two and allow it to have occasional vacations with a brief fast.

Bread equals sugar

Bread, gluten-free or gluten-containing, in terms of carbohydrate content, is equivalent to sugar.

Two slices of store-bought whole grain bread, such as the gluten-free bread I discussed in my last post, equals 5- 6 teaspoons of table sugar:








 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Some breads can contain up to twice this quantity, i.e., 10-12 teaspoons equivalent readily-digestible carbohydrate.

Gluten-free carbohydrate mania

Here's a typical gluten-free product, a whole grain bread mix. "Whole grain," of course, suggests high-fiber, high nutrient composition, and health.



 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What's it made of? Here's the ingredient list:
Cornstarch, Tapioca Starch, Whole Grain Sorghum Flour, Whole Grain Teff Flour, Whole Grain Amaranth Flour, Soy Fiber, Xanthan Gum, Soy Protein, Natural Cocoa and Ascorbic Acid

In other words, carbohydrate, carbohydrate, carbohydrate, carbohydrate and some other stuff. It means that a sandwich with two slices of bread provides around 42 grams net carbohydrates, enough to send your blood sugar skyward, not to mention trigger visceral fat formation, glycation, small LDL particles and triglycerides.

Take a look at the ingredients and nutrition facts on the label of any number of gluten-free products and you will see the same thing. Many also have proud low-fat claims.

This is how far wrong the gluten-free world has drifted: Trade the lack of gluten for a host of unhealthy effects.

Gluten-free is going DOWN

The majority of gluten-free foods are junk foods.

People with celiac disease experience intestinal destruction and a multitude of other inflammatory conditions due to an immune response gone haywire. The disease  is debilitating and can be fatal unless all gliadin/gluten sources are eliminated, such as wheat, barley, and rye.

A gluten-free food industry to provide foods minus gliadin/gluten has emerged, now large enough to become an important economic force. Even some Big Food companies are getting into the act, like Kraft, that now lists foods they consider gluten-free.

So we have gluten-free breads, cupcakes, scones, pretzels, breakfast cereals, crackers, bagels, muffins, pancake mixes and on and on. All are made with ingredients like brown rice flour, cornstarch, tapioca starch, and potato starch. Occasionally, they are made with amaranth, teff, or quinoa, other less popular, but gluten-free, grains.

Problem: These gluten-free ingredients, while lacking gliadin and gluten, make you fat and diabetic. They increase visceral fat, cause blood sugar to skyrocket higher than nearly all other foods (even higher than wheat, which is already pretty bad), trigger formation of small LDL and triglycerides, and are responsible for exaggerated postprandial (after-eating) lipoprotein distortions. They cause heart disease, cataracts, arthritis, and a wide range of other conditions, all driven by the extreme levels of glycation they generate.

Eliminating all things wheat from the diet is one of the most powerful health strategies I have ever witnessed. But replacing lost wheat with manufactured gluten-free foods is little better than replacing your poppyseed muffin with a bowl of jelly beans.

Whenever we've relied on the food industry to supply a solution, they've managed to bungle it. Saturated fat was replaced with hydrogenated fat and polyunsaturates; sucrose replaced with high-fructose corn syrup. Now, they are replacing wheat gluten-containing foods with junk carbohydrates.

For this reason, I am bringing out a line of recipes and foods that will be wheat gliadin/gluten-free, do NOT contain the junk carbohydrates that gluten-free foods are made of, and are genuinely healthy. They are tasty, to boot.

The gluten-free industry needs to smarten up. Having a following that is free of cramps and diarrhea but are obese, diabetic, and hobbling on arthritic knees and hips is good for nobody.

Medicine ain't what it used to be

The practice of medicine ain't what it used to be.

For instance:

White coats are out-of-date--Not only do they serve as filthy reservoirs of microorganisms (since they hang unwashed after repeated use week after week), they only serve to distance the practitioner from the patient, an outdated notion that should join electroshock therapy to treat homosexuality and other "disorders" in the museum of outdated medical practices.

Normal cholesterol panel . . . no heart disease?

I often hear this comment: "I have a normal cholesterol panel. So I have low risk for heart disease, right?"

While there's a germ of truth in the statement, there are many exceptions. Having "normal" cholesterol values is far from a guarantee that you won't drop over at your daughter's wedding or find yourself lying on a gurney at your nearest profit-center-for-health, aka hospital, heading for the cath lab.

Statistically, large populations do indeed show fewer heart attacks at the lower end of the curve for low total and  LDL cholesterol and the higher end of HDL. But that's on a population basis. When applied to a specific individual, population observations can fall apart. Heart attack can occur at the low risk end of the curve; no heart attack can occur at the high risk end of the curve.

First of all, to me a "normal" lipid panel is not adhering to the lax notion of "normal" specified in the lab's "reference range" drawn from population observations. Most labs, for instance, specify that an HDL cholesterol of 40 mg/dl or more and triglycerides of 150 mg/dl or less are in the normal ranges. However, heart disease can readily occur with normal values of, say, an HDL of 48 mg/dl and triglycerides of 125 mg/dl, both of which allow substantial small oxidation-prone LDL particles to develop. So "normal" may not be ideal or desirable. Look at any study comparing people with heart disease vs. those without, for instance: Typical HDLs in people with heart attacks are around 46 mg/dl, while HDLs in people without heart attacks typically average 48 mg/dl--there is nearly perfect overlap in the distribution curves.

There are also causes for heart disease that are not revealed by the lipid values. Lipoprotein(a), or Lp(a), is among the most important exceptions: You can have a heart attack, stroke, three stents or bypass surgery at age 40 even with spectacular lipid values if you have this genetically-determined condition. And it's not rare, since 11% of the population express it. How about people with the apo E2 genetic variation? These people tend to have normal fasting cholesterol values (if they have only one copy of E2, not two) but have extravagant abnormalities after they eat that contribute to risk. You won't know this from a standard cholesterol panel.

Vitamin D deficiency can be suggested by low HDL and omega-3 fatty acid deficiency suggested by higher triglycerides, but deficiencies of both can exist in severe degrees even with reasonably favorable ranges for both lipid values. Despite the recent inane comments by the Institute of Medicine committee, from what I've witnessed from replacing vitamin D to achieve serum 25-hydroxy vitamin D levels of 60-70 ng/ml, vitamin D deficiency is among the most powerful and correctable causes of heart disease I've ever seen. And, while greater quantities of omega-3 fatty acids from fish oil are associated with lower triglycerides, they are even better at reducing postprandial phenomena, i.e., the after-eating flood of lipoproteins like VLDL and chylomicron remnants, that underlie formation of much atherosclerotic plaque--but not revealed by fasting lipids.

I view standard cholesterol panels as the 1963 version of heart disease prediction. We've come a long way since then and we now have far better tools for prediction of heart attack. Yet the majority of physicians and the public still follow the outdated notion that a cholesterol panel is sufficient to predict your heart's future. Nostalgic, quaint perhaps, but as outdated as transistor radios and prime time acts on the Ed Sullivan show.

 

Idiot farm

The notion of genetic modification of foods and livestock is a contentious issue. The purposeful insertion or deletion of a gene into a plant or animal's genome to yield specific traits, such as herbicide resistance, nutritional composition, or size, prompted the Codex Alimentarius Commission, an international effort to regulate the safety of foods, to issue guidelines concerning genetically-modified foods.

The committee is aware of the concept of unintended effects, i.e., effects that were not part of the original gene insertion or deletion design. In their report, last updated in 2009, they state that:

Unintended effects can result from the random insertion of DNA sequences into the plant genome, which may cause disruption or silencing of existing genes, activation of silent genes, or modifications in the expression of existing genes. Unintended effects may also result in the formation of new or changed patterns of metabolites. For example, the expression of enzymes at high levels may give rise to secondary biochemical effects or changes in the regulation of metabolic pathways and/or altered levels of metabolites.

They make the point that food crops generated using techniques without genetic modification are released into the food supply without safety testing:

New varieties of corn, soybean, potatoes and other common food plants are evaluated by breeders for agronomic and phenotypic characteristics, but generally, foods derived from such new plant varieties are not subjected to the rigorous and extensive food safety testing procedures, including studies in animals, that are typical of chemicals, such as food additives or pesticide residues, that may be present in food.

In other words, conventional plant breeding techniques, such as hybridization, backcrossing, and introgression, practices that include crossing parental plants with their progeny over and over again or crossing a plant with an unrelated plant, yield unique plants that are not subject to any regulation. This means that unintended effects that arise are often not identified or tested. Plant geneticists know that, when one plant is crossed with another, approximately 5% of the genes in the offspring are unique to that plant and not present in either parent. It means that offspring may express new characteristics, such as unique gliadin or gluten proteins in wheat, not expressed in either parent and with new immunological potential in consuming humans.

Dr. James Maryanski, the FDA's Biotechnology Coordinator, stated during Congressional testimony in 1999 that:

The new gene splicing techniques are being used to achieve many of the same goals and improvements that plant breeders have sought through conventional methods. Today's techniques are different from their predecessors in two significant ways. First, they can be used with greater precision and allow for more complete characterization and, therefore, greater predictability about the qualities of the new variety. These techniques give scientists the ability to isolate genes and to introduce new traits into foods without simultaneously introducing many other undesirable traits, as may occur with traditional breeding. [Emphasis mine.]

Efforts by the Codex Alimentarius and FDA are meant to control the introduction and specify safety testing procedures for genetically modified foods. But both organizations have publicly stated that there is another larger problem that has not been addressed that predates genetic modification. In other words, conventional methods like hybridization techniques, the crossing of different strains of a crop or crossing two dissimilar plants (e.g., wheat with a wild grass) have been practiced for decades before genetic modification became possible. And it is still going on.

In other words, the potential hazards of hybridization, often taken to extremes, have essentially been ignored. Hybridized plants are introduced into the food supply with no question of human safety. While hybridization can yield what appear to be benign foods, such as the tangelo, a hybrid of tangerines and grapefruit, it can also yield plants containing extensive unintended effects. It means that unique immunological sequences can be generated. It might be a unique gliadin sequence in wheat or a unique lectin sequence in beans. None are tested prior to selling to humans. So the world frets over the potential dangers of genetic modification while, all along, the much larger hazard of hybridization techniques have been--and still are--going on.

Imagine we applied the hybridization techniques applied by plant geneticists to humans, mating an uncle with his niece, then having the uncle mate again with the offspring, repeating it over and over until some trait was fully expressed. Such extensive inbreeding was practiced in the 19th century German village of Dilsberg, what Mark Twain described as "a thriving and diligent idiot factory."

Eat triglycerides

Dietary fats, from olive oil to cocoa butter to beef tallow, are made of triglycerides.

Triglycerides are simply three ("tri-") fatty acids attached to a glycerol backbone. Glycerol is a simple 3-carbon molecule that readily binds fatty acids. Fatty acids, of course, can be saturated, polyunsaturated, and monounsaturated.

Once ingested, the action of the pancreatic enzyme, pancreatic lipase, along with bile acids secreted by the gallbladder, remove triglycerides from glycerol. Triglycerides pass through the intestinal wall and are "repackaged" into large complex triglyceride-rich (about 90% triglycerides) molecules called chylomicrons, which then pass into the lymphatic system, then to the bloodstream. The liver takes up chylomicrons, removes triglycerides which are then repackaged into triglyceride-rich very low-density lipoproteins (VLDL).

So eating triglycerides increases blood levels of triglycerides, repackaged as chylomicrons and VLDL.

Many physicians are frightened of dietary triglycerides, i.e, fats, for fear it will increase blood levels of triglycerides. It's true: Consuming triglycerides does indeed increase blood levels of triglycerides--but only a little bit. Following a fat-rich meal of, say, a 3-egg omelet with 2 tablespoons of olive oil and 2 oz whole milk mozzarella cheese (total 55 grams triglycerides), blood triglycerides will increase modestly. A typical response would be an increase from 60 mg/dl to 80 mg/dl--an increase, but quite small.

Counterintuitively, it's the foods that convert to triglycerides in the liver that send triglycerides up, not 20 mg/dl, but 200, 400, or 1000 mg/dl or more. What foods convert to triglycerides in the liver? Carbohydrates.

After swallowing a piece of multigrain bread, for instance, carbohydrates are released by salivary and gastric amylase, yielding glucose molecules. Glucose is rapidly absorbed through the intestinal tract and into the liver. The liver is magnificently efficient at storing carbohydrate calories by converting them to the body's principal currency of energy, triglycerides, via the process of de novo lipogenesis, the alchemy of converting glucose into triglycerides for storage. The effect is not immediate; it may require many hours for the liver to do its thing, increasing blood triglycerides many hours after the carbohydrate meal.

This explains why people who follow low-fat diets typically have high triglyceride levels--despite limited ingestion of triglycerides. When I cut my calories from fat to 10% or less--a very strict low-fat diet--my triglycerides are 350 mg/dl. When I slash my carbohydrates to 40-50 grams per day but ingest unlimited triglycerides like olive oil, raw nuts, whole milk cheese, fish oil and fish, etc., my triglycerides are 50 mg/dl.

Don't be afraid of triglycerides. But be very careful with the foods that convert to triglycerides: carbohydrates.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Cureality | Real People Seeking Real Cures

Who lost weight?

The results of the latest Heart Scan Blog poll are in.


I went wheat-free and I . . .


Gained weight 6 (3%)

Lost no weight 41 (21%)

Lost less than 10 lbs 28 (14%)

Lost more than 10 lbs 34 (17%)

Lost more than 20 lbs 22 (11%)

Lost more than 30 lbs 28 (14%)

I'm still losing weight! 30 (15%)

(189 respondents)


This means that, by eliminating wheat:

24% had no success

31% had moderate success (less than 10 lbs or more than 10 lbs)

25% had extravagant results with 20 lbs or more lost


It would be interesting to know where along the weight-loss spectrum the last category, "I'm still losing weight," group falls. (Anyone with a good story please speak up!)

I believe we can conclude from this casual exercise that, as a simple strategy, wheat elimination is surprisingly effective.

Why would 3% gain weight? Well, without knowing the details, there are several possible explanations:

1) Weight gain developed through other foods. For instance, I've had people eliminate wheat only to replace it with fattening gluten-free alternatives. Remember: wheat-free is not gluten-free. Others load up on the wrong foods, e.g., Craisins and other dried fruit; overdo dairy; or snack on wheat-free but unhealthy foods like ice cream and chips.

2) Too much alcohol

3) Hypothyroidism--A lot more common than you'd think. In fact, this has been the case with a majority of people who have done everything right, yet either failed to lose weight or gained weight.

Those are the biggies.

I'd like to hear your personal stories of wheat elimination--the ups and downs, your success or failure, how you felt during the process, how easy or difficult, your eventual results. Just post them as a response to this blog post.

A niacin primer

A reader of Life Extension reminded me of a piece I wrote about niacin a couple of years back.

Anyone desiring a primer on how and why to use niacin to correct lipid and lipoprotein patterns might find this useful.

While some people, no matter what they do, cannot tolerate niacin (about 10% of people), many others enjoy spectacular benefits.


Q: I recently had a cholesterol profile blood test and learned that I may be at risk of heart disease because my levels of beneficial HDL (high-density lipoprotein) are too low. I read that niacin could help increase my HDL, but my doctor said niacin is dangerous. Whom should I believe?

A: Your doctor would be right—if we were still living in 1985. Since then, however, we have learned how to use niacin (vitamin B3) safely and effectively. Unfortunately, many physicians have not yet caught up, or are still trapped by the idea that cholesterol-lowering statin drugs are the only way to decrease cardiovascular disease risk. I have personally prescribed niacin for thousands of patients as part of our program to reverse coronary disease. In fact, niacin is the closest thing we have available to a perfect treatment that corrects most of the causes of coronary heart disease.

Continued here.

What would life be like . . . ?

What if coronary heart disease could be prevented--no eliminated--applying methods that were accessible, easy, and cheap?

What if coronary heart disease and, thereby, angina, heart attack, sudden cardiac death, ventricular tachycardia, heart failure, and the cerebrovascular equivalent, stroke, could be eliminated using readily available tools available to virtually everyone in the U.S.? And, over a year, it cost less than a once-a-week latte at Starbucks?

How would the healthcare landscape change? What would become of hospitals, manufacturers of the billions of dollars of hospital equipment necessary to supply the cardiovascular hospital industry (e.g., stent manufacturers, catheter manufacturers, defibrillator and pacemaker manufacturers, pharmaceutical manufacturers who no longer have to produce the volume of antiplatelet agents, inotropic drugs, antiarrhythmic agents, etc.)?

How would our lives change? What would the end of life look like if people stopped dying of heart attack, sudden cardiac death, congestive heart failure at age 55, 65, or 75, but lived out their lives to die of something unrelated?

What if the solution had little or nothing to do with drugs but evolved from simple nutritional strategies, supplements meant to correct the deficiencies that accompany modern lifestyles, and a few unique strategies targeted towards the genetic predispositions that lead to heart disease?

What if all this were possible at a cost of a few hundred dollars per year?

It would certainly be a cataclysmic change. Hospitals would shrink to a small remnant of their current gargantuan, dozens-per-city presence. The need for hospital staff would be slashed by over half. The rare cardiologist would tend to congenital heart disease sufferers and other unusual forms of heart disease and he or she might have a colleague or two in all of a major city.

Healthcare costs would plummet, no longer having to sustain the enormous cardiovascular healthcare machine of hospitals, staff, industry, and long-term care. Health insurance, private or public, would drop by 50%.

It would free up nearly a trillion dollars that could be redirected towards other pursuits, like schools and research. Extraordinary leaps forward in quality of life and science would emerge, given that magnitude of funding.

It's not as grand a thought experiment as Alan Weisman's The World Without Us, in which he imagines what the world would be like without humans altogether.

How long would it take to recover lost ground and restore Eden to the way it must have gleamed and smelled the day before Adam, or Homo habilis, appeared? Could nature ever obliterate all our traces? How would it undo our monumental cities and public works, and reduce our myriad plastics and toxic synthetics back to benign, basic elements?

But I believe this thought experiment--what would life be like without heart disease because it was eliminated using inexpensive tools-- is more plausible, more likely to occur. In fact, it has already begun to occur.

See those vines growing up the side of the hospital?

Are jelly beans heart healthy?

Total Fat

3 g or less

Less than 6.5 g





Saturated Fat



1 g or less

1 g or less





Cholesterol

20 mg or less

20 mg or less





Sodium

480 mg or less per RACC* & labeled serving

480 mg or less per RACC* & labeled serving





Nutrients

Contain 10 percent or more of the daily value of 1 of 6 nutrients; vitamin A, vitamin C, iron, calcium, protein or dietary fiber



Contain 10 percent or more of the daily value of 1of 6 nutrients; vitamin A, vitamin C, iron, calcium, protein or dietary fiber





Trans fat

Less than 0.5 g per RACC* and labeled serving



Less than 0.5 g per RACC* and labeled serving





Whole Grain

N/A



51 percent by weight/RACC*







Minimum Dietary Fiber



N/A

1.7 g/RACC of 30 g

2.5 g/RACC of 45 g

2.8 g/RACC of 50 g

3.0 g/RACC of 55 g





(RACC=Reference Amount Customarily Consumed)

Thyroid correction: The woeful prevailing standard

Rich has been taking Synthroid or levothyroxine for many years.

When Rich came to my office for continuing management 10 years after his bypass surgery, I checked his thyroid panel:

TSH 7.44 uIU/L

Free T4 1.88 ng/dl (Ref range 0.80-1.90 ng/dl)

Free T3 2.0 pg/ml (Ref range 2.3-4.2 pg/ml)


Rich's thyroid hormone distortions--high TSH, low T3--are sufficient to account for a tripling of heart attack risk long-term.

As Richs' thyroid was being managed by his primary care physician, I notified this doctor of Rich's panel. He therefore increased Rich's levothyroxine from 75 mcg per day to 100 mcg per day. Another thyroid panel several months later showed:

TSH 0.98 uIU/L

Free T4 2.38 ng/dl

Free T3 2.0 pg/ml



As you would expect, increasing the intake of the T4 hormone (levothyroxine) increased free T4 and suppressed TSH.

But what about T3? It's unchanged.

Indeed, Rich says that he feels no better and, in fact, wakes up in the morning foggy and requires a nap in the afternoon.

In my experience, the majority (approximately 70%, but not 100%) experience subjective improvement when T3 is added in some form and the free T3 level is increased. While the data (summarized here) are conflicted on whether there is objective benefit to T3 management and supplementation, there seems to be a poorly-quantified subjective improvement.

Rich's increased levothyroxine dose decreased (calculated) LDL cholesterol by 10 mg/dl. Based on my experience, I'll bet that his lipid panel would likely be further improved with T3 correction.

What I find incredible is the absolutely rabid resistance waged by primary care physicians and endocrinologists against this notion of T3, mostly due to fears of the remote likelihood of inducing atrial fibrillation and osteoporosis, while they are ready to prescribe lifelong statin drugs without a moment's hesitation.

Launch of new Track Your Plaque newsletter: Cardiac Confidential

Track Your Plaque has just launched a new version of our newsletter. We call it Cardiac Confidential.

Cardiac Confidential is meant to be a no-holds-barred, go-for-the-throat exposé of the world of heart disease. We will expose the dishonest, reveal what we view as the underlying truth. We'll even have an occasional "undercover" report of what goes on in hospitals and the go-for-the-money world of heart procedures.

Read the first issue here (open to everyone) in which "Laurie" describes her encounter with a sleazy, profiteering cardiologist. She survives, but not without paying a dear price.

Thyroid: Be a perfectionist

If you'd like to reduce LDL cholesterol with nearly as much power as a statin drug, think thyroid.

When thyroid is corrected to ideal levels, LDL cholesterol drops 20, 30, 40 mg/dl or more, depending on how poor thyroid function and how high LDL are at the start. The poorer the thyroid function (the higher the TSH or the lower the T3 and T4) and the higher the LDL cholesterol, the more LDL drops with thyroid correction.

(For those of you minding LDL particle size, such as Track Your Plaque Members, the "dominant" LDL species will drop: If you are genetic small LDL, small LDL will drop. If you have mostly large LDL because of being wheat-free and sugar-free, then large LDL will drop.)

One of the problems is that many healthcare providers blindly follow what the laboratory says is "normal" or the "reference range," which is usually nothing more than a population average (actually the mean +/- 2 standard deviations, a common method of developing references ranges). In other words, a substantial degree of low thyroid function, or hypothyroidism, can be present when your doctor adheres to the reference range provided by the laboratory.

What does it mean to achieve ideal thyroid status? My list includes:

--Normal oral temperature of 97.3 F first upon arising. (The thyroid is the body's thermoregulatory organ.)
--TSH 1.0 mIU/L or less
--Free T3 upper half "normal" range
--Free T4 upper half "normal" range
--You feel good: mental clarity, energy, upbeat mood. You lose weight when you try.

Iodine replacement should be part of any thyroid health effort. Iodine is not an optional trace mineral, no more than vitamin C is optional (else your teeth fall out). The only dangers to iodine replacement are to those who have been starved of iodine for many years; increase iodine and the thyroid can over-respond. I've seen this happen in 2 of the last 300 people who have supplemented iodine.

In my view, neglecting T3 replacement is absurd. While it is not clear to me why many otherwise healthy people have low T3 at the low range of "normal" or even in the below-normal range, people feel better and have better health--faster weight loss, reduced LDL, reduced triglycerides, they are happier and enjoy more energy--when T3 is increased to the upper half of the reference range. (Crucial question: Why is the 5'-deiodinase enzyme that converts T4 to T3 inhibited, resulting in reduced free T3? What is in our diets or environment that is exerting this effect? I don't have answer, but we sorely need one.)

It pays to be a perfectionist when it comes to thyroid. Not only do you feel better, but LDL cholesterol can drop with a statin-like magnitude, but with none of the adverse effects.

If interested, Track Your Plaque offers fingerstick blood spot testing that you can perform in your own home. Each test kit will test for: TSH, free T3, free T4, along with a thyroid peroxidase antibody (a marker for Hashimoto's thyroiditis, an autoimmune inflammatory condition of the thyroid).

Nutrition Syllogism

What do you think of these chains of logic?

Cyanide is a potent lethal poison; carbon monoxide is a less lethal poison.
Therefore: plenty of carbon monoxide is good.




Having uterine cancer is a bad thing. Having uterine fibroids is a less bad thing.
Therefore: plenty of uterine fibroids are good.



These are obvious examples of seriously flawed logic. Students of logic and philosophy will recognize the above erroneous sequences as examples of the twisted arguments often used to persuade an argumentative opponent of the logic of a premise. As long ago as 335 B.C., Greek philosopher, Aristotle, recognized the pitfalls of thinking in such arguments. You think we’d know better by now.

Try this one:

White enriched flour is a bad for health; whole grains are less bad for health.
Therefore: plenty of whole grains are good for health.



Ouch!

In the 1960s, we all ate hot dogs on white buns, white flour Wonder Bread® sandwiches, Mom made cookies and cupcakes with white flour. Then, during the 1970s and 1980s, clinical studies were performed demonstrating that whole wheat and whole grains reduced colon cancer, high blood pressure, diabetes, and heart disease compared to white flour. In other words, add back fiber and B vitamins and health benefits develop: No argument here.

Therefore: whole grains must be good for health. Further, lots of whole grains?unlimited quantities of whole grains many times per day, every day?must be even better. Even the USDA says so on their nutrition pyramid, with 8-11 servings of grains per day, 4 of which should be whole grains, at the widest portion of the pyramid.

But what happens when you follow this logic through and fill your diet with whole grains?

Look around you and it’s easy to see: Appetite increases, people become obese, blood sugar increases, diabetes develops, HDL cholesterol plummets, triglycerides skyrocket, inflammatory patterns (e.g., c-reactive protein, or CRP) increase, small LDL (the number one cause for heart disease in the obese U.S.!) shoots through the roof.

I would no more fill my diet with “healthy whole grains” than I would close my garage door with the car running.

Is pomegranate juice healthy?


Pomegranate juice, 8 oz:

Sugars, total 31.50 g

Sucrose 0.00 g

Glucose (dextrose) 15.64 g

Fructose 15.86 g




In your quest to increase the flavonoids in your diet, do you overexpose yourself to fructose?

Remember: Fructose increases LDL cholesterol, apoprotein B, small LDL, triglycerides, and substantially increases deposition of visceral fat (fructose belly?). How about a slice of whole grain bread with that glass of pomegranate juice? The Heart Association says it's all low-fat!


(Coming on the Track Your Plaque website: A full in-depth Special Report on fructose in all its glorious forms and whether this is truly an issue for your health. Fructose tables and the scientific data to establish a safe "threshold" value will be included.)

Image courtesy Wikipedia

Honeydew melon


Honeydew melon:

Sugars, total 51.97 g

Sucrose 15.87 g

Glucose 17.15 g

Fructose 18.94 g

Because sucrose is half fructose (the other half is glucose), there are approximately 26 grams of fructose per one-half honeydew melon.



Image courtesy Wikipedia