Is Jimmy still eating eggs for every meal in order to lose weight?

Dr. Davis, How true is this statement?
"before resorting to muscle tissue, the body will burn fat. If you have no body fat, (or even very little of it), then eating carbohydrates is a good idea. If there is fat to burn, it will be burned first. Our entire body runs on sugar, but you can turn fat into sugar and sugar into fat, depending on the current needs of the body"

No - he is off the eggs, but somewhere up around 282lbs.  Jimmy is indeed a great connector and does well with podcasts and interviews but his own diet - and as a consequence his weight - remains a problem.  He remains obese and as such is not a great advert for low carb.

THANKS for the plug for my new "Fan Club" associated with my podcast, Dr. Davis.  I certainly hope to indeed connect fans of "The Livin' La Vida Low-Carb Show" with more of the behind-the-scenes happenings to get them involved in the interview process, share transcripts of past episodes, and even let them hear sneak peak audio of not-yet-aired podcasts.  I'm excited to make this little something extra available to those who want more.

As for the the anonymous criticism about my weight, yes I weigh more than I would like to at this moment.  This is not a secret and I've been quite candid about this publicly because there are many who face the same frustrations of doing everything right and yet seeing very little progress on the scale.  While I'm seeking to rectify those issues by lowering my calories to 1800/daily and engaging in regular exercise, the fact remains my health is immaculate.

High HDL, low triglycerides, low percentage of Small LDL particles, stable blood sugar, normal blood pressure, a heart scan score of ZERO, abundant energy and so much more.  While the focus tends to be on weight as the key measurement in someone being healthy, I think that's as shortsighted as telling someone a low-fat, high-carb diet is the only way to lose weight and be healthy.  Again, I'd like to weigh less than I do now but it's difficult to argue that the way I'm eating isn't making me healthier than when I weighed 400+ pounds in 2004 on three prescription medications.

Re: Jimmy's weight - it's Jimmy's business!  The guy does a massive amount of work, as highlighted by Dr Davis' post, promoting the many and varied strains of low carb eating, and he does so because he has first-hand experience of the benefits of doing so.  Sure HE might not want to be where HE wants to be with HIS weight, but it isn't like he is ht eonly guy pushing the low carb mantra and peddling snack oil is it?

Jimmy, I'd have no doubt you could get to where you wanted to be (or closer to it at least), if you gave up on the stuff that you do.  But the rest of us would be poorer for it.  A run a very small and very much part-time blog in this field and if I put in the amount of time Jimmy does with all his work, I doubt I would be able to maintain the other aspects of my life that I enjoy so much.  It is a sacrifice Jimmy makes.

One last thing, and Jimmy may disagree with me on this... At one point in time, Jimmy's lifestyle lead him down the obesity pathway.  One aspect of this, and one that I try to promote in my line of work, is if you go down that road, there is no guarantee you can come back out of it.  Things like the consumption of industrial seed oils can lead to fat cell hypertrophy & hyperplasia... size AND number of fat cells increase.  Stay in this state long enough, and there is high chance you will never fully undo the damage done.  You can certainly imporve your health biomarkers as Jimmy has obviously done.  But you might not necessarily be able to return to an ultrathin body, no matter how much you desire it.  There is a degree of ingorance from people who just automatically assume that because one is eating low carb, they should look like a Crossfitter all the time and failure to do so means that low carbing is a failure also.

Well said Jamie!  I totally agree.

Nothing measures up when compared to perfection. It's better to compare real-life choices and their likely consequences whenever possible.

If someone was 400+ pounds and on medications on their old diet, and 120 pounds lighter, energetic and off the medications on a different diet, the different diet must have some benefits. I prefer to think in terms of progress, not perfection.

Jimmy, Jamie and Lori


AMEN !!!!


Sue

I know Jimmy personally and he is a sincere, hard-working nice guy.

We are all learning new lessons in nutrition and how to manage diet, navigating all the landmines in the commercial food that we are sold.

Jimmy's unquestioned role in this has been to facilitate the discussion, bringing differing viewpoints from interesting people like Gary Taubes and Jeff Volek.

Personally, I am grateful that we have someone like Jimmy Moore who acts as amiable host to our discussions.

i love Jimmy's podcasts. In fact i subscribe via itunes. He never fails to have intelligent guests. Especially in the last year or two he has had many paleo people which is great. I like to see the focus on good-health-all-around entering into his lowcarb world, rather than the sole goal of weightloss that i feel many atkinsers etc have. Anyway, he's doing a great job. and he has been for quite some time now. His weight? Who cares. Jimmy, dont sweat it! you've lost all that, your health numbers look great and you are leading a life that benefits many. I think you can be satisfied.

Train wreck/drama queen. Needs to lift free weights or join a cross fit gym…quit making excuses..

"Train wreck/drama queen...quit making excuses..."

You got that right!

Thank you so much Jimmy for the help you provide to all of us.
I am an uruguayan and follow your podcast from Uruguay LA.
Thanks again.
Jose.

If not for Jimmy Moore I would never have heard of Dr Davis, Mark Sisson, Stephan Guyenet, Robb Wolf, Dr Briffa, Fred Hahn and so many others.  I would never in a million years have thought to include strength training in my lifestyle.  I wouldn't have learned about the impact of sleep on health and mood.  Without the information Jimmy Moore brought into my life, I'd still be Vitamin D deficient, undermuscled, underslept and unhealthy.  Instead I've grown strength and muscle, ditched lifelong allergies and have had only one cold in the last three years.  (I work in healthcare and get coughed/sneezed upon constantly, so this is no insignificant fact.)

Jimmy is humble, funny, candid and generous.  Sure, we'd all like to include "stunning physique" in our list of personal qualities, but some of us just have to be satisfied with excellent health and an ongoing commitment to pursue optimal body composition.

For me, Jimmy Moore is a treasure.

Kudos to Jimmy for all his good work. I completely agree with Jamie above.

Anonymous trolls, just go away, or at least show a little spine and put your name.

Tony K

I stopped eating wheat when I read Gary Taubes's book Good Calories, Bad Calories.  However, I haven't noticed any changes.  My blood sugar is still a little high, and my weight is about the same.  Could you cite a study that shows that blood sugar and weight often go down when you stop eating wheat.

Yes, yes!  Great post!  However, I think there is a huge mssing link here, and that is the source of wheat.  Sure, wheat (or gluten in many cases) causes problems.  I totally agree.  But my theory is that people who drop weight and improve their health by eliminating wheat were not eating the ocassional slice of home-made sourdough.  Nope.  I'd be willing to bet that most of the "wheat" elimination that leads to a better lipid profile and decreased body fat is from the elimination of packaged and processed foods like cereals, bars, crackers, store breads and buns, and other snack foods.

Avoiding wheat due to a sensitivity or allergy is one thing.  But gorging oneself on processed foods and so-called healthy whole grain products only to later marvel at the results of a "wheat" elimination diet is a bit ridiculous.

Eat from the earth.  And if for you that means no wheat, then great!  Just don't go eating all that "gluten free" stuff.  One can still eat a ton of junk without eating wheat.

I love that you're pursuing this matter.   It's not just wheat, though.  It's all the gluten grains related to wheat: barley, rye, spelt, kamut, etc.  In those of us sensitive to gluten, even the tiny bits of gluten in most processed foods cause problems.  So do oats, even gluten-free oats, in some Celiacs.

Keep up the anti-wheat campaign, but please add the other gluten grains to your target.

Dr. Davis,
I started the gluten-free diet 2 months ago after reading all your blogs. The one thing I did not think it would influence is thyroid. You stated so confidently that it influences Hashimotos, I wondered how you came to that knowledge---articles, research, personal observation?
For 8 years my TPO antibodies have been very high in 700-800 range even with meds and good T4, T3 numbers. All tests came back negative for celiac although with high IGA. I have never been able to get Hashimotos numbers down, so would love to know how/where you heard about this. I will report back if after being wheat free my IGA and TPO numbers go down.
Warmly,  Catherine

Fantastic post.


I have been looking into a lower wheat (or gluten?) diet for a bit now, and recently purchased The Paleo Diet for Athletes. As soon as a finish In Defense of Food, that is next on my list.

A quick question if you have a second. Maybe you can simply directly me to a page with the answer, as I have not been able to clearly find it.

Is the key avoiding grains as a group, or would eating gluten free products be partially sufficient?

Do you have any references you could post for those claims?

In answer to several questions to clarify what I mean by "wheat":

1) For celiac disease or marked wheat sensitivity, including "wheat addiction," all grains that immunologically cross-react with wheat should be eliminated--barley, spelt, oats.

2) For those with extreme carbohydrate sensitivity--meaning diabetics, pre-diabetics, or marked small LDL, then even spelt, bulghur, sorghum, quinoa, barley, etc. can present excessive carbohydrate loads.

For everyone else, I believe that these whole grains can play a role.

Re: references. Just go to Pubmed.gov and enter your relevant search terms. It's quite easy.

It's hard for me to separate out the effects of wheat, gluten, flour, grains, carbs.  

Probably, nobody really knows yet., which is what it's like in 2009: lots of clues but nothing definitve.

My wife has hashimoto's thyroiditis, and cutting out the gluten has led to tremendous improvements. Her T3 and T4 levels are back to normal, and her anti-thyroid antibodies dropped significantly, to nearly undetectable. And she feels normal, not cold and lethargic.

I am not convinced that all people with Hashimoto's benefit from cutting out gluten - some studies showed only about 30% to 50% of the group improved (but many people show amazing improvement). A change of diet should be the first thing tried IMO. It was not something the endocrinologist discussed. When my wife asked if there were any dietary or lifestyle changes that might help, she was told there were none.

Hi, Jonathan--

Yes, wheat exposure probably requires years to trigger the Hashimoto's reaction. Unfortunately, to my knowledge, the precise trigger and "dose" or duration required is not well sorted out.

I find the statement “don’t go eating all that ‘gluten free’ stuff” rather silly – the implication being that it’s full of junk.  Most of the gluten free food I’ve found is wonderfully free of the usual high-fructose corn syrup and the like.  It’s a real blessing, to be quite frank.  And by the way, all my food comes from Earth.

Dr. D, correct me if I am wrong but quinoa is not a grain (it's a seed) and should not be grouped with wheat, spelt, barley, etc.

My understanding is that its impact on the body is significantly more positive compared to grains.

I have both gluten sensitivity and insulin resistance. Gluten free means I avoid wheat(includes spelt, kamut and other related grains), barley and rye. Oats are available that are certified gluten free. Removing gluten eliminated my GERD, gas and bloating, improved my neuropathy, lifted my depression, stopped my joint pain and the list goes on.

When I discovered my blood sugar issues, I dropped all the gluten free grains that caused spikes in blood glucose. OK, I have not found a grain that does not spike my blood sugar so I am now grain free. The only problem I noticed when eating the GF grains was the blood sugar effect.

Gluten/wheat and carbs/sugar are two separate issues for me.

Is it full of soy?  That's junk.

Peter, you probably have to reduce your carbs to see improvement in your blood sugar levels.

To clarify: My point was that most products tha are labeled as "gluten free" are processed, and largely a part of the food industry's marketing tactics.  They are not there for your health, but rather to make profits.

You can buy gluten free cookies, cereal, and other snack foods.  These foods are far from being close to the earth, and IMHO, not to be a regular part of a healthful diet.

The sentiment is valuable, but I worry about hyperbole.  If an individual cuts out 1000 calories a day of wheat-related foods (a generous estimate), and doesn't replace those calories with any other foods, then they would lose about 2 pounds a weeks, not 10 or 15.

I agree with Anon., who on the 15th wrote it's about reducing calories.

1lb fat = 3,500 cals; hence 2lbs/week is practical weight loss. Getting fat does not happen overnight, or a week for that matter so why would anyone expect to loose weight magically within a week.

If by not eating wheat you get there, I say go for it. For me, I feel much better since doing mega-dose K2/D3/B3/C which I learned here on the Heatscanblog and I will be forever grateful for those who aid Dr Davis in sharing their knowledge such as Ted Hutchinson who takes the time to post links to scientific papers supporting the cause of improved heart health.

Question - how about rice? Is it just as bad?

I take wheat grass tablets from Pines.  I have stopped eating wheat and reduced all grain consumption dramatically.  However, I still take the wheat grass tablets.  Is wheat grass a problem, like wheat?

Well I acquiesce in but I contemplate the list inform should have more info then it has.

Again a gentle post. Thanks your also pen-friend

I think there is a huge missing link here, and that is the source of wheat.

I just bookmarked your blog and will come back in the future. Keep up your great job, I hope you have a nice day!

Hello! nice article, thanks for sharing with us. how to save a relationship | saving a relationship | save the marriage | win back ex | get him back | getting ex back | want ex back | get her back | to get him back

Hi! interesting article, thanks for sharing. July 2010 nursing board exam results | CPA board exam results | let exam results | bar exam results

Pretty good post. I just stumbled upon your blog and wanted to say that I have really enjoyed reading your blog posts. Any way I'll be subscribing to your feed and I hope you post again soon.



Web Design

I study carried out in China proved conclusively that wheat was the major cause of heart attacks. I am quite sad to read these reports because I love bread. The question is that do I love it to death?

This is generally a wonderful website i should say,I enjoyed reading your articles. This is truly a great read for me. I have bookmarked it and I am looking forward to reading new articles. Keep up the good work.


Education

I'm new here but looking for answers on systemic inflammation.
Can eliminating wheat or gluten reduce the inflammation in my system?

Hey Dr. Williams,
My mom stumbled across this article a year ago in attempt to help me explain some unusal blood work and severe contipation issues that the gastro doc called IBS after a negative celiac test. At the time my c-reactive protein was elevated, my T4 was elevated, I was chronically tired, cold intolerant, constant constipation, stabbing pain in my abdomen (hurt to touch my toes and put shoes on),had eczema, and mood swings. More then ten years ago I had thought I was a celiac and had gone wheat free, went to a gastro doc but was told it was just IBS and now looking back my symptoms were worse after I began to eat wheat again.
So, I have now been wheat free for a year now because of your article!.... my constipation has been reduced dramatically (no more miralax everyday) and my eczema only flares when I have accidently eaten something with wheat in it!
Here's my delima now.. I thought that being wheat free for a year would change the unusal blood work, but I just got results back and my c-reactive protein has elevated slightly more, my T4 has elevated more, but the strange thing is my TSH is on the higher end too. Hashimoto's usually has high T4 and low TSH, plus all my symptoms are that of someone with a hypothyroid.  I'm still chronically tired, cold, and getting more moody. Any ideas?

I recently had a discussion with a relative who got a prescription for Vitamin D.  (This after I bought her a Vitamin D test from Grassroots showing a level of 19.)  I told her the prescription was a bad idea as it was surely Vitamin D2.  She looked into it and came back and told me, no, it was D3.  I have not seen it, but I am asking now - is it really true that prescriptions are invariably D2?  She claimed it was 50k IU of D3, once a week.

Separately, I see it stated here and there that the Vitamin D added to milk is D2.  Most milk labels I see show it as D3.

A bit of information that the drug reps don't tell the physician is people need to be on a maintenance dose. I have seen so many people who were prescribed D2 for a few months. Once the vitamin D level rose to over 30, they were told they could discontinue taking the D2.

One person told me that she had started and stopped D2 three times. She said her doctor could not figure out why her vitamin D level keeps dropping when the D is stopped. At least she was retested. The other people who were told to stop taking D2, were never retested once their D hit "normal".  

I have a friend who told her doctor she would get her vitamin D as D3 OTC. She said he expressed surprise that it could be bought without a prescription.

The study you site appears to use the dry form of vitamin D3.

So is D2 a prescription medicine?

Here is an abstract providing an example of the total lack of effect of D2 in a patient.
The lack of vitamin D toxicity with megadose of daily ergocalciferol (D2) therapy:
The maximum daily dose of vitamin D currently recommended is 2000 IU. Ergocalciferol (D2) 50,000 IU orally weekly for 8-12 weeks is often used to treat vitamin D deficient patients (25(OH) vitamin D <20 ng/mL).
The lack of vitamin D toxicity after massive doses of ergocalciferol has yet to be reported in the literature.
We report a case of a 56-year-old woman who received supratherapeutic doses of ergocalciferol (150,000 IU orally daily) for 28 years without toxicity. We discuss the possible mechanisms which may account for a lack of toxicity despite intake of massive daily doses of ergocalciferol in this patient.

The sad aspect to this story is that as Vitamin D2 at that ridiculously high intake didn't do her harm, it's also probable that her body did not recognise it at all, so it probably didn't do her any good either. As there have been other accounts of people taking large (but not as huge as this case) amounts of D2 and it not having any noticeable effect on Vitamin d deficiency symptoms it seems just pointless to risk using it, when there is a cheaper, more reliable, alternative readily available.

I think it is up to the patient who is tuned in to this fine blog and several other like minded blogs who preach as you do, such  as "nephropal.blogspot.com" to bring your information to their primary doctors.  My primary doctor still takes a Staten drug even though he knows and marvels at the health gains that I have achieved through supplementation with high dose vitamin D3 and high dose omega 3fish oil, along with a cave man like diet.  I asked him why he take a Staten drug when they work by increasing his vitamin D level? I said just take vitamin D3 instead of the Staten drug.  His answer was that he only takes a little Staten drug.  When he found my wife to be vitamin D deficient, he in fact ordered a script for vitamin D2.  I insisted that she take OTC vitamin D3 and after a tussle he gave in.  

I am sorry to say that only we the patients can change the system.  I don't blame the very over worked primary care physicians who have no time to read the necessary science.  We the patients have to bring the relevant data to them.  After all it's our health that is being impacted.

Bark--

There is indeed a prescription D3.

Now, why a prescription form is necessary is beyond me. I suppose we could make prescription vitamin C, too, and charge $120 per month.

Hi, Anne-

Yes, I also see this incredible blunder occuring around me.

I'm not sure what they're thinking.

Vitamin D3 1000 IU 240 tablets per bottle x 2 bottles purchased from Costco is dirt cheap.  $5.20 Cdn.  Very cheap $ U.S. dollars.

I take 3,000 to 5,000 IU daily and associate it with stopping hot flashes.

Inadvertently 'experiments' by running out of D3 for several weeks at a time resulted in really terrific hot flashes. Nothing is quite as unpleasant as having a hot flash as soon as I wake up, for example. Clearly I have not done double blind studies.  I am (sort of) menopausal.  No periods from September 2008 to June 2009.  Now, back.

No vitamin D3 intake during summer of 2008:  terrible terrible hot flahses. Then started taking D3 3000 IU in August 2008. Ran out of D3 sometime in Januray.  Hot flashes started up sometime later.  However, no hot flashes since end of March 2009.  No hot flashes from September to January.  Stopped taking D3 because too lazy to go to Costco to buy more.  Then started taking D3 and then stopped with the hot flashes and have not had another one in months even though obviously the hormones are fluctuating.

I used to think that HRT would stop hot flashes.  HRT does nothing for the hot flashes.  Vitamin D3 appears to work much more effectively.  

Dr. G. Kadar
Toronto, Canada

Dr. Kadar--

Fascinating observation!

Any other ladies who've made similar observations? Or perhaps taken vitamin D yet continued to experience hot flashes?

Tony ~ D2 can be bought as an OTC too.

Dr. Kader ~ I have a co-worker who says her hot flashes disappear when she takes vitamin D.
Anne

I wonder if there is any research on your view that the tablets don't work, only the gelcaps, for raising vitamin D levles.  It seems like it would be very easy to show whether or not this is true, and very important since lots of people take the tablets.

Hi, Peter-

To my knowledge, there is no research on this topic. However, having tested vitamin D blood levels thousands of times, I can say with confidence that the tablets are inconsistently absorbed--sometimes they work, often they don't, or they increase blood levels less effectively. Levels also vary widely, due to inconsistent absorption.

Gelcaps--i.e.,oil-based--are absorbed consistently.

What are some good brands of OTC D3?  I see the Costco mentioned, but has it been independently tested?  I know the Costco brand fish oil is supposedly decent, so it would make since that the D3 is as well.

I usually order online (vitacost.com) and I like the NSI brands.  Are they good?

Dr. Kadar

Thanks for sharing about your success with vitamin D3 bringing relief for your hot flashes.  I have a daughter who was suffering with hot flashes and refused to take the dangerous medically recommended hormones to alleviate the problem.  Instead she started to take black cohosh. when I pulled a negative study from Pub Med she stopped. She continued to suffer and not in silence.  In the meantime, understanding the health benefits, I convinced her to start taking 6000 IU of vitamin D3 soft gels.  It never dawned on me that this could be so positive relative to hot flashes.  This morning I asked her how come I don't hear any hot flash complaints and she answered that she hasn't had an episode in a very very long time.  It seems likely that we now can put a face on the reason why.  Yet another use for the miracle health supporting hormone vitamin D3.  

It truly is a fascinating observation,as Dr. Davis remarked.  Thanks for solving this mystery.

It's just a guess, but the inconsistent absorption of dry  D3 sounds like it's due to fats (or lack of fats) consumed when dosing. So if patients take it with fish oil, or right after a fatty meal, it may work.

But I see no reason to stay on dry anyway as gels are very cheap. There are also liquid drops (usually with a fat carrier) for those who dislike pills.

I'm just waiting for a company to put out a D3/K2 gel next. They seem like logical partners.

I have a blogsite where I am tracking successes regarding the usage of vitamin D.  Will you tell your success story?  I am an advocate and educator for using Vitamin D3.  I personally take 6000-8000 to keep my levels of D3 at the appropriate level.  

I will never stop!  It manages the SAD disorder that I had without knowing for over 25 years.  It has changed my life.  My sense of wellbeing has increased to 100%.  Before, it was always a struggle to shake off the feeling that something always felt off, or wrong. It never felt like depression, and my outlook has always been upbeat.  But I still carried around, what I only know how to discribe as almost a sadness, or a feeling that something was wrong but I couldn't put my finger on it.  After taking the Vitamin D3, it just disappeared.  So, now I am an advocate, and believe firmly that this information must be disemminated out into the communities.  

If you have a story to tell I would appreciate it if you would add it to my blog site:

http://dactionhealth.ning.com/

Best~Diana~

There are also D3 available in liquid form.  It is great for those who can't swallow pills.  I believe it is through Biotics Research.  It is 2000U a drop.  I put 3 to 4 on my finger, and it is done. Nice to have the option and works better for children.

I recently discovered while shopping for my D3 that there is also a D3 version made from sheep lanolin.  Is this as effective as the D3 from fish oil?  Is there any reason why one would be preferred over the other?  I go for the fish oil source because I just don't know anything about the other.

I've been taking anywhere from 4,000 iu to 10,000 iu per day since February 2009 when my test revealed a level of 27 ng/dl. Last month I asked my dr for another test and he said they normally don't test again, which I just don't understand!(kaiser insurance). I still have my hot flashes but now that I think about it they are few and far between and less intense.
Nancy

Probably taking vitamin D3 tablets with a meal containing fat helps with absorption.

I've got patients using the drops.  They butter their toast and add the relevent number of drops of D3 1000 IU per drop to their buttered toast. (I recommend 100% rye sourdough bread for those patients who must eat their bread.)

I am now asking female patients experiencing intrusive hot flashes to take vitamin D3.  I'll wait for feedback from them.  Also for perimenopausal mood fluctuations.

Looked at another way:  D3 is a hormone replacement therapy.  

I do also tell patients about vitamin K2 and how it is also necessary for bone metabolism.  If they take therapeutic doses of
vitamin D3, then they also must eat eggs (and cheese, liver, etc.)  But minimally, they must eat egg yolks.  In Canada, K2 is not available in any serious way as a supplement.  

Dr. G. Kadar
Toronto, Canada

I would love to take my D3 in gelcap form, but have thus far been unable to find any here in Canada.  I sometimes take the liquid, but get hung up on what constitutes 'a drop,'  so usually settle for tablets along with fish or krill oil.  Anyone know of a Canadian source for gelcaps?

Dr. William Davis said...

"I can say with confidence that the tablets are inconsistently absorbed--sometimes they work, often they don't, or they increase blood levels less effectively. Levels also vary widely, due to inconsistent absorption.

Gelcaps--i.e.,oil-based--are absorbed consistently."


I cannot say anything about hot flashes since I'm a man (but can and will tell these interesting observations to PMP women I know), yet I have something to say about tablet versus powder versus gelcaps issue that may be of interest.

I have moderate level Crohn's disease and got great help from D3 supplements for over 7 months now. I started with gelcaps (dosage 25-75 µg/d), then abruptly moved into powder form (Vit D Max, dosage 125 µg/d) and observed GREAT improvement in a couple of weeks. Even my BP dropped so much - from 145/95 to 115/75 and I even got dizzy during daytime. (I also took some melatonin to be fair).

Then - after about 4 months - I changed back to gelcap form and kept the dosage and experienced somewhat more symptoms - if only for a while.

Is it possible that powder form may work more quickly, or did my powder D3 contain more D3 than mentioned? I honestly don't know.

I wrote for Dr B G about my Crohn improvement a while ago but she seems to be on holiday as we're speaking?

- Neo

I buy small easy to dissolve capsules of D3 (dry powder, not oil) made by Bio-Tech from Dr. Eades' Protein Power site (no affliation other than as a reader).  The cost for the dose is very, very good ($8 for 100 capsules) and the bottles are small.  I was able to buy 11 bottles for the same shipping price as 1 bottle, so I stocked up and shared with family members (my experience is that middle aged adults need at least 5000iu per day year round to keep 25 (OH)D levels above 50 ng/mL).  I test at least twice a year, so I know that the D3 is absorbing.  

I also usually take the D3 around the same time I am consuming some fat, which probably helps with absorption.  Other family members take Carlson's oil capsules with good results.  We avoid hard tablets.

Bio-tech also makes a non-prescription D3 in a 50,000iU dose, 12 capsules for about $18 (plus shipping), which is a very competitive price compared to high dose Rx D2.

Hi
Really a nice blog!
Needs stuff to to!

Readers who are using Vitamin D3 for cancer prevention may be interested in this new paper from Vieth
How to Optimize Vitamin D Supplementation
to Prevent Cancer, Based on Cellular
Adaptation and Hydroxylase Enzymology
The hypothesis seeks to answer some of the Dilemmas that challenge the vitamin D/Cancer hypothesis regarding prostate/pancreatic cancers.
1)How can the vitamin D hypothesis explain the U-shaped risk curve for prostate cancer when the data suggest that the average 25(OH)D
concentrations in countries with relatively high rates of prostate cancer are apparently the optimal concentrations for preventing prostate
cancer?
2 What plausible mechanism, other than vitamin D, could account for the association between greater lifetime sun exposure and diminished risk of prostate cancer ?
3 How can latitude and environmental ultraviolet light be associated with increased risk of prostate cancer, and pancreatic cancer, yet not be a significant contributor to the lower average 25(OH)D concentrations theorized to be the key component of the mechanism that relates latitude to cancer risk?
4 Why is summer season of diagnosis, or a higher serum 25(OH)D associated with better prognosis of prostate cancer?
5 If vitamin D is adverse for prostate cancer, then why is the rate of rise in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) slower in summer  than in other seasons and why would vitamin D supplementation slow the rate of rise in PSA ?
6 Why, in regions of the United States where environmental UVB is low, is there a positive association between pancreatic cancer versus serum 25(OH)D, while at the same time, in regions where UVB is high (presumably providing even higher serum 25(OH)D levels), is there no relationship with 25(OH)D ?
7 If 25(OH)D is antiproliferative in cell cultures of prostate cells in vitro  and pancreatic cells, then why would it contribute to the development of cancer in vivo?

Vieth suggests that as circulating 25(OH)D levels rise and fall, 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D  concentrations  need to be adjusted and the balance between 25(OH)D-1-hydroxylase [CYP27B1](tumor surpressing) and the catabolic enzyme, 1,25(OH)2D-24-hydroxylase [CYP24](oncogene) may for a while become disrupted.

Any time there is a delay in cellular adaptation, or lag time in the fine tuning of  1,25(OH)2D  in response to fluctuating 25(OH)d concentrations there is the potential for too little of the tumor suppressor enzyme and too much of the oncogene CYP24.

Regular daily supplementation with D3 keeps levels high.
Regular 25(OH)D testing will enable you to see your levels are remaining steady.
It may be  sensible for people living further North to have a lower summer intake and higher winter amount in order to reduce the amplitude between summer highs and winter low 25(OH)D levels.

Those who go for Winter sunshine breaks may want to think about increasing D3 intakes before they fly off, reducing supplement intake while under the tropical sunshine and resuming supplementing immediately on returning home to prevent sudden changes in status and limit the extent of gains/losses.

25(OH)D levels need to be both high and stable.

The graph Dr Davis shows how D2 levels dropped steeply (indeed levels at the end of the month were  lower than before supplementing started) so the fact that D2 increases the rate at which 25(OH)D depletes making the fluctuation in level more acute, is a further reason to avoid it.

Dr. Davis,
I just got my labs back after 7 months on low-carb, high-fat diet.  Chol was 337 (my labs are here).
I was wondering if you or readers could point me to 5 or 6 links that would help educate me on this issue so I can see if I need to make any changes in the next 7 months.  Thank you for your time.

Why do doctors prescribe Vitamin D2?
They don't very often. Calcitriol (most common brand, Rocaltrol) is the most often prescribed Vitamin D around here (near Philadelphia).

Why do we need a prescription Vitamin D when OTC Vitamin D is just as good?
Two reasons:
1. Without a prescription, patients take medicine less reliably,
2. More importantly, many of my patients are poor, and OTC meds are not paid for, but prescriptions are.

I take D2 (and get as much midday sun as is safe) because of the horrible way the sheep are treated.

http://www.savethesheep.com/animals.asp

I know a nurse practitioner who practices in Phoenix, Arizona. She has done hundreds of blood draws for nutrient levels and has noted that some 99% of people were vitamin D deficient.

She went on to explain that a lot of these people were construction workers and did not even wear sunscreen. Again, this is in Phoenix where the sun shines intensely nearly every single day of the year. If those people are not getting enough D, I think it's pretty safe to say that you are at least at risk.

D2 comes from plant sources. D3 comes from animal sources, primarily animal skins. If you are vegetarian you would not want to take D3.

The primary reason the prescription form is D2 is because D2 is much safer. Too much vitamin D is worse than too little. The standard prescription dose is very high, 50,000 units. High doses like that of D3 would be extremely dangerous. Your body is much better able to regulate it's absorbtion of D2.

I would never take D3. It might take a bit higher dose of D2  to achieve the same result (studies do not agree on this) but I am never going to poison myself. I expect sereous negative health consequences in the future as a result of the marketing of D3. D3 is pretty much all you can find over the counter these days. I assume that it is more about promoting animal agriculture than human health.

It is true that the pharmaceutical industry has at times had undue sway over the medical profession.  To say that physicians are educated by "pretty representatives" is insulting and undermines the credibility of the author.  I agree that vitamin D3 is more "natural" and technically more potent.  The reason why vitamin D2 is more often prescribed is at least three-fold.
1. Vitamin D2 is available in a prescription strength that allows for a more rapid repletion of vitamin D levels.  (It is hard to find a prescription vitamin D3)  In other words, it would take longer to replete vitamin D with over-the-counter doses of vitamin D3.  So why not just take a bunch of D3 capsules?  The dosing schedule for repletion of vitamin D with D3 is not as well worked out as it is with vitamin D2.  As soon as someone does a large scale study using vitamin D3, we will all be willing to switch.  Doctors are hesitant to make up regimens where effective ones already exist (re: risk of patient harm/legal liabilities)  
2. Vitamin D2 has been prescribed for decades. We as physicians are more familiar with its effect on patients.  
3.  Finally, vitamin D3 used to be more expensive--another reason D2 was preferred over D3.  Doctors, like everyone else, are often resistant to change.
One thing is certain.  The author's assertion that physicians are not guided by science is false.  What we need is large scale clinical trial with vitamin D3.  The problem here is funding.  Who will pay for it?  Until then, the most we can say is that vitamin D3 is more "natural" and more potent.  Vitamin D2 however is effective and has not been shown to be injurious.

Dr. J--

Allow me to insult you again: It has been my experience that many of our colleagues are miserably susceptible to the smile of a pretty representative. Perhaps you are not, but I see it all the time.

I'm afraid that I believe you are way off base on the D2. I recommend that you read the existing literature. I believe that there's only one conclusion: D2 is markedly inferior. While better than nothing, why would anyone take a non-human form over a human form?

Having replaced vitamin D in approximately 2000 patients using D3, I can tell you it is safe and reliable. In the handful of patients taking D2, I've seen everything from modest increases in blood level so 25-hydroxy vitamin D to no increase at all.

Twice I have been on prescription strength Vit d2(50,000 units first for 8 weeks since my level was 30  and then rose to 66 with RxI took good quality Vit D3 in between 2000 units daily faithfully,eat a good diet (also take ERT age 65) and after serveral months^ my level again fell to 33 now have beenplaced on Vit D2 for 12 weeks, blood level 64 and will repeat test in 6 months.I am now taking 4000 units of D3. I DO NOT seem to be absorbing Vit D3 and wonder why or if I need even more daily

Why wouldn't you just obtain your Vit D through food sources? sardines, salmon, tuna, liver, egg yolk, cod liver oil, fatty fish, dairy

I HAVE to say something.  There are some valid health related reasons why some people/children have to take D2.  My daughter has to take D2 (her levels are at 33) so her DAN doc wants her D supplemented.  She also has some gastritis/EE he is hoping to heal in her tummy w it.  He wishes and we all wish she could take D3--I know its way better than D2.  BUT--she can't take D3--she is allergic to both fish and lanolin . . . so . . . therefore she has to take D2 right?  No other D3 option out there for her right--please answer if there is another option for her.  She is allergic to all the natural foods with D3 as well--egg etc.  D2 is all thats left.  I PRAY its helping her a little. We use a local company in WI called Cty Line Pharmaceuticals--the D2 is liquid, its D2 dissolved in propylene gycol with NOTHING else added.  Its a bit spicy but my daughter "Gags" it down as she  surely be allergic to anything added to flavor it.

There is no such nutritional supplement representative in the waiting room. This preference for the "drug" D2 over the supplement D3 also stems from the inherent preference of physicians for things they can control, whether or not there is proof of superiority.

I was vit D deficient at a level 12. I was told to take over the counter D3 1,000 a day for 5 mths, retest. It raised to only 23. I was told to take Vit D 3 at 2,000 a day for another 4 mths and the result was I went back down to 18. Finally took the presciption D2 at 50,000 a wk and I am mid normal. My 2 daughters were recently diagnosed with D deficiency as well. I walk a dog daily yet my 85 yr old mother who does not really see the sun and when does wears sunscreen takes no Vit D and is not deficient. Go figure.

P.S. Yes Vit D did reduce hot flashes as well.

In 1972, one year after starting my Medical Education {Psychology}, I attended the yearly "National Health Federation" {Monrovia, California} Convention. I was already prescribing High Doses of Vitamin D, and I attended a lecture by a  Physician who was already known as THE EXPERT in Vitamin D research!! To this day, I don't remember his Name. The Subject of this particular presentation,  was that Vitamin D2 was toxic to the Kidneys & caused Kidney Damage; Primarily Kidney Stones! His Research was solid and alarming! I bought the 90-minute Tape of his entire Presentation, but misplaced it approximately 5 years later. His presentation  was a Classic, and I'd pay $50.00 to $100.00 for a copy of the Tape today! If anyone has this tape, PLEASE contact me!!
Meanwhile, NEVER take any amount of Vitamin D2. He proved that Vitamin D3 was safe, and that Vitamin D2 should never be ingested!

I find this very interesting because on the one hand they are giving up control over what their advertisement says, but on the other hand the ads that people come up with are probably even more relevant to the readers.

Very good blog, support, only the future health!