Hospitals: Then and Now

It's 1920. The hospital in your city is a facility run by nuns or the church. It's a place for the very ill, often without hope of meaningful treatment, but nonetheless a place where surgeries take place, babies are born, the injured and chronically ill can find care. No one has health insurance and there's no Medicare. Everyone pays what they can. The hospital is accustomed to doling out plenty of care without compensation. For that reason, they welcome donations and sometimes will build new additions or other facilities in honor of a major donor.

Volunteeers are common, since the wards are understaffed and generally suffering from a shortage of trained nurses and personnel associated with the church. Drugs, such as they are, are often prepared from basic ingredients in the hospital pharmacy. Product representatives hawking medicines and devices are virtually unheard of.

Though their therapeutic tools are limited, the physicians are a proud group, dedicating their careers to healing. The majority of the medical staff volunteer large portions of their time to care for the poor who come to the hospital with very advanced stages of disease: metastatic tumors, advanced heart failure, debilitating strokes, overwhelming septicemia, etc.

Hospitals are usually governed by a board of clergy and physicians who make decisions on how to apply their limited resources and continually seek charitable donations.


Fast forward to present day: Hospitals are high-tech, professional facilities with lots of skilled people, complicated equipment,and capable of complex procedures. While they still house people with advanced illnesses, the floors are also filled with people with much earlier phases of disease. In general, they do a good job, with quality issues scrutinized by a number of official agencies to police practices, incidence of hospital-related infections, medication errors, care protocols, etc.

The hospital of 2006 is a more more effective place than the hospital of 1920. But its aims and operations are different, also. Though some churches are still involved in hospitals, more and more are owned by publicly-traded companies that answer to shareholders--shareholders who want share value to increase. Though donations are still sought, much of the revenues are obtained by concentrating on profitable, large-ticket procedures. More procedures are often generated by advertising.

Because they operate to generate profits, several hospitals in a single city or region compete with one another. The 21st century has therefore witnessed the phenomenon of hospital-owned physicians: more and more practicing physicians are employees of their hospital. That way, the physician brings all his patients and procedures to his hospital, not to a competitor. The top of the funnel is the primary care physician, who tends to see all disease when it first occurs. The primary care physician then sends the patient to the specialist, who is obliged (by contract) to perform his/her procedure in the hsopital paying their salary.




Representatives from companies manufacturing and selling expensive hospital equipment and drugs are everywhere, falling over themselves to gain attention of the physicians using their equipment and the hospital buyers who make purchasing decisions. Millions of dollars can be transacted with just one sale.

The number of volunteers has dwindled. The poor and uninsured are commonly diverted elsewhere, often to a government-funded, and often second-rate, institution. Hospitals measure success by comparing annual revenues and numbers of major procedures.

The hospital of 2006 is a vastly different place than 1920. If you're expecting charitable treatment, compassion, and selfless care, you're in the wrong century. In 2006, the hospital is a business. You don't expect charitable treatment at Wal-Mart or from your car dealer. Don't expect it from your hospital. They are businesses and you are a customer. Recognize this fact, lose the nostalgia for the hospitals of yesterday, and a lot more will become clear to you.
Loading
Everything has omega-3

Everything has omega-3

Walking the supermarket aisles, you may have lately noticed that numerous new products are appearing sporting "omega-3s" on the label.

Some products simply contain alpha-linolenic acid, a tiny amount of which is converted to the biologically active omega-3s, EPA and DHA. Natural Ovens' Brainy Bagel, for instance, carries a claim of "620 omega-3."



I find this confusing and misleading, since people will often interpret such a claim to mean that it contains 620 of EPA and DHA, similar to two capsules of standard fish oil (1000 mg capsules). Of course, it does NOT. I find this especially troublesome when people will actually stop or reduce their fish oil, since they've been misled into thinking that products like this bread contain active omega-3 fatty acids that yield all the benefits of the "real stuff."


Other products actually contain the omega-3, DHA, though usually in small quantities. Breyer's Smart with DHA is an example, with 32 mg DHA per container.


I find products with actual DHA (from algae) a more credible claim. However, the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) has looked at the actual contents of DHA in some of these products and found some discrepancies, including amounts of DHA less than the labeled amount and claims of omega-3 wihtout specifying DHA vs. linolenic acid. (It's probably linolenic acid, if it's not specified.)

All in all, the addition of DHA to food products is a nice way to boost your intake of this healthy omega-3. However, keep in mind that these are processed, often highly processed, foods and you will likely pay a premium for the little boost. For now, stick to fish oil, the real thing.

For a brief summary of the CSPI report and a link to the Nutrition Action Newsletter, see Omega-3 Madness: Fish Oil or Snake Oil.

Comments (5) -

  • ethyl d

    11/8/2007 5:38:00 PM |

    I get really annoyed sometimes when grocery shopping by all the food manufacturers trying to manipulate us into buying their product by trumpeting whatever health angle they can get away with. "Only 100 calories!" "Good source of fiber!" "Low-fat!" Only 1g carb per serving!" "25% less sugar!" They sniff the air for whatever the latest health trend is and see how they can get their product modified a little while still remaining junk to cash in on the trend. They don't care about our health, they just want our money.

  • Michael

    11/8/2007 7:00:00 PM |

    There is one thing I am unsure about regarding all of the 'omega-3' products -- is it even healthy for men to use omega-3 products derived from non-fish (flax)? ALA has been shown to raise the risk of prostate cancer, although some studies also show other aspects of flax decreases the risk (making it all nice and confusing). I've also read, that for some people, who can't convert ALA to omega very well in their bodies,  flax can also raise inflammation levels.

    Should men even bother taking flax or products with  flax omega, at all? My own cardiologist pushes flax on me, oddly enough, even though I guzzle down plenty of fish oil. When I mention possible problems from flax, she basically drops the subject, leaving me in the dark as to why she suggested it in the first place.

  • Cindy Moore

    11/9/2007 4:21:00 AM |

    I saw a commercial for baby food with added DHA being marketed at helping your baby's brain development.

  • Carl

    11/10/2007 9:02:00 PM |

    I found this little article to contain very useful advice.  

    How to Eat - in Seven Words

    "Eat food," said Michael Pollan. "Not too much. Mostly plants."

    Seven words - short ones, no less, totaling eight syllables. Easy to spell, translate, or jot on a sticky note. But really, is that all that needs to be said?

    Pollan - a journalism professor at the University of California at Berkeley and author of the bestselling book The Omnivore's Dilemma - admits that boiling down advice on how human beings should eat to a mere seven words is dicey. A great deal, for example, depends on how one defines "food."

    But in a rousing presentation to a packed room of health professionals at the Fourth Annual Nutrition and Science Conference in San Diego, Calif., on May 2, 2007, Pollan argued that Americans have gone astray when it comes to thinking about food. While other cultures define food in terms of pleasure, sociability, religion or history, Americans are uniquely mesmerized by its scientific aspect.

    We are followers, Pollan said, of "nutritionism."

    "It is an ideology, a way of organizing experience," he said. "Like other 'isms' it rests on a simple set of assumptions, though we don't realize it." The connection between food, science, and health is "a real linkage," he said, "but it has overwhelmed all of the other linkages in our culture."

    Only in America, Pollan said, do people care more about food components - cholesterol, saturated fat, omega 3 oils, fiber and so on - than the foods themselves. And only in America can a low-fat craze grip the country, as it did from 1977 until 2002, to be displaced within a few months by a low-carb craze.

    The problem with nutritionism, Pollan said, is that it gives processed foods a huge advantage over whole foods. "A banana or potato cannot significantly change its structure. But any processed food can be changed overnight to correspond with food fads. You can even rejigger bread along Atkins lines." So the "loudest foods in the market" he said, are processed foods, touting their nutritional virtues via a $42 billion marketing industry, while "these poor whole foods just sit there silently."

    Thus, the irony: Americans are "a people obsessed with eating healthily, yet they are nonetheless very unhealthy."

    Nutrition science has value, Pollan said, but unbridled "nutritionism," pushed by processed food marketers has simply left people confused. In an attempt to simplify food, he came up with his seven-word, three-sentence manifesto, though he concedes that each sentence needs amplification:

    Eat food. The key term here, of course, is "food." We need to make hard distinctions between real food and "food-like products," Pollan said. Some guidelines:

    Don't eat food with more than five ingredients, or with ingredients you can't pronounce, or that contain high-fructose corn syrup (which serves as a 'marker' indicating that the food is highly processed).

    Eat only food that you have cooked, or could cook.

    Eat only food that your great, great grandmother would recognize as food.

    Not too much. The chief harm of nutritionism, Pollan said, is that processed food companies seize on "good nutrients" and "push us to eat more of them." The result is a tendency for Americans to eat more generally, which is one reason why we are consuming 300 calories more daily than in 1985. In the mass of verbiage surrounding food in America, plain overeating is "the elephant in the room." Pollan's advice to reverse the trend:

    Don't eat alone.

    Don't eat in front of the TV.

    Don't eat seconds.

    Perhaps most importantly, pay more and eat less. "I believe that the better quality food you eat, the less you need to feel satisfied."

    Mostly plants. "It's not that meat will kill you," he said. "I eat meat. Small amounts of meat have much to recommend them in terms of vitamins, minerals and taste. Most traditional diets - whether Mediterranean, Asian, Indian or Mexican, use meat sparingly, as a flavoring. I think that's an important lesson."

    By Brad Lemley
    DrWeil.com News

    http://www.drweil.com/drw/u/id/ART02840

  • Dr. Davis

    11/10/2007 11:20:00 PM |

    For anyone who has not read Michael Pollen's book, I would strongly urge you to read this logical and entertaining discussion that attempts to re-introduce rational thinking back into diet.

Loading
Vitamin D for $200?

Vitamin D for $200?

What if vitamin D cost $200 rather than $2?

In other words, what if cholecalciferol, or vitamin D3, was a patent-protectable agent that would sell for an extravagant price, just like a drug?

Vitamin D would be the hot topic. There would be TV ads run during Oprah, slick magazine two-page spreads with experts touting its outsized benefits, insurance companies would battle over how much your copay should be.

The manufacturer would host large fancy symposia to educate physicians on how wonderful vitamin D is for treatment of numerous conditions, complete with dinner, a show, and gifts. They would hire expert speakers to speak, scientists to have articles ghost-written, give out knick knacks with the brand label inscribed--just like Lipitor, Actos, Vytorin, ReoPro, Plavix . . .

After all, what other "drug" substantially increases bone density (up to 20% in adult females), enhances insulin responses 30% (equivalent to the TZD drugs, Actos and Avandia), and slashes colon cancer risk?

But it's not a drug. That is both vitamin D's strength and its weakness. It's a strong point because it's natural, phenomenally helpful across a variety of conditions, and inexpensive. It is also a weakness because, at $2 a month, no one is raking in the $12 billion annually that Pfizer makes for Lipitor that allows it to fund an enormous marketing campaign.

Vitamin D is a "discovery" of huge importance for health, including making reductions of CT heart scan scores far more likely for more people. And it comes without a prescription.

Comments (2) -

  • Edward

    3/14/2007 8:34:00 AM |

    http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/abstract/85/3/860
    This recent research shows the poor Vitamin D status of most UK white residents. 87% lower than ideal in Winter and 60% remain so throughout the year. Goodness knows what the situation is for those with brown or black skins but it will inevitably be worse as it takes longer for darker skins to make the same amount of D3.

  • Neil

    3/15/2007 12:42:00 AM |

    Poster Edward and Dr. Davis, I have been reading quite a lot about vitamin D, the subject to me is absolutely fascinating. Edward, your thought about darker skin pigmentation and low vitamin D status is verified throughout medical literature and news articles. Like this...

    "...92 percent of African-American babies and 66 percent of white infants found to have inadequate vitamin D concentrations in their blood at birth." Link… http://tinyurl.com/2xpjse

    This especially gives one pause when you then consider the rate of cardiovascular disease, cervical, colorectal, lung, and prostate cancers, hypertension, fibromyalgia, Alzheimer's, and diabetes run much higher in the African American community, sometimes as much as 100-200% higher for some of these diseases.  Since these are all conditions strongly associated with vitamin D status, could it be all they need is this inexpensive vitamin supplement on an ongoing basis? And these strong associations with vitamin D status and rate of these serious diseases hold true for other racial backgrounds. One study of Southeast Asians living in England found they had a low Vitamin D status as well.

    To quote Dr. Davis from the other day "The whole vitamin D "discovery" sometimes worries me. Vitamin D has proven to be an unbelievable, remarkable, dramatic boon to health, including facilitation in dropping CT heart scan scores. Yet the answer was always right in front of us. It worries me that you and I might have the answer to important questions right within our grasp all along--but don't know it. What if the same were true, say, for cancer? That is, a profound answer is right there, but our eyes just pass right over it."

    In my recent reading I have run across so many articles on vitamin D that are just so stunning that I saved them.

    "Vitamin D deficiency is a major contributor to chronic low back pain in areas where vitamin D deficiency is endemic." Link...  http://tinyurl.com/2u4ayp

    “…...the vitamin plays a role in shutting down or activating at least 100 genes, many of which are involved in preventing diseases....family members of the Alzheimer's patients reported how well they were performing and acting within weeks of being put on large doses of prescription vitamin D, said lead author Robert Przybelski, an associate professor of geriatric medicine at the University of Wisconsin.”We hypothesize that good vitamin D levels might prevent or mitigate the disease," Przybelski said.”  Link… http://tinyurl.com/2uk2hy


    “…the deadliness of the 1918 killer flu could have been largely a result of vitamin D deficiency. Worldwide, an estimated 25 million people died from that flu.” Link… http://tinyurl.com/33ogga

    “…With respect to the modulation of cardiovascular effects by 1 ,25-(OH)2D3, further investigations are needed that could eventually lead to novel pharmacological approaches to manage hypertrophy, restenosis, and atherosclerosis or remodel the cardiovascular system.” Link… http://tinyurl.com/36897n

    “…71% of patients with severe PAD had serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] levels that were below 9 ng/mL” Link…  http://tinyurl.com/2gqe3r

    How could a two dollar a month supplement do all this!!! Pretty incredible stuff.

    My own family tree is littered with victims of cancer, heart attack (leading to sudden death MI’s in my Uncle and Grandfather both at the age of 52), stroke, Alzheimer’s, ALS, etc. Could vitamin D have been a strong contributing factor to their deaths??? Considering my own vitamin D level was EXTREMELY low and I now have to take about 6,000 IU daily just to normalize it, and I as well had a heart attack at 46, I consider this idea at least as a possible common factor.

    Dr. Davis...Thanks for keeping us informed on your patient experiences and your latest thoughts on Vitamin D and all the other treatments you are exploring. Your daily observations through your blog have helped me a great deal in becoming healthier. Reading your blog and webpage are constant sources of inspiration as well.

    Neil

Loading
Is it or isn't it vitamin D?

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