[LinuxBender]

I use 60,000 to 90,000 IU's per day and have been doing so for years. The most I have taken in a 24 hour period is 140,000 IU's. There is no way I could have started off at those levels however. It would have induced major hypercalcemia had I done that prior to mobilizing all the stored/misplaced calcium in my gut and vasculature. I am not suggesting anyone else do this. One must have a specific need when doing this.

I only mention this to say that one can go well above the RDA/RDI that are highly contested to be far too low for modern diets, environmental inputs and lifestyles.

[TameAntelope]

> Taking 60,000 international units (IU) a day of vitamin D for several months has been shown to cause toxicity. This level is many times higher than the U.S. Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA) for most adults of 600 IU of vitamin D a day. [0]

I think you may be poisoning yourself.

[0] https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/nutrition-and-h...

[LinuxBender]

That would certainly be true had I done that from day one as I had mentioned. Their documentation as with most medical documentation is based on the lowest common denominators. They will not risk explaining why one might do what I am doing.

[TameAntelope]

It seems true without qualification.

What you're saying here has a lot in common with "woo", I hope you realize.

[LinuxBender]

I suppose time will tell. I've been doing this a number of years. I will check back in a few more years to see how things are going. Honestly the cholecalciferol levels are the least taboo of the biohacking I do with myself. The more risky testing I did was to see how high I could go on the tocotrienols, tocopherols and fibrinolytic enzymes before I ran into bleeding.

[TameAntelope]

Aren't you concerned that your data is super subjective as you're collecting it on yourself?

It sounds like there are a ton of confounding variables possible, not to mention your own personal biases in interpreting any potential causality.

[LinuxBender]

It sounds like there are a ton of confounding variables possible, not to mention your own personal biases in interpreting any potential causality.

Absolutely 100% this. For years I was following the scientific method, reading countless papers on PubMed, binge watching videos from micro biologists and eventually reached the conclusion that if I continued down that path my progress would be paralyzed by the scientific method itself. To use those methods properly in a controlled manor would take thousands of years that I simply don't have.

In summary, I have long since dropped the scientific method on the cutting room floor and instead use the "shoot in the dark" or "shotgun" methodologies. I don't have to tell you this comes with many risks, but I have weighed the risks and benefits and concluded that this was the right path for me. Anecdotally I am very pleased with my progress. I have reversed many chronic health issues. I look and feel decades younger than I did a decade ago. That is of course my own biased opinion of which I hold in high confidence. I would never expect anyone else to do what I am doing nor would I try to convince anyone that I am doing the right thing.

As for the original topic of vitamin D3 which isn't a vitamin at all, I stand by my words that the RDA is far too low for most people today given the lack of sunlight exposure, the poor diets, the high levels of stress and inflammation from bad diets and so many more factors. I should add the disclaimer that I am a doctor though most doctors are not really trained in this and what little training they receive in medical school is crammed into their heads and lost as fast as they gained it.

[ekianjo]

the 600 IU RDA is clearly a mistake in an earlier publication. it should be 10x that.

[dragonwriter]

No, 600 IU (15mcg) is the actual RDA. There's a lot of belief that it's an error, but it's not a typographical error.

[ekianjo]

The actual RDA is not correct.

[TameAntelope]

It is more correct than the research that shows otherwise.

[ekianjo]

If you skin produces dozens of thousands of IU while staying 20 minutes in the sun, and the RDA is not even a tenth of that, I'd rather wage the RDA is completely wrong and misplaced.

[dralley]

The dose they claim to be taking is 100x that, not 10x.

[stjohnswarts]

That's a crazy amount. I had a very low blood test started supplementing with k2/5000 vitamin d several years ago and my blood levels have been fine ever since.

[voldacar]

How much K2 are you taking?

[LinuxBender]

100mcg for each initial 5000 IU's for the day but I stop at 800mcg of K2 MK-7 regardless. I sometimes also take K2 MK-4 in addition to that. I also get a small amount of K2 from eggs.