Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by TameAntelope 1508 days ago
> 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...
2 comments
LinuxBender 1508 days ago
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.
link
TameAntelope 1508 days ago
It seems true without qualification.

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

link
LinuxBender 1508 days ago
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.
link
TameAntelope 1508 days ago
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.

link
LinuxBender 1508 days ago
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.

link
TameAntelope 1508 days ago
> 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.

You aren't qualified to make this statement, doctor or no, especially considering it's in direct contradiction to consensus medical advice.

link
ekianjo 1508 days ago
the 600 IU RDA is clearly a mistake in an earlier publication. it should be 10x that.
link
dragonwriter 1508 days ago
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.
link
ekianjo 1507 days ago
The actual RDA is not correct.
link
TameAntelope 1507 days ago
It is more correct than the research that shows otherwise.
link
ekianjo 1507 days ago
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.
link
LinuxBender 1507 days ago
Type 1 skin is 2000 IU's per hour if completely exposed to the sun though someone may call the cops. Type 5 skin is 500 IU's per hour but all of this is moot if one does not have sufficient precursor elements for the D3 process to occur. This involves vitamin D2, C, collagen and a few other elements. I don't remember the whole chain off the top of my head. I'm lazy and just take pills.
link
TameAntelope 1507 days ago
Your skin doesn't do that.
link
dralley 1508 days ago
The dose they claim to be taking is 100x that, not 10x.
link