View Single Post
Old 12-02-2010, 12:32 AM
Conductor71's Avatar
Conductor71 Conductor71 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,474
10 yr Member
Conductor71 Conductor71 is offline
Senior Member
Conductor71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,474
10 yr Member
Default Be Heard

Quote:
Originally Posted by lurkingforacure View Post
And now, from the other side...

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-relea...111112159.html

Don't forget I just bought that liquid D3, one drop = 1,000IU. We're on day two, and I figure it'll be at least two weeks for it to get working in the system to build up the GDNF. I'll post updates along with everyone else who is trying this.
I am going to just play the diplomat and say that I understand the caution in reccommending any big changes in vitamin D intake based on studies linking vitamin D levels to multiple diseases. Everything is more complex than simply noting a deficiency in such a wide spectrum unless we can maybe step back and see a common link between these diseases like inflammation, for example. Even then it would be unlikely they would recommend sweeping changes based on a link that needs fleshing out or longitudinal studies looking at higher levels of D as it occurs more naturally.

I would be most interested in how D levels play out in other countries notably Scandinavia for lack of light and in maybe tropical climates where residents naturally take in more vitamin D. Are there any statistical correlates with normal levels of D and disease? I also would like to see that basic research be done to find out why deficiency surfaces in so many different disorders and diseases. That is what do all these things have in common that take a hit when Vita D is low? Maybe mitochondrial dysfunction? Some

My biggest concern is that they are choosing to suppress information; they are not releasing the finding of their expert panel. What is up with that? I assume it is because it is supportive of boosting levels more, but they either do not want to explain or substantiate their final recommendation and/or they don't want people like us trying to optimize themselves based on results.

My response is let's send that panel a strong message. This grassroots campaign is an adjunct of the Vitamin D Council. You can sign up to be a white rat with them; the D'Action program involves a five year commitment to having your D3 levels tested and reported. This could impact PD studies if they include our "co-morbidity" in the results. I am going to participate and write the panel letting them know that many are doing exactly what they were trying to avoid in the first place. It might also be great to start a white rat contingent of our own who are in this study and we can share our biannual results here on the forum.

http://www.grassrootshealth.net/daction
Conductor71 is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
"Thanks for this!" says:
just_me_77 (12-03-2010), VICTORIALOU (12-03-2010)