[Lara]

Hello.

I watched this show on tv here recently.
http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/2514231.htm
Catalyst - Vitamin D.

Note that it is an Australian programme and is obviously based on our Australian weather conditions. We (my state Queensland in particular) used to have the highest rate of melanoma in the world. I think New Zealand does now which surprised me. (maybe it's the hole in the ozone. Seriously.)

They mentioned "Vitamin D compounds used topically". Topically means something that is applied to the skin as far as I know. Is there a product like that available?

Edited later to add: I forgot the rest of my question. lol
If there was something topical, then would it be strong enough to raise levels if they were too low?
Would topical only give the skin the protection?
What about all the other conditions that are implicated with low Vit D. levels?
Would topical help raise levels high enough to help or would it need to be ingested?

Prof. Rebecca Mason:
What we've shown is that Vitamin D compounds used topically both in human skin and in animals reduce UV induced DNA damage and in animals reduces the immuno suppression and the skin cancers. We think that this reflects a natural protection in the skin that Vitamin D is giving you.

Would love to read any comments about the programme from people if they have the time.

We get such mixed messages in this climate. One day it's cover up because of skin damage, next it's get out there in the sun. I think they made some valid points regarding older people and people who've already dealt with melanoma here.

I've read so much posted over the years in different places but the information was coming from countries with much lower temperatures and long dark winters. Don't have that here. Totally different conditions.

thanks.

[mrsD]

I'd have to look this up.

But I did see a show on Science channel about our magnetic poles. In it there was a discussion on how our poles are getting ready to switch again. When this happens, certain signs occur on the Earth. What they showed was a HOLE in the magnetic lines which is over parts of Australia, Pacific ocean and New Zealand.
This has to do with the core being not completely spherical and hence the magnetic flux lines which protect us from radiation are weak in that area.
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/3100

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sciencean...suns-rays.html

http://gizmodo.com/5112096/huge-hole...d-in-panic-now

I'd have to look around about topical Vit D.
If you want substantial absorption, a transdermal gel is the best carrier. But if you want to block UV? I don't know if it will do so.

Let me look around and see if there is data on its validity.

[bruegger84]

sometimes i think that vit D is overrated, and the only reason why people that have high levels of vitamin D are healthier is maybe because they just happen to have higher levels of vitamin D, because they stay outside longer, and the sun just warms their bodies more, and they therefore become less depressed, more healthy, and their overall well-being is better. so the result is higher levels of vitamin D, yet the vitamin itself having nothing to do with it, and just the warmth of the sun having a lot to do with it.

but maybe they disproved this already, not sure, but all i know is when i take vitamin D, i dont really feel much of a difference.

[mrsD]

Originally Posted by Lara

Hello.

I watched this show on tv here recently.
http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/2514231.htm
Catalyst - Vitamin D.

Note that it is an Australian programme and is obviously based on our Australian weather conditions. We (my state Queensland in particular) used to have the highest rate of melanoma in the world. I think New Zealand does now which surprised me. (maybe it's the hole in the ozone. Seriously.)

They mentioned "Vitamin D compounds used topically". Topically means something that is applied to the skin as far as I know. Is there a product like that available?

Edited later to add: I forgot the rest of my question. lol
If there was something topical, then would it be strong enough to raise levels if they were too low?
Would topical only give the skin the protection?
What about all the other conditions that are implicated with low Vit D. levels?
Would topical help raise levels high enough to help or would it need to be ingested?



Would love to read any comments about the programme from people if they have the time.

We get such mixed messages in this climate. One day it's cover up because of skin damage, next it's get out there in the sun. I think they made some valid points regarding older people and people who've already dealt with melanoma here.

I've read so much posted over the years in different places but the information was coming from countries with much lower temperatures and long dark winters. Don't have that here. Totally different conditions.

thanks.

Bruegger, Well, I don't think Vit D is highly overrated.... I think low levels of this contribute to alot of disease and suffering.

That was a great video, Lara. Thanks for posting it.

I've looked around a bit about Vit D ointment.
Historically Vit A and D oint has been used for healing for diaper rash and also in long term care where older adults are wearing diapers.
Vit D analogs are used in RX creams/ointments here, to treat psoriasis. They do not use Vit D3 because of the risk of hypercalcemia. Applying over large areas increases absorption risk, and since Vit D is fat soluble it is absorbed to some extent.
(my husband used Dovenex cream for example for his psoriasis successfully)

If it is determined to be useful in areas like where you are, Lara, then it would be very critical to make sure dilute amounts were formulated, so that those risks would be lessened.
I found one report on PubMed but that patient was also on HCTZ which is a known agent for increased serum calcium as well. It was the D analog that caused the report.

I know I feel much better this winter with my 4000IU daily than I did last winter at 2000IU. Less depression and less pain.
Let us know if you find a new product "down under" where you are!

[Lara]

Thank you both for your comments.

It was a great video wasn't it.

Appreciate your information. Thankyou.

[bruegger84]

wow 4000 iu, maybe that's why my vitamin D3 aint working well enough. i was taking about 1000 iu, which is what they are suggesting now. so you maybe right mrsD, but there's no evidence to the contrary to what I was saying, but there probably is out there somewhere, but the thing is I'm too lazy to search for it.

another thing is maybe vitamin d cream used in certain areas, would not cause hypercalcemia, but you'd have to talk to a dermatologist, or a very well-educated one in the area, so that you would be sure you would not get hypercalcemic.

[Lara]

http://www.mayoclinic.org/news2009-rst/5218.html

Mayo Clinic Study Suggests Those Who Have Chronic Pain May Need to Assess Vitamin D Status

Friday, March 20, 2009

[tingsdonwrk]

Thank you for the link...I found it very helpful...I am obese and have been really working hard to lower my wieght but my vit. D is an 8 on that test and my PC is sending me 50,000units to take once a week for 5 weeks...

[mrsD]

I saw a statement on a website recently... I didn't save it.

But it mentioned that overweight people store Vit D in the fat,
and it may test low even with supplements. So keep this in mind when you get retested.