Vitamin D3

Lilja · Post by **Lilja** » Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:39 am

Hi all,
My GP called me last Monday to say that I had to quit supplementing with vitamin D3, because my level was 255 nmol/L, so I have. My GP said that my level would last at least for 6 months.

After Christmas I have reduced all my supplements to include only vit D3, occasionally vit B12 (which I now have quit taking) and magnesium (with D-Mannose now and then).

He also said that I had too much microscopic blood in urine. I know something is wrong with my kidneys or bladder, since I have spot brown stains in my undies with my own eyes for a long time.

Now, after 3 months with reduced supplements, the brown spots are no longer visible.

I wonder if this was what we call "kidney sand", and whether this can be due to taking too much supplements?
And, is it dangerous to have such high values of vitamin D3?

The only thing I can complain about nowadays is that I feel tired, and that sleep doesn't help. Compared to all the issues I had three years ago, this is nothing

Lilja

Post by **tex** » Fri Apr 08, 2016 9:57 am

Hi Lilia,

That's interesting that reducing supplements stopped the brown spot problem. I've never heard of that happening before.

A 255 nmol/L (102 ng/mL in the U. S.) vitamin D test level is definitely not dangerous. That's only 5 nmol/L above the normal range. But some doctors mistakenly believe that no one should have a level higher than about 75 nmol/L (30 ng/mL), and others arbitrarily choose various other levels as their selection for a safe vitamin D level. Some cancer patients have been advised to boost their level up to the range between 250–375 nmol/L (100–150 ng/mL) in order to help fight the disease. A vitamin D test level above 375 nmol/L (150 ng/mL) is considered to be excessive though, because it can cause symptoms of vitamin D overdose (toxicity).

Personally, I try to keep my level in the 150–225 nmol/L (60–90 ng/mL) range, but that seems to be very difficult for me to do in actual practice. When I order a test kit each spring (I ordered a test kit yesterday) my level is usually slightly below 250 nmol/L (100 ng/mL), so I'll stop taking vitamin D for the summer (because I get a lot of sun exposure here in Central Texas), but by October when I order another test kit, my level will usually be slightly above or below 125 nmol/L (50 ng/mL), so I'll begin taking more vitamin D supplement.

The main risk of too much vitamin D in circulation is too much calcium in the blood, which can lead to various issues, including kidney problems. So yes, it's possible that high vitamin D levels may have contributed to the spotting problem, but it's somewhat rare for that to happen unless vitamin D levels are much higher. So it's likely that some other issue causes the problem but too much vitamin D can make it worse.

Tex

Lilja · Post by **Lilja** » Fri Apr 08, 2016 1:35 pm

Hi Tex,

I have had microscopic blood in the urine since '92. I have been taking high amounts of supplements since late '80s. I just added vitamin D3 in 2013, so I don't think the bladder/kidney issue is due to too much vitamin D3.

I'll just have to continue to ask for different tests to find out. But, maybe the answer is that I have exaggerated the intake of vitamins, and that my body has been somewhat "poisoned" since I feel so good now that I have a "vitamin pause".

Lilja

Post by **tex** » Fri Apr 08, 2016 2:31 pm

You may be right. Sometimes stopping all medications or supplements helps because one or more of them is/are causing problems.

Tex

Lilja · Post by **Lilja** » Sat Apr 09, 2016 7:33 am

Tex:

I don't know, I'm just thinking out loud, but Friday I will visit my new 30-year old wonderboy doctor, and see if he has detected something"wonderful" through my blood and urine tests. He has become quite popular after he took the initiative to the massive demonstration in front of our Parliament building we had last October, after our authorities had decided that supplements should be treated as prescription medications, and that private import of supplements should be banned. This was totally unknown to the public, the news were only released in September, and the law should become effective November 1! (They had to withdraw the law after huge pressure from the public and our FB Group). His patients are people with multiple issues that other medical doctors don't understand, or are unwilling to try to treat, other than through prescription medications.

Fingers crossed!

Lilja

Lilja · Post by **Lilja** » Sat Apr 16, 2016 3:33 am

Hi,

I went to the doctor yesterday and had my test results. They seem pretty good, except from this (I don't know if our countries have the same "reference areas" though):

B-Leucocytes :
Lymphocytes: 3,5* (reference area 1,1 - 3,3)
Eocinophiles: 0,4* (reference area <0,4)

Does this mean that I still have some inflammation?

S-Magnesium: 0,76 (reference area: 0,71 - 0,94)
S-Zinc : 12,1 (reference area: 9,0 - 17,0)

Free T4: 16,7 (ref area 11,0 - 23,0)
Free T3: 4,8 (ref area 3,5 - 6,5)
Anti TPO: <28 (reference area : <100)

I was adviced to increase iodine intake in the forms of sea weeds like Arame, Wakame and Kombu, together with Kelp.
For my pyrolles I was adviced to take Zink and B6/P-5-P.
Against oxidative stress I was adviced to take 2 grams of vitamin C.

I don't put too much value to the magnesium level, since I've learned here that a blood test doesn't give a right picture of the level, but I will continue to take 400 mg daily.

He also mentioned that everybody would benefit from taking Niacin, but I think Niacin gives awful flushes and makes me tremble :-)

If you have comments to the test results, I would love to hear them.

Lilja

Post by **tex** » Sat Apr 16, 2016 11:29 am

Lilia wrote:Does this mean that I still have some inflammation?

Yes, increased lymphocytes usually mean inflammation. Eosinophils are a type of lymphocyte that's commonly associated with allergic reactions such as pollen allergies.

Everything else looks OK. Please be aware that B-6 is used by the body as a cofactor in the conversion of histidine into histamine. IOW, histidine decarboxylase converts histidine into histamine, but B-6 is also required for the conversion process. if you are having histamine problems, it's possible that more B-6 might make the problem worse by allowing the production of even more histamine. If you're not having histamine problems though (or if you're deficient in histamine) then B-6 might help.

If you are already using the vitamins in Metanx, then you should be getting more than enough B-6 already, because Metanx contains the active form of B-6.

Tex

Lilja · Post by **Lilja** » Sat Apr 16, 2016 1:25 pm

Thank you Tex,

Ever since you gave me the recipe to make the equivalent to the ingredients in Metanx, I have been using it up till February this month. I don't have any clear histamine issues, NB: that I know of*

My B-vitamin test results were: Serum B12 644 (ref area 170-650), Serum Folate 40,4 (ref area >5,7) and P-Homocysteine 8,9 (ref area 5,0-17,0).

*Serum Immune quantitation:
S-IgG: 13,2 (ref area 6,1-14,9)
S-IgA: 2,3 (ref area 0,7-4,3)
S-IgM: 0,7 (ref area 0,4-2,1)

Lilja

Post by **tex** » Sat Apr 16, 2016 3:29 pm

Those results all appear to be good.

Tex

Lilja · Post by **Lilja** » Sat Apr 16, 2016 4:39 pm

Thank you, Tex

Lilja

Gabes-Apg · Post by **Gabes-Apg** » Sat Apr 16, 2016 4:42 pm

did they test your Copper level - for the pyrrole?

Lilja · Post by **Lilja** » Sun Apr 17, 2016 6:32 am

Gabes-Apg wrote:did they test your Copper level - for the pyrrole?

Yes, Gabes.

S-Copper: 16,9 umol/L (ref area: 12,0 - 25,0)
S-Zink: 12,1 umol/L (ref area: 9,0 - 17,0)

The "u" stands for micro, but I don't know how to type it.

Gabes-Apg · Post by **Gabes-Apg** » Sun Apr 17, 2016 1:53 pm

thats cool - the measurements are the same in Aus (although our ranges are a bit different)

the aim is to get the zinc higher than the copper and ideally the zinc and copper into a 10:7 ratio

ie zinc 15: copper 10
zinc 20: copper 14

I am almost 2 years into focussed zinc supplementation and have only just got the zinc level with the copper..
(but have got my unbound copper way down...) I am estimating it will take me another 2 years to get into the preferred ranges.

Lilja · Post by **Lilja** » Sat Apr 23, 2016 9:25 am

Wow, Gabes... You are a true source of information

If I understand correctly the ratio between my levels are almost in the correct range?

Can I ask you one more thing?

Because of microscopic blood in urine which I've had since 1992 and which was thouroughly investigated in 2012 and nothing wrong was detected, my new GP wants to get to the bottom of the phenomenom, so he has ordered a CT of the urinary tract on Tuesday next. I'm sure that the result will be the same as in 2012. However, back then they did find a cyst of 8 mm in one of my adrenals, which was said to be hormonally inactive, according to the blood tests they did, and therefore harmless.

What other tests might be done to find out why I have this urine-blood issue?

Should I for instance insist on following the cyst trace? Can I rely on the "harmless" label from 2012?

Grateful for all input you may have!

Lilja

Gabes-Apg · Post by **Gabes-Apg** » Sat Apr 23, 2016 3:17 pm

as i have pyrolle myself, i have done alot of research on zinc and copper and cell health!
the ratio is not ideal, it is kinda the wrong way round. we need zinc higher than copper.

when you posted about the urine issue after the L-methionine I did some reading to try and see if I could find anything - nothing.
the only thing I can think of is that you have some sort of rare bacteria/parasite that does not show in mainstream tests. this could also impact adrenals.

if it is accessible and affordable, adrenal function test could be a good indicator if the cyst is causing issues -
cortisol issues could explain some of your symptoms. (brain, energy and kidney/urine)
Keeping in mind that none of these tests are black and white exact - more so indicators...

one of 4 main causes of cysts is defects in the cells. given your medical journey of the past 10 years this is a most likely cause. (and again current testing does not provide an easy way to confirm this.. sigh..)

not sure if i have been any help...