to be getting hot and bothered about the Vit D push?

[stinkingbishop]

I am prepared to be corrected but, having been hassled yet again by the HV about giving the twins Vit D because of the oft cited 'rise in Rickets', and saying, again, that they had a good diet, including oily fish, and play outside, and again being made to feel like I am stubborn/neglectful, I am getting rather worked up.

As I understand it, one of the main reasons we all have different coloured skin is because we have evolved to be able to absorb the optimum amount of Vit D from the sun (or rather for the sun to catalyse our absorption). Those in very sunny climes have darker skin so they don't overload; us peely wallies are that way because we have such brief windows. Interestingly, it's why Inuits have darker skin than, say, Scandinavians, because they eat so much fish. Very clever, Nature.

Vit D deficiency is caused by a mismatch between your current environment and what you evolved for. So someone whose ancestors lived in the Congo and is now in Stornoway really needs to eat a lot of herring. It's compounded by inner city living eg not having a garden, being inside most of the time. And also strikes some Asian populations because of vegetarian diets and processed flours used in eg chapatis, and because of a culture of covering up, especially girls, and staying at home.

I can't find anything online which shows the incidence of Rickets amongst caucasian children in Britain who play outside regularly (15 mins a day) and have a good diet. Is there anything? Have there been cases? Where should I be looking?

If it genuinely is a problem, I will calm down. But at the moment I just wonder to what extent this national, indiscriminatory push is motivated by the Government's desire not to be seen as racially profiling (but we SHOULD profile for some conditions, because your ethnicity does correlate with various issues and potential issues) and/or because they're using some research funded by whoever it is manufactures the supplements (I have no evidence of this because again I can't find anything).

So, do I calm down, or do I fire something off to whoever is in charge of briefing Health Visitors? It just seems yet another thing to beat nervous, unsure new Mums with. For the vast majority of whom, if I'm correct, this is a complete non-issue.

You left one out rainy. Many women slap 15-25SPF on their faces 365 days a year because almost all moisturisers come that way nowadays.

All children were given cod liver oil after WW11 and at that time less chemicals were on the food we ate and vitamin and mineral content of food was higher.

These days it is very possible to be over weight and suffering from malnutrition at the same time.

Personally I do up my intake of vit k at certain times. It helps to keep me mentally good.

settingsitting Have a little look at the video I posted upthread it explains why would we all or most need vit D now, but havent seemed to for say the last 70 years.

20 years ago people weren't slapping on 30+ suncream everytime a child ventured outdoors

hmm. Just watched the entire video. Have to say I am much more seeing the point now. Have sent the link to my kids.

10 mins unprotected skin time in the UK April to October is enough. An hour will burn a kid. Cloud cover and temperature irrelevant.

latitude is relevant and levels aren't high enough in the rest of the year to make vit D. Fine for most healthy adults but not for kids, old people, unhealthy people who may/do need supplements. The other reasons you state; crap diet, too much time indoors, no exposed skin will also be relevant.

and being in an inner city is no excuse not to go outside.

settingsitting I'm glad you found the video useful. It's amazing when you look at the website and on the lefthand side it lists all the conditions that have had Vit D studies just how important it is.

specialsubject 10 minutes isn't enough if you are wearing shorts and t-shirt though, which is what most people will be.

Good vid btw!

I was a bit sceptical of it but then was diagnosed as deficient - and I am very pale, don't use sun cream unless really necessary and don't have a car so walk a lot.

Special subject that is just not true.

Rickets is just the most obvious crisis level result of vitamin d deficiency. Vitamin D plays a part in all sorts of bodily functions. My father (well known scientist) is publishing a series of papers on Vitamin D. The first paper showed the connection between Vitamin D deficiency in the pregnant mother as a significant cause of autism. The next paper which will be out in the next few months shows the connection between all the mood disorders and vitamin d deficiency. In answer to StandOn the cause of SAD is almost certainly vitamin d deficiency and depression can be significantly helped with vitamin d supplementation. Stinking there is a fair amount of research showing that the rates of vitamin d deficiency in the caucasian population in the northern countries (like britain) and northern US states are very high (of course even higher in the dark skinned population). It's cheap and easy to supplement. But the best thing is to get your levels tested and then there will be no doubt about your need for supplementation.

It's apparently impossible to get enough vitamin D from due alone.

The "ten minutes" is enough rule only applies when a significant proportion of your bod is uncovered I.e. not just arms and legs in the sun.

Add to that the little time UK kids seem to head outdoors plus the crazy sunscreen fad of suncream in the cloud at 8am, or factor 15 every day, and it seems very many of us are deficient.

It's not just about rickets.... MS, osteoporosis, certain cancers, fatigue... Tis mind boggling....

Here is what I do. We all supplement in the winter (I also take K). In the summer I generally don't but on nice sunny days get my kids out without their tshirts on in the back garden on hot sunny days before 11 am and after 3pm. On not such hot days, none of us bother with sun cream. We have quite sallow skin though - we don't ever burn.

It's a real guessing game and the NHS don't routinely test but I'm comfortable with this.

This sunscreen-at-all-times is bonkers. The risks of vitamin D deficient are very real. I'm not sure there is any risk from very lightly tanned skin.....

FFS - for 'due' read 'diet'....

Those blonde scandinavians don't get rickets because cod liver oil and vit D drops have been part of a daily diet for generations, so not because of their skin colour. Victorians suffered hugely with rickets in the UK, and honestly you see plenty of bow legged people if you look for it (obvs not just because of vit D... but). YABU to be hot and bothered by this, a real crisis might just push you over the edge.

Another risk factor I don't think has been mentioned - sorry if I'm repeating is that people who are overweight have a much higher incidence of deficiency - there is some suggestion that it is all tied up with metabolic syndrome - either way if you are very overweight it's more likely you are Vit d deficient, get tested or consider boosting your levels through sun or supplements.
The depression thing is interesting - I have suffered from depression on and off since having the dcs more often than not around March/April time which fits - I've always said it felt more like a chemical imbalance, it felt like a sadness forced on me, rather than something that was induced by life's pressures - I have a pretty cushy life. If it has been driven by Vit D deficiency it will make a huge amount of sense, only time will tell if the black cloud returns, I hope it's the answer.

I think the Swedish people do have very different skin tothe average brit. The stereotypical Swedish colouring of light hair and tanned skin seems to be very common and the Swedes seem to tan very easily, my half Swedish ds had a tan last year when he was only 7 months old ( much to my dismay!) I kept him in the shade constantly he must have got his tan in the time it took to walk from the car to the house. I think possibly if you have skin that tans rather than burns but skin which is pale in the months where vitamin d is in short supply it's easier to get vitamin d naturally.

Ds does have vitamin d drops but dp wasn't given any supplements as a child and he grew up on the arctic circle so in the depths of winter the sun never rose. The culture seems to be that as soon as there is sun everyone is out in the sun, it has been really hot the last couple of weeks and we have spent the majority of our time at the lake swimming and enjoying the sun, ds is naked, I don't have him out in the very middle of the day(he's asleep) this seems a pretty standard.

Does anyone know of a link between Vitamin D deficiency and panic attacks? My 15 year old has the deficiency and has just started having panic attacks that I've out down to exam stress.

I've just watched a video by and he states that 20min a day of sunshine will give enough Vit D from sunlight IF you are virtually naked sunbathing. If you are wearing shorts and tshirt then you need to be outside for 3hrs a day but if you are wearing sunscreen... you will get virtually no Vit D.... He also said that from approx Oct to March.. we won't get any Vit D from the sun (if you live about 35degN). He also discusses breast feeding and Vit D (about 13 mins in). It's a long video and I'm only 1/2 way through but I think it's worth watching.

The more I read around and look at the links and videos posted above! the more I realise that actually, the majority of us are not getting enough Vit D and we are all still on the "20 min a day is fine" not actually clicking that we need to be totally uncovered and live in a country where we can get strong enough sunlight all year round (apparently Florida is the place to be!)....

That 35degN is the line around the world, above which between approx Oct to March we don't have enough or strong enough sunshine.

"There's no point getting mine tested - they're just not deficient..."

Really? How do you know that?

I eat oily fish at least once a week, if not more.
I am an archetypal red head, pale and freckly, so optimal design to make maximum vit D from minimum sun.
I have been taking a multivit/min and fish oil supplement most days for the last 7 years.
I don't wear sunscreen unless I'm going to be out in the sun for hours,
I live in Australia.

I got tested 3 years ago, as part of my general health check after 3 MCs, and I was deficient in vit D, so my GP put me on 10,000 IU per week to build up my levels, which worked. And I got pg again and it stuck (DS2). While pg, I stopped taking the 10,000 IU because no one knew if it was safe; but got retested halfway through and was back to being deficient again, so the GP put me on 1000 IU/d as that was considered to be safe in pg.

Since having DS2, I know that my vit D levels are important because he takes it from me while bf'ing, so I now take 4000 IU/d. DS2 also has a nightly bottle of milk, and every now and then he'll get liquid vit D in that too, just to keep him up.

DS1 was tested when he was 4 (2 years ago). He was also below normal range and takes 1000 IU/d vit D.
DH (Aussie) was also tested around the same time - he was also deficient and also takes 3000 IU/d.

A friend of mine in the UK was tested as vit D deficient - and then a few months later, she was diagnosed with malignant melanoma, despite being very careful with sunscreen etc. (Also a pale freckly redhead).

So yes, YABU to be so dismissive of the guidelines, and to arrogantly assume that your family is somehow exempt from the possibility of deficiency - chances are you're not.

amandaclarke
Your posts are quite offensive.
It's nothing like the MMR vaccinations.

Miscellaneous - vit K 2 is the vitamin you mean, not vit K (generally taken to be vit K1, a completely different kettle of fish).

Vit K2 = menaquinone, found in grass-fed animal products (dairy, meat fat and egg yolks)
Vit K (K1) = phylloquinone, found in dark green leafy vegetables primarily.

They are related - but menaquinone is produced from phylloquinone by the grass fed animals - our gut bacteria can convert some, but not very much, and we can't do it ourselves at all.

Vit K2 activates a protein in our bod called osteocalcin - the job of which is to put calcium where it belongs in our body, i.e. in bones and not floating around in excess and being deposited around blood vessels.
Taking too much calcium and vit D --> excess calcium in the body, which, if your osteocalcin isn't activated, isn't going to be used effectively and could contribute to hardening of the arteries. Making sure you have enough vit K2 to activate your osteocalcin ensures this doesn't happen - it effectively prevents hardening of the arteries AND osteoporosis in one hit. Bargain!

Vit K1 doesn't do this, it's important in the clotting process (liver manufacture of clotting factors). Vit K2 has a very minor ability in that area as well but it is its role in activating osteocalcin that is so important.

Anyone who thinks they are getting enough from diet and from being outside may be lulling themselves into a false sense of security, I think. As others have posted, you would need to be outside for hours every day year round or a shorter period completely or largely starkers, without suncream, to synthesize enough Vit D.

Even eating oily fish is a red herring, not unless you eat tons and tons of it (as in, it's a staple of your diet) and it's wild fish as opposed to farmed. One study showed wild salmon had more than three times as much Vit D in it as farmed.

offensive?
How ridiculous.
Sure, disagree with my analogy, but to be offended by it is a bit extreme.

Many ppl refused mmr (and other vaccines on behalf of their children) because they were ill- informed, yet considered themselves very well informed. And we're persistently resistant to the mainstream heal promotion message.
I think that stubbornly refusing a vitamin supplement in this situation reflects a similar attitude.

You can be offended if you like but it seems like a waste of energy.