Vitamin D test question

bevfromwa · Post by **bevfromwa** » Sat Dec 21, 2013 1:25 pm

I was taking 2000 mg D3 for a while, finally convinced PCP to test me a year ago Results: 25 which is considered "insufficiency". Dr recommended that I double it to 4000, which I've been doing for a year, and asked that he retest me. After a year of 4000 it only went to 38, which is low end of "sufficiency". I don't like that result, given to me by the nurse--think it should be much higher. I mentioned a probable absorption problem because of MC, and she said she'd talk to the Dr and see if he wanted to do anything. Such as maybe a very high dose for a while and then see what happens. Haven't heard back yet.

She asked if maybe I was using outdated pills, I said no, my husband a year ago tested 19.2, "deficiency" so Dr recommended taking 2000. The retest in 6 months showed a jump to 73.6, which I think is great. The point is that we take the same pill (vitacost) so it is neither outdated nor impotent.

If you were me, what would you do about this?

Thanks for any input.

Beverly

JFR · Post by **JFR** » Sat Dec 21, 2013 2:01 pm

I take 6000iu of Vitamin D. I do the testing myself through Grassroots Health: http://www.grassrootshealth.net/ and I use the results of the test to determine what dosage of D to take. I just got my latest results and went from 54 to 74 in 6 months. The first time I was tested my results were 42. I tend to like doing things on my own if possible, no doctor involved, even if it cost me a little more money that way. The grassroots health site has information on how to determine what dosage of D to take dependent on how high you want to raise your level.

Jean

Post by **tex** » Sat Dec 21, 2013 2:20 pm

Hi Beverly,

Your husband's response is not typical of what most of us on this board experience. Most of us show responses very similar to yours. For example, despite taking a year-round average of about 4,000 IU per day, for several years my 25(OH)D test result was stuck at around 45. So last year I increased my dosage to a year-round average of around 5,000 IU per day, and my last test result was 55. I'm increasing my dosage some more this year. The point is, vitamin D supplementation cannot be treated as a one-size-fits-all solution.

And like Jean, I've started doing my own testing, because most doctors seem to drag their feet on vitamin D testing, and they simply don't like to order the tests. I'm sure that many doctors consider such tests (for vitamins) to be a waste of money.

The main reason (IMO) why our response rates are so much lower than the response rate for "normal" people is due to the fact that IBDs deplete vitamin D supplies in the body. IOW, the immune system "consumes" a lot of vitamin D in the process of healing the gut, and the healing process takes years. For many of us, it probably never ends.

Tex

Gabes-Apg · Post by **Gabes-Apg** » Sat Dec 21, 2013 3:35 pm

Beverly

if the ability of the gut to absorb nutrients is compromised, you may need to consider taking Vit D as a sublingual or liquid form,

Sublingual, is a bit more expensive, but it is way more effective for people with IBD's
The additional cost is worth it, once the body has good Vit D levels, it will absorb other nutrients better.

bevfromwa · Post by **bevfromwa** » Tue Dec 31, 2013 6:48 pm

I appreciate all this input. Bottom line: my Dr. did not respond which I take to mean he thinks 38 is perfectly ok, after all it is at the low end of so called sufficient. So, as many of us do, I'm going to self medicate. Tex, you pointed out that MC tends to consume or deplete Vit. D, so that's why I didn't get the level up despite taking 4000 a day for a year. Gabes, thanks for the suggestion, I just ordered some liquid D from vitacost that seems acceptable and has good reviews--one drop is 2000, so I plan to bump it up to 6000, and then take Jean's suggestion that I start checking my levels with Grassroots, so plan to do that after 6 months at the higher leve

Again, thanks to all. HAPPY NEW YEAR!

Beverly

Post by **tex** » Tue Dec 31, 2013 9:40 pm

My experience with doctors has been that regardless of the type of test, they are happy campers whenever they see a result anywhere within the so-called "normal" range. They don't seem to grasp the concept of a spectrum of results in which test results in part of the range might be better than results in other parts of the range.

To my way of thinking, such lack of sophistication in interpreting test results leaves a lot to be desired, but they probably adopt that attitude because it makes their job easier.

You're very welcome, and Happy New Year.

Tex

JFR · Post by **JFR** » Wed Jan 01, 2014 5:17 am

bevfromwa wrote:I appreciate all this input. Bottom line: my Dr. did not respond which I take to mean he thinks 38 is perfectly ok, after all it is at the low end of so called sufficient. So, as many of us do, I'm going to self medicate. Tex, you pointed out that MC tends to consume or deplete Vit. D, so that's why I didn't get the level up despite taking 4000 a day for a year. Gabes, thanks for the suggestion, I just ordered some liquid D from vitacost that seems acceptable and has good reviews--one drop is 2000, so I plan to bump it up to 6000, and then take Jean's suggestion that I start checking my levels with Grassroots, so plan to do that after 6 months at the higher leve

Again, thanks to all. HAPPY NEW YEAR!

Beverly

The term "self-medicate" has a negative connotation, as if it is a bad thing to do. Instead I would say that you are taking charge of your own heath by coming to understand that doctors do not have all the answers, sometimes even have the wrong answers, and consequently sometimes the best thing do to is figure it out on your own and then take the appropriate steps.

Happy New Year!

Jean