Hacker News Reader

Comment by RL_Quine | Hacker News Reader

Many are toxic (vitamin D included) in unsuitable amounts, that’s probably too strong of a statement.

The study mentions 1,000 IU D3 dosage. A quick google turns up a rough figure of 60,000 IU "daily for multiple months" can become toxic.

You're probably right, most things taken at 100x the normal dose for long period of time are toxic. (Water included)

The largest dosage of D3 I can find on Amazon is 5000 IU in a 240 capsule bottle. To take 60000 IU, you'd have to take a dozen capsules daily, getting a new bottle every 20 days, probably multiple times.

While possible, it does seem unlikely.

There are 50000 IU capsules readily available on many stores.

Taking 100000 IU per day for months/years is not necessarily toxic, especially when reducing calcium intake.

I'm currently taking 60K IU D3. The dosage is 1 capsule a week, for 8 weeks, and the capsules come 4 to a pack. This is followed by a maintenance dosage of 1 60k capsule once a month.

Is this to treat a medical condition?

I'm curious why an acute high dose would be preferable over a lower dose taken daily.

Sounds like he was diagnosed with a very low level of Vitamin D and got prescribed high dosage to get up to a healthy level quickly.

No obvious medical condition, other than a vit D serum level of 15 ng/mL. Depending on who you ask, that's a deficiency. I'm personally less convinced.

It's not quite an acute high dose. The body produces the equivalent of 10,000 IU per day in high sun exposure, so 60K per week tries to achieve that level. I believe the high dosage is simply convenience. The 2K IU daily dose is pretty common as well.

You can bolous dose. Depending on the which country. It might be prescription only. I take 20,000 IU once a week, 1000 iu everyday. I have bought prescribed 60,000 IU in the past.

There is an interesting video about a boy who did just that, by mistaking vitamin gummies for candy:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZ6nREONy_4

Higher ones can be found at a pharmacy

Water is lethal at far less than 100x the normal dose. Google hyponatremia. You can die from ingesting a gallon of water in a few minutes.

Just anecdotal observation, I have been taking 40,000 IU D3, 800mcg K2, 400mg Magnesium among other things, daily for 3+ years, no issue. I had to work my way up to that. I've been reversing calcium buildup in my vascular system to lower my CaC score. I know of many people doing the same thing, some longer than I have been. We are all doing good. I also stay well hydrated.

Sorry a bit off-topic, but what form of K2 and magnesium do you take? Can you point me to your protocol to reverse calcium buildup?

I can point you to some of the studies on calcium removal. [1] They don't create a well defined protocol, though doctors have formed their own. I take 600mcg K2 MK-7 and 200mcg of K2 MK-4. I alternate between Magnesium-lysinate-glycinate-chelate (bound to L-Lysine and L-Glycine) and Magnesium Citrate. Since I am listing papers I have to point out that I am not a doctor and this is not medical advise. This method has been working slowly for me and faster for others, likely due to epigenetic and environment factors. I take these things with fatty meals to allow D3 binding and absorption.

[1] - https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=&bih=&q=si...

Thanks so much! Really appreciate the info.

In general, yes, but not in this particular context: it is extremely common to have shortages of vitamin D, B12 and magnesium, and would take quite a bit of effort to overdose on them.

(I have already been taking all three as supplements for the last year due to other research suggesting that having a shortage of them worsens ADHD symptoms)

Yeah but come on, most everyone don't take it in unsuitable amounts just like they don't drink 6 gallons of water every day.

Taking vitamin D for the average American will surely help in keeping good immunity, bone health, etc.

D supplements as well as fish oil were thought promising until studies showed they did not really do what they were advertised to do in supplement form.

https://www.acc.org/latest-in-cardiology/clinical-trials/201...

How typical that you get downvoted when you're one of the few here to actually cite a source for your claim.

I do wonder though if this is an important caveat though:

> among healthy participants.

.. since the rest of the discussion resolves around adding supplements to fight shortages. If "healthy" implies not have said vitamin D shortage then that is still a useful study but doesn't disprove the thesis that taking supplements is probably a good idea.

Everything is toxic in unsuitable amounts, it's an empty statement that doesn't really serve any purpose and is impossible to discuss.

I took > 100,000IU for nearly 3 months (look up the Coimbra Protocol) with no ill effects. Avoid calcium like your life depends on it (even for months after stopping) and you'll likely be fine (I am not a doctor, this is not advice, just sharing my experience.)

I assume you’re saying to avoid calcium supplements, not to avoid calcium?

No avoid all calcium if you’re taking high doses of D on a daily basis.

Therapy is also deadly in too high of quantities because if you're stuck in your therapists office and can't leave then you will starve to death or die of dehydration.

B vitamins are the exception to the rule, most vitamins and minerals are toxic in high doses (like most things).

What amount of vitamin D is toxic?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com