The Vitamin D Council is not satisfied with the Food and Nutrition Board on vitamin D. Here is their press release: Today, the Food and Nutrition Board has failed Millions
I am still stunned at the release by the IOM’s Food and Nutrition Board on the amount of vitamin D suggested. To consider bone health only and ignore the rest of what vitamin D does for the body is outrageous. The expert reviewer reports, fourteen in all, were suppressed by the FNB. If the FNB had got it right there would have been no reason to suppress these reviews. The Vitamin D Council has requested these reports under the freedom of information act. It will be interesting to see what they contain.
As I viewed the report presentation on Tuesday, I was amazed at the double standards of the committee. First a question was raised about the amount of vitamin D that pregnant women should have. The response was that the body was so conservative with vitamin D during pregnancy that additional supplementation was not required. There is no science to support this statement or just a ‘shot from the hip.’ There was concern by one of the panel members as a few minutes later the statement was made that breast feeding mothers should take 6,400 IU’s of vitamin D3 per day so that the infant would get 400 IU per day. The risk to the mother was less than the significant need for the infant to get at least 400 IU per day stated the panel member. What is interesting is that the same research that said that lactating mothers should get 6,400 IU per day also stated that the needs of the mother during pregnancy was more than 4,000 IU per day. If the risk to mother and child at 6,400 IU per day is less than the needs, then I suspect their fear mongering about vitamin D risk was just that. In other words, the panel member does not mind that you get chronic disease from vitamin D deficiency as you age, but was filled with guilt at the thought of damaging a baby.
It is definitely clear from the science that one size does not fit all. It is totally amazing that 400 IU is the requirement for a baby but a 300 pound person needs only 600 IU. There is only one explanation for getting it so wrong, fear that a healthy population would decimate the medical economy. Next we will continue to explore the government policy first stated by Michael Leavitt, former Secretary HHS, ‘markets before mandates’. The economy is more important to your well being than your physical health?