CSN Login
Members Online: 13

Vitamin D3 and cancer

llight
Posts: 99
Joined: Feb 2010

Is anyone else taking Vit D3-cholecalciferol? There’re compelling data to support its effect against cancer; he (Garland) hypothesizes at any stage. The amount he recommends is having a serum blood level of 40-60ng/ml 25-hydroxy vitamin D [25(OH)D].

Vitamin D Prevents Cancer: Is It True? – This video is for the lay person
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQ-qekFoi-o
--19 minutes in, Dr. Garland speaks for 10 minutes

Vitamin D and Cancer Prevention – This is the one to watch, if you can!
Scientific Lecture by Cedric Garland, Dr. PH / UC San Diego
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1PsyaYNX1dw
--19 mintues in, he makes this quote:
“There’s no chemotherapeutic agent that I’ve seen that produces quite this amount of reduction. Although this is not administered as chemotherapy but rather observed.”
--30:35 in, he gives stats for endometrial cancer…36% preventable, hormonal factors are also involved
--37 minutes in, he speaks to Vit D and progesterone

Would love to hear if others are taking vitamin D3.

jazzy1's picture
jazzy1
Posts: 1387
Joined: Mar 2010

When I was diagnosed with cancer Feb '09 I did much research and have a good friend who's an RN in oncology at San Diago University. She told me to start on vitamin D3 and calcium -- both needed to build up calcium in our bodies (for bones), plus they help push away cancer. See article below.

I wouldn't want to miss out on this very important vitamin.

Thanks,
Jan

------------

(NaturalNews) What initially causes cancer to develop? The current scientific model assumes that a genetic mutation begins the genesis of a malignancy. But what if that assumption is wrong and there's another key to the start of cancer? Scientists at the Moores Cancer Center at the University of California (UC) in San Diego have raised that possibility. And they've come up with another, brand new model of how cancer develops.

Reporting online in the current Annals of Epidemiology, they point to a host of research that suggests cancer develops when cells lose the ability to stick together in a healthy, normal way -- and the key factor to this initial triggering of a malignancy could well be a lack of vitamin D.

In the article, Cedric Garland, DrPH, professor of family and preventive medicine at the UC San Diego School of Medicine, and his research team explain that previous theories associating vitamin D with many cancers have been tested and confirmed in over 200 epidemiological studies. In addition, more than 2,500 laboratory studies have been conducted that provide an understanding of the physiological basis of vitamin D's link to cancer.

According to Dr. Garland, researchers have documented that with enough vitamin D present, cells adhere to one another in tissue and act as normal, mature epithelial cells. But if there is a deficiency of vitamin D, cells can lose this stick-to-each other quality, as well as their identity as differentiated cells. The result? They may revert to a dangerous stem cell-like state and become cancerous.

In a statement to the media, Dr. Garland suggested that much of the process that starts cancer in the first place could be stopped at the outset by maintaining enough vitamin D in the body. "Vitamin D may halt the first stage of the cancer process by re-establishing intercellular junctions in malignancies having an intact vitamin D receptor," he said. And, he added, that if diet and supplements restore appropriate levels of vitamin D, the development of cancer might be prevented. According to Dr. Garland, vitamin D levels can be easily increased, if needed, by modest supplementation with vitamin D3 in the range of 2000 IU/day.

The "cure" for cancer already exists

This new model of cancer's cause has been dubbed DINOMIT by Dr. Garland and his colleagues. Each letter stands for a different phase of cancer development: "D" refers to disjunction, or loss of communication between cells; "I" is for initiation, where genetic mutations begin to play a role; "N" refers to natural selection of the fastest-reproducing cancer cells; "O" is a for overgrowth of cells; "M" stands for metastasis, the spread of a malignancy to other tissues; "I" refers to involution and "T" for transition, both dormant states that may occur in cancer and can potentially be altered by increasing vitamin D.

"Competition and natural selection among disjoined cells within a tissue compartment, such as might occur in the breast's terminal ductal lobular unit, for example, are the engine of cancer," Dr.Garland said in the press statement. "The DINOMIT model provides new avenues for preventing and improving the success of cancer treatment."

In their Annals of Epidemiology report, the UC scientists point to a host of studies that show an apparent beneficial effect of vitamin D (and, to some extent, calcium) on cancer risk and survival of patients with breast, colorectal and prostate cancer. In fact, Dr. Garland and his team have published epidemiological studies about the potential preventive effects of vitamin D for some twenty years.

In 2008, Dr. Garland and his colleagues found an association between a lack of sunlight exposure, low vitamin D and breast cancer. In earlier work, they showed linkages between increased levels of vitamin D3 or markers of vitamin D and a lower risk for breast, colon, ovarian and kidney cancers, too.

As reported earlier in Natural News, clues about a possible cause-and-effect association between a lack of vitamin D and cancer's development have rapidly accumulated over the past few years. For example, researchers have found that women who are deficient in vitamin D at the time they are diagnosed with breast cancer are nearly 75 percent more likely to die from the disease than women with sufficient vitamin D levels. Moreover, their cancer is twice as likely to metastasize to other parts of the body (http://www.naturalnews.com/024324.html).

Healthy levels of vitamin D have been found to slash the risk of numerous cancers by 77 percent (http://www.naturalnews.com/021892.html).

Cecile Louise's picture
Cecile Louise
Posts: 135
Joined: Dec 2009

I am 2 years out from my last chemo and I'm taking 2,000 units a day on the advice of my regular gynecologist, plus 50k units once a week for 8 weeks because he found that I am Vit D deficient. Actually, my gyno has had blood work done every year for the last 3 years and I've been found Vit D deficient, in addition to having osteopenia (precursor to osteoporosis). Although I was told that my oncologist would be in charge of all my exams for 5 years after my surgery, I still see my gynecologist regularly, and glad I do since my oncologist has never tested me for Vit D or ordered a bone density test.
I posted a snippet of an article some time ago regarding Vit D and cancer; some pretty good info, I think - I'll see if I can find it.

Love,
Cecile

MoeKay
Posts: 63
Joined: Feb 2004

Just be sure that you get a blood test to ascertain your Vitamin D level before starting supplementation, and have routine testing done during supplementation. Vitamin D is a fat soluble vitamin, meaning that excesses are not excreted by the kidneys and accumulate in the body. Too much Vitamin D can result in serious side effects. My most recent test showed that I am slightly above the high end of the normal range. The lab where my testing was done uses an upper limit normal of 67, and my level was 68. So I am being cautious in how much Vit. D supplementation I do.

Cecile Louise's picture
Cecile Louise
Posts: 135
Joined: Dec 2009

Excellent point! You are correct - it's very important to make sure you need it before you start Vit D supplements. Thanks!

Love,
Cecile

culka's picture
culka
Posts: 158
Joined: Oct 2009

Watch this video too http://naturalnews.tv/v.asp?v=234

kkstef's picture
kkstef
Posts: 706
Joined: May 2008

Some good info....thanks!

Yes, I take 2000 units of Vit D3 daily. There is some discussion that the “normal” range for Vit D is too low and there is an effort underway to raise the “normal” to about 50. Below are 2 articles from research done at Creighton U. The first article is about Vit D3 and reduction of cancer risk and the second article, although focused on osteoporosis is a good resource on why one needs Vit D, and how much to take etc. It appears that the “safe” level is still quite far above the current laboratory “high”.

I had attended 2 different lectures, one by A dietitian and one a naturopath and both talked about the need for Vit D, suggesting getting a baseline and then yearly recheck. I had to ask my GP to order it….my oncologist never mentioned it! (is that a surprise??)

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/73654.php

http://osteoporosis.creighton.edu/Vitamin_D_FAQ/Vitamin%20D%20for%20website_MOD.pdf

Cheers!

Karen

daisy366's picture
daisy366
Posts: 1493
Joined: Mar 2009

My homeopathic doc recommended that I take liquid Vit D3. He also told me to "put on my bikini and get out in the sun" (a sight that would not be pleasant for sure). Moderation of course, not to get a burn - but do get sunshine to get this naturally.

Mary Ann

Cecile Louise's picture
Cecile Louise
Posts: 135
Joined: Dec 2009

Another excellent point about getting Vit D! (except for the bikini part - I'd hate to scare my neighbors!)

Love,
Cecile

culka's picture
culka
Posts: 158
Joined: Oct 2009

If you are eating what you eating you will never get a burn.

Double Whammy's picture
Double Whammy
Posts: 2338
Joined: Jun 2010

I've been Vitamin D deficient for a couple of years. My primary care physician ordered the test as part of routine blood work. Anyway, I haven't been very good about taking the supplements. I've been sporadic. My levels never improved. And guess what? I now have 2 cancers - uterine and breast. Any relationship to Vitamin D deficiency? Who knows. I know I'm paying attention now. I've just started 50,000 U of Vitamin D weekly, prescribed by my primary care physician. I discussed this with my medical oncologist a couple of weeks ago. She agreed, but I had to ask her about it. She also advised "15 minutes in the sun every day and don't tell the dermatologists".

I don't have a clue if this is good or bad during chemotherapy which I'm about to start for breast cancer, but I will be sure my medical oncologist knows how much I'm taking. My Vitamin D level was really low - 13.

Remember, we're our own best health advocates. Sometimes we have to ask questions and remind our physicians about certain details.

Suzanne

mmurcia2000
Posts: 27
Joined: Jun 2010

Ladies,
This information is so interesting. I saw my endocrinologist and he just happened to add the vitamin D test to my routine workup. Well it turns out that my level is 24 when normal is 35 to 100 according to him. I am going to get started on some high doses of vitamin D to bring me up to normal.

I will talk to my oncologist during my appointment today too and see what he has to say about the cancer and vitamin D connection.

Thanks for the imformation.

kathybd
Posts: 126
Joined: Jul 2009

I HAVE TAKEN VIT D 3 SINCE MY HUSBAND WAS DIAGNOSED WITH COLON CANCER 2 YEARS AGO. WE SAW A HOLISTIC DOC THAT RECCOMENDED IT. I WAS JUST SPORADIC WITH TAKING IT, AND ENDED UP WITH UTERINE CANCER. NOW I AM CONSISTENT WITH IT AND CURCUMIN, FLAX SEED OIL, VIT C, B COMPLEX AND OTHERS FOR GLUCOSE LEVELS. NO METASTISIS AS OF LATEST TESTS.

llight
Posts: 99
Joined: Feb 2010

I'm glad others find this interesting as I continue to do research on this fascinating subject.

Please note that Cedric Garland and Servan-Schreiber are recommending 60ng/ml as the blood serum level goal for cancer patients. Donald L. Trump (who treats prostate cancer) tries to get his patients up to 60-75 ng/ml if my memory is serving me. 21 minutes into Trump's UCTV lecture on youtube he discusses this. Also, says he checks his cancer patients Vit D levels every 3 mos. I think we all need to be getting our doctors to do this for us. Get checks on D and calcium. Drink plenty of fluids to help prevent possible stone formation. Note: Vit D has the same receptors as Vit A so it's important to keep Vit A levels to a minimum. All in the videos.

Garland has a June 2010 UCTV lecture on youtube, also, that is worth watching. Same info but some new stuff at the end during Q&A.

Vitamin D: Role in Preventing Cancer – Cedric Garland, Dr. PH, UCSD, UCtelevision, June 2010 – 55 min video, more details
http://tinyurl.com/39rzz4b>http://tinyurl.com/39rzz4b
(46:40 in) Why Vit D may work in people that already have cancer; watch the DINOMIT theory (34:58) first.
(36:30 in) His group is suggesting 50ng/ml though he feels that there is a region above that that is quite possibly safe and efficacious; you don’t want to go below 50ng/ml. he said. Other organizations may recommend 4000-10,000ius/day. Please watch the video for details. D3 and ionized calcium levels should be monitored through your doctor to watch for kidney stones and other possible side effects.
(49:20) Talks about a seasonal phase

Please watch, ladies. This is important stuff you won't hear from your oncologists!

Rewriter's picture
Rewriter
Posts: 496
Joined: Dec 2009

At my last primary care checkup in August, my doctor warned me against taking calcium supplements (heart attack risk) and said she preferred me to get my vitamin D from food and the sun. I've read about the potential danger of calcium pills, but what is the current thinking on vitamin D? I had been taking Solgar brand Calcium Citrate capsules, which contain 1000 mg. of calcium citrate and 600 IUs of vitamin D3 (as cholecalciferol; and even with this supplementation, my vitamin D level was 37. I read somewhere that taking calcium in combination with vitamin D minimized the risks of either supplement. I do not eat anything that is "fortified" and can't really afford to eat the amount of fish necessary to raise my vitamin level. Anyone have advice?

RoseyR
Posts: 464
Joined: Feb 2011

Can hardly profess to be an expert on the subject, but low vitamin D levels were a major concern to my integrative physician; they were soon after diagnosis a mere 24; he wanted them between 45 and 65 ASAP!

His prescription was "Liqui-D," very inexpensive drops of D to be taken after a meal daily.
Sometimes he wanted me to take as much as five drops a day (10,000 IU) UNTIL my level went up to at least 45. Never did he recommend calcium, and in fact, I've read often that calcium supplements are hyped and often dangerous; in fact, the more D you get, the more risk that you will become too high in calcium, a dangerous condition that a blood test can catch. (It's calcium and magnesium that need to be in ratio, I recall).

If you're eating enough dark green vegetables (esp kale and broccoli), and occasional sardines, you're getting plenty of calcium, I am told.

Just conveying what I've read and been told; doesn't necessarily mean it's entirely right.

Best,
Rosey

JoAnnDK
Posts: 276
Joined: Jun 2011

coincidentally, this recently appeared in my inbox:

Vitamin D Benefits: Hope or Hype? —>>>

http://www.medpagetoday.com/PrimaryCare/DietNutrition/29879

not saying it's right, just interesting to read.

Rewriter's picture
Rewriter
Posts: 496
Joined: Dec 2009

The article was very interesting and will help me decide about supplementation.

daisy366's picture
daisy366
Posts: 1493
Joined: Mar 2009

I'm glad you are being monitored closely. My intregrative practitioner also recommended the same liquid with instruction to take only 2 drops daily for first month than 1 (each drop has 2000 units). Your 5 drops scared me - but good that this was temporary.

When I reviewed taking liquid D with my PCP (a DO), she warned me about potential toxicity because D is fat soluble and can build up in the body unlike other supplements which are flushed away.

Like calcium, not all supplements are helpful in large doses. At this point, I rely on diet and take the D (I get lots of sun here in FL), a multi, and aspirin when I think of it.

All the best to you, Mary Ann

PS In rereading the earlier posts, I think I just repeated things that others wrote!!

Rewriter's picture
Rewriter
Posts: 496
Joined: Dec 2009

for sharing your experience. Most of what I've read leans in the direction of correcting low levels of vitamin D but being careful NOT to raise those levels too high. What constitutes levels that are one or the other, and how many IUs are dangerous to take, is where most of the controversy exists. As you point out, hypercalcemia can result from "too much" D, and that condition can damage the heart and other organs. At my physical in August, my vit. D level was 37 (in the lab's normal range); and my calcium was also normal, but in the high normal range. My diet at that time (and now) was full of dark green vegetables; and I was getting plenty of sunshine. Now that I am not in the sun nearly as much (my physical was in August, and I was taking walks on the beach), I want to go back to taking the supplement. This is a real dilemma: Keeping your vitamin D in normal range but being very careful not to go beyond that range. Ugh. I spend so much time trying to maintain a healthy diet and ensuring that my blood levels are within range that I barely have time for anything else. That is hyperbole, but only slightly.

bell_ella
Posts: 7
Joined: Jan 2012

Read the book The Vitamin D Solution by Michael F Holick

I live in the tropics - lots of sun here - and I was still low in Vit D. My sistersw also and my mother - wow.

Being ocverweight does not help either - Vit D trapped in fat but lots of oestrogen feeging the cancer (ULMS) - oh dear, can't win.

Dr Oz now advocates it and I started on it last year after being tested by an MD who deal with complementary issues - a little too late I fear.

My sister in law who just got breast cancer (no history in family but still got aggressive cancer) was also found to be low in Vit D and was told to take large supplements to get them back to normal to assist the cancer 'fight'.

She is thin.

Read the book. It is compelling.

Subscribe with RSS
About Cancer Society

The content on this site is for informational purposes only. It is not a substitute for professional medical advice. Do not use this information to diagnose or treat a health problem or disease without consulting with a qualified healthcare provider. Please consult your healthcare provider with any questions or concerns you may have regarding your condition. Use of this online service is subject to the disclaimer and the terms and conditions.

Copyright 2000-2014 © Cancer Survivors Network