Saturday, 25 August 2012

At last some movement upwards on the RDA of vitamin D in Europe


EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies (NDA); Scientific Opinion on the Tolerable Upper Intake Level of vitamin D. EFSA Journal 2012;10(7):2813. [45 pp.] doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2813. 

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies was asked to re-evaluate the safety in use of vitamin D and to provide, if necessary, revised Tolerable Upper Intake Levels (ULs) of vitamin D for all relevant population groups. The ULs for adults including pregnant and lactating women, children and adolescents were revised. For adults, hypercalcaemia was selected as the indicator of toxicity. In two studies in men, intakes between 234 and 275 microgram/day (9,360-11,000U/day) were not associated with hypercalcaemia, and a no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) of 250 microgram/day (10,000U) was established. Taking into account uncertainties associated with these studies, the UL for adults including pregnant and lactating women was set at 100 microgram/day (4,000U/day). Despite a continuing paucity of data for high vitamin D intakes in children and adolescents, the UL was adapted to 100  microgram/day for ages 11-17 years (4,000U/day), considering that owing to phases of rapid bone formation and growth this age group is unlikely to have a lower tolerance for vitamin D compared to adults. The same applies also to children aged 1-10 years, but taking into account their smaller body size, a UL of 50 microgram/day is proposed (2,000U/day). For infants, the UL of 25 microgram/day (1,000U/day) based on previously available data relating high vitamin D intakes to impaired growth and hypercalcaemia was retained as limited additional evidence has emerged since the previous risk assessment. Data on vitamin D intakes from surveys in 14 European countries indicate that intakes in high consumers are below the revised ULs for vitamin D for all population groups. © European Food Safety Authority, 2012.


"This is great news, at last the recommended daily allowances for vD are moving upwards. As we live and work in the EU I feel we should take these recommendations to heart and get as many people as possible to adopt them."

NEW RECOMMENDED DAILY ALLOWANCES FOR VITAMIN D3 SUPPLEMENTATION

Adults 18 years or older = 4,000 U/day or 100 micrograms/day
Children 11-17 years of age = 4,000 U/day or 100 micrograms/day
Children 1-10 years of age = 2,000 U/day or 50 micrograms/day
Infants less than 1year of age = 1,000 U/day or 25 micrograms/day

Maximum safe dose or NOAEL = 11,000 U/day or 275 micrograms/day

8 comments:

  1. Great news! Glad to see there's been progress in this, but still think it should automatically be the first thing that doctors check when diagnosing MS....apart from the LP and MRI!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Very good news though still less than the minimum 5000 units a day recommendation

    Now doctors won't treat Vit D talk as crazy stuff from the internet

    ReplyDelete
  3. I agree this is great news for us... I am taking myself 2.000 IU supplements (9 months since Dx and living in Spain), and now will move to 5.000 IU following your recommendation. I have one question: Does Vit. D have an impact on the course of the illness both for RRMS and SPMS? Thanks

    ReplyDelete
  4. I think this decision actually pushed up the Tolerable Upper Intake Limit rather than the Recommended Daily Allowance. As I understand it the difference is that the RDA is what they think you need and the UL is what you can get away with without harm

    ReplyDelete
  5. After a year of taking 10,000 IU/day, my vitamin D levels have edged up to 48 ng/mL. I was thinking of trying 15,000 IU to see if I could get it up a little more. Is there any reason to think that is likely to be dangerous? Is the maximum safe dose listed above conservative?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Do you have an opinion on the accuracy of types of vitamin D tests, e.g., radioimmunoassay (RIA) methods vs. liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) methods?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Wait, where are the new RDA figures from? They don't seem to be in the paper you cite? Are they official?

    ReplyDelete