Cheap Vitamins etc?

Ted_Hutchinson

treliac wrote: »

This site is supposed to be for the discussion of money saving. It is not for pseudo-health advice, which is dangerous and unethical.

Exactly which is why it is important that the main stream opinion of Vitamin D experts should be taken note of and not the ideas propounded by Trevor Marshall that are not support by main stream medical research scientists.

We evolved for over 2 million years living mainly outdoors. Our bodies work best when this fact is not forgotten. This research shows the level of 25(OH)D our body naturally attains and maintains given adequate exposure to sunshine or supplements of effective strength.

It is reasonable to question the advice currently propounded by Dawn Primarolo when that advice will lead to more ill health than it prevents.

High prevalence of vitamin D deficiency in newborn infants of high-risk mothers

lexa34

lotto-dreamer wrote: »

Advice, yes please!

I've been trying to find a good cheap alternative to Seven Seas Multi Spectrum but thought cheaper may mean inferior when it comes to things like vitamins (I particularly like this Seven Seas combination as it includes choline and inositol)

meant to add - I'm not keen on very large capsules which is why I like the Seven Seas ones as they're very easy to swallow

Trying to find out what is best to take and where to best the best quality, value tablets is a nightmare- where can one start!

I want the hight EPA stuff to possibility help sorting my brain out!
help ...:rotfl:

maytaurus

Hi lexa34
have a look here
[FONT=verdana,arial,sans-serif]Dosage and Ingredients[/FONT] @
http://www.zipvit.co.uk/cgi-bin/ingredients.cgi

http://www.zipvit.co.uk/cgi-bin/healthnotesmenupage.cgi
I use them all the time ! @
http://www.zipvit.co.uk/

also
http://www.hollandandbarrett.com/index.asp?afid=70&safid=Yahoo&scid=4898

I always get things here when they have a sale

chuckles1066

Tigersilly wrote: »

I'm wary of buying cheap vits and minerals in case they are less potent - do people feel they actually work?

You have to check the dosage against what you're paying otherwise, as you say, you end up thinking you've got a bargain when, in fact, the dosages are so low to be of negligible benefit.

For example, cod liver oil needs to be 1000mg to be of any use - you'll be surprised how many places still sell 400mg capsules.

I use Zipvit....their echinacea pills are the strongest I've found anywhere and they've currently got a silly deal on omega 3 fish oils, 360 x 1000mg capsules for £9.89.

Ted_Hutchinson

chuckles1066 wrote: »

You have to check the dosage against what you're paying otherwise, as you say, you end up thinking you've got a bargain when, in fact, the dosages are so low to be of negligible benefit.

I use Zipvit....their echinacea pills are the strongest I've found anywhere and they've currently got a silly deal on omega 3 fish oils, 360 x 1000mg capsules for £9.89.

But as you say you have to be very careful to buy the right product to get the best deal.
A39a 360 = £9,89 = 2.75 for 300mg omega 3
A316a 360 =£14.49= 4p for 550 omega 3
Ideally 1.5g omega 3 daily is a reasonable minimum. so the lower strength requires 5 daily cost 13.75p/d
while the stronger ones cost 12p daily and you get a bit extra omega 3 and fewer capsules to swallow.

Zipvit charge £1 for orders less than £16
So those who just want the omega 3 may be better off at Simply Supplements where 360 Omega 3 Triple Action cost £14.35 and post and packing is free.

lotto-dreamer

lexa34 wrote: »

Trying to find out what is best to take and where to best the best quality, value tablets is a nightmare- where can one start!

I want the hight EPA stuff to possibility help sorting my brain out!
help ...:rotfl:

...........me too

"...better brains in the head than riches and confusion" (...or maybe not :rolleyes: )

dougz_2

treliac wrote: »

Perhaps this is more readable for you:

Unfortunately not, looks like more of the same, the jist of which seems to be an untested regime involving the deliberate deprivation of vitamin D as a method to treat specific types of chronic bacterial infection, the sufferers of which are probably willing to try anything in desperation. The advocates of the plan then get carried away with it to the extent of wanting to deprive the rest of the population too. None of which seems relevant to me who simply wants to compensate for lack of sunlight.

Back on the topic of saving money. Given that the larger dosages of vit D tablet work out much cheaper per microgram, I am wondering would it not be cheaper to try to use those instead? For example if your desired supplementation was 1000iu per day why not just take one 5000iu every 5 days instead? I am thinking this should not cause an issue, as it would basically simulate a similarly uneven dosing as would sunbathing once a week.

An even cheaper strategy would be to buy the 50,000ui capsules and split them. I assume they contain powder which could be bulked up in the correct ratio and then either used to fill new empty capsules, or mixed with food or drink.

treliac

dougz wrote: »

if your desired supplementation was 1000iu per day why not just take one 5000iu every 5 days instead? I am thinking this should not cause an issue, as it would basically simulate a similarly uneven dosing as would sunbathing once a week.

I'm glad you're not talking about exceeding Dr Sahelian's recommended max dosage dougz.

I eat plenty of dairy products and supplement via multivitamin/mineral and calcium with vit d to aid absorbtion. I'm vegetarian and keep well, with the assistance of nutritional supplements. Everything in moderation and balance.

dougz_2

treliac wrote: »

I'm glad you're not talking about exceeding Dr Sahelian's recommended max dosage dougz. .

I haven't actually decided yet. I am still investigating. It may depend result of blood test. This article suggests if it is low enough I could possibly end up getting prescribed well over that by my GP anyway
http://www.clinicalanswers.nhs.uk/index.cfm?question=7309
I would agree that moderation is generally a good policy though.

Ted_Hutchinson

dougz wrote: »

I haven't actually decided yet. I am still investigating. It may depend result of blood test. This article suggests if it is low enough I could possibly end up getting prescribed well over that by my GP anyway
http://www.clinicalanswers.nhs.uk/index.cfm?question=7309
I would agree that moderation is generally a good policy though.

I really don't understand why people refuse to listen to the experts.
The case against ergocalciferol (vitamin D2) as a vitamin supplement
this sets out the evidence, there are other papers as well I could list, as to why ergocalciferol should not be used. We know perfectly well it can raise Vitamin D2 status but we do not know that every person with a raised D2 status can utilise that form of Vitamin D. We do know the everyone can use the natural form D3.

The Heartscanblog Dr Davis provided an example a while ago of a woman who came to him who had been taking 50,000iu/d2 regularly for over a year but who just did not respond to it. When a product is both less reliable and more expensive we do have to question the motives and common sense of people who only use or continue to recommend (Both ergocalciferol (25-OHD2) and cholecalciferol (25-OHD3) are effective therapy for vitamin D deficiency,) the least reliable, least effective, most unsafe form.
The urgent need to recommend an intake of vitamin D that is effective
This shows that Supplemental intake of 400 IU vitamin D/d has only a modest effect on blood concentrations of 25(OH)D, raising them by 7–12 nmol/L, depending on the starting point.

If you read this paper Not enough vitamin D
you see the oral dose of vitamin D3 to attain and maintain 25(OH)D levels >80 nmol/L is 2200 IU/d if baseline levels are 20 to 40 nmol/L,
That is in Canada where milk/cereals are Vit d fortified, where most Canadians actually live further south than most UK adults and in a continental country where more hours of sunshine are available than in a cloud covered island.

It is only basic maths to work out how much you need to raise your status once you have a 25(OH)D level. I take 5000iu/daily my status was 147.5nmol/l when last tested I would not be happy if it dropped below 125nmol/l.

Risk Assessment Vitamin D
sets out the safety issues. As 10,000iu is suggested as the safe upper limit and it takes 40,000iu/daily for some months before levels start to approach the level at which adverse events occur.
This is what happens when people take 6400iu/daily
Figure 2Circulating 25(OH)D as a Function of Vitamin D3 Status in Supplemented Subjects
Bear in mind that research with the lactating mothers was done in Charleston latitude 32 so the background sunshine vitamin d availability was also greater than here. I reckon the body has a natural level that it settles at given adequate sun exposure or the equivalent amount of sunshine that natural level (bearing in mind we spend over 200million years evolving living mainly outdoors) is probably the best for health. Certainly significantly over 100nmol/l seems to equate with optimising the amount of vitamin d in breast milk, lower cancer incidence, lower heart disease, lower incidence of infections and optimal feelings of well being.

The Vieth talk here is worth listening tobut so are most of them if you have the time.

Diagnosis and treatment of vitamin D deficiency