Rhonda Patrick· PhD
in those cases people actually need a higher dose um to get normal levels of vitamin D like I said which are above 30 nanograms per milliliter
Loading…
The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
in those cases people actually need a higher dose um to get normal levels of vitamin D like I said which are above 30 nanograms per milliliter
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
And I've had several friends that have had to take like up to 30,000 IUs a day because they have a SNP.
But generally speaking, because I mentioned vitamin D, that is, you know, one that is there's a variety of very common snips that people do not convert the vitamin D three into the twenty five hydroxy vitamin D very well, or they do not convert the twenty five hydroxy vitamin D into the. steroid hormone very well. And I've actually seen blood work data from people that, friends even, that had to supplement with a much, much higher dose. So I mentioned 4,000 IUs being the tolerable upper intake that the RDA, or sorry, that the Institute of Medicine set, well, I've seen people have to take, you know, between 20,000 to 30,000 IUs a day to even just get a normal, like, 30 or 40 nanogram per milliliter blood concentration of 25-hydroxyvitamin D because they have a genetic polymorphism that makes them so inefficient at doing that.