The Vitamin D Revolution: Why Everything You Know About Dosage Might Be Wrong

In a provocative video that's stirring up debate in medical circles, Dr. Eric Berg DC challenges long-held beliefs about vitamin D dosage. His claims, based on historical data and recent studies, suggest that current recommendations for vitamin D intake may be dangerously low. This comprehensive exploration of Dr. Berg's arguments sheds light on a topic that could revolutionize our approach to health and disease prevention.

The Historical Context of Vitamin D

Dr. Berg begins by taking us back to the early 1900s, a time before vaccines and antibiotics. During this era, sunbathing, or "heliotherapy," was a common treatment for various ailments. Tuberculosis, asthma, osteoporosis, tooth decay, psoriasis, mood disorders, diabetes, heart disease, and even cancer were addressed through controlled sun exposure. This natural approach to health was soon overshadowed by modern medical advancements and growing concerns about skin cancer.

The Controversy Surrounding Dosage

At the heart of Dr. Berg's argument is the claim that the currently recommended daily allowance (RDA) of 600 IU (International Units) for vitamin D is woefully inadequate. To put this in perspective, he points out that 600 IU is equivalent to just 1.8 minutes of sun exposure on a summer day. In contrast, 10,000 IU would be comparable to about 30 minutes in the summer sun.

Dr. Berg cites a groundbreaking study commissioned by the government and conducted by the University of Illinois Chicago. This extensive research, involving hundreds of doctors, 773 patients, and even 63 dogs, used vitamin D dosages ranging from 200,000 to 1 million IU. Surprisingly, the study found no evidence of toxicity at these high levels.

The Miscalculation Controversy

Perhaps one of the most shocking revelations in Dr. Berg's video is the alleged miscalculation in vitamin D recommendations. He mentions that two organizations re-evaluated the data used by The Institute of Health (which recommends 600 IU) and found significant errors. According to these findings, the correct recommendation should be 8,895 IU – a far cry from the current guidelines.

Geographical Correlations and Disease Risk

Dr. Berg presents intriguing graphs showing correlations between latitude and disease risk. These visual representations suggest that areas closer to the equator, where sun exposure and consequently vitamin D levels are higher, have lower risks of multiple sclerosis, breast cancer, colorectal cancer, and diabetes. While correlation doesn't imply causation, these patterns raise important questions about the role of vitamin D in disease prevention.

The Evolution of Vitamin D Recommendations

The video provides a timeline of vitamin D recommendations, highlighting how they've changed – or in many cases, remained stagnant – over the past century:

- 1900-1910: Rickets was common

- 1918-1920: Sun therapy and cod liver oil used for rickets

- 1922: Vitamin D discovered

- 1946: 400 IU recommended to prevent rickets

- 1950-1970: Despite growing awareness of vitamin D's broader health benefits, the 400 IU recommendation persisted

- 1980s: More benefits for the immune system and chronic diseases recognized, yet the 400 IU recommendation remained

- 1997: The Institute of Medicine introduced "adequate intake" levels, recommending 200 IU for adults, 400 IU for those 51-70, and 600 IU for those over 70

- 2010: Recommendations increased to 600 IU for adults under 70 and 800 IU for those over 70

The Paradox of High-Dose Medications

Dr. Berg points out an interesting paradox: while health authorities cautioned against high vitamin D intake, three commonly prescribed medications contained 50,000 IU of vitamin D. This discrepancy between over-the-counter recommendations and prescription dosages raises questions about the true safety profile of higher vitamin D intake.

The Sun Exposure Controversy

The conversation touches on the widespread campaign in the 1980s advising people to avoid sun exposure and use sunblock to prevent skin cancer. Dr. Berg challenges this approach, suggesting that melanoma, the deadliest form of skin cancer, often develops in areas not exposed to the sun. He goes as far as to propose that melanoma might actually be a result of vitamin D deficiency.

Barriers to Vitamin D Absorption

Dr. Berg explains that vitamin D is crucial for over 2,700 different genes in the body. However, he notes several factors that can hinder vitamin D absorption:

1. Limited dietary sources

2. Genetic vitamin D resistance

3. Darker skin pigmentation

4. Aging skin

5. Higher body weight (as vitamin D gets diluted in fat cells)

These barriers suggest that many people might need higher doses of vitamin D than currently recommended to achieve optimal levels.

The Pharmaceutical Industry's Role

Dr. Berg implies that the pharmaceutical industry and modern medicine have a vested interest in keeping recommended vitamin D doses low. While this claim is controversial, it invites further investigation into the economic and political factors that might influence health recommendations.

Conclusion

Dr. Eric Berg DC presents a compelling case for reevaluating our approach to vitamin D supplementation. While his claims challenge established medical wisdom, they are based on historical data, recent studies, and intriguing correlations. As with any controversial medical topic, it's crucial for individuals to consult with their healthcare providers and consider their personal health circumstances before making significant changes to their vitamin D intake.

Dr Berg serves as a reminder that medical knowledge is constantly evolving, and what we accept as truth today may be challenged by new evidence tomorrow. As research continues, the optimal approach to vitamin D supplementation may indeed be due for a revolutionary change.