Comment

Comment by moritzwarhier

> Source? There have been many articles on HN showing the RDA to be ~10x too low (something like 5,000 IU) and that the daily safety limit to be significantly higher than that (something like 30,000 IU).

First: the RDA and the safety limit are not the same, and an RDA in a country being too low does not mean that the maximum safe dose is wrong.

And it certainly does not mean that there is a higher risk in under-dosing than overdosing when taking the RDA (which already includes recommendations for supplementing if you spend most of your time indoors).

I'm not a scientist, so I only know what physicians told me and what's explained in news publications or by consumer advocacy non-profits.

Here are a study (which I didn't read) and the NHS's advise on Vitamin D toxicity:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK557876/

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/vitamins-and-minerals/vitamin-...

The study says:

> Most cases of vitamin D toxicity resolve without serious complications or sequelae. However, in some instances, severe hypercalcemia can lead to acute renal failure requiring hemodialysis. Cases of permanent renal damage due to vitamin D toxicity are rare.

Which sounds good, but I don't think it supports that there is no risk of oral Vitamin D overdose.

parent moritzwarhier 9 months ago

Discussion

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton