Double Vitamin D, Kids' Doctors Say

Pediatricians Urge Twice-Daily Recommendation May Reduce Risk Of Cancer, Diabetes And Heart Disease

(CBS/AP)  A report from the American Academy of Pediatrics says children, from newborns to teens, should get twice the previously recommended daily amount of Vitamin D.

New studies have found it may help reduce risks of cancer, diabetes and heart disease, in addition to keeping bones strong.

Those studies mean that many American children, like David Osorio, are Vitamin D deficient, reports CBS News medical correspondent Dr. Jon LaPook. Osorio is only six-years-old and has already suffered bone fractures in both arms.

"I fell off the slide and first I broke this wrist," Osorio said cradling his left arm in his right hand.

But the root cause of those broken bones is more than a boisterous boy at play, LaPook reports, it's also a serious lack of Vitamin D.

"It's a very preventable thing if you're up on your nutrition - it seems easy enough to supplement with Vitamin D rather than suffer the consequences of having a broken bone," says Dr. Shevaun Doyle.

The new advice replaces a 2003 academy recommendation for 200 units daily.

That's the amount the government recommends for children and adults up to age 50; 400 units is recommended for adults aged 51 to 70 and 600 units for those aged 71 and up. Vitamin D is sold in drops for young children, capsules and tablets.

"New research is showing that you need to at least double that in order to not only fight off the old diseases like rickets (which is a bone disease) and osteomalaysia, but we're looking at diabetes and heart disease and even cancer," Dr. Ian Smith told CBS' The Early Show.

To meet the doctors' new recommendation of 400 units daily, millions of children would need to take daily vitamin D supplements, the American Academy of Pediatrics said. That includes breast-fed infants - even those who get some formula, too, and many teens who drink little or no milk.

Baby formula contains vitamin D, so infants on formula only generally do not need supplements. However, the academy recommends breast-feeding for at least the first year of life and breast milk is sometimes deficient.

Most commercially available milk is fortified with vitamin D, but most children and teens do not drink enough of it to meet the new requirement, said Dr. Frank Greer, the report's co-author.

The report does not recommend getting the extra vitamin D from eating more food containing the vitamin, because of the amount of food one would have to consume.

"For example, if you are a child, you'd have to drink four cups of fortified milk in order to get your recommended 400 units," Smith said. "Most children and teenagers are not drinking four cups. So what you have to do is figure out whether or not you can get a combination of milk, fortified cereals or oily fish, such as tuna, mackerel or sardines."

Since it is difficult to get enough Vitamin D through diet alone; the best source is sunlight because the body makes vitamin D when sunshine hits the skin.

While it is believed that 10 to 15 minutes in the sun without sunscreen a few times weekly is sufficient, people with dark skin and those in northern, less sunny climates need more. Because of sunlight's link with skin cancer, "Vitamin D supplements during infancy, childhood and adolescence are necessary," the academy's report says.

Can one have too much vitamin D in their diet?

Smith says yes, but that is rare, "because the amount you have to consume is outrageous. Ninety-five percent of the people who are consuming the average diet, who are getting the average exposure to sunlight will not have too much vitamin D in their system."

The new advice is based on mounting research about potential benefits from vitamin D besides keeping bones strong, including suggestions that it might reduce risks for cancer, diabetes and heart disease.

But the evidence is not conclusive and there's no consensus on how much of the vitamin would be needed for disease prevention.

Christine Stencel, a spokesperson for the U.S. Institute of Medicine, which sets recommended daily doses of nutrients, says it's been several years since they looked at revising the recommendation for Vitamin D and it may now be time.

"The Institute of Medicine would stand ready to do a new review of all the scientific evidence about Vitamin D intakes," she told CBS News.

The recommendations were prepared for release Monday at an academy conference in Boston. They are to be published in the November issue of the academy's journal, Pediatrics.

Dr. Greer, a University of Wisconsin pediatrician, acknowledged that most studies suggesting vitamin D may play a much broader role in disease prevention have been observational, not the most rigorous kind of medical evidence.

Nonetheless, many doctors consider the research compelling and many have begun to offer patients routine vitamin D testing.

Adrian Gombart, a vitamin D researcher at Oregon State University, said the new recommendations are safe and conservative but that 400 units "is probably not enough."

Gombart's lab work in human tissue has shown that vitamin D helps increase levels of a protein that kills bacteria. He said many experts believe that between 800 and 1,000 units daily would be more effective at helping fight disease.

Several members of an academy committee that helped write the guidelines have current or former ties to makers of infant formula or vitamin supplements.

[erasmus81]

I am all for kids drinking more milk and eating better, but as far as increasing the vitamin supplements, FORGET IT. Parents are already overdosing their kids on vitamins. They think that because they are chewable and fruity flavoured that they are just like candy. Some will be thinking that they will just increase the daily vitamin, but in doing so they will be doubling everything else, and that would be very bad. Vitamin D and vitamin A can be very TOXIC in larger amounts. The body can''t get rid of excess amounts.

The problem is that they come out with their "new" findings and then a few years down the road it''s "OOPS, we were mistaken".

[nangoat-2009]

You need the Sun.
The current belief that sunlight is causing cancer will be understood eventually to realize it''s not the Sun causing the cancer. It is the Suns'' ability to work as a ''poultice'' upon the body that allows it to draw the cancer already within the body to the surface of the skin.
Sure, too much Sun can be damaging. But it is not the Sun causing cancer. it is the pollutants in your diet and environment that is already in your body that is causing it.

[justfacts2]

I agree with you erasmus81. Just like everything else, these "new findings" should be taken with a grain of salt.

[kerrjac2]

Vitamin d''s been linked to schizophrenia, Crohn''s, stomach ulcers, and MS...& it doesn''t cure any of those. Now they''re saying everyone is vitamin d deficient, & everyone should take more. More & more foods are fortified with it everyday - half of what I eat almost - yet levels are still low? On top of my vitamin-d fortified milk, cereal, & OJ, what''s an extra 400 IU going to do?

Then there''s the issue of lack of causal research and creating a problem where there is none. Without a clear theoretical foundation, you don''t treat a lab result that''s not tied to clinical symptoms - and vitamin d''s no exception. It''s also dangerous, particularly b/c vitamin d is unique in its effect on hormones & the immune system, which isn''t always positive. And unless breast milk is too low in vitamin d b/c of the mother''s low exposure to vitamin d, there''s no need to tamper with it, as it''s been perfected over millions of years of evolution.

Personally, I suspect that we''re going to find out that low vitamin d may be potential indicator of something else more important - be it something autoimmune, tied to digestion, infection. But meanwhile, without the appropriate theoretical background, there''s no reason to have everyone taking tons of the stuff. Until then, all this hoopla only benefits the vitamin d lobby.

[jw218389]

What do you bet that this study was funded by the Milk industry???

They are telling us that for 2 MILLION years that breastmilk doesn''t have enough vitamin D??? !!!

*********!

[ausus-2009]

The lack of Vitamin D has been linked to osteoporosis. Increasing the intake of calcium without increasing Vitamin D is relatively useless.

As well, Vitamin D in a cream form is a treatment for skin afflictions such as psoriasis and eczema.

Too much of anything can be a problem, but taken in recommended amounts, it is perfectly safe.

[dharano]

Instead of telling us to double vitamin D intake, why don''t they suggest to back off on the sunscreen/ sunblock? We all could use more SUN! :)

[kerrjac2]

Too much of anything can be a problem, but taken in recommended amounts, it is perfectly safe.

That''s exactly the issue, the recommended amount has doubled, & some think it''s still not high enough.

[toolmangler-2009]

Instead of telling us to double vitamin D intake, why don''''t they suggest to back off on the sunscreen/ sunblock? We all could use more SUN! :)

Posted by dharano at 08:27 PM : Oct 13, 2008


With respect, that is only valid for those kids that use sunblock. I never use it and am still ''D'' defecient. (I am not a kid)

[ausus-2009]

Using the sun instead of vitamin D (the most effective form being D3) invites the risk of skin cancer. Taking vitamin D in tablet or capsule form provides the benefits without that risk. If you have concerns, get a blood test. I did and was found to be deficient in vitamin D. I had a persistent skin condition which has improved with vitamin D.

I know that vitamins can be faddish even in medical circles. I can remember when vitamin E was going to solve all of your problems and vitamin C has come in and out of favor.

A balanced diet is the best way of getting vitamins, but for some people even with the best diets there can be vitamin deficiencies, possibly through malabsorption.

Welcome to the party doctors. The nutrition world seems to be ahead of you. Synthetic chemicals that are unnatural to the body cause more harm than good.

[vcofreason]

The reason kids and adults are deficient in Vitamin D is because they are all inside now. No one goes outside to play anymore. If you did, you would get enough of the vitamin D you needed.

However, in order to truly document a deficiency, one should have a CBC to determine the levels. I had to take a vitamin D pill once a week for 3 weeks last year because my levels were abnormally low. I was home bound and ill and that explained it.

[secundus2]

A report on the BBC website links vitamin D deficiency to Parkinson''s disease. It is unknown whether the association is a cause or an effect.

[brainteaser2]

To VC of Reason: You can''t measure vitamin D levels with a CBC. You get a specific Vitamin D blood level. But your thought is in the right place.