Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

think

(11,641 posts)
33. The end of the article links to a Harvard article
Fri Jan 24, 2014, 07:03 PM
Jan 2014

which includes a section on vitamin D and cancer:

Vitamin D and cancer

Nearly 30 years ago, researchers noticed an intriguing relationship between colon cancer deaths and geographic location: People who lived at higher latitudes, such as in the northern U.S., had higher rates of death from colon cancer than people who live closer to the equator. (26) Many scientific hypotheses about vitamin D and disease stem from studies that have compared solar radiation and disease rates in different countries. These can be a good starting point for other research but don’t provide the most definitive information. The sun’s UVB rays are weaker at higher latitudes, and in turn, people’s vitamin D levels in these high latitude locales tend to be lower. This led to the hypothesis that low vitamin D levels might somehow increase colon cancer risk. (2)

Since then, dozens of studies suggest an association between low vitamin D levels and increased risks of colon and other cancers. (1,27) The evidence is strongest for colorectal cancer, with most (but not all) observational studies finding that the lower the vitamin D levels, the higher the risk of these diseases. (28-38) Vitamin D levels may also predict cancer survival, but evidence for this is still limited. (27) Yet finding such associations does not necessarily mean that taking vitamin D supplements will lower cancer risk.

The VITAL trial will look specifically at whether vitamin D supplements lower cancer risk. It will be years, though, before it releases any results. It could also fail to detect a real benefit of vitamin D, for several reasons: If people in the placebo group decide on their own to take vitamin D supplements, that could minimize any differences between the placebo group and the supplement group; the study may not follow participants for a long enough time to show a cancer prevention benefit; or study participants may be starting supplements too late in life to lower their cancer risk. In the meantime, based on the evidence to date, 16 scientists have circulated a “call for action” on vitamin D and cancer prevention: (27) Given the high rates of vitamin D deficiency in North America, the strong evidence for reduction of osteoporosis and fractures, the potential cancer-fighting benefits of vitamin D, and the low risk of vitamin D supplementation, they recommend widespread vitamin D supplementation of 2000 IU per day. (27)

Read more: vitamin D trials for cancer prevention

From:

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/vitamin-d/#vitamin-d-and-cancer



Notice the "Read more" links to Vitamin trials for cancer prevention. From that link there is information regarding early studies, more recent studies, and new on going ones:

Vitamin D Trials for Cancer Prevention

The randomized controlled trial evidence on vitamin D supplementation and cancer prevention has been mixed to date. The Women’s Health Initiative trial, which followed roughly 36,000 women for an average of seven years, failed to find any reduction in colon or breast cancer risk in women who received daily supplements of 400 IU of vitamin D and 1,000 mg of calcium, compared to those who received a placebo. (1, 2) But that study had several limitations, chief among them the relatively low dose of vitamin D. (3, 4) Also, some people in the placebo group decided on their own to take extra calcium and vitamin D supplements, minimizing the differences between the placebo group and the supplement group, and about one third of the women assigned to vitamin D did not take their supplements. (5)


A more recent trial among nearly 1,200 postmenopausal women found significant reductions in overall cancer incidence
among those randomized to receive 1,100 IU of vitamin D plus 1400-1500 mg calcium. (6) The Vitamin D and Omega 3 Trial (VITAL) study, which is testing 2,000 IU of vitamin D per day, should offer more answers on the role of vitamin D in cancer prevention, although it could be affected by some of the same limitations as the Women’s Health Initiative.

Entire article:
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/vitamin-d-cancer-trials/



The new ongoing study is called Vital and involves studying 20,000 individuals who are given Vitamin D and Omega 3's.

Welcome to the VITAL Study

Welcome to the Web site of the VITamin D and OmegA-3 TriaL (VITAL) at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, an affiliate of Harvard Medical School, in Boston, Massachusetts. VITAL is a research study in 20,000 men and women across the U.S. investigating whether taking daily dietary supplements of vitamin D3 (2000 IU) or omega-3 fatty acids (Omacor® fish oil, 1 gram) reduces the risk for developing cancer, heart disease, and stroke in people who do not have a prior history of these illnesses. Please click on Study Q&A to learn more about this important research endeavor.

http://www.vitalstudy.org/


Will be interesting to see what kind of results come out this study.....





Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

So at my next physical I should take this to my doctor snooper2 Jan 2014 #1
I contacted my doctor about the recent AMA re-definition of high blood pressure IDemo Jan 2014 #2
I don't think it was Chuuku Davis Jan 2014 #53
It was the AMA IDemo Jan 2014 #57
Doesn't follow that you are not actually low on D3... hlthe2b Jan 2014 #3
This is about people taking vitamin D that aren't deficient. tammywammy Jan 2014 #9
Not entirely frazzled Jan 2014 #15
I'll take that 15%, thank you. djean111 Jan 2014 #4
Their outrage over woo has blinded them to what woo is. Rex Jan 2014 #16
Yes! If we say that taking vitamin D reduces fractures by 15%, then we are saying the same thing, Squinch Jan 2014 #29
That's what a doctor/researcher was saying on tv tonight laundry_queen Jan 2014 #52
Odd then dipsydoodle Jan 2014 #5
This is not about people that are deficient. tammywammy Jan 2014 #7
You reject it if you don't need it. dipsydoodle Jan 2014 #17
No. There are 4 fat soluble vitamins, K, A, D and E AngryAmish Jan 2014 #39
Dipsy, please read my post below. Boudica the Lyoness Jan 2014 #50
Don't tell that to the woo crowd. Vashta Nerada Jan 2014 #6
Unless . . . JustAnotherGen Jan 2014 #8
vit D bloodwork cost me $200 to find out I'm deficient - $2.34 cost of 3/mos Vit D nashville_brook Jan 2014 #10
Ahh JustAnotherGen Jan 2014 #14
since unused vitamin D is just flushed out, I'm skipping the bloodwork from now on nashville_brook Jan 2014 #56
vitamin D is a fat soluble vitamin, it is not "flushed out" etherealtruth Jan 2014 #60
JAG, what is A.S.? Number23 Jan 2014 #23
Ankylosing Spondylitis JustAnotherGen Jan 2014 #24
Dh has this too MissB Jan 2014 #26
Feel free JustAnotherGen Jan 2014 #31
Creaky joints are like my speciality Number23 Jan 2014 #34
I'm okay JustAnotherGen Jan 2014 #40
Oh my goodness, I had no idea Number23 Jan 2014 #41
Many thanks for all of it JustAnotherGen Jan 2014 #45
That doesn't leave us many other options during the Winter. tridim Jan 2014 #11
DU Rec... SidDithers Jan 2014 #12
Wait... what? DeadLetterOffice Jan 2014 #13
The question is, 15% of WHAT. frazzled Jan 2014 #19
Wow that some special kinda stupid they're teaching a MedU Biostatics 101. GeorgeGist Jan 2014 #27
Um, no frazzled Jan 2014 #28
You're quite right... DeadLetterOffice Jan 2014 #32
Supplements help when you have a deficiency. If you aren't deficient in something, you don't... phleshdef Jan 2014 #18
Mushroom soup-esp in winter... marions ghost Jan 2014 #20
How big was the study? flamingdem Jan 2014 #21
I long ago decied that there arew so many conflicting claims and studies about food that.... Armstead Jan 2014 #22
15% is better than most big pharma drugs. GeorgeGist Jan 2014 #25
Unless you have a vitamin D deficiency Dollface Jan 2014 #30
The end of the article links to a Harvard article think Jan 2014 #33
Thanks! pnwmom Jan 2014 #35
yw :) Just noticed that there is also a link think Jan 2014 #37
I'm wondering why some people are so eager to push the meme that supplements are worthless pnwmom Jan 2014 #38
Exactly! n/t Yo_Mama Jan 2014 #44
I can attest to that. RebelOne Jan 2014 #47
I have a b-12 deficiency, but that doesn't mean everyone should get the shots. pnwmom Jan 2014 #48
I take the shots for B6, B12 and Thiamine siligut Jan 2014 #54
Well ... my level was 13 the last time they tested in 2013 tandot Jan 2014 #51
Except the study doesn't apply to people with low blood levels, people who are actively pnwmom Jan 2014 #36
What a bunch of BS Matariki Jan 2014 #42
love hearing that greymattermom Jan 2014 #58
Interesting! Is there an increase in people suffering migraines? Matariki Jan 2014 #59
Of course it is, a certain group here always pushes FUD and hides behind Rex Jan 2014 #61
If you are really low in Vitamin D they definitely do Yo_Mama Jan 2014 #43
I hardly think this study takes chronic low D into account. Jasana Jan 2014 #46
Vit D can be dangerous. It has been for me. Boudica the Lyoness Jan 2014 #49
I saw your note above. dipsydoodle Jan 2014 #55
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Vitamin D Supplements Don...»Reply #33