So I'm still exclusively breastfeeding my 5 month old baby. I started taking about 5-6k vitamin D about 3 months ago and started giving my little one Carlson baby D drops daily (400iu) about two months ago (I think.)
Is this a good amount for both of us?? I'm wondering if I should be taking more. I live in New England and it's not very sunny where I live and in the past I suffered from major depression issues. Does anyone know what the upper limits are for infants? I've heard of 3 year olds taking close to 2000iu. I also take Cod liver oil, vitamin K2 (mk-7 100), magnesium, and a prenatal multivitamin. My son hasn't ever been sick since we brought him home, knock on wood, so I'm assuming he's well nourished but I just want to make sure.
If anyone has any peer reviewed info I would REALLY appreciate that or info from a real researcher/doctor. I don't want to "experiment" with my kid. :-)
asked byAshley_Roze_ (10904)
Get FREE instant access to our Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!
on May 12, 2011
at 06:42 PM
I think you are doing just fine. At the vit d council, there is this posting about Dr Hollis leaving...but it talks about breastfeeding and Vit D3.
Professor Hollis provided another biomarker, one every woman ??? and most men ??? can immediately accept as the best biomarker yet: how much vitamin D does a woman need to be sure that her breast milk has adequate vitamin D? When you think about it, that's about as good as biomarkers get.
Professor Hollis answered that question in his research, finding that when a lactating woman has vitamin D blood levels of 40???50 ng/ml (100???125 nmol/L), her breast milk finally has enough vitamin D to support the vitamin D levels of her nursing infant. At levels below 40, the vitamin D content of breast milk becomes unpredictable. I'd say Bruce's discovery is more important than PTH or calcium absorption. I also say the women (and men) on the recent vitamin D FNB panel should be ashamed of themselves for apparently not knowing this.
I always wondered how that could be, after first learning in medical school that human breast milk ??? unlike the breast milk of wild mammals ??? has little or no vitamin D. How could Nature's perfect food be void of the pre-hormone needed for infant growth and development? Bruce answered the question, breast milk is not devoid of it, it is just that virtually all modern lactating women are.
Between you and the Carlson's 400IU, I think you are doing the best thing for yourself and your little one...breastfeeding..no artificial formula devoid of cholesterol..and the Vit D3.
Congratulations on being a good mom!
Edit: There is this NIH study using 6400IU per day resulting in adequate circulating Vit D3 in both Mom and infant. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17661565
on May 27, 2011
at 10:35 PM
The general rule of thumb is 1000 IUs per 25 lbs. of body weight, and up to twice that much temporarily if one is ill, or fighting off infection. Be sure to take an easily absorbed form. I love Biotics micro-emulsified D....each drop is 2000 IUs! It's called Bio-D-Mulsion Forte.
on May 12, 2011
at 06:58 PM
I have been giving my 4 yr old boy between 1000-1400IU for the past year. Recently, he had a 25(OH)D test in connection with some allergy tests. I was really happy to find out that his level is 61 ng/ml. This is on the low end of acceptable according the Vit D Council. Our doctor was pleasantly surprised because he said that virtually every child he sees is Vit D deficient. We live in southern California and probably get a bit more than average sunlight compared to most in North America.
This probably doesn't exactly correlate to your 5 month old, but it is another data point to consider.
on June 03, 2014
at 06:16 PM
I take 10,000 iui a day, but I also have a severe vit D deficiency. My breastfeeding little one takes 800iui a day in carlsons drops, and we live in the Pacific North West. (The dose her ped recommended. She is currently 20 pounds.)
on May 12, 2011
at 07:28 PM
Something to watch with the Vitamin D recommendations is the quantity that they recommend as a minimum (i.e. to avoid rickets), vs. the amount recommended (usually by different people/organizations) for optimal health. There is usually a very wide gap between these numbers, for example the latest recommendation talks about supplementing with around 600IU per day, while other sources (including those Paleo quacks) recommend as high as 5,000-10,000IU (the higher ranges perhaps temporarily). The difference is an order of magnitude! Realizing this is what led me down the path of believing that I've been deficient in vitamin D.
My kids are 6 and 8 and breast fed for ~18 months and we were never told to supplement with vitamin D. But I have friends with kids < 2 and this is apparently a big thing now, some are being told to supplement if the kid is exclusively breast fed. I think views on this have changed relatively recently. The idea is that breast milk is considered low/deficient in vitamin D, so if the infant is breast fed exclusively (vs. fed with formula which is fortified), then you need to supplement with vitamin D.
New guidelines were evidently released late in 2010 so this is still changing.
Personally, I am skeptical of the idea that an infant needs supplementation when eating the ultimate Paleo diet -- mother's milk. Perhaps the case could be made that the average nutrition of the average mother is not what it should/could be and the supplementation is a reflection of the mother more than the baby.
I do think the typical modern person gets way less vitamin D than our ancestors, especially if you don't eat processed foods, which are supplemented, and if you fear the sun as we've been told to.