You are here: Welcome to the MPKB » Welcome to the MPKB » Science behind Pathogenesis » Science behind vitamin D » Latitude studies on vitamin D and disease
Home

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision		Previous revision
Next revisionBoth sides next revision
home:pathogenesis:vitamind:latitude [10.29.2010] – paulalberthome:pathogenesis:vitamind:latitude [03.06.2011] – external edit 127.0.0.1
Line 1: Line 1:
 ====== Latitude studies on vitamin D and disease ====== ====== Latitude studies on vitamin D and disease ======
  
-<relatedarticle> [[home:othertreatments:antidepressants|Sunshine/light exposure as therapy]] </article>+<relatedarticle> [[home:othertreatments:sunshine|Sunshine/light exposure as therapy]] </article>
  
 The "latitude studies" are [[home:pathogenesis:vitamind:observational_bias|observational]] - as opposed to interventional - studies  that use ambient solar UV radiation as a proxy for latitude and vitamin D status. For these studies, researchers compare rates of certain major cancers - most notably breast, colorectal and prostate cancer - to rates of sunlight exposure. This group of research has the liability of being wildly inconsistent. The choice to publish research on a specific latitude gradient may be a better proxy for a researcher's bias. There is sufficient variability in the prevalence of disease among countries and ethnicities that different researchers have come to different conclusions even those looking at the same data source. The "latitude studies" are [[home:pathogenesis:vitamind:observational_bias|observational]] - as opposed to interventional - studies  that use ambient solar UV radiation as a proxy for latitude and vitamin D status. For these studies, researchers compare rates of certain major cancers - most notably breast, colorectal and prostate cancer - to rates of sunlight exposure. This group of research has the liability of being wildly inconsistent. The choice to publish research on a specific latitude gradient may be a better proxy for a researcher's bias. There is sufficient variability in the prevalence of disease among countries and ethnicities that different researchers have come to different conclusions even those looking at the same data source.
Line 141: Line 141:
  
 PMID: 19425095</blockquote> PMID: 19425095</blockquote>
 +
 +
 +  * **atherosclerosis in African Americans** – Vitamin D is widely used to treat patients with osteoporosis and/or low vitamin D levels based on a medically accepted normal range. This "normal" range is typically applied to all race groups, although it was established predominantly in whites. It is thought that as low vitamin D levels rise to the normal range with supplementation, protection from bone and heart disease (atherosclerosis) may increase, as well. Blacks generally have lower vitamin D levels than whites, partly because their darker skin pigmentation limits the amount of the vitamin produced by sunlight. "Despite" these lower vitamin D levels and dietary calcium ingestion, blacks naturally experience lower rates of osteoporosis and have far less calcium in their arteries. Studies further reveal that black patients with diabetes have half the rate of heart attack as whites, when provided equal access to health care. A 2010 study (explained [[http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/03/100315091259.htm|here]]) determined the relationship between circulating vitamin D levels and arterial calcium in 340 black men and women with type 2 diabetes.(({{pubmed>long:20061416}})) The team concluded that higher circulating levels of 25-D in blacks were associated with higher levels of calcified atherosclerotic plaque. 
  
 ===== References ===== ===== References =====
home/pathogenesis/vitamind/latitude.txt · Last modified: 09.14.2022 by 127.0.0.1
© 2015, Autoimmunity Research Foundation. All Rights Reserved.