Posted on 12/05/2011 6:24:04 AM PST by decimon
Study finds low vitamin D levels associated with higher degrees of insulin resistance
A recent study of obese and non-obese children found that low vitamin D levels are significantly more prevalent in obese children and are associated with risk factors for type 2 diabetes. This study was accepted for publication in The Endocrine Society's Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism (JCEM).
High rates of vitamin D deficiency have been found in obese populations and past studies have linked low vitamin D levels to cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes. The mechanisms by which obesity and its comorbidities are related to vitamin D deficiency are not fully known. This new study examined associations between vitamin D levels and dietary habits in obese children, and tested whether there were correlations between vitamin D levels and markers of abnormal glucose metabolism and blood pressure.
"Our study found that obese children with lower vitamin D levels had higher degrees of insulin resistance," said Micah Olson, MD, of The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas and lead author of the study. "Although our study cannot prove causation, it does suggest that low vitamin D levels may play a role in the development of type 2 diabetes."
(Excerpt) Read more at eurekalert.org ...
Ping
ping
Because kids who have higher levels of D because they are outside playing more, and therefore eat less and exercise more? May be purely correlative.
I don’t disagree with you concerning your husband’s case.
But low levels of vitamin D in children with type 2 is not surprising.
Children never play outside anymore without being slathered
in sunscreen.
The average diet of an american shild pretty much eliminates viamin D as well
Combine this with the near extiction of physical education programs in our schools, you end up with overweight kids with low vitamin D.
Maybe the overweight part is more to the point than the lack of VitD.
Bur rickets was a problem back when children presumedly were outdoors more than today.
I pinged the wrong Suz. Sorry.
Just a guess, but rickets was prevalent in the tenements and those children likely spent their days indoors doing piecework of some sort. Also, from the drawings of the period, the slums were dark due to narrow streets and coal smoke. How much actual sunshine did those children receive? Then add diet to determine how much milk, eggs or fish the poorer children actually consumed.
It would be interesting to see a study comparing urban children with rural children as to prevalence of rickets.
“Because kids who have higher levels of D because they are outside playing more, and therefore eat less and exercise more? May be purely correlative.”
You nailed it!
No, I think rickets were particularly common in big city tenements - where they weren’t allowed out much.
It would be interesting to see a study comparing urban children with rural children as to prevalence of rickets.
The following short history supports your contention: Vitamin D, Cod-Liver Oil, Sunlight, and Rickets: A Historical Perspective
However, given what I've read, I think that even rural Floridians would benefit from some supplementation.
You can barely get enough sun if you live north of say Dallas, even if you are outside especially once fall starts.
I’d be curious if kids who are on anti-seizure medications are at risk for type 2 diabetes.
My daughter has low levels of vitamin D due to anti-seizure medication zapping it from her system. Even when she is outside a lot in the summer (we have a pool), it is still low.
We supplement, but it is still low. We just keep on upping the supplements.
4,000 to 6,000 IU’s of D3 a day keeps disease away. We have been so much healthier since we started taking D3 the last couple of years.
Add that absorption rates vary according to age and perhaps other existing health conditions.
I am olive skinned and because I was on an antibiotic that increases photo-sensitivity last August, I did not get my usual amounts of summer sun. I noticed some symptoms of low D3 and increased my consumption. My diet is relatively high in D, but I am nearly 69. I had noticed earlier last year that I was showing signs of low B-complex, although, again, my diet is quiet high in these vitamins. I added a simple multi vitamin and symptoms went away completely, in a relatively short amount of time.
Then, I added a new antioxidant, Astraxanthin (red krill oil), which aggravated some mild psoriasis. So, I stopped that supplement and the aggravation is slowly diminishing.
So many things to take into consideration concerning nutrition. I used to not take any supplements at all, but I can tell my body is changing with age.
Since they are comparing obese and non-obese children, how can they be sure that it is the Vitamin D levels making the difference, and not the amount of time spent, say, outside riding bikes, skating, etc.?
The actual study has not yet been published, but I went to the website and read the abstract and it seems that they did not control for these other (glaringly obvious) confounding factors.
I once knew a young boy who was given a video gaming system for Christmas. He gained a significant amount of weight over the next three to six months.
When asked, his mother revealed that the gaming system had drastically altered his playing habits. Previously, he had spent lots of time playing outside on his swing set and trampoline and just running around with his siblings and neighbors. After he got the gaming system, he spent virtually all of his free time in front of it.
I pointed out to the mother what she had just told me and tried to give her a grasp of the obvious: he had gained weight because he was no longer physically active. I suggested that she consider drastically cutting down on his "game time" as a remedy, since she was concerned about his weight gain.
She looked at me as if I were suggesting that she perform an obscenity.
In a 2007 study, Harvard Medical School researchers engineered mice without vitamin D receptors (VDRs). Since vitamin D can have no effect on the body unless it can bind to the VDR, the mice could use no vitamin D whatsoever in their bodies. The researchers found that if the mice were given a diet high in calcium and phosphorous they did not develop rickets and their bones were just as strong as normal mice with active Vitamin D Receptors. Bowed legs are a sign of rickets. The latest molecular evidence does not support adding high levels of vitamin D to the food chain in the name of “preventing rickets.”
Demay MB, Sabbagh Y, Carpenter TO Calcium and vitamin D: what is known about the effects on growing bone. Pediatrics. 2007;119 Suppl 2:S141-4.
One team assessed the absorption of calcium in 15 Nigerian children with active rickets. They found that all 15 children had resolution or improvement of rickets after six months of treatment with calcium supplements.
5. Graff M, Thacher TD, Fischer PR, Stadler D, Pam SD, Pettifor JM, Isichei CO, Abrams SA Calcium absorption in Nigerian children with rickets. Am J Clin Nutr. 2004;80:1415-21.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.