I have a nutrition text book copyrighted 1994 that states that "the likeliest
victims of vitamin D poisoning are infants..."   Has this idea undergone a
revision?  It states that "intakes of only 5 times the RDA have been
associated with signs of vitamin D toxicity."  They mention that concentrated
supplements should be treated with respect.

According to this text, sunscreens of SPF's of 8 or above prevent vitamin D
synthesis.  They also state that "daily doses of vitamin D or even sunshine
are not necessary because synthesis of vitamin D continues for days after
exposure to sun and because the body stores  vitamin D in its fat tissue
enough vitamin D to last through the dark winter months."
From:  Sizer, F. and Whitney E., Nutrition Concepts and Controversies (6th
edition),West Publishing Co. 1994 pg.222

In the rush to prevent rickets are we throwing out due caution.  Why are we
not considering the simple and inexpensive preventative measures? For infants
with lighter skin it may be a matter of only exposing an infant to sunlight
for a few minutes a couple times a week.  For darker skinned infants it may
mean more time in the sun.  It seems to me that we are biologically meant to
spend some portion of time outside.  That we have built an environment so
polluted or so dangerous that preclude outdoor activity is shameful.

And as far as I am concerned, this sudden media blitz about rickets has
everything to do with an industry in search of a market.  I think Nikki made
some good points in her post about rickets.  I was born in Northern Ontario
and have been told that my mother took me outside everyday--even during the
cold months of winter.  We have disregarded this tradition at a cost.
Valerie W. McClain, IBCLC

             ***********************************************
The LACTNET mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software together with L-Soft's LSMTP(TM)
mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html