The Most Toxic Chemical Added to the North American Food Supply
by Jym Moon, PhD, FACN, Certified Nutrition Specialist
INTRODUCTION
The macrobiotic community is well aware of some of the problems created by the addition of the pro-hormone, "vitamin D," to milk and other foods. In 1974 the George Ohsawa Macrobiotic Foundation published my brief book, A Macrobiotic Explanation of Pathological Calcification. In that book I explaned how the use of "vitamin D" as a food additive has resulted in widespread human poisonings, predominantly in North American, but also in Great Britain, Germany, and Denmark.
WHAT KIND OF PATHOLOGY DOES "VITAMIN D" INDUCE?
The pathology resulting from "vitamin D" excess depends on several factors. Frank hypervitaminosis D is due to the large amounts of "vitamin D" that can be only achieved by self-administration of high potency "vitamin D" supplements. In 1970, the FDA made it illegal to sell over the counter supplements that contain any more than 499 IU in the label-recommended intake. This largely curtailed the occurence of frank hypervitaminosis resulting from over the counter supplements. However, in l992, a number of adults suffered frank hypervitaminosis D as a result of drinking milk that had very large amounts of "vitamin D" accidently added to it. The poisonings were reported in The New England Journal of Medicine (326: 1172-1177, April 30, l992). The authors concluded that "Milk that is fortified with vitamin D must be carrefully monitored." Unfortunately, the FDA and Health Canada have ignored this recommendation, as we still have no idea how much "vitamin D" is going into milk in North America! (See later discussion.)
The manifestations of frank hypervitaminosis D are similar to those seen among humans poisoned by long-term-level ingestion of "vitamin D." These include calcifications of the coronary artery, kidneys, renal arteries, cerebral artteries, and peripheral blood vessels. Bone mineral levels are generally reduced due to removal of calcium phosphates from bone and its deposition in soft tissues. Kidney stones are frequent among people who have been acutely poisoned, as well as among those who consume low levels of "vitamin D" over a long period of time.
To summarize, "vitamin D" excess causes heart, kidney, and artery caclifications, and demineralization of bone. An overall term that summarizes these effects is pathological calcification--hence the term used in A Macrobiotic Explanation of Pathological Calcification. Pathological calcification is currently the most prevalent cause of death and debility seen among North Americans.
The pathological calcifications seen with excess "vitamin D" ingestion are somewhat different in males as compared to females, and in infants compared to adults. We therefore discuss each of these separately: males, females, infants.
MEN
Adult males are poisoned by "vitamin D" display characteristic deposits of calcium phosphates (bone) in soft tissues of the body, including the heart and coronary artery, the kidneys and their arteries, and cerebral and peripheral blood vessels. These calcium deposits result in coronary artery disease, kidney stones, cerebrovascular accidents (strokes), and arthritic conditions. It is very likely that the widespread use of "vitamn D" in North America is a fundamental factor causing the present epidemic of coronary artery disease and kidney stones among men. Millions of North American men suffer from these conditions. As it expected, macrobiotics and other vegans are protected from coronary artery disease, as these people ordinarily consume no "vitamin D" or cholesterol! (Both "vitamin D" and cholesterol occur only in animal-derived foods).
WOMEN RESPOND DIFFERENTLY
Interestingly women respond differently to "vitamin D" from men or infants. The reason for this is that estrogens block the actions of the "vitamin D" -hormones on bone. The function of the "vitamin D"-derived hormone (which is referred to as 1,25-dihydroxy vitaman D) is to maintain blood calcium levels constant. Blood calcium levels are tightly controlled, and relatively small variations can result in pathology. The way the hormone functions is to withdraw calcium and phosphorous from bone, and to increase absorption of calcium and phosphorous in the intestine.
The effect of removing calcium and phosphorous from bone is known as the osteoclastic actions of the hormone. The "vitamin D"-hormone stimulates the cells in bone that are responsibile for breaking down bone matrix and removing calcium and phosphorous from bone are known as osteoclasts.
At any reate, estrogens block the osteoclastic actions of "vitamin D." Thus, women are protected from coronary artery disease and from unnatural removal of calcium from bone (osteoporosis) until after menopause. Once menopause has passed, estrogens are not longer present to block the osteoclastic actions of the hormone, and women begin to lose bone mineral at a rapid rate.
As well, due to an inability to excrete the amounts of calcium and phosphorous that are being withdrawn from bone and absorbed from the intestine, there is a redistribution of these minerals in the body leading to coronary artery cacification and, in some cases, kidney stones. Thus women after the age of about 65 (20 years or so after cessation of estrogen secretion) are afflicted with coronary artery disease with a frequency equal to that among men.
The frequency of kidney stones among women also increases after menopause, and continues to increase with aging. By age 65 or 70, virtually all women (other than macrobiotic and vegan women who have been dosed with "vitamin D") suffer from serious loss of bone mass, known as postmenopausal osterporosis. Concurrent with decalcification of skeletal structures there is development of calcification of the coronary and cerebral arteries leading to coronary artery disease and cerebral sclerosis.
Although it is no laughing matter, I have to laugh when I read of the statement regarding functions of "vitamin D" in the most recent Dietary Reference Intakes (National Academy press, 1997, p. 260), which is supposed to be an accurate statement regarding the value of "vitamin D" in the North American diet. Here is the absurd statement: "The ultimate effect of vitamin D on human health is maintenance of a healthy skeleton. Thus, in reviewing the literature for determining vitamin status, one of the indicators that has proven valuable is an evaluation of skeletal health." Since North American women suffer the highest incidence of osteoporosis found anywhere in the world, I would say that "vitamin D" has not done its job, and Food and Nutrition Board of the Institute of Medicine has done a great disservice to people in North America by claiming that we in North America enjoy "good skeletal health!"
What the committee wrote that statement really meant is that they had reviewed the literature to find any cases of osteomalacia, the adult condition resulting from low circulating levels of "vitamin D" derivatives. Of course, osteomalacia is rare in North America! With the amount of "vitamin D" being forced on the North American population it is hardly conceivable that any adult in North America could have low circulating levels of the "vitamin D"-hormones. Analyses have shown North Americans to have the highest circulation of 25-hydroxy vitamin D found in any population - and the highest incidence of osteoporosis.
Osteomalacia is found with some frequency in Great Britain, but has yet to be documented in North America. It is so rare that even a single case would be worthy of a medical publication! Even before the advent of "vitamin D" in the North American Food supply osteomalacia had not been documented in North America. Osteomalacia of the elderly is strictly due to lack of sunshine, so that only house-bound elderly people are at risk for its development. However, the committee did not look for evidence that the poor bone health of the North American female population, as seen by the epidemic occurence of osteoporosis, is due to long term low-level ingestion of "vitamin D," which is very likely the case.
Infants respond somewhat differently, perhaps because the facial bones begin to form shortly after birth. In an epidemic of infant poisonings in Great Britain, which resulted from an increase in the amount of "vitamin D" added to national powdered milk, several hundred infants were seen with characteristic modifications of the facial structures - referred to an 'elfin facies.' Many of these infants were mentally retarded as a result. Many other infants developed a characteristic heart affliction, usually with abnormal dental development, known as the Williams' Syndrome. Some infants poisoned by "vitamin D" have died of generalized arteriosclerosis of infancy (calcified arteries throught the body).
As with adults, kidney stones are seen among infants poisoned by "vitamin D." Excess "vitamin D" is the only known cause of kidney stones in infancy. In Germany a different type "vitamin D" prophylaxis is used. Infants are given intermittent high doses of "vitamin D" - 6000,000 IU orally every 3 to 5 months. Since the 1980's, a number of pediatricians in Germany have reported a high frequency of kidney stones among infants receiving this treatment. Infants in Germany suffer the highest incidence of kindey stones found anywhere in the world!
In general, infants poisoned by "vitamin D" are characterized by an elevation of blood calcium levels. This is referred to as hypercalcemia - hence the term, "idiopathic hypercalcemia of infancy" that is used to describe the epidemic of infant poisonings that occurred in Great Britain in the near 1950's. The consequences of hypercalcemia during infancy are many, including, as we have mentioned, heart caclifications, artery calcifications, kidney calcifications, and facial and dental abnormalities.
Animal experiments support the concept that "Vitamin D" excess causes arteriosclerosis, atherosclerosis, osteoporosis, and kidney stones. In Pathological Calification, it was carefully explained how the introduction of "vitamin D" into the diet in the 1920's has disturbed the intricate homeostatic balances that maintain calcium deposits in bone and out of soft tissues (heart, kidneys, arteries). Laboratory animals treated with excess "vitamin D" develop kidney stones, as well as a condition that is very similar to human coronary artery disease. In fact, actual death from coronary infarct has been documented in Rhesus monkeys when they were fed a diet containing nicotine, cholesterol and "vitamin D."
One of the early observations was that "vitamin D" in excess causes withdrawal of calcium and phosporous from bone, resulting in fragile bones. This has also been observed in humans who have been accidentally poisoned by "vitamin D." However, in some instances of human poisonings, the bones have become hyper-calcified resulting in osteoclerosis (instead of osteoporosis)!
"VITAMIN D" OCCURS ONLY IN ANIMAL-DERIVED FOODS
"Vitamin D" occurs naturally in a few animal-derived foods (deep sea fish, egg yolk, and milk). There is no "vitamin D" in any plant-derived food. However, there are several plants that grow in South America that contain the hormone form 1,25dihydroxy vitamin D. Cattle that graze on these plants die of a bone-wasting disease.
Although there are some populations who eat some natural "vitamin D," it is unlikely that any population has ever been exposed to the amounts of "vitamin D" that are currently being delivered to the North American population (14,000 pounds in 1972, and likely more now). In a 1983 publication, the relationship of adequate and excessive intake of vitamin D to health and disease (J. Am. Coll. Med. 2:173-99), Holmes and Kummerow estimated this to be enough to provide approximately 90 ug (3600 IU) per person per day. That is enough "vitamin D" to cause a lot of human suffering!
Experts are not in agreement as to whether "vitamin D" is a vitamin or not. Many of us consider "vitamin D" to be more similar to the hormones than to the vitamins. In 1980, Drs. Shi-Kaung Peng and C. Bruce Taylor of the Albany, New York Medical College published an editorial in Arterial Wall, "Probable role of excesses of vitamin D in genesis of arteriosclerosis" (VI:63-68) in which they recommended that "vitamin D" be reclassified as a "potent, carefully controlled hormone."
The reason I don't consider "vitamin D" to be a vitamin is because it is clear that the vast majority of humans never consume any "vitamin D," and do not suffer any deficiency as a result of not consuming it. It it were a true vitamin, it would occur in plant-derived foods, and its absence from the diet would cause a deficiency disease. That is the definition of a vitamin. Clearly the absence of "vitamin D" from the vegetarian diet does not cause any known pathology!
The natural way to receive the "vitamin D" prohormone is through exposure from the sun. Sunshine striking the skin makes the prohormone in the skin, and its manufacture is carefully controlled (unlike the circumstance when it is consumed). Ultraviolet light from the sun converts a derivative of cholesterol to a substance known as "pre-vitamin D." The "pre-vitamin" can then undergo a change that converts it to "vitamin D." In the event that levels of the "pre-vitamin" begin to get excessive, further exposure to ultraviolet causes it to be changed back to the cholesterol derivative from which it was derived. This prevents people from being poisoned by "vitamin D" due to exposure to sunshine. Unfortunately, when "vitamin D" is consumed, it is efficiently absorbed along with other fats into lymphatic circulation. There is no internal control mechanism to decrease absorption, and virtually all "vitamin D" that enters the digestive tract is absorbed.
WHY SO UNNATURAL AND DANGEROUS?
COW MILK
It is true that some "vitamin D" is found naturally in cow milk. Among cattle that are exposed to ample sunshine, the "vitamin D" content can be as high as 50 IU per quart. During winter months cow milk contains very little "vitamin D." Of course, this is the reason it was decided to add "vitamin D" to milk, because there is so little of present in milk most of the year. But why was it decided to add 400 IU of "vitamin D" per quart of milk? This is eight times as much as is naturally present, even under optimal conditions for its production! It is also far more than is necessary to prevent rickets in infants or osteomalacia among the elderly. In fact, the 1997 DRIs list is adequate intake for infants as 5.0 up (200 IU) - one half the previous RDA of 400 IU. With the publication of the 1997 DRI's, there should have also been a decrease in the addition of "vitamin D" to milk, and the upper limit on over the counter supplements should have been reduced to 200 IU, but there has not been any effort to accomplish this.
Unfortunately, milk has a great deal of calcium and phosphorous, the calcifying minerals, but very little magnesium, which counteracts the effects of excessive calcium and phosphorous. The "vitamin D" that is added simply increases absorption of the calcifying minerals, and if not properly controlled, unnatural calcifications result, as happened in the epidemic in Great Britain and as is happening to most of the North American Population.
HUMAN MILK
Human milk contains very little "vitamin D." Colostrum has been analyzed to have 15.9 + (is shown in the MBT article with the plus sign over an underscore--don't know how to make that on my computer!) 8.6 IU per liter. Women who were consuming from 600 to 700 IU of "vitamin D" per day had total milk vitamin D concentrations ranging from 5 to 136 IU per liter, with a predicted mean of 26 IU. In spite of these low levels of "vitamin D" in human milk, studies in Utah and China have demonstrated that breast-fed infants in the regions studied do not need to be given any supplemental "vitamin D" for adequate bone mineralization.
