Lex's Journal

[ys]

I also have buildup behind lower teeth, I have gum recession there and it builds up pretty nicely.  The dentist said the build up does not come from food, but from the saliva.  The salivary glands are just behind lower teeth and the calcium from saliva gets deposited right there.

So, could it be that Vitamin D affect calcium saturation in the saliva?  Appears to be the case.

Unfortunately there is not much sun in the Midwest this time of year, so no outside tanning for us.

[Michael]

I also have buildup behind lower teeth, I have gum recession there and it builds up pretty nicely.  The dentist said the build up does not come from food, but from the saliva.  The salivary glands are just behind lower teeth and the calcium from saliva gets deposited right there.

So, could it be that Vitamin D affect calcium saturation in the saliva?  Appears to be the case.

Unfortunately there is not much sun in the Midwest this time of year, so no outside tanning for us.

The case builds!
Lex, did you have other adequate sources of vitamin D at any point such as Blue Ice cod liver oil?
I've been taking Blue Ice for many months but still get vast amounts of calculus build up and have receding gums.  Perhaps there's an issue with utilisation of this supplemented Vitamin D which has been overridden by Lex by going straight to THE source - the sun?

Likewise ys, we have little sun here at this time of year and when we do it's simply too cold for a cold intolerant individual like myself to venture out semi-naked!  Perhaps we just need to push the boundaries a little.

[Michael]

Sorry Lex.  I seem to be dominating your journal at the moment but I just wanted to post this information that I just came across from Bee Wilder (of Candida fame) in case it was useful.  I'm not sure what her sources are for this information but, if valid, it's good to know.

In order to achieve optimal levels of vitamin D from the sun, 85% of body surface needs exposure to prime midday sun (10:00 AM to 2:00 PM). About 100-200 IUs of vitamin D are produced for each 5 percent of body surface exposed.

Light skinned people need 10-20 minutes of exposure, while dark skinned people need 90-120 minutes. It takes about 24 hours for UV-B-stimulated vitamin D to show up as maximum levels of vitamin D in the blood. Please note that natural body oils are critical to this absorption process. Because the body needs 30-60 minutes to absorb these vitamin D containing oils, it is best to delay showering, bathing, or swimming in a chlorinated pool for one hour after exposure.

Chris Masterjohn also has some more detailed information on Vitamin D here: http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com/Vitamin-D.html

[cherimoya_kid]

I definitely notice that I have less plaque on my teeth when I am supplementing with Vitamin D-3.

[raw]

I definitely notice that I have less plaque on my teeth when I am supplementing with Vitamin D-3.

can you please tell me which company's vit D3 you use? i'm not in big about taking supplements, but certain time, it becomes necessary i guess. thanks.

[wodgina]

Hey Lex

Why did you take up the sunbathing routine? do you wear a shirt? do you work outside or just bathe? are you craving sunlight?...ha ha so many questions!

Our paleo ancestors would of spent enormous amounts of hours a day in the sun, without much clothing. Even 1 hour a day seems pretty low compared to what we would of experienced ( up to 8 hours, everyday!)

This year  I've shown complete disregard to the deadly cancer causing rays of the sun and have actively exposed myself for 3+ hours a day. I've been doing this because I crave sunlight more than ever this year, interestingly I'm experiencing my first completely free hayfever/eczema  spring of my life.

[RawZi]

Hey Lex

Why did you take up the sunbathing routine? do you wear a shirt? do you work outside or just bathe? are you craving sunlight?...

... have actively exposed myself for 3+ hours a day. I've been doing this because I crave sunlight more than ever this year, interestingly I'm experiencing my first completely free hayfever/eczema  spring of my life.

    Weeks/months I stayed away from all starch, greens, seaweeds, legumes, grains, nuts, dairy and meat completely, I craved sun.  I don't think I've ever craved sun otherwise.  Could it be consuming lots of water makes us crave sun?

[cherimoya_kid]

can you please tell me which company's vit D3 you use? i'm not in big about taking supplements, but certain time, it becomes necessary i guess. thanks.

I use the Now Brand.  I've really only tested Carlson's and Now brands, and Carlson's definitely does not work. I think it's important to use a softgel or a liquid, because I've read that the number one thing that clogs up city wastewater systems is undigested vitamin and mineral supplement pills.

[lex_rooker]

I don't really follow US politics closely.  Is that on the agenda?!  Is the existing privatised system being replaced?  That's big news if so which I somehow missed?!    As I'm sure you know, we have a National Health Service here in the UK which was setup by the socialist labour government in the post-WW2 welfare-state reforms.  It's not without it's major flaws but, in theory at least, provides free medical care to all.  As far as I'm aware, private lab work is not illegal here in the UK as a consequence of this.  Have the US proposed such a development as part of their healthcare reforms?

Yup major broughhaha here in the US as the Democratic Party (similar to your Labour Party) have full control of the government and are desparately trying to bring about a much more socialist agenda - free health care for all just being part of the mess.  Of course 'free' means a cost of 2.5 trillion dollars and a signifiant tax increase across the board for everyone.  They are also moving in a direction to make any private health care options illegal.  This wouldn't happen in the very short term but is in the long range plans.  As an example, in one of the current Bills under consideration, you may keep your private health care insurance until there is any change in the insurance either in the policy itself or even in the premium paid at which time you must move over to the government plan.  Also, if you don't have any insurance, either public or private (which you must prove each year when you file your tax return) you must pay a hefty fine with possible jail time.  It's a real mess.

I wonder if there is a link between i) the calcium build-up on your teeth  ii) the kidney stones (calcium deposits?)  iii) night cramps (Ca/Mg deficiency or inbalance) ?

I have no clue here.  Interesting that the calcium build-up on my teeth seemed  to be reduced,  but then I end up with kidney stones.  It is true that the kidney stones could be something other than calcium, (uric acid is a possibility), but since I wasn’t able to capture the stone (at least up to now) we don’t know.  Don’t have any idea about the night cramps as I didn’t keep any records as to when they went away.

It seems to me that there may have been a historical root problem related to Vitamin D deficiency as this is involved in the metabolism of these minerals.  Your observations following your sun exposure would strengthen this hypothesis I believe.

It seems to but then again, maybe not.  Just not enough information to make a solid link.

The dentist said the build up does not come from food, but from the saliva. 

All the dentists I’ve had over the years have told me the same thing.  They also said it was “body chemistry” and there wasn’t anything I could do about it.  I’m now beginning to question whether this is the case.

So, could it be that Vitamin D affect calcium saturation in the saliva?  Appears to be the case.

This is my speculation based on the limited data I have, but it is purely speculation.  By posting this, my hope is that others will try supplements or sun exposure and see if either of these (or both) bring about similar changes.

Lex, did you have other adequate sources of vitamin D at any point such as Blue Ice cod liver oil?

Nope.  No supplements and I’ve been pretty much an urban troglodyte for the past 30 years, spending most of my time indoors chained to a desk under fluorescent lighting.  Also, my dermatologist has insisted for many years that I avoid sun exposure at all costs due to skin cancer fears.  Wide brimmed hats, sun screen, long sleeved shirts etc. – especially in summer.  I’m now questioning the wisdom of this advice.

Why did you take up the sunbathing routine? do you wear a shirt? do you work outside or just bathe? are you craving sunlight?...ha ha so many questions!

I started looking a vitamin D and the best way to get it based on what I’ve been reading on Dr Harris PaNu blog, Peter’s Hyperlipid blog, and the Health Scan blog.  The case seemed pretty strong that we are very vit D deficient and since I didn’t want to take supplements I decided to throw caution to the wind and get real sun exposure.  I wear only gym shorts.  I usually walk for an hour, but if I have yard would to do will I now make sure I’m appropriately dressed (undressed?)

Our paleo ancestors would of spent enormous amounts of hours a day in the sun, without much clothing. Even 1 hour a day seems pretty low compared to what we would of experienced ( up to 8 hours, everyday!)

I think you are quite correct on this point, but I do have a life ( and interests) that are more suitable to indoors than out ( I refuse to move my lathe and milling machine out in the yard to turn into piles of rust).  My compromise is to take a 1 hour walk everyday wearing as few clothes as possible (basically just gym shorts) to get as much skin exposure as possible.

…… interestingly I'm experiencing my first completely free hayfever/eczema  spring of my life.

My experience is similar.  Many small annoying issues that weren’t directly affected by diet alone seem to have greatly improved.

[PaleoPhil]

...This is my speculation based on the limited data I have, but it is purely speculation.  By posting this, my hope is that others will try supplements or sun exposure and see if either of these (or both) bring about similar changes.

I'm one step ahead of you. I started supplementing with cod liver oil a month or two ago and after reading the sources you did I recently added some straight vitamin D (along with K2 and bone meal) to bring it up to 5000 IUs without overloading on vitamin A. I also eat raw eggs and I'm hoping to add more raw liver and shellfish into my diet as I get used to it, so that I can eventually take just cod liver oil.

[alphagruis]

All the dentists I’ve had over the years have told me the same thing.  They also said it was “body chemistry” and there wasn’t anything I could do about it.  I’m now beginning to question whether this is the case.

The "body chemistry, one can't do anything about" the dentists invoke to explain the formation of tartar is in IMO most likely just a matter of poisoned biochemistry brought about by standard cooked food. When I switched on 100% raw paleo diet the phenomenon disappeared almost completely, independant of any apparent change in vitamin D status (neither supplementation nor change in sun exposure). Yet this change took about 4 years on RPD, probably the time needed for the organism to get rid of its poisoning. So the dentist's statement is indeed quite mistaken for people on more appropriate RPDs.

Nope.  No supplements and I’ve been pretty much an urban troglodyte for the past 30 years, spending most of my time indoors chained to a desk under fluorescent lighting.  Also, my dermatologist has insisted for many years that I avoid sun exposure at all costs due to skin cancer fears.  Wide brimmed hats, sun screen, long sleeved shirts etc. – especially in summer.  I’m now questioning the wisdom of this advice.

Here again the dermatologist's advice to avoid sun exposure is most likely wisdom for a large fraction of people on standard diets but utterly wrong or nonsense for people on RPD for a couple of years or so. Sun induced skin cancer is largely the result of skin biochemistry poisonig due to inappropriate neolithic cooked foods. Once on RPD for a few years my resistance to sun exposure and burn increased drastically and I can now feel quite precisely when exposure is enough and should be stopped. It is apparent that vitamin D synthesis as well as overall skin reaction to sun exposure may be quite perturbed in people on SAD.   

[Michael]

Yup major broughhaha here in the US as the Democratic Party (similar to your Labour Party) have full control of the government and are desparately trying to bring about a much more socialist agenda - free health care for all just being part of the mess.  Of course 'free' means a cost of 2.5 trillion dollars and a signifiant tax increase across the board for everyone.  They are also moving in a direction to make any private health care options illegal.  This wouldn't happen in the very short term but is in the long range plans.  As an example, in one of the current Bills under consideration, you may keep your private health care insurance until there is any change in the insurance either in the policy itself or even in the premium paid at which time you must move over to the government plan.  Also, if you don't have any insurance, either public or private (which you must prove each year when you file your tax return) you must pay a hefty fine with possible jail time.  It's a real mess.

This big news obviously passed me by.  That's amazing!  Is there uproar or do the majority (of sickly SAD eaters!) think it's a good idea?  I hope it's run a little better than our NHS which has proven financially crippling.  Funny enough, our system seems to be heading in the opposite direction with increasing participation of the private sector.

All the dentists I’ve had over the years have told me the same thing.  They also said it was “body chemistry” and there wasn’t anything I could do about it.  I’m now beginning to question whether this is the case.
This is my speculation based on the limited data I have, but it is purely speculation.  By posting this, my hope is that others will try supplements or sun exposure and see if either of these (or both) bring about similar changes.

My sun exposure is extremely limited and has been for the last few years.  I am regularly taking Blue Ice FCLO and will make a point of exposing my skin for at least an hour per day as you are Lex - come the spring of course!  I'll report back any noticeable effects.

Nope.  No supplements and I’ve been pretty much an urban troglodyte for the past 30 years, spending most of my time indoors chained to a desk under fluorescent lighting.  Also, my dermatologist has insisted for many years that I avoid sun exposure at all costs due to skin cancer fears.  Wide brimmed hats, sun screen, long sleeved shirts etc. – especially in summer.  I’m now questioning the wisdom of this advice.

ha ha    You've certainly been testing the boundaries of limited Vitamin D intake then Lex!  Do I recall correctly that you've suffered from skin cancers or lesions repeatedly in the past?  Interestingly, I've spent much of my working life in air-conditioned, fluorescent-lit offices too but I've also had periods when I've spent lots of time exposing my skin outdoors (long periods travelling Americas and Europe, local cycling/hiking, various construction jobs).  Pre RAF - my Vit D must have always been poor too as I never ate liver, CLO etc and spent years as a  vegetarian/vegan.  I've had my fair share of skin cancers.  I used to slather suncream on in my youth but 15 years ago came to the conclusion that those toxic chemicals help cause skin cancer!  I don't burn as easily as I used to and this will hopefully continue improving as the years pass on my VLC/ZC RPD diet.

[PaleoPhil]

...I used to slather suncream on in my youth but 15 years ago came to the conclusion that those toxic chemicals help cause skin cancer! ...

Yes, that's what studies have found. Ironic, isn't it? I have known of people who constantly stayed covered with hats, long sleeves, and sun block and still got skin cancer, and now it makes more sense.

[lex_rooker]

Yet this change took about 4 years on RPD, probably the time needed for the organism to get rid of its poisoning.

I'm glad to see that my experience that many changes take months or years is supported by your experience as well.  So many people are looking for instant results.  My thought is that it took us years of abusing our bodies to get them into such a mess, it will certainly take a good bit of time to reverse the damage - assuming it can be reversed.

Michael - The sentiment on government run health care here in the US is running about 60% against, but the politicians are hell bent on pushing it through anyway.  I think they see it as increasing their long term political power and they are willing to do anything to push it through.

I've suffered with the pre-cancerous lesions for many years, but they have actually gotten better since I've gone VLC/ZC and my last to visits to the dermatologist there were none.  He did, however, comment on my obvious tan and warned me that I needed to stay out of the sun.  I mentioned the need for vit D and he said that 10 min sun exposure per week was more than enough.  He also failed to notice that all that sun exposure that I was getting resulted in zero pre-cancerous lesions - go figure.

Phil - One of the things I noticed was that people who got skin cancer often got it in places where there was little sun exposure, like on the small of the back below the belt line.  No one has been able to give me a satisfactory explaination as to why this is so, and makes me question the conventional wisdom.

Lex

[Michael]

Yes, that's what studies have found. Ironic, isn't it? I have known of people who constantly stayed covered with hats, long sleeves, and sun block and still got skin cancer, and now it makes more sense.

I'm glad to hear, at least, that studies are now proving this to be the case.  I used to have a real hard time persuading people that the chemical soup they bathed their skin in was going to promote rather than protect against skin cancer!  Of course, I don't try to persuade anyone of anything anymore!    My experiences are the same PaleoPhil.  I've known many people who, like Lex, have spent most of their lives covered up and avoiding the sun only to end up with skin cancer issues.  On the flip side, particularly when I used to do alot of outdoor construction work, I've known many people who spent virtually all day every day in the bright sun throughout the year wearing little more than a pair of shorts.  These builders and outdoor workers are the strongest, healthiest people I've known and all have had wonderful physiques with blemish and cancer free tanned skin.  Interestingly, their diets in the main were considered awful by conventional standards at the time - eggs, bacon, meat, butter, sheeps blood etc.  Little in the way of fruit/veg and limited grains & dairy.  And to think I used to try to convert them to my healthy vegetarian ways!!   

[PaleoPhil]

There is one part of the body that I wonder about whether it should be covered--which is the scalp. Stone Agers didn't tend to go bald, so I wonder if that area is more sensitive to the sun and therefore more prone to damage. I do know several people who have skin cancers on their scalp. Since dermatologists say that most of the skin damage is done in youth but the scalp was covered with hair in youth, that tells me the damage occurred later in life with balding, despite the apparent fact that such later-life damage is rare.

[PaleoPat]

Interesting that the calcium build-up on my teeth seemed  to be reduced,  but then I end up with kidney stones.

Lex, Peter at HyperLipid actually discusses this in his latest post.  He thinks that high-carb diets result in many people having asymptomatic kidney stones...asymptomatic, because they are too large to enter the urethra.

But correct the diet and they begin to dissolve, eventually shrinking to the point where they will fit into the urethra, thus becoming symptomatic (causing excruciating pain.)

[PaleoPhil]

Yes, and he also discusses hyperglycaemia and muscle cramps--all issues that Lex had at one time or another.

November 27, 2009
A brief discussion of ketosis
http://high-fat-nutrition.blogspot.com/


Dr. Harris added an interesting comment and also mentioned still being in ketosis, like you:

"I think the stone issue is most likely a phenomenon of dissolution and mobilization into the ureter, but it could be dehydration related to decreased meal frequency and lack of thirst formerly stimulated by bagels and potato chips.

I find myself sort of stuck in ketosis. ...."


Whereas I seem to have come out of ketosis after 3.5 months. Fascinating stuff. Ketosis is certainly one of the more mysterious aspects of VLC/ZC.

[Michael]

There is one part of the body that I wonder about whether it should be covered--which is the scalp. Stone Agers didn't tend to go bald, so I wonder if that area is more sensitive to the sun and therefore more prone to damage. I do know several people who have skin cancers on their scalp. Since dermatologists say that most of the skin damage is done in youth but the scalp was covered with hair in youth, that tells me the damage occurred later in life with balding, despite the apparent fact that such later-life damage is rare.

I agree that covering the head with a hat - particularly if balding or close shaven - may be a wise precaution.  The scalp is obviously much less exposed in it's lifetime due to a full head of hair in addition to being very thin and prone to easy burning.  With burning supposedly being one of the factors influencing later cancers and lesions it would make sense to take greater care.  Having said that, I don't personally know of anyone who's had skin cancer on the scalp but know many on the face, neck and torso.  I feel that Lex's point is also relevant:

Phil - One of the things I noticed was that people who got skin cancer often got it in places where there was little sun exposure, like on the small of the back below the belt line.  No one has been able to give me a satisfactory explaination as to why this is so, and makes me question the conventional wisdom.

I've suffered with the pre-cancerous lesions for many years, but they have actually gotten better since I've gone VLC/ZC and my last to visits to the dermatologist there were none.  He did, however, comment on my obvious tan and warned me that I needed to stay out of the sun.  I mentioned the need for vit D and he said that 10 min sun exposure per week was more than enough.  He also failed to notice that all that sun exposure that I was getting resulted in zero pre-cancerous lesions - go figure.

ha ha    That's representative of the average GPs powers of observation and logic!?  Great news about the sudden absence of lesions Lex!

Lex, Peter at HyperLipid actually discusses this in his latest post.  He thinks that high-carb diets result in many people having asymptomatic kidney stones...asymptomatic, because they are too large to enter the urethra.

But correct the diet and they begin to dissolve, eventually shrinking to the point where they will fit into the urethra, thus becoming symptomatic (causing excruciating pain.)

That's very interesting PaleoPat.  Peter certainly seems to know what he's talking about too so I would consider his views seriously.  That would also make perfect sense.  A little disconcerting for many of us current RPDers who were previously high-carb SADers though!!   

Whereas I seem to have come out of ketosis after 3.5 months. Fascinating stuff. Ketosis is certainly one of the more mysterious aspects of VLC/ZC.

I'm going to buy some Multistix this week and start testing my own state of ketosis etc.  I agree that this is all extremely interesting.  I clearly need to spend more time reading Hyperlipid too!

[PaleoPhil]

...I'm going to buy some Multistix this week and start testing my own state of ketosis etc.  I agree that this is all extremely interesting.  I clearly need to spend more time reading Hyperlipid too!

I did a bit of searching on them and they apparently vary in level of quality (accuracy). The Ketostix I have are much cheaper, but only provide the one ketones test, so I've got Multistix on my wish list.

[Sully]

There is one part of the body that I wonder about whether it should be covered--which is the scalp.

Well I guess the scalp can be conditioned. I think the egyptions did this by shaving there heads and conditioned their scalps tolerance by this. My legs and arm pretty much never burn in the sun. But my neck, shoulders, scalp (shaved head) and face has in the past. Perhaps these areas weekness to sun is because most non dark skinned people have naturally long hair (if not cut)to cover and shade these areas.

[wodgina]

Most skin cancers are fairly harmless. It's mainly melanomas which you need to worry about and most specialists will check the soles of your feet first for these cancers! Since when do they get exposed to sunlight!

Think about all those dodgy flip flops that you wear and the rubber and plastics. I got told walking bare foot on asphalt causes melanomas from a friend who recently had a checkup with a specialist. Forget the sun there's other factors at play here.

[alphagruis]

I'm glad to see that my experience that many changes take months or years is supported by your experience as well.  So many people are looking for instant results.  My thought is that it took us years of abusing our bodies to get them into such a mess, it will certainly take a good bit of time to reverse the damage - assuming it can be reversed.

I agree heartedly, Lex. This actually makes sense from a scientific point of view. We cannot expect that the damage brought about by tens of years of agressive diets can be merely reversed within a few weeks or months. And it is also likely that every damage may not be reversed at least not in our own lifetime but will possibly need several generations to heal as in Pottenger's cat experiment.

Yet there are now more and more compelling reasons and available experiences to believe that it is really worth to stay patiently on RPD. And so many ailments are in fact at least allieviated already after a few months. Quite rewarding.

These "scientific" considerations mean also that there is not necessarily a causal relationship between a given recent improvement or change in health and what has been done just during the weeks or even months before. A more or less sudden improvement might well be the global result of a healing process that took several years of RPD and other changes in lifestyle to mature and succeed.

Similarly it is indeed not unlikely that your recent elimination of kidney stones is actually a good sign with no serious reason to worry about rather than a bad sign indicating something's wrong with your diet. The poisoning that led to their formation might well originate in your inappropriate diets before switching to RPD and all the years since were necessary for the organism to heal and finally begin to eliminate the stones. Hopefully.

Yet, just an hypothesis, of course. There is so much we don't really know or understand that one has to be cautious.

   

[PaleoPhil]

Most skin cancers are fairly harmless. It's mainly melanomas which you need to worry about and most specialists will check the soles of your feet first for these cancers! Since when do they get exposed to sunlight!

Think about all those dodgy flip flops that you wear and the rubber and plastics. I got told walking bare foot on asphalt causes melanomas from a friend who recently had a checkup with a specialist. Forget the sun there's other factors at play here.

True, but I know someone who uses that reasoning to not protect his bald scalp at all, despite the fact that he already has precancerous lesions on it and is not on a full RPD diet. He excuses it by saying his dermatologist told him that most sun-related skin cancer comes from sun burns in youth (so it's OK for him to get lots of sun today, he figures). Except that he had hair as a kid and didn't burn his scalp. He only burned his scalp after he went bald in adulthood, and it's coincidentally where he gets the most sun and the only place he has the precancerous lesions. So I wouldn't rule out sun as a factor among people who have skin that has been damaged by diet and is deficient in vitamin D and other important nutrients. I think that non-RPDers should probably limit their bald-scalp exposure to reasonable levels, especially when they already have pre-cancerous lesions. And yes, I knew about the commonness of skin cancers on non-sun-exposed areas. I actually work with dermatologists, among other physicians. I also know that most of the precancerous lesions and melanomas I've seen have been on sun-exposed areas (on SAD dieters, of course). The nose, face, shoulders and trunk are common areas to get them. I would say the most common area of all is probably the face, including:

Cheek, external
Chin
Eyebrow
Forehead
Nose, external
Temple

...though I haven't checked the stats.

Also, the people who don't change their diet like Lex did continue to get more of those precancerous lesions for the rest of their life, and have to keep going in and getting them removed, and often develop melanomas later in life.

[RawZi]

It's mainly melanomas which you need to worry about and most specialists will check the soles of your feet first for these cancers! Since when do they get exposed to sunlight!

Think about all those dodgy flip flops that you wear and the rubber and plastics.

    It's not that I don't agree, as the soles of my feet get sore when in man-made material shoes, so it does make me wonder. 

    I am curious though, as people do lie out at the beach.  Their soles could get some sunlight.  People with dark skin often have just as light skinned soles of their feet as people with light skin.  Are their any studies that show one race getting their melanoma on the soles of their feet a higher percentage of the time than another race?  Bob Marley was pretty dark skinned.  I heard what killed him was a melanoma that started on his toe.  Does anyone here know if this was the top of his toe or another part of it?