Vitamin d3 Sunlight & Colon cancer

[Ted Hutchinson]

Solar ultraviolet-B exposure and cancer incidence and mortality in the United States, 1993-2002 (http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1471-2407-6-264.pdf)
For non-Hispanic whites, an inverse relationship between solar UV-B exposure and cancer incidence and mortality was observed for ten sites: bladder, colon, Hodgkin lymphoma, myeloma, other biliary, prostate, rectum, stomach, uterus, and vulva.....
This paper adds to the mounting evidence for the influential role of solar UV-B exposure on cancer, particularly for some of the less-well studied digestive cancers. The relative risks for cancer incidence are similar to those for cancer mortality for most sites. For several sites (breast, colon, rectum, esophagus, other biliary, vulva), the relative risks of mortality are higher, possibly suggesting that the maintenance of adequate vitamin D levels is more critical for limiting tumor progression than for preventing tumor onset............Thus it may be that one’s overall risk of contracting colon cancer may be moderately influenced by reduced solar UV-B exposure (with an increased risk of 10% to 15% in the northern versus southern United States), while the risk of dying from the disease is more strongly related to reduced solar UV-B exposure (with an increased risk of 25% to 30%).................the evidence is clear that exposure to solar UV-B affords protection against numerous cancers, and that current public health recommendations that advocate little or no sunlight exposure should be revisited – especially since the adverse health effects of vitamin D deficiency are not limited to cancer, but also appear to include type 1 diabetes, multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis, cardiovascular disease, and osteoporosis

[Lara]

I just posted this on another forum, and saw your post here. Just wanted to add something from my area of the world.

Food for thought...

I live in a state of Australia where the rates of melanoma and skin cancer are extremely high. It used to be the highest rate in the entire world, not sure if it still is now. In the past year it has been suggested, based on studies from temperate climates in the world, that we are perhaps covering our skin too much when exposed to the sun. However, we don't live in a temperate climate so there is a lot of work being done in this area at the moment here in my state to clarify our individual situation. For decades we have been advised to cover our skin in the sun. We have a motto here that is just automatic now and one we've been teaching our children and our children's children, 'cause so many of the people my age have skin damage or worse from sun exposure. The aussie motto is Slip, slop, slap. Slip on a shirt, slop on the sunscreen, slap on a hat. Every Australian would know it. Now we're hearing conflicting reports... that we may have been covering up too much, or have we? They're working on clarifying the situation for us here.

My area has an average of about 300 days of sunshine a year. That's average. Some years much more, some less.

Study of Vitamin D levels in Brisbane
<snipped article>
The results of our recent research suggest that some adult living in South East Queensland are also vitamin D deficient or have low levels of vitamin D (8% and 23% respectively). These unexpected findings suggest that some Queenslanders may have moderated their outdoor activity and clothing in order to protect themselves from UV.

Therefore, low vitamin D levels may be a public health issue for some population sub-groups living in sunny climates. However, as Queensland has extreme levels of ambient UV and a very high incidence of skin cancer, considerable attention needs to be paid to the accuracy of guidelines about maintaining adequate vitamin D levels through sun exposure and/or supplementation. Queenslanders need clear public health messages (formulated from evidence-based guidelines) that provide information about the relevance to them of media messages from more temperate climates. Health authorities will be unable to provide suitable guidance until a thorough investigation of the vitamin D levels of the Queensland population has been undertaken.

Pilot data generated by this project would also provide a basis for the further investigation of sensible evidence-based guidelines on UV exposure, which balance the need for sun-protection and adequate vitamin D levels, and consider the different requirements of people living in sub-tropical and tropical Australia. Such guidelines should reduce public confusion and prevent changes in behaviour which may ultimately lead to an increase in the incidence of skin cancer.
bold added by me.
http://www.uv.hlth.qut.edu.au/research/index.jsp
The Australian Sun and Health Research Laboratory
Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation

from Cancer Council of Australia (http://www.cancer.org.au/documents/Risks_Benefits_Sun_Exposure_MAR05.pdf)
Risks and Benefits of Sun Exposure Statement

[Ted Hutchinson]

We found evidence of an inverse association for nineteen cancer sites Here are the UK 2004 death totals for some of those cancers.
prostate = 10.209
female breast = 12.347
colon = 16,148
ovary = 4,434
uterus = 3,204
bladder = 4,816
Oesophagus = 7,230
kidney = 3,611
lung = 33,044
pancreas = 7,040
stomach = 5,881
gallbladder = 102
larynx = 655
Hodgkin lymphoma= 294
non Hodgkin lymphoma=4418
myeloma = 2531
Total number of cancer deaths that could be lowered by increased sun exposure =115,964
total number of cancer deaths which may be attributable to too much sunshine
the Five other sites found to be positively associated with solar UV-B are
Here are the uk 2004 death totals for those cancers.
cervix = 1093
melanoma = 1777
non-epithelial skin cancer= 310
oral cavity = 877
Total that are postively linked to sun exposure 4057

So for every one person who MAY be harmed by too much sun 30 people MAY be harmed by too little sun.
The point is that you don't have to get SUNBURNT to get sufficient Vitamin d but you do need regular limited safe sun exposure and this is FAR more beneficial to far more people than the dangers that may be attributed to over exposure. Do take account that this balance sheet is only considering Cancer Deaths When you add in the extra MS cases Autoimmune Illness Diabetes Heart Disease, Hyperparathyroidism, Hypertension,Osteoarthritis Osteoporosis, Obesity I could go on, that are related to vitamin d insufficiency you will see that it is far more important for people to get regular sun exposure than to completely shun the sun.
The reports here (http://www.healthresearchforum.org.uk/reports.html) explain the issues in greater detail but make no mistake NOT getting sufficient sunlight is FAR FAR FAR more dangerous than getting too much.

[Ted Hutchinson]

Higher Levels of Vitamin D May Protect Against Cancer in Men
(http://patient.cancerconsultants.com/news.aspx?id=36692)Researchers from Harvard University, the Medical University of South Carolina, and the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute recently conducted a study to evaluate the possible effects of vitamin D on the incidence of cancer in men.

This study included nearly 48,000 men involved in the Health Professionals Follow-Up Study. The researchers assigned levels of vitamin D according to dietary and supplementary vitamin D, skin pigmentation, body fat, geographic residence, and leisure-time physical activity (these factors are associated with plasma-levels of vitamin D). The participants completed questionnaires regarding these and other factors.

Men with lower levels of plasma vitamin D had an increased risk of developing cancer as well as death from cancer compared to those with higher levels:

Men with a low level of vitamin D had a 17% higher risk of developing any type of cancer within their lifetime than those with high levels of vitamin D.
Men with low levels of vitamin D had a 29% higher incidence in death from cancer than those with high levels of vitamin D.
Men with low levels of vitamin D had a 45% higher incidence of death from cancers affecting the digestive system than those with high levels.
The researchers concluded that men with low levels of vitamin D appear to have significantly higher rates of cancer as well as death from cancer than men with high levels. Patients may wish to speak with their physician regarding their individual variables that affect vitamin D levels.

Reference: Giovannucci E, Liu Y, Rimm E, et al. Prospective Study of Predictors of Vitamin D Status and Cancer Incidence and Mortality in Men. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. (http://jncicancerspectrum.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/jnci;98/7/451) 2006; 98: 451-459.

[Ted Hutchinson]

Season of diagnosis is a predictor of cancer survival. Sun-induced vitamin D may be involved: A possible role of sun-induced Vitamin D. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=17229569&query_hl=12&itool=pubmed_docsum)The calcidiol level in a group of Norwegians (14,000 individuals, age range 16-80) was found to be highest in late summer. The seasonal variation was larger for young than for old persons. The calcitriol concentration was practically constant throughout the year. Younger persons had less calcidiol and more calcitriol than older persons, indicating that the conversion of calcidiol to calcitriol is more efficient in younger persons. A seasonal variation of prognosis of cancer (colon-, breast-, prostate- cancer and Hodgkin lymphoma) was found. The survival is highest for summer and autumn diagnosis, corresponding to maximal calcidiol levels. Thus, calcidiol may act synergistically with traditional treatment modalities. In view of these calcitriol and calcidiol data, the seasonal variation of cancer survival may be related to the calcidiol gradient, indicating that this Vitamin D metabolite may be more important than believed so far.

[Ted Hutchinson]

Chemopreventive efficacy of 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 in colon cancer. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=17257827)The increased expression of 1alpha(OH)ase in colon cancer cells treated with the pro-hormone and its anti-proliferative effects, suggest that 25(OH)D(3) may offer possible therapeutic and chemopreventive option in colon cancer.

[Ted Hutchinson]

Vitamin D dramatically cuts cancer risk: study (http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070607/vitamin_cancer_070607?s_name=&no_ads=)

Don't take any notice of the information towards the end of this article.
There is NO risk from taking under 10,000iu daily (http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/abstract/85/1/6) Your body uses 4000iu daily (http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/77/1/204)

most people particularly those in the UK are Vitamin D insufficient (http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/abstract/85/3/860). Restricting intake to 1000iu/daily will not correct insufficiency or raise status to optimal in the UK. To do that you need an amount approaching the amount your body actually needs daily. Milk in the UK is not fortified. By all means drop daily intake to 1000iu/d between April and September when vitamin D from sunshine is available. Vitamin d from sunshine is more effective then from supplements as it generates vit d and it's metabolite right where it's needed, on the skin, where it acts straight away boosting your immune system and producing antimicrobial peptides.

[Ted Hutchinson]

http://professional.cancerconsultants.com/oncology_main_news.aspx?id=40189Further Evidence that Low Vitamin D Increases Risk of Colorectal Cancer
Further Evidence that Low Vitamin D Increases Risk of Colorectal Cancer

Researchers from Harvard University have reported that low plasma 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations increase the risk of colorectal cancer. The details of this study were published in the July 10, 2007 issue of the Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

Preclinical and clinical studies have suggested that high serum levels of vitamin D are associated with a lower incidence of several cancers. This is a difficult subject to study since vitamin D can be increased by both sunlight and oral intake. The usual dose of vitamin D in multi-vitamin preparations is 200-400 IU/day. High serum levels of vitamin D and intakes of 1000 IU/day of vitamin D have been associated with a 50% reduction in the risk of developing colorectal cancer. However, a randomized trial of calcium and vitamin D supplementation at normal doses found no evidence of a decreased incidence of colorectal cancer.

The current study evaluated 25-hudroxyvitamin D concentrations in 170 patients with colorectal cancer and 356 control subjects within the Health Professionals Follow-up Study (HPFS), Low levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D were associated with an increased incidence of colon cancer but not for combined colon and rectal cancer. These data were pooled with data from the Nurses’ Health Study cohort. In the pooled data, high plasma 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels were associated with decreased risks of both colon and rectal cancer.

Comments: These data provide further documentation for the relationship between vitamin D and colorectal cancer. 1-2000 IU/day of vitamin D should be a standard preventative measure.
Reference: Wu K, Fesamich D, Fuchs CS, et al. A nested case-control study of plasma 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations and risk of colorectal cancer. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2007; 99:1120-1129.

[Ted Hutchinson]

Vitamin D and Colorectal Neoplasia (http://streaming.biocom.arizona.edu/event/?id=20744)
Elizabeth T. Jacobs, PhD

This is an hour long video presentation for medical students. It summarizes the understanding of Vitamin D and Colorectal cancer up to May last year.
Although it's a bit technical I think most people will get something useful from watching it.