Is Vitamin D3 Better than D2?

Vitamin D Comes in Different Forms; They're not All the Same!

22 Comments
Join the Conversation
Recommended dietary allowances for vitamin D may be insufficient for many people. - Steve Christensen
Recommended dietary allowances for vitamin D may be insufficient for many people. - Steve Christensen
Current recommended dietary allowances for Vitamin D are probably too low, and the form you take could further decrease your supplement's effectiveness.

Anyone who watches television, stares at a computer screen or listens to a radio already knows the news: Vitamin D not only helps to build strong bones; it probably helps to protect us from heart attacks, cancer, diabetes, and even multiple sclerosis. Alas, many Americans aren’t getting enough of the “sunshine vitamin.”

Vitamin D Overdoses from Fortified Foods Led to Excessive Caution

Vitamin D’s role in preventing rickets (a disease characterized by softened and malformed bones) has long been understood. Misguided attempts to prevent rickets in the 1940s by supplementing foodstuffs with vitamin D led to the overdosing of many children, some of whom subsequently suffered irreversible brain damage.

Paradoxically, the ensuing apprehension about vitamin D toxicity resulted in a recommended dietary allowance (RDA) that is too low for most people. Indeed, one study published in the June 2008 issue of Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine showed that 40% of American babies and toddlers may have inadequate blood levels of vitamin D; another study suggests that adolescents can and should be taking as much as four times the latest RDA of 600 IU daily.

Vitamin D Is a Hormone Derived from Sun Exposure

Vitamin D is unique among the many vitamins that contribute to human health. It is the only vitamin that the human body, in a self-regulated process, can produce on its own via exposure to sunlight.

About an hour of sun exposure each week is considered sufficient (and this can be achieved in several, short-term forays into the outdoors) but individual needs vary, depending upon age, skin color, and underlying health problems. However, with the well-documented connection between skin cancer and exposure to ultraviolet light, a lot of people are hesitant to spend much time in the sun; they prefer to take a vitamin D supplement instead. In many cases, these individuals will simply take the form of vitamin D that is recommended by their physicians.

Vitamin D3 Is More Effective than D2 for Raising Blood Levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D

Unfortunately, despite some well-designed studies revealing the superiority of vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol) as a supplement, the form of vitamin D found in most prescription preparations in the US is vitamin D2 (ergocalciferol). It is noteworthy that vitamin D2 was developed and patented by the pharmaceutical industry and has since been prescribed by physicians for patients who need vitamin D. Many doctors don’t know that vitamin D2 differs radically from vitamin D3 in its physiologic activity. Once in the human body, vitamin D2 is inactivated in the normal metabolic pathway that converts vitamin D3 to an active precursor form of the vitamin. Vitamin D3 is the form that leads to higher levels of serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D, which is converted to 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D, the molecule that confers vitamin D’s benefits. Conversely, the metabolic products of D2 are not efficiently bound to important carrier proteins in the bloodstream, and they don’t effectively activate the appropriate cellular receptors. Finally, vitamin D2 has a shorter shelf life than D3.

In summary, then, it is clear that vitamin D3 is the preferred form of supplemental vitamin D; vitamin D2—in spite of longstanding medical dogma—is simply a less effective form of supplementation.

Sources

  1. Gordon CM, et al. Prevalence of Vitamin D Deficiency Among Healthy Infants and Toddlers. Arch Pediatr Adol Med. 2008;162(6):505-512
  2. Vieth R. Critique of the Considerations for Establishing the Tolerable Upper Intake Level for Vitamin D: Critical Need for Revision Upwards. J Nutr. 2006;136(4):1117-1122
  3. Office of Dietary Supplements: Vitamin D
Steve Christensen, MD, Tonya Attridge

Stephen Allen Christensen - Dr. Steve Christensen's writing has appeared in magazines, professional journals, poetry anthologies, and children's books since 1976.

rss
Advertisement
Leave a comment

NOTE: Because you are not a Suite101 member, your comment will be moderated before it is viewable.
Submit
What is 4+9?
22 Comments

Comments

Aug 17, 2008 3:57 PM
Guest :
You are not very infomed if you say that D2 was created by the pharmaceutical industry. Vitamin D2 is found in plants. It is active but it is less active than D3. And it is even perscribed by many doctors to decrease D3 and increase D2 in the body because D3 is a steriod. Besides that you aren't saying the side affects of D3 even in a dose of 500 I.Us many find that there bones become brittle.
Aug 17, 2008 5:56 PM
Stephen Allen Christensen :
I would refer you to http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/84/4/694
Physicians prescribe what they're taught to prescribe, and much of doctors' prescribing practices are dictated by the pharmaceutical industry in this country. That's just the way it is.
Doctors don't prescribe D2 to decrease levels of D3 in the body; unfortunately, they seldom give it a thought, because physicians, in the main, aren't well-versed in matters of nutrition.
I do speak from a position of experience, if not authority. Aside from getting a middling background in nutrition, I practiced medicine for nearly two decades. I can attest to the influence of "Big Pharma", both in medical education and in medical practice.
By the way, MANY of the molecules that are critical to cellular function are "steroids." Indeed, the very membranes of our cells are laden with steroid molecules. Just because a molecule is classified as a steroid doesn't mean it is detrimental to human health.
Jan 12, 2009 9:12 AM
Guest :
But I've heard that vitamin D3 supplements are animal-derived. if that is true I would rather take D2..
Jan 15, 2009 11:15 AM
Stephen Allen Christensen :
Whether D3 is plant- or animal-derived is moot in the minds of many, because as soon as you step out into the sunshine, you begin to synthesize D3 in your skin via the interaction of ultraviolet-B light and a derivative of the cholesterol molecule. So, whether a person takes it or makes it is an academic question.
Now, for the strict vegan who eschews the ingestion of all animal products, this could certainly become a philosophical issue.
Feb 1, 2009 7:29 AM
Guest :
Thank you for the information, Dr. Christensen. I am a 45 yr. old female and have had basal cell CA 3 times, so the sun is not an option for me. Do you recommend 1000 units of D3 daily...is this enough? I know more is not necessarily better, but in this case, would 5000 units daily be optimal?
Thanks,
Michele
Feb 1, 2009 5:27 PM
Stephen Allen Christensen :
Michele,
The maximum daily dose recommended by the Food and Nutrition Board of the Institute of Medicne is 2000 IUs daily. However, this may be an overly conservative recommendation. Vitamin D toxicity is unlikely below 10,000 IUs daily. Personally, I take 2000 IUs daily during the winter and when I'm not able to get out into the sun during the summer.
I hope that helps.
Feb 12, 2009 6:44 PM
Guest :
Thank you! off to get some cholecalciferol.
Mar 13, 2009 2:11 PM
Guest :
Does it help if the D3 supplement comes in gel form versus the dry form?
Mar 14, 2009 7:55 AM
Stephen Allen Christensen :
Different vehicles for vitamins (i.e., gel, liquid, tablet, powder, capsule) may confer different levels of absorption. In the pharmaceutical industry there are quality standards that require certain levels of availability for given agents. Unfortunately, the supplement industry is not so carefully constrained. All else being equal, a gel may provide a more readily-absorbed nutrient than a tablet or powder, simply because it's already in a semi-liquid form. However, just because a product is offered in gel form doesn't guarantee its quality. My advice would be to consult with a nutritionist that you trust (that person might be your favorite vitamin retailer) and find a good-quality form of every supplement that you take. Once you find the ones you like, stick with them.
Sep 22, 2009 4:34 AM
Guest :
I started taking a multi-vitamin which contains 600 UI a few months ago and then this past weekend I started adding Vitamin D3 pills which contains 1000 UI. I started getting a small rash on the inside of my elbow and on my shoulder. Can this be the cause? Also my neck is very irritated - I can't wear scarves, turtlenecks, neckalces, or put on perfume. This has been this way since the winter. Could the multi-vitamin have this affect?
Sep 22, 2009 1:16 PM
Stephen Allen Christensen :
One easy way to find out if the vitamin is the culprit is to stop taking it for a couple of weeks. As long as your diet is reasonably well-balanced, stopping the multivitamin won't hurt you a bit. If the rash and skin sensitivity go away, it could be something in the vitamin that's causing the problem. You could always restart the same multivitamin to see if the problem returns-- thus clinching it--but I'd just get a different vitamin...if you think you really need it.
If the rash and sensitivity persist after you've been off the vitamin for two to three weeks, I'd start looking for other possible causes (i.e., perfumes, cosmetics, soaps and detergents, etc.) or have a doc take a look.
Sep 24, 2009 4:03 AM
Guest :
Thanks - I'll do that. I just never thought a multi-vitamin would have that affect. Who would have thought that something which is supposed to help with your health can cause this sort of problem?
Oct 2, 2009 2:26 PM
Guest :
Because I do not get much exposure to daylight (I go to sleep and wake up late), I began taking 3000-4000 IUs of D3 earlier this year. I too noticed a rash around my neck and shoulders, which seems to have intensified when I recently began taking the pills twice a day (2 x 1000 IUs) instead of 3 or 4 times (3 or 4 x 1000 IUs).

I attributed this rash initially to irritation from laundry products or perfume, but the only thing that changed in the weeks prior to the rash's intensification was the doubling of the amount of D3 I was taking at one time. I also find it interesting that another reader here has experienced a similar rash in the neck/shoulder area.

As an experiment, I will cut back to 2000 IUs per day, taken in two installments, and report back here in a week or two with an update on the state of the rash.
Oct 2, 2009 2:32 PM
Guest :
Because I do not get much exposure to daylight (I go to sleep and wake up late), I began taking 3000-4000 IUs of D3 earlier this year. I too noticed a rash around my neck and shoulders, which seems to have intensified when I recently began taking the pills twice a day (2 x 1000 IUs) instead of 3 or 4 times (3 or 4 x 1000 IUs).

I attributed this rash initially to irritation from laundry products or perfume, but the only thing that changed in the weeks prior to the rash's intensification was the doubling of the amount of D3 I was taking at one time. I also find it interesting that another reader here has experienced a similar rash in the neck/shoulder area.

As an experiment, I will cut back to 2000 IUs per day, taken in two installments, and report back here in a week or two with an update on the state of the rash.
Oct 3, 2009 3:59 PM
Guest :
Rereading my post of yesterday, I realized that when I wrote:

"...when I recently began taking the pills twice a day (2 x 1000 IUs)..."

it was not clear that I meant 2000 (2 x 1000) IUs, twice a day (total 4000 IUs), an amount which I shall now be halving.
Oct 12, 2009 5:44 PM
Guest :
For the past 3 years I have been taking calcitroil .25 mcg's 2x/day. I have also been taking Calcium Citrate plus Vitamin D (ergocalciferol) Vitamin D 400 IU plus Calcium 1000 mg (1500 mg a day) and recently was told to take 1000 IU's of Vitamin D. I took one each day and noticed numbing and tingling in my lips, left side of face, fingers and toes. After the first day, I stopped taking it and symptoms went away. Next day I took it again and same symptoms appeared. My multivitamin, and Calcium Citrate both have Vitamin D in it, perhaps it was too much or I am allergic to the brand of Vitamin D, I am not sure which. I just realized that there was two types of Vitamin D (ergocalciferol and Cholecalciferol). One is D2 and the other is D3. I was never told there was a difference and have been taking D2 all along and then switched to another brand which apparently is D3. I don't know which is better. Any help would be appreciated.
Oct 12, 2009 7:11 PM
Stephen Allen Christensen :
Rocaltrol (calcitriol) is usually recommended for people suffering from renal failure, osteoporosis, or hypoparathyroidism. Calcitriol is a potent form of vitamin D, and anyone taking it in conjunction with other forms of vitamin D should be closely monitored. I assume your calcium and vitamin D levels are being checked periodically; one side effect of vitamin D intoxication could be the sensory disturbances you have described.
However, to ensure that no stone is unturned, I would recommend medical evaluation to ensure that nothing else is going on. Citrate toxicity, for example, can cause the symptoms you report; it is a common side effect of blood transfusion or in people who donate platelets. I've also heard of it happening in dialysis patients.
Additionally, although your symptoms are unusual for someone suffering from TIAs ("ministrokes"), there might be something neurological going on that is unrelated to your vitamin D intake.
By the way, I always recommend vitamin D3 over D2, for the reasons I mentioned in the article.
Sep 7, 2010 12:49 PM
Guest :
Wow this article couldn't be more wrong. Look at the latest research and start by visiting TotalNutraceutical.com
Sep 7, 2010 1:37 PM
Stephen Allen Christensen :
Sorry. The article cited by the "Mushroom Doctor" at totalnutraceutical.com is less than convincing. (Mushrooms, by the way, are a source of vitamin D2, not D3, and the website is designed to sell nutraceuticals derived from mushrooms; there may be a conflict of interest here). There is compelling evidence that D3 is more appropriate for use in humans, notwithstanding the other benefits of mushrooms. From one recent (2008) review:
"Most experts now believe that the only form that should be purchased is vitamin D3. Vitamin D2 is also very acceptable, but in the author’s opinion, most individuals should switch to D3. There is a plethora of logical reasons for advocating the use of vitamin D3 over vitamin D2 dietary supplements (Wolpowitz, & Gilchrest, 2006), including:

•UVB light from the sun strikes the skin, and humans synthesize vitamin D3, so it is the most "natural" form. Human beings do not make vitamin D2, and most healthy fish contain vitamin D3.
•Vitamin D3 is the same price as vitamin D2.
•Vitamin D3 may be less toxic than D2 because higher concentrations of D2 circulate in the blood when consumed (compared to vitamin D3). It does not bind as well to the receptors in the human tissues compared to vitamin D3.
•Vitamin D3 is the more potent form of vitamin D, which is a potential benefit. For example, obesity tends to lower blood levels of vitamin D, so a more potent form is needed.
•Vitamin D3 is more stable on the shelf compared to D2, and is more likely to remain active for a longer period of time and when exposed to different conditions (temperature, humidity, and storage). This is perhaps why the amount of vitamin D2 in certain fortified food products have been significantly lower than that advertised on the label in numerous instances.
•Vitamin D3 has been the most utilized form of vitamin D in clinical trials, and there have only been a few clinical trials of vitamin D2 to prevent bone fractures in adults.
•Vitamin D3 is more effective at raising and maintaining the vitamin D blood test (again, D2 binds less tightly to the vitamin D receptors in the body; therefore, D2 does not circulate as long in the body, which means it has a shorter half-life)."

The preponderance of evidence still weighs heaviest on the side of vitamin D3. But do continue your mushrooms; I take reishii- and maitake- and agaricus-containing products myself.
Sep 9, 2010 10:05 AM
Guest :
The conclusions of this article are nor correct; also the article is several years old.
Recent data from Dr. Michael Hollick of Boston states that D2 and D3 are equal
Moreover, D2 is natural and D3 comes from sheep wool grease; not sure I would use the term natural, clean and pure for D3.
There is data that shows selective receptors for D2 versus D3 in different tissues.
May 11, 2011 8:02 AM
Stephen Allen Christensen :
Hopefully, 2011 is recent enough: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21289249

I would call the reader's attention to the phrase: "Overall, D(3) is slightly, but significantly, more effective than D(2) to increase 25(OH)D."

D3 is produced by exposing wool fat to UV light, followed by purification.
D2 is produced by exposing yeast to UV light, followed by purification.
Wool or yeast? The virtues and vices of each are certainly open to discussion, but I think the operative term here is "purification."
Aug 9, 2011 5:44 PM
Guest :
Guest:
Every time I take D3 my blood pressure goes up and my heart rate speeds up. I have tried different brands to experiment. I have no problem with D2, but it has become difficult to find separately or in a mulitvitamin. I can tell you that I am very allergic to lanolin and wool which I understand D3 is derived from. I have discussed this with my primary care MD. He said this was interesting because he has been seeing these symptoms in other patients he has recommended to take additional vitamin D.
22 Comments
Advertisement
Advertisement