I don't really know where to post this. It isn't exactly research or news, but it isn't about personal experience of taking oral vitamin A either.
There has been a lot of talk about vitamin D deficiency and the need to supplement.
Those here who have been around for a few years might recall how the Vitamin D council recommended not supplementing with Vitamin A, as the two competed.
It now seems that this advice may not be correct.
We all know how dangerous accutane can be, but natural vitamin A from foods/supplements might, in some cases be beneficial. (Not synthetic).
Here are a couple of interesting reads.
I started supplementing with Vitamin D3 back in early 2009 and at first, barring some initial side effects, I found increasing my D levels beneficial. I was deficient prior to starting.
Then as time passed, benefits decreased and in the end I couldn't tell if it was helping or hinding.
The bell curve might apply and I am sure it does.
My serum levels became in excess of 100ng/mL and after a lot of discussion with scientists, I reached the conclusion that it probably wasn't a good idea to maintain such a high level. Studies have shown that in cultures which are exposed to a lot of sunlight, very few people have serum levels above ( around) 88ng/mL. There is suggestion that higher levels might increase mortality, but having said that, I have no idea how well researched this area of medicine is.
What has become of more interest to me lately, is that of ratios. The ratio between vitamin D, A and k2. Common sense tells us that everything works in synergy and when you tinker with one player, surely it might adversely affect others?