Talk:Calcifediol: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 00:34, 3 March 2015

Chemicals Start‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemicals, a daughter project of WikiProject Chemistry, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of chemicals. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.ChemicalsWikipedia:WikiProject ChemicalsTemplate:WikiProject Chemicalschemicals articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Calcidiol does not promote bone and teeth mineralization directly. Calcidiol is converted to calcitriol which actually promotes bone DE-mineralization as well as increased uptake of calcium into the bloodstream. Because of this, people with calcidiol converted rapidly into calcitriol are assumed to be 'deficient' when they may simply have an infection which upregulates TLR-4 leading to upregulation of CYB27B1 which converts calcidiol -> calcitriol.

In this model, high calcidiol is an indicator of health, not a cause of it.

High levels of 1,25D3 (calcitriol, which is produced from calcidiol) are associated with increased risk of heart disease as high blood calcium leads to calcification of soft tissues. Vitamin K2 (Menaquinone) is capable of blocking the effect of bone demineralization caused by calcitriol, as the Rotterdam study indicates.

--Ryan Wise (talk) 23:02, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

25(OH)D

The reference given, http://www.chem.qmul.ac.uk/iupac/misc/D.html (or its PDF equivalent, http://www.iupac.org/publications/pac/1982/pdf/5408x1511.pdf) doesn't mention 25(OH)D anywhere... CielProfond (talk) 20:56, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article about identification process says nothing about who uses it.

This article is not a survey about whether "physicians worldwide" (trust this test), and that is not a valid indicator of reliability in the test, anyway, so I want to say something else. Also, the pubmed version has no abstract, so maybe we should be linking to jama. 70.74.198.226 (talk) 00:34, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 15: / Line 15: @@
 The reference given, http://www.chem.qmul.ac.uk/iupac/misc/D.html (or its PDF equivalent, http://www.iupac.org/publications/pac/1982/pdf/5408x1511.pdf) doesn't mention 25(OH)D anywhere... [[User:CielProfond|CielProfond]] ([[User talk:CielProfond|talk]]) 20:56, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
+== Article about identification process says nothing about who uses it. ==
+[http://archinte.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=578861 This] article is not a survey about whether "physicians worldwide" (trust this test), and that is not a valid indicator of reliability in the test, anyway, so I want to say something else. Also, the [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/4332591 pubmed version] has no abstract, so maybe we should be linking to jama. [[Special:Contributions/70.74.198.226|70.74.198.226]] ([[User talk:70.74.198.226|talk]]) 00:34, 3 March 2015 (UTC)