Majority of Americans and Canadians are getting enough vitamin D and calcium, says report

The majority of Americans and Canadians are getting enough vitamin D and calcium to meet their needs, says a new report from the Institute of Medicine.  Most people up to age 70 need no more than 600 international units, or IUs, of vitamin D per day, and those 71 and older may need as much as 800 IUs, the report finds.  The amount of calcium needed ranges, based on age, from 700 to 1,300 milligrams per day.

A large amount of evidence reviewed by the committee that wrote the report confirms the roles of calcium and vitamin D in promoting skeletal growth and maintenance and the amounts needed to avoid poor bone health.  The committee also reviewed hundreds of studies and reports on other possible health effects of vitamin D, such as protection against cancer, heart disease, autoimmune diseases, and diabetes.  While these studies point to possibilities that warrant further investigation, they have yielded conflicting and mixed results and do not offer the evidence needed to confirm that vitamin D has these effects.

Sunlight triggers the natural production of vitamin D in skin and contributes to people's vitamin D levels.  Individuals' sun exposure varies greatly, however, so the committee assumed minimal exposure to establish the intake values.  The new intake levels for vitamin D cover the needs of individuals who get little sun.  

Getting too much calcium from dietary supplements has been associated with kidney stones, while excessive vitamin D can damage the kidneys and heart.  Evidence about other possible risks associated with routine vitamin D supplementation is still tentative, but some signals suggest there are greater risks of death and chronic disease associated with long-term high vitamin D intake.  The report also set upper intake levels, which represent the upper safe boundary rather than amounts people should strive to consume.  The upper intake levels and the amounts people require based on age and gender are detailed at

Confusion about the amount of vitamin D necessary to ward off deficiency has arisen in recent years as tests that measure blood levels have become common.  The measurements of sufficiency and deficiency that laboratories use to report test results are not standardized and different labs use different cutpoints.  There may be an overestimation of deficiency because many labs appear to be using cutpoints that are higher than the evidence indicates are appropriate.  


  1. Henry Lahore Henry Lahore United States says:

    The reports for rickets has not changed much in the past 2 years, so the report, which they clearly says is for BONE health, not BODY health is correct. Yes, only need 800 IU to prevent rickets.
    But the random controlled trials of the past 2 years have round that we need a lot more to prevent many more diseases!

The opinions expressed here are the views of the writer and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of News Medical.
Post a new comment

While we only use edited and approved content for Azthena answers, it may on occasions provide incorrect responses. Please confirm any data provided with the related suppliers or authors. We do not provide medical advice, if you search for medical information you must always consult a medical professional before acting on any information provided.

Your questions, but not your email details will be shared with OpenAI and retained for 30 days in accordance with their privacy principles.

Please do not ask questions that use sensitive or confidential information.

Read the full Terms & Conditions.

You might also like...
Study links endocrine-disrupting chemical exposure to poorer sleep and vitamin D deficiency