Trusted Information for Healthy Pregnancies
16 weeks
High-dose vitamin D safe during pregnancy
May 3rd
Taking high doses of vitamin D during pregnancy is safe and appears to reduce the risk of preterm birth and infections, say the authors of a study that compared different amounts of supplementation in expectant mothers.
But their recommendation that pregnant women should take 4,000 international units of vitamin D daily -- at least 10 times the standard recommended amount -- is sure to generate controversy.
"When we first proposed the study in 2002, it was heresy to even think about giving more than 400 international units a day of vitamin D," co-principal investigator Dr. Carol Wagner said from Vancouver, where the two-part study is being presented at an international pediatrics meeting.
"Diet doesn't provide enough vitamin D, and we don't go in the sun as much as we need (to)," said Wagner, adding that her research team set out to determine the optimal dose of vitamin D supplements for pregnant women that would promote health without doing harm.
The researchers enrolled 494 pregnant women at 12 to 16 weeks' gestation in the study and assigned them to three groups: one group received 400 IUs of vitamin D a day until delivery; the second got 2,000 IUs; and the third 4,000 IUs. The women were tested monthly to ensure they were not suffering any negative effects.
Neither the women nor the researchers knew what dose of vitamin D they were receiving in the study, a "blinded," randomized controlled trial whose methodology is considered the gold standard of medical science.
"What we found was that 2,000 was better than 400, and 4,000 was the best, without any adverse events that were associated with vitamin D," said Wagner. "And then ... we found fewer infections in the 4,000 group and fewer preterm labors and-or preterm birth deliveries in the 4,000 group compared to the 400 group."
Analysis of the data also showed that the women taking 4,000 units of vitamin D had half the rate of pregnancy-related disorders, such as gestational diabetes and preeclampsia, compared to expectant mothers taking 400 units.
However, Wagner conceded that the notion of pregnant women taking a daily dose of 4,000 IUs of vitamin D will likely stir some debate, especially within the medical community. The current recommended daily dose is 200 to 400 IUs daily.
Dr. Gideon Koren, head of the Motherisk Program at Toronto's Hospital for Sick Children, said the study is too small to provide such a definitive recommendation and to "declare therapeutic superiority" of 4,000 units of vitamin D.
"I think for now women should be sure that they get the recommended dose. I don't know that this study by itself should send women to buy 4,000. No, no way. I don't think this is sufficient."
"The study's important to show that it doesn't cause side-effects, but I think to tell women that they need 4,000 - to go from 400 to 4,000 - is huge."
However, Dr. Reinhold Vieth, head of the Bone and Mineral Laboratory at Mount Sinai Hospital in Toronto, has long argued that recommended daily amounts (RDAs) for vitamin D are outdated and woefully inadequate.
Vieth, who has conducted numerous studies on vitamin D in different patient populations, said the Canadian Pediatric Society has been advocating 2,000 units during pregnancy since 2007.
"The next step, 4,000, well, I bet you they'll come up with that in a couple of years, because this (the Wagner-group study) has to get published first," he said, adding that he agrees that pregnant women should be taking that level of vitamin D daily.
Dr. Robert Gagnon, a spokesman for the Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada (SOGC), said the study was well-designed and its findings are important.
The Montreal specialist said SOGC is in the process of reviewing the medical literature before deciding on its official recommendation for expectant mothers.
"We need to see all the details of the study before we come to the recommendation," he said. "To say (pregnant women) should take 4,000, I think it's a little premature for that."
SourceStudy Links Folic Acid Supplement in Late Pregnancy to Asthma in Offspring
Nov 4th
Women who take folic acid supplements during the later months of pregnancy may be increasing their baby's risk of developing asthma, according to a newly released Australian study.
Found in its natural form in leafy green vegetables, legumes and some nuts, folic acid is commonly recommended to women trying to conceive to prevent neural defects in the first weeks of pregnancy.
But the Australian study found that women who continue to take folic acid late into pregnancy were 30 percent more likely to give birth to a child which would develop asthma.
"We see a substantial proportion of women taking these folate supplements throughout pregnancy, and it may be because people think it is entirely benign," said Michael Davies, associate professor at Adelaide University.
"Folate is incredibly important because of its role in preventing neural tube defects (like spina bifida). But because it is so important, and so bioactive, it needs to be treated with some respect as well."
Of the 550 women studied, those who took the folic acid supplements before conception and not more than several weeks into their pregnancy had no increased risk of asthma in their children.
But women who took it during weeks 16 to 30 of the pregnancy increased their risk of having a child with asthma by about 30 percent, according to the research, published in the American Journal of Epidemiology.
"Our finding should be reassuring to women who take folate for the purpose of preventing neural tube defects because we found no evidence of early supplementation (leading to asthma)," Davies told newswire AAP.
Davies said a diet rich in natural folate carried no increased risk of asthma for the baby.
Source