Vitamin D Deficiency: Reality or Racket?

A little Vitamin D isn't that hard to come by!

Before we left the hospital with Suzi I was required to attend a "class" on how to care for my newborn. One of the points covered was that we must administer Poly-Vi-Sol drops every day. Our generous hospital had provided our first bottle, compliments of their philanthropic buddies at Enfamil. In the first day or two home from the hospital, I dutifully squirted this disgusting liquid into Suzi's mouth, only to have her throw it back up, along with the milk I'd just breastfed her. This was disconcerting, especially since she was gaining slowly anyway.

The next time we took Suzi to the doctor, I asked if it was really necessary to give her those vitamins. The doctor gave a knowing chuckle and said, with a sideways look, that yes, it was necessary because the vitamin D deficiency in some children's diets could leave them prone to rickets. She seemed skeptical herself of what she was saying, but at the time I knew no better than to do whatever the doctor said. My mom kept trying to give them to Suzi since it was hard for me, and Suzi spit them out and stained her clothes.

After a few weeks we decided to discontinue the supplements. My maternal instincts were telling me the stuff was noxious, so I took Suzi out for a little extra sunshine to get vitamin D instead. It was the first time I vetoed the Baby Police in favor of common sense.

Today as I was browsing my favorite blogs, I came across this article on Mama Knows Breast, which was sparked by an article in the New York Times. The AAP insists that it is necessary to supplement all babies except those who are fed formula, because the formula is fortified with everything baby needs. Sunlight, they say, is not sufficient because no one is sure how much sunlight is enough for any given child (darker skin pigments need more sunlight to generate vitamin D). Furthermore, we shouldn't be taking our infants out in the sun anyway, because it increases their risk for skin cancer.

Hogwash.

According to KellyMom, a site I love and trust, babies are usually only at risk for deficiency if 1) they don't have enough exposure to sunlight, 2) mother and baby have darker skin, or 3) the mother is deficient in vitamin D.

Suzi and I, as you may have noticed, are light-skinned. We both get a fair amount of sunlight and Suzi has had no problems so far with her bones. The claim that sun causes skin cancer so we should keep our babies out of it at all times is just ludicrous. Most people who end up with skin damage from UV rays have spent whole summers lying out on a beach blanket trying to get a tan, or repeatedly work outdoors without wearing sunscreen. Some experts suggest that sunlight is the safest way to get vitamin D because it allows the body to synthesize it, which takes away the risk of overdosing on supplements.

If adequate sunlight exposure is for some reason unfeasible, why not supplement the mother? She can take vitamins, or if that's not appealing vitamin D can be found in eggs, fortified milk, and many other foods.

I think we as a society have become too dependent on vitamins in general. When we should be planning our diet around our deficiencies, we've been popping pills to fix them. While vitamins are sometimes useful, no pill can replace a balanced diet. As for the vitamin D supplements, I will never give them again. To me, it's just something unnecessary which allows a formula company to make money even off women who are breastfeeding--which is exactly what they want.