10 mg of Vitamin K1 a day? 10 times what I take now?!!

I think you should go by your labs.  K1 and osteocalcin unless you think that the lab ranges we are using are wrong.

~Becky

Amy, what test do you use for K1 and what was your last level?

In June my K1 lab came back low at .13 on a scale of (.28-1.78)  I had been taking 1000mcg from Vitamin Shoppe.  Now I have switched to 4000 mcg daily from Vitalady.

-Jenny

Jenny,

My vitamin K level was Low at   0.18   ( range of 0.28-1.78).  But we need more than just a vitamin K level to be more accurate with this I think. 

For my next set of labs, I plan on having these tests done which are also related to Vitamin K:

Osteocalcin N-MID 16322
Protein C and Protein S, functional 39457
Vitamin K 36585

ICD 9 Code(s):  269.0
                             269.2
                             263.0

I will take 20 mg of Vitamin K1 today.  It is not stored in the body---can't go toxic according to everything I've read.  I think we need more Vitamin K.  I want my bones, my heart, my brain, my blood to flow nicely.  It's scary, but I figure this is how we came about taking so much Vitamin D.  Both sides of clotting issues... excess bleeding and coagulation issues stem from a Vitamin K deficiency.  Interesting... 

"Recommended intakes of vitamin K1 are based solely on

amounts required to maintain coagulation function (25, 320). It is

doubtful that average intakes, although below the Adequate

Intake, hinder coagulation because the Adequate Intake includes

a safety factor (25). However, concern has been expressed

among some experts that current intake recommendations for

vitamin K1 may not be high enough to ensure adequate function

of VKD proteins not involved in coagulation" (eg, reference

I believe the article was talking about total needs, which the majority of those needs are met by gut microflora.  It's rare for a normal person to have to supplement K1.

I take 1000 mcg daily and my labs are great. I also take 250 mcg of K2 for calcium absorption and those labs are good too (keeping all digits crossed!).

Hugs,
Ratkity

"Previous theory held that dietary deficiency is extremely rare unless the intestine (small bowel) was heavily damaged, resulting in malabsorption of the molecule. The other at-risk group for deficiency were those subject to decreased production of K₂ by normal flora, as seen in broad spectrum antibiotic use.^[33] Taking broad-spectrum antibiotics can reduce vitamin K production in the gut by nearly 74% in people compared to those not taking these antibiotics.^[34] Diets low in vitamin K also decrease the body's vitamin K concentration.^[35] Additionally, in the elderly there is a reduction in vitamin K₂ production.^[36]

Recent research results also demonstrate that the small intestine and large intestine (colon) seem to be inefficient at absorbing vitamins K.^[37][38] These results are reinforced by human cohort studies, where a majority of the subjects showed inadequate vitamins K amounts in the body. This was revealed by the presence of large amounts of incomplete gamma-carboxylated proteins in the blood, an indirect test for vitamins K deficiency.^[39][40][41] And in an animal model MK4 was shown to prevent arterial calcifications, pointing to its potential role in cardiovascular disease prevention.^[42] In this study vitamin K₁ was also tested and shown to not prevent arterial calfications."


That was taken from Wikipedia on Vitamin K...  I still just think we need more Vitamin K 1 and Vitamin K2  in the MK-4 form not MK-7.   I think we are deficient based on our "gla protein levels" which none of us, to my knowledge, has ever had measured.  This is just a hunch though.

I researched all this K2 stuff about a year or more ago. I got to the point where I was about to pull my hair out. There are two distinct school of thought as to which form is better. I finally found myself kind of leaning towards the MK7, which is by the way just one of several numbers assigned to various Mk's. Vitalady likes the MK7. Maybe she will chime in and tell you why.

But one point some author made, really stuck in my mind. (I hope I can say this half-right) The reason MK4 is sometimes favored is because it is used in so many studies and the reason for this is that where the studies are done the MK4 form is plentiful and cheap.

The MK-7 has a much longer half life. MK-7 stays in bloodstream 20 times longer than MK-4 (100h vs 5h) Some people feel this is a good reason to only take it a couple of times a week

I remember being on this kick a year or so ago as well!  lol.  Everything I read NOW suggests MK-4 and much more Vitamin K1.  There is TONS of info out now on Vitamin K.  I think it has taken off and is being studied a lot more.  Have you looked into "Osteo K?"  There is a website, a 15 minute video on K... I put myself on that product as well.  lol.  Wikipedia has a good starting point on vitamin K info.  And then I look at all the cites it quotes. 

WHAT is this?  Greek.  :)  I hope it forwards okay this time.

Serum undercarboxylated OC (u**** is a

sensitive indicator of vitamin K status and correlates

with plasma PIVKA-II concentrations (r=0.27,

Osteocalcin.  There. I answered myself from above post.  lol.  We need this measured!   Along with protein S/C and vitamin K.  Is anyone reading this?  :)