Vitamin D experience

I thought to share this with you guys. I had been diagnosed with some bone loss (osteopenia) so being concerned about my bone health doctor said to take calcium and vitamin D. So i bought the two supplements. First I tried the calcium alone and then added vitamin D to it. Thing is I have notice my skin is looking better with the vitamin D. Granted my acne is pretty much gone thanks to accutane but I still breakout at eating chocolates. Well thing is that one day i decided to eat chocolates (couldn’t resist) and I noticed that I didn’t breakout from it. I was like wow and then i realize that it might had to be the vitamin d. I thought to eat more chocolates and see if it was just luck that day. I did not breakout again. Not one zit and skin looking fab. I have continued eating chocolate with no problems. I then did some search online on vitamin d and acne and found out that it is fat soluble vitamin that does help skin. It’s liquid sunshine. I wanted to share with you guys and suggest you all try it and see if it makes a difference to you guys or if that was only me. I’m taking 400IU of dry vitamin D (cholaciferacol) vitamin shoppe brand.

Related Acne Archive Posts & Questions

20 thoughts on “Vitamin D experience

  1. thanks for that link maya!

    I think I’m going to take 800IU’s instead of the 400IU. I think I was indeed in need of vitamin D. And you know it never occured to me to try for acne. I really wished i had tried before i did accutane.

  2. Hi everyone,
    I have just read interesting article about vitamin D and sunshine. We all know sunbathing is not recomended these days, but sunshine is so important for us, it helps create vitamin D in our bodies. Maybe instead of eating vitamins, you can enjoy the sunshine during summer time (of course with sunblock)
    Check it out:
    http://www.realself.com/sun_damage_skincare_live_like_vampires.html

    Have a great day

  3. I remember reading a lot about Vitamin D. Its often paired up with Vitamin A.

    I’m looking information into this wally because i now believe these two must connected. I been experiencing a big difference in my energy levels, my health in general and I never felt this good since before accutane. My bones in my spine that were doing a lot of cracking sounds since accutane have dissappeared, it is unbeliavable. I’m leaning to think that i was vitamin d defficient and that the accutane made it worse. I called the doctor about the dosage and he said to take 400IU’s twice a day. This along with calcium cause if one supplements with D has to supplement with Calcium.

  4. Lisa4Real, wouldn’t wearing sunblock block the Vit. D also? If I were taking all the multi vitamins that I was supposed to be taking (2 with each meal, i.e. 6 per day) then I would be getting 400 I.U.’s of Vit. D per day. I’m also taking calcium powder daily. The only thing is that I’ve been missing the lunch doses a lot of the time. I can’t swallow pills so I have to open the capsules into applesauce and take it that way and I oftentimes forget to take applesauce with me and take it when I’m away from home. Mari, I’m so excited to hear that you’ve experienced such great results from taking the Vit. D. It’s a good reminder to me to really get serious about taking my supplements regularly.

    Here’s an article from Dr. Andrew Weil’s website. He has upped his daily Vit. D recommendation from 400 I.U.’s to 1000 I.U.’s per day!

    DrWeil.com

    Question:

    I’ve heard that you’re changing your vitamin D recommendation. Why? And how much do you now recommend?

    Answer:

    Orginally Published 3/8/2005

    Yes, I am raising my recommendation for vitamin D from 400 IU to 1,000 IU per day. That may sound like quite a leap, but evidence has been accumulating to suggest that the 400 IU now recommended for adults isn’t enough for optimum health. We need vitamin D to facilitate calcium absorption and to promote bone mineralization as well as for protection from a number of serious diseases. I recently reviewed a series of studies on vitamin D and bone health with Walter Willett, MD, professor of epidemiology and medicine at Harvard Medical School. Dr. Willett has assembled a compelling review of clinical evidence suggesting that current vitamin D recommendations, including my own, are too low.

    To sum up, most adults are simply not getting enough vitamin D for good bone health. We get vitamin D from such foods as fortified milk and cereals as well as from eggs, salmon, tuna, mackerel and sardines, and our bodies make vitamin D with exposure to sunlight. Unfortunately, many people don’t spend enough time in the sun to get optimal exposure, particularly in northern latitudes during the gray winter months. In addition, sunscreen blocks vitamin D synthesis in the skin, and dermatologists have made people so paranoid about sun exposure that many people in lower latitudes and in summer don’t get enough either.

    And, clearly, many people are falling short of their vitamin D needs. A study published in the February 2001 issue of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition showed that even while taking a 1,000 IU supplement, fewer than half of the participants in a Canadian study were getting enough to achieve optimal blood levels of vitamin D. And research published in the January 2003 issue of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition showed that 1,700 IU was needed to bring blood levels of vitamin D to optimal levels during winter months in Nebraska. Dr. Willett told me that other studies have shown that an intake of 400 IU of vitamin D per day has no impact on the risk of fractures, but that 700 to 800 IU per day, with or without calcium supplements, does seem to reduce fracture incidence. He noted that some evidence further suggests that a higher intake of vitamin D may reduce the risk of prostate cancer, colon cancer, other malignancies, and multiple sclerosis.

    Don’t be concerned that 1,000 IU will give you too much vitamin D – exposure to sunlight in the summer can generate between 10,000 and 20,000 IU of vitamin D per day with no ill effects. What’s more, no adverse effects have been seen with supplemental vitamin D intakes up to 10,000 IU daily.

    Increasing my vitamin D recommendation to 1,000 IU daily may not be the last word on this subject. Depending on the amount of sunshine available where you live, you may need to take even more. Stay tuned.

    Andrew Weil, M.D.

    Copyright 2006 Weil Lifestyle, LLC
    All material provided on the DrWeil.com Web site is provided for informational or educational purposes only. Consult a physician regarding the applicability of any opinions or recommendations with respect to your symptoms or medical condition.

  5. I asked my naturopathic doctor and he wrote me back:

    Yes, extra Vitamin D is excellent, esp. for those who don’t get out in the
    sun much.

    Pure Encapsulations, $10.30 vitamin D, 1000 mg. 60 capsules

    I’m taking a jillion supplements but I guess I can take a jillion and one now. I hope I get similar benefits as you’ve gotten Mari. I feel like an old lady at the moment. I sat out in the late afternoon sun today for a while.

  6. I never wear any sunscreen. In the summer, the minute the sun is out I’m out! I get as much sun as I possibly can (minimal clothing) and this helps store of Vit D for the winter.

    The darker the skin you have, the more sun you need to get enough Vit D.

  7. I never wear any sunscreen. In the summer, the minute the sun is out I’m out! I get as much sun as I possibly can (minimal clothing) and this helps store of Vit D for the winter.

    The darker the skin you have, the more sun you need to get enough Vit D.

    that’s true maya people with dark skin need supplemental D as with the sun they won’t create much. My doctor suggest to better take vitamin D supplements instead of the sun because of skin cancers.

  8. I asked my naturopathic doctor and he wrote me back:

    [quote]Yes, extra Vitamin D is excellent, esp. for those who don’t get out in the
    sun much.

    Pure Encapsulations, $10.30 vitamin D, 1000 mg. 60 capsules

    I’m taking a jillion supplements but I guess I can take a jillion and one now. I hope I get similar benefits as you’ve gotten Mari. I feel like an old lady at the moment. I sat out in the late afternoon sun today for a while.[/quote]
    lenore I think you need to stop taking a jillion supplements. And I hope Vitamin A is in neither of those supplements because you know vitamin A is the major offender after accutane. My doctor suggested 400IU’s twice a day like yours did but I think I will remain at 400IU once a day since I have seeing major benefit just with that. The vitamin D supplement I bought from vitamin shoppe price is only $3 dollars.

    I want to make a note here for those who have taken accutane and want to try vitamin D. Make sure the vitamin D is in dry form and not from fish oil source. Those from fish oil source have vitamin A so avoid those.

  9. My N.D. is very cognizant about how much Vit. A I’m taking and how much is a safe amount. I hope I can cut down on the amount of vitamins I’m taking soon. He says it’s for a brief time until I get better. When one has serious health issues like I have one has to trust a health practitioner at some point and do what they recommend. Still, I am beginning to resent the cost, the energy and time, the nausea that it causes me, etc. I don’t know how much longer I can keep up this regimen. It feels like too much for my system. I’m going to have to talk to him. I think that one’s intuition is important to listen to also.

  10. Maybe I’m missing something, but Maya, aren’t you worried that your skin will age if you don’t put sunscreen on?

  11. I think that one’s intuition is important to listen to also.

    totally lenore, listening to your body is the most imortant thing. If i take something and it doesn’t make me feel better I absolutetly don’t take it. Realize that medical malpractice is the leading third cause of death in this country.

  12. Maybe I’m missing something, but Maya, aren’t you worried that your skin will age if you don’t put sunscreen on?

    I’m 43 and most people say I look around 33 – so, no. I’m not scared of ageing.

    The bottom line is, there are enormous lies spread about the need for sunscreen. Its a wonderful piece of false marketing.

    People age not because of the sunshine, but because of stuff like sugar, hydrogenated fats and acidic diets. One we have a lot of junk in our bodies, the free radicals are triggered by the sunshine and wrinkling/ageing occurs.

    And wearing sunscreen creates a false sense of safety. We are MEANT to be under cover in mid day sun. Sunshine is essential to health.

  13. maya i had understood that aging happens because of aging genes we have. But if you take care of your body like seem to do you can certainly extend your lifespan. I agree that there are lies around about the need of sunscreen but i believe ones needs sunscreen like if one is going to the beach at mid day sun like you say. I guess everything balance is okay. But that of like going for tanning salons too often will certainly age your skin. I remember the sister of a bf I had she looked so old and she was way younger than me and I looked younger than her!

  14. Maya, I think the main concern is skin cancer. I understand about the diet and skin cancer connection, but if someone is not eating a great diet, perhaps they should be using sunscreen to avoid getting skin cancer as the combination of the bad diet and sun exposure could add up to skin cancer. People do tend to get skin cancers on the areas where they get the most sun. On the other hand, we’re all at risk of getting Vit. D deficient due to being so scared of getting any sun.

  15. What I am trying to say is that the use of sunscreens is linked with skin cancer!

    There are 3 people I personally know who had/have skin cancer. All 3 wore spf 15-30 every day, much of their adult life.

  16. This is worth reading:

    Review of the evidence linking the use of sunscreens to an increased risk of melanoma and skin cancer

    Sunscreens and Cancer

    by Hans R. Larsen, MSc ChE

    In 1991 Professor Johan Moan of the Norwegian Cancer Institute made an astounding discovery. He found that the yearly incidence of melanoma in Norway had increased by 350% for men and by 440% for women during the period 1957 to 1984. He also determined that there had been no change in the ozone layer over this period of time. He concludes his report in the British Journal of Cancer by stating “Ozone depletion is not the cause of the increase in skin cancers”(1).

    SKIN CANCER
    There are three major forms of skin cancer.

    BASAL CELL CARCINOMA is the most common form of skin cancer. It occurs most frequently in men who spend a great deal of time outdoors and primarily produces lesions on the head and neck(2). Basal cell carcinoma rarely spreads throughout the body but can invade neighbouring bone and nerves(3).

    SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA is the second most common skin cancer. It primarily affects people who sunburn easily, tan poorly, and have blue eyes and red or blonde hair. Squamous cell carcinoma most commonly develops from actinic keratoses and can metastasize if left untreated. Squamous cell carcinoma of the lip is 12 times more common among men than among women(4).

    MALIGNANT MELANOMA is the rarest form of skin cancer but is the most deadly. It affects the cells which produce melanin and seems to be more prevalent among city-dwellers than among people who work out-of-doors. It does not necessarily occur on sun-exposed areas of the body and is thought to be linked to brief, intense periods of sun exposure and a history of severe sunburn in childhood or adolescence. Malignant melanoma metastasizes easily and is often fatal if not caught in time(2,5).

    The skin cancer epidemic is a worldwide phenomenon. In 1978 there were approximately 480,000 cases of non-melanoma skin cancer in the United States alone. This is expected to rise to over one million in 1994(6). Malignant melanoma is growing at a rate of 7% per year in the United States. In 1991 cancer experts estimated that there would be about 32,000 cases during the year of which 6,500 would be fatal(7). In Canada melanoma incidence rose by 6% per year for men and by 4.6% per year for women during the period 1970-1986(8). Australia has the highest melanoma rate in the world. For men the rate doubled between 1980 and 1987 and for women it increased by more than 50%(9). It is now estimated that by age 75 two out of three Australians will have been treated for some form of skin cancer(10).
    If the ozone layer has not yet changed significantly except at the poles, then what is causing the enormous increase in skin cancer?

    The sunscreen connection
    The Australian experience provides the first clue. The rise in melanoma has been exceptionally high in Queensland where the medical establishment has long and vigorously promoted the use of sunscreens. Queensland now has more incidences of melanoma per capita than any other place. Worldwide, the greatest rise in melanoma has been experienced in countries where chemical sunscreens have been heavily promoted(11).

    Drs. Cedric and Frank Garland of the University of California are the foremost opponents of the use of chemical sunscreens. They point out that, although sunscreens do protect against sunburn, there is no scientific proof that they protect against melanoma or basal cell carcinoma in humans(11). There is, however, some evidence that regular use of sunscreens helps prevent the formation of actinic keratoses, the precursors of squamous cell carcinoma(12).

    The Garland brothers strongly believe that the increased use of chemical sunscreens is the primary cause of the skin cancer epidemic. They emphasize that people using sunscreen tend to stay longer in the sun because they do not get a sunburn – they develop a false sense of security(7). Chemical sunscreens are formulated to absorb UVB radiation, they let most of the UVA rays through(7). UVA rays penetrate deeper into the skin and are strongly absorbed by the melanocytes which are involved both in melanin production (sun tanning) and in melanoma formation(11). UVA rays also have a depressing effect on the immune system(13).

    ULTRAVIOLET RADIATION
    UVA rays constitute 90-95% of the ultraviolet light reaching the earth. They have a relatively long wavelength (320-400 nm) and are not absorbed by the ozone layer. UVA light penetrates the furthest into the skin and is involved in the initial stages of suntanning. UVA tends to suppress the immune function and is implicated in premature aging of the skin(2,13,14).

    UVB rays are partially absorbed by the ozone layer and have a medium wavelength (290-320 nm). They do not penetrate the skin as far as the UVA rays do and are the primary cause of sunburn. They are also responsible for most of the tissue damage which results in wrinkles and aging of the skin and are implicated in cataract formation(2).

    UVC rays have the shortest wavelength (below 290 nm) and are almost totally absorbed by the ozone layer. As the ozone layer thins UVC rays may begin to contribute to sunburning and premature aging of the skin(2).

    All forms of ultraviolet radiation are believed to contribute to the development of skin cancer(2).

    Most chemical sunscreens contain from 2 to 5% of benzophenone or its derivatives (oxybenzone, benzophenone-3) as their active ingredient. Benzophenone is one of the most powerful free radical generators known to man. It is used in industrial processes to initiate chemical reactions and promote cross-linking(15). Benzophenone is activated by ultraviolet light. The absorbed energy breaks benzophenone’s double bond to produce two free radical sites. The free radicals desperately look for a hydrogen atom to make them “feel whole again”(15). They may find this hydrogen atom among the other ingredients of the sunscreen, but it is conceivable that they could also find it on the surface of the skin and thereby initiate a chain reaction which could ultimately lead to melanoma and other skin cancers. Researchers at the Harvard Medical School have recently discovered that psoralen, another ultraviolet light-activated free radical generator, is an extremely efficient carcinogen. They found that the rate of squamous cell carcinoma among patients with psoriasis, who had been repeatedly treated with UVA light after a topical application of psoralen, was 83 times higher than among the general population(16).

    The benefits of sunlight
    Some scientists believe that UV light causes skin cancer through the combined effect of suppression of the immune system and damage to DNA(10,17). Exposure to UV light is, however, not all bad. Most of the body’s vitamin D supply, about 75% of it, is generated by the skin’s exposure to UVB rays(18). Using a sunscreen drastically lowers the cutaneous production of vitamin D3(19). A low blood level of vitamin D is known to increase the risk for the development of breast and colon cancer and may also accelerate the growth of melanoma(18,19,20).

    Dr. Gordon Ainsleigh in California believes that the use of sunscreens causes more cancer deaths than it prevents. He estimates that the 17% increase in breast cancer observed between 1991 and 1992 may be the result of the pervasive use of sunscreens over the past decade(20). Recent studies have also shown a higher rate of melanoma among men who regularly use sunscreens and a higher rate of basal cell carcinoma among women using sunscreens(11,21).

    Dr. Ainsleigh estimates that 30,000 cancer deaths in the United States alone could be prevented each year if people would adopt a regimen of regular, moderate sun exposure(20).

    Although the medical establishment still strongly supports the use of sunscreens there is a growing consensus among progressive researchers that the use of sunscreens does not prevent skin cancer and, as a matter of fact, may promote skin cancers as well as colon and breast cancer.

    The bottom line
    So what should you do to protect yourself as much as possible against these cancers? Summarizing current research the following recommendations appear reasonable:

    DO NOT rely on the use of sunscreens to protect you against skin cancer.
    DO NOT try to get a tan by visiting a tanning studio. The rays from their UV lamps are extremely harmful and the tan produced does not have the protective effect of a sunlight-induced tan(2,7).
    DO try to develop a moderate natural suntan unless you have extremely sensitive skin and burn easily. Regular and moderate unprotected sun exposure in the early morning or late afternoon will help maintain a protective tan and keep your vitamin D stores at an optimum level(20).
    DO wear protective clothing and a wide-brimmed hat when you are outside. Avoid sun exposure between 10 AM and 3 PM if at all possible. Remember that UV rays, particularly UVA, are present even on cloudy days(7).
    DO wear sunglasses that filter out 100% of the ultraviolet light to protect yourself against the development of cataracts(7).
    DO remember that sunlight is strongly reflected from sand, snow, ice, and concrete and can increase your direct sunlight exposure by 10 to 50%(2).
    DO make sure you get enough vitamin D3 and beta-carotene, if necessary through supplementation. Recent research has shown that taking 30 mg of beta-carotene a day protects against the suppression of the immune system by UVA rays(13).
    DO make sure to supplement your diet with antioxidants. Dr. Abram Hoffer in Victoria, Canada recommends that vitamin C, vitamin E, and selenium be used as a protection against the damages of excessive ultraviolet radiation. He suggests daily dosages of 3 grams or more of vitamin C, 800 IU of vitamin E, and 200 micrograms of selenium (l-selenomethionine)(22). Vitamins C and E also protect against cataract formation(23,24).
    DO cut down on the fat in your diet. Recent research has shown that patients with non- melanoma skin cancers can reduce their risk of developing additional actinic keratoses (precursors to skin cancer) by switching to a low fat diet(25).

    SUNSCREENS
    Sunscreens are designed to protect against sunburn (UVB rays) and generally provide little protection against UVA rays. They come in two forms:

    CHEMICAL SUNSCREENS contain chemicals such as benzophenone or oxybenzone (benzophenone-3) as the active ingredient. They prevent sunburn by absorbing the ultraviolet (UVB) rays(2).

    PHYSICAL SUNSCREENS contain inert minerals such as titanium dioxide, zinc oxide, or talc and work by reflecting the ultraviolet (UVA and UVB) rays away from the skin(2).

    A sunscreen with a SPF of 15 filters out approximately 94% of the UVB rays. One with a SPF of 30 filters out 97%. The SPF applies for UVB rays only. The protection provided against UVA rays in chemical sunscreens is about 10% of the UVB rating(26).

    REFERENCES

    Moan, J. & Dahlback, A. The relationship between skin cancers, solar radiation and ozone depletion. British Journal of Cancer, Vol. 65, No. 6, June 1992, pp. 916-21
    Harmful effects of ultraviolet radiation. Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 262, No. 3, July 21, 1989, pp. 380-84
    Haynes, Harley A. Primary cancer of the skin. Harrison’s Principles of Internal Medicine, McGraw- Hill, 7th ed., 1974, pp. 2024-25
    Hacker, Steven M. & Flowers, Franklin P. Squamous cell carcinoma of the skin. Postgraduate Medicine, Vol. 93, No. 8, June 1993, pp. 115-26
    Lee, John A.H. The relationship between malignant melanoma of skin and exposure to sunlight. Photochemistry and Photobiology, Vol. 50, No. 4, 1989, pp. 493-96
    Miller, Dena L. & Weinstock, Martin A. Nonmelanoma skin cancer in the United States: incidence. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, Vol. 30, No. 5, Pt. 1, May 1994, pp. 774-78
    Skolnick, Andrew A. Revised regulations for sunscreen labelling expected soon from FDA. Journal of the American Medical Assocation, Vol. 265, No. 24, June 26, 1991, pp. 3217-20
    Statistics Canada, Canadian Cancer Statistics 1991.
    Reynolds, Tom. Sun plays havoc with light skin down under. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Vol. 84, No. 18, September 16, 1992, pp. 1392-94
    Ozone depletion and health. The Lancet, December 10, 1988, p. 1377
    Garland, Cedric F., et al. Could sunscreens increase melanoma risk? American Journal of Public Health, Vol. 82, No. 4, April 1992, pp. 614-15
    Dover, Jeffrey S. & Arndt, Kenneth A. Dermatology. Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 271, No. 21, June 1, 1994, pp. 1662-63
    Fuller, Cindy J., et al. Effect of beta-carotene supplementation on photosuppression of delayed-type hypersensitivity in normal young men. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 56, 1992, pp. 684-90
    Fitzpatrick, T.B. & Haynes, H.A. Photosensitivity and other reactions to light. Harrison’s Principles of Internal Medicine, McGraw-Hill, 7th ed., 1974, pp. 281-84
    Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology, Vol. 13, 3rd ed., 1981, pp. 367-68
    Stern, Robert S. and Laid, Nan. The carcinogenic risk of treatments for severe psoriasis. Cancer, Vol. 73, No. 11, June 1, 1994, pp. 2759-64
    Wright, Brett. Sunscreens and the protection racket. New Scientist, January 22, 1994, pp. 21-2
    Garland, Frank C., et al. Geographic variation in breast cancer mortality in the United States: a hypothesis involving exposure to solar radiation. Preventive Medicine, Vol. 19, 1990, pp. 614-22
    Koh, Howard K. & Lew, Robert A. Sunscreens and melanoma: implications for prevention. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Vol. 86, No. 2, January 19, 1994, pp. 78-9
    Ainsleigh, H. Gordon. Beneficial effects of sun exposure on cancer mortality. Preventive Medicine, Vol. 22, February 1993, pp. 132-40
    Garland, Cedric F. et al. Effect of sunscreens on UV radiation-induced enhancement of melanoma growth in mice. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Vol. 86, No. 10, May 18, 1994, pp. 798-801
    Goodall, John & Hoffer, Abram. Protection against ultraviolet radiation. Canadian Medical Association Journal, Vol. 147, No. 6, September 15, 1992, pp. 839-40
    Robertson, J.M., et al. Vitamin E intake and risk of cataracts in humans, Annals of the New York Academy of Science, Vol. 570, 1989, pp. 372-82
    Knekt, Paul, et al. Serum antioxidant vitamins and risk of cataracts. British Medical Journal, Vol. 305, December 5, 1992, pp. 1392-94
    Black, Homer S., et al. Effect of a low-fat diet on the incidence of actinic keratosis. The New England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 330, No. 18, May 5, 1994, pp. 1272-75
    Kaidbey, Kays & Gange, R. William. Comparison of methods of assessing photoprotection against ultraviolet A in vivo. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, Vol. 16, No. 2, Pt. 1, February 1987, pp. 346-53
    McDonald, Charles J. Status of screening for skin cancer. Cancer (supplement), Vol. 72, No. 3, August 1, 1993, pp. 1066-70

    This article was first published in the International Journal of Alternative & Complementary Medicine,
    Vol 12, No 12, December 1994, pp.17-19

  17. Oh, I see Maya. Even with full spectrum non-chemical non-carcinogenic sunscreens? There seems to be a lot of controversy within the medical community about this issue as doctors still generally recommend wearing a full spectrum sunscreen. I thought the skin cancer link to sunscreens was if they weren’t broad spectrum and people were still getting the rays coming through that didn’t cause burning, thinking that they were totally protected or if the chemicals in the sunscreen itself were carcinogenic. The only sunscreen I wear actually is just what’s in the mineral powder make-up that I use. I have the MyChelle sunscreen but I find it to be quite heavy and smothering feeling. I don’t go out much during midday when the sun is very intense.

Comments are closed.