The 2011 Report on Dietary Reference Intakes for Calcium and Vitamin D from the Institute of Medicine: What Clinicians Need to Know
Ross AC, et al • J Clin Endocrinol Metab
Key Finding
Vitamin D RDA: 600 IU/day ages 1-70, 800 IU/day ages 71+; target serum 25(OH)D: 20 ng/mL (50 nmol/L); UL 4,000 IU/day for ages 9+
Key Findings
- 1Vitamin D RDA: 600 IU/day ages 1-70, 800 IU/day ages 71+
- 2Target serum 25(OH)D: 20 ng/mL (50 nmol/L)
- 3Upper limit: 4,000 IU/day for ages 9+
- 4Extraskeletal benefit evidence deemed inconsistent and inconclusive
Original title: “The 2011 Report on Dietary Reference Intakes for Calcium and Vitamin D from the Institute of Medicine: What Clinicians Need to Know”
Plain English Summary
IOM committee report establishing RDAs for calcium and vitamin D based on skeletal health evidence. Found extraskeletal benefit evidence "inconsistent, inconclusive as to causality, and insufficient."
In-Depth Analysis
Study Details
Authors: A Catharine Ross (Chair), JoAnn E Manson, Steven A Abrams, et al.
Organization: Institute of Medicine Committee
Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab, 2011; 96(1):53-58
PMCID: PMC3046611
Key Recommendations (from original report)
Vitamin D RDA (IU/day)
- •Ages 1-70: 600 IU
- •Ages 71+: 800 IU
- •Infants 0-12 months: 400 IU
Target Serum 25(OH)D
- •20 ng/mL (50 nmol/L)
Vitamin D Upper Limits
- •Ages 9+: 4,000 IU/day
- •Infants: 1,000-1,500 IU/day
Calcium RDA (mg/day)
- •Ages 1-3: 700
- •Ages 4-8: 1,000
- •Ages 9-18: 1,300
- •Ages 19-50: 1,000
- •Ages 51-70 (female): 1,200
- •Ages 71+: 1,200
Committee Conclusions
"Available scientific evidence supports a key role of calcium and vitamin D in skeletal health"
Evidence for non-skeletal benefits was "inconsistent, inconclusive as to causality, and insufficient."
"Higher values were not consistently associated with greater benefit" - identified U-shaped risk curves at both low and high vitamin D levels.
Source: PMC full text (PMC3046611)
Paradigm Relevance
How this study applies to different clinical perspectives:
Standard Medical
RelevantConventional clinical guidelines used by most doctors
Why it matters:
The official US standard for vitamin D adequacy; basis for most clinical lab reference ranges
Research Consensus
Current scientific understanding, often ahead of guidelines
Not directly relevant to this paradigm
Metabolic Optimization
Proactive targets for optimal health, not just disease absence
Not directly relevant to this paradigm
Study Details
- Type
- Expert Opinion
- Methodology
- IOM committee review establishing Dietary Reference Intakes based on systematic evidence review for skeletal and extraskeletal outcomes.
Evidence Quality
Grade A - IOM consensus report. PMC3046611. Establishes official US/Canadian dietary recommendations.
Related Biomarkers
Calculate & Evaluate on Metabolicum
Original Source
DOI (Digital Object Identifier) is a permanent link to this publication. Unlike website URLs that can change, a DOI always resolves to the correct source.
Related Studies
Health Effects of Vitamin D supplementation: Lessons Learned from Randomized Controlled Trials and Mendelian Randomization Studies
Bouillon R, et al • J Bone Miner Res • 2023
Cancer mortality: daily dosing RR 0.88 (95% CI 0.78-0.98, 10 trials); bolus RR 1.07 (ineffective); VITAL: normal BMI cancer OR 0.76; shift focus to deficient individuals
Vitamin D supplementation and total cancer incidence and mortality: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Keum N, et al • Annals of Oncology • 2019
Cancer mortality: 13% reduction (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.79-0.96, p=0.005); Cancer incidence: no effect (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.93-1.03, p=0.42)
International Vitamin D Supplementation Guidelines
Pludowski P, et al • Journal of Steroid Biochemistry and Molecular Biology • 2018
Target 25(OH)D levels of 30-50 ng/mL (75-125 nmol/L) recommended for general health; higher targets (40-60 ng/mL) for specific conditions.