> In Finland, the recommendation for daily vitamin D supplementation was gradually reduced from 4000-5000 IU in 1964 to 400 IU in 1992.
And from https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4210929/ which has
> The Institute of Medicine (IOM) issues dietary recommendations on the request of the U.S. and Canadian governments. One of these recommendations is the Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA). The RDA is the nutrient intake considered to be sufficient to meet the requirements of 97.5% of healthy individuals. The RDA for vitamin D is 600 IU per day for individuals 1 to 70 years of age and is assumed to achieve serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) levels of 50 nmol/L or more in 97.5% of healthy individuals.
Some discussion then: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15867918
gmane•6mo ago
Seems... like a quack.
its-summertime•6mo ago
gmane•6mo ago
Edit: You can also click on his name in the original post (or the link above) and see all the papers in pubmed authored by him.
Edit 2: These two papers:
Veugelers PJ, Ekwaru JP. A statistical error in the estimation of the recommended dietary allowance for vitamin D. Nutrients. 2014;6(10):4472–4475. - PMC - PubMed Veugelers PJ, Ekwaru JP. A statistical error in the estimation of the recommended dietary allowance for vitamin D. Nutrients. 2014;6(10):4472–4475. - PMC - PubMed
and
Heaney R, Garland C, Baggerly C, French C, Gorham E. Letter to Veugelers, P.J. and Ekwaru, J.P., A statistical error in the estimation of the recommended dietary allowance for vitamin D. Nutrients 2014, 6, 4472-4475; doi:10.3390/nu6104472. Nutrients. 2015;7(3):1688–1690. - PMC - PubMed
its-summertime•6mo ago
> Following an ecological integrative approach, we examined the associations between published representative and standardized European population vitamin D data and the Worldometer COVID-19 data at two completely different time points of the first wave of this pandemic.
and
> Thus, a major limitation of our ecological approach is that we had to rely on published - but perhaps not always completely representative - data on the vitamin D status of the populations in Europe.
gmane•6mo ago
its-summertime•6mo ago
gmane•6mo ago
Either the author didn't do a literature review before publishing, isn't well versed in the field, or chose not to cite works which may not agree with their results. Neither of which reflects well on the author.
Supermancho•6mo ago
There are a few hundred PHDs^1 that agree that Vitamin D deficiency increases COVID 19 mortality (nowhere is prevention mentioned) in the US, with no EU overlap that I could see from casual review.
Maybe I'm taking sides here, but I think the data is supported, even if the NIH papers are flawed. Funding what many people assume to be a null hypothesis, is not popular so there may never be research that is convincing, for most.
^1 The signatories are not a comprehensive list, but one list among others: https://www.onedaymd.com/2020/12/vitamin-D-COVID19.html
seec•6mo ago
Having more Vitamin D probably means that you are getting more outside activity and/or have a better diet. Both things have a protective effect against things like Covid in the way of better cardio and immune system.
So, I would say that the link is very weak at best and probably not related to vitamin D directly.
criley2•6mo ago
"The Big Vitamin D Mistake is a concise advocacy editorial, not a definitive study. Its central thesis—that we all need ~10× more vitamin D than current RDAs—is not supported by subsequent large randomized trials or by regulatory reviews. Use it, if at all, as a conversation starter about DRI methodology, not as a basis for clinical dosing."