I'm not complaining about the headline, I'm saying that people read far too far into them. The paper itself says that there is no causal link here, that the fac

I'm not complaining about the headline, I'm saying that people read far too far into them. The paper itself says that there is no causal link here, that the fact these people have decreased VitD is actually possible due to their [psychotic] behaviour, though without investigation, because that's not the aim of this paper. What I meant is that people who are so paranoid they can't get out of bed probably don't see much sunlight. Before admission. Exactly what the paper said, what you've repeated. I'm not sure what you don't understand here. And yet the second-highest comment was talking about adding this to a guide about "hacking" mental health. HN has a hair trigger for digesting the fringes of scientific discovery and spinning it into quackery-fuelled hope for other sufferers. I'm euphoric that this worked for you, once, but please don't use it as an argument that every comment on HN that advocates a supplement should be treated as anything more than the anecdote it is.