4 ms·

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-77093-z https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-77093-z

by untererdisch 6y ago

mattmanser 6y ago
The fatality rate was high in vitamin D deficient (21% vs 3.1%).
- hda111 6y ago
  It’s just a correlation. No need to take vitamin d.
  - SifJar 6y ago
    Do you have some evidence of this?
    - Uberphallus 6y ago
      Yes, the very same paper. > Although results of an observational study, such as this one, need to be interpreted with caution, as done by the authors [1], due to the potential of residual confounding or reverse causality (i.e., vitamin D insufficiency resulting from poor health status at baseline rather than vice versa), You need a control group with vitamin D deficiency but no other health issues to prove the hypothesis. They are just stating there's a correlation worth looking into.
      - skj 6y ago
        Rather, a control group who does not take vitamin D supplements. Choose them randomly and you can find causation (or lack thereof).
  - TomSwirly 6y ago
    Why do you say this? Almost half of Americans are vitamin D deficient, a lot more if you are Black or Hispanic: https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/vitamin-d-deficiency-symptoms#TOC_TITLE_HDR_1 https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/vitamin-d-deficiency-sy... Vitamin D is very cheap, and it takes a lot to overdose: https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/nutrition-and-healthy-eating/expert-answers/vitamin-d-toxicity/faq-20058108 https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/nutrition-and-h... Up until a very short time ago, humans spent most of their time outside, and sunscreen did not exist. Now we spend nearly all our time inside, and many of us wear sunscreen whenever it's really sunny. And there's a serious correlation between low vitamin D levels and COVID-19 fatalities. We haven't proved causation yet, and we might never, but given the previous three points, there's every good reason to take vitamin D.
    - xenophonf 6y ago
      My problem with this line of reasoning is that people without the relevant expertise will think it means "Vitamin D supplementation protects me from COVID-19," start taking the vitamin, and stop engaging in other behaviors that reduce their risk of exposure, like social distancing and mask wearing. I see this in infosec all the time. People think, for example, "I'm running antivirus software; I'm safe," which they'll use to justify all sorts of risky behavior that could (and sometimes does) lead to a security breach. They don't understand that antivirus software only reduces the risk of a security breach, never eliminating it, and it only works on certain kinds of attack vectors. The same goes for vitamin D. Sure, lots of people are deficient, and the current evidence-based medical consensus is that people who are deficient should supplement. And maybe there's a weak correlation with COVID-19 infection/mortality risk, but people who aren't experts might misinterpret that and think they should hang out with their buddies in the sunshine or something equally risky while we're in the middle of a pandemic, instead of following the other bits of the current evidence-based medical consensus, which tells us to stay away from one another and to wear masks over our mouths and noses, which we know will greatly reduce virus transmission rates.
      - tomhoward 6y ago
        > hang out with their buddies in the sunshine or something equally risky Spending time with people outdoors, especially in sunshine, is not risky, and for regions with serious outbreaks is an ideal way of finding compromise between keeping people isolated when indoors and allowing people some much needed social interaction. I'm from Melbourne Australia which is just coming out of one of the longest/strictest lockdowns in the world, and all the evidence has been that letting people have some social interaction in the outdoors is beneficial to people's mental health and not a contributor to viral spread.
        xenophonf 6y ago
        Q.E.D.
        6y ago
- Uberphallus 6y ago
  Vitamin D deficient people usually have other deficiencies as well, pinning it down to D is textbook causation-correlation mixup. As TFA says, it "may" account for it. Or may not. You need a control group with D (but no other) deficiency to upgrade from "may" to "does".

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-77093-z https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-77093-z

mattmanser 6y ago

The fatality rate was high in vitamin D deficient (21% vs 3.1%).

hda111 6y ago
It’s just a correlation. No need to take vitamin d.
- SifJar 6y ago
  Do you have some evidence of this?
  - Uberphallus 6y ago
    Yes, the very same paper. > Although results of an observational study, such as this one, need to be interpreted with caution, as done by the authors [1], due to the potential of residual confounding or reverse causality (i.e., vitamin D insufficiency resulting from poor health status at baseline rather than vice versa), You need a control group with vitamin D deficiency but no other health issues to prove the hypothesis. They are just stating there's a correlation worth looking into.
    - skj 6y ago
      Rather, a control group who does not take vitamin D supplements. Choose them randomly and you can find causation (or lack thereof).
- TomSwirly 6y ago
  Why do you say this? Almost half of Americans are vitamin D deficient, a lot more if you are Black or Hispanic: https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/vitamin-d-deficiency-symptoms#TOC_TITLE_HDR_1 https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/vitamin-d-deficiency-sy... Vitamin D is very cheap, and it takes a lot to overdose: https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/nutrition-and-healthy-eating/expert-answers/vitamin-d-toxicity/faq-20058108 https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/nutrition-and-h... Up until a very short time ago, humans spent most of their time outside, and sunscreen did not exist. Now we spend nearly all our time inside, and many of us wear sunscreen whenever it's really sunny. And there's a serious correlation between low vitamin D levels and COVID-19 fatalities. We haven't proved causation yet, and we might never, but given the previous three points, there's every good reason to take vitamin D.
  - xenophonf 6y ago
    My problem with this line of reasoning is that people without the relevant expertise will think it means "Vitamin D supplementation protects me from COVID-19," start taking the vitamin, and stop engaging in other behaviors that reduce their risk of exposure, like social distancing and mask wearing. I see this in infosec all the time. People think, for example, "I'm running antivirus software; I'm safe," which they'll use to justify all sorts of risky behavior that could (and sometimes does) lead to a security breach. They don't understand that antivirus software only reduces the risk of a security breach, never eliminating it, and it only works on certain kinds of attack vectors. The same goes for vitamin D. Sure, lots of people are deficient, and the current evidence-based medical consensus is that people who are deficient should supplement. And maybe there's a weak correlation with COVID-19 infection/mortality risk, but people who aren't experts might misinterpret that and think they should hang out with their buddies in the sunshine or something equally risky while we're in the middle of a pandemic, instead of following the other bits of the current evidence-based medical consensus, which tells us to stay away from one another and to wear masks over our mouths and noses, which we know will greatly reduce virus transmission rates.
    - tomhoward 6y ago
      > hang out with their buddies in the sunshine or something equally risky Spending time with people outdoors, especially in sunshine, is not risky, and for regions with serious outbreaks is an ideal way of finding compromise between keeping people isolated when indoors and allowing people some much needed social interaction. I'm from Melbourne Australia which is just coming out of one of the longest/strictest lockdowns in the world, and all the evidence has been that letting people have some social interaction in the outdoors is beneficial to people's mental health and not a contributor to viral spread.
      - xenophonf 6y ago
        Q.E.D.
        6y ago
Uberphallus 6y ago
Vitamin D deficient people usually have other deficiencies as well, pinning it down to D is textbook causation-correlation mixup. As TFA says, it "may" account for it. Or may not. You need a control group with D (but no other) deficiency to upgrade from "may" to "does".