While that does include a significant percentage of America, I would argue that, for the time being, that $2 is better spent elsewhere. Unfortunately, this par

While that does include a significant percentage of America, I would argue that, for the time being, that $2 is better spent elsewhere. Unfortunately, this part of the argument is fairly subjective. Is $2/mo/person on vitamin D worth it? ...maybe, but do we really know that yet? Would that $2 be better spent on something else that would have more definitive long-term benefits? Ultimately, I don't see the logic in encouraging people to prioritize self-medication with vitamin D. Of all the issues about which we could raise awareness, that seems like one of the most misguided and short-sighted: it's focused on the pandemic of today, not the healthcare of tomorrow. Of course, it's possible to raise awareness about multiple issues, but to me this feels like one of the most out-of-touch with reality. As a concrete, one-step-up example, what about vitamin C? I would assume you're more likely to get scurvy than rickets as a working-class Westerner, though I haven't checked the numbers.