4 ms·

>after that abstract I'm not sure I want to check out the details There's a fairly short review of why the study is kinda silly here: https://gidmk.medium.com/

• m0llusk 5y ago
  That article is just a load of snark. It starts off my claiming that Vitamin D is suggested as a cure for all kinds of things, but the science shows that low Vitamin D levels are correlated with various diseases. There is a huge difference between saying low levels should be avoided in order to reduce disease and claiming that there is a cure. Not being able to tell the difference shows a lack of interest or understanding in the basic science involved. Railing against purported false claims is a rhetorical tactic and it is worth noting there are no citations for any of the claimed cure claims. And the science involved is quite complex as recent studies have suggested that people can become resistant to Vitamin D in a way that mirrors insulin sensitivity. This means that serum levels vary in ways that are very much not directly related to supplementation, especially dietary supplementation. In any case getting distracted by the "Regression SUGGESTED a THEORETICAL zero point of mortality ..." remark doesn't make sense because even Vitamin D enthusiasts rarely sustain levels much above 40.
  • Vrondi 5y ago
    Wow, the concept of "Vitamin D Resistance" is truly fascinating. Thanks for sharing this.