6 comments

[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 21.6 ms ] thread
This paper cites 10 other papers, two of which are essentially the same paper. The author also has additional papers claiming that Vitamin D helps prevent COVID mortality using a "ecological integrative approach." His papers also all seem to be lacking concrete meta-analysis and discussion of other approaches and clinical data.

Seems... like a quack.

I would like to point out (as I have seen this confused by many non-scientists) that the NIH (National Library of Medicine) provides a service called "PubMed" which collates peer-reviewed (and many pre-print) scientific papers into one database / website. This particular paper (like 99% of the papers on PubMed) was not published by a NIH scientist or by the NIH itself.
The crux of the title is from the following

> 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.

Off topic, but I know someone who was able to narrow down the source of their kidney stones to vitamin D supplement pills, and they were taking them at suggested doses. Wanted to put that here in case it helps someone avoid agony.
(comment deleted)