Toggle Health Problems and D

Test Several more Vitamin D analyses fail to consider dose size, duration, etc. – Dec 2013

Proof that Vitamin D Works has the following summary of typical errors of Trials and Meta-analysis

Observation by Henry Lahore of VitaminDWiki Dec 2013

I am unaware of a single vitamin D clinical trial which used enough D for long enough that did not get great results.

Many Clinical Trials do not find a benefit bacause of one or more of the following:

  1. Have used too small a dose of vitamin D (often < 1,100 IU)
    Even larger dose needed if: 1) [tiki-index.php?page_id=710|obese], 2) [tiki-index.php?page_id=745|poor gut], 3) sick (many diseases consume lots of vitamin D
  2. Fails to have given vitamin D for too short of time (a few RCT lasted less than 5 weeks)

Fails to have given Vitamin D frequently enough. [tiki-index.php?page_id=2475|At least every 2 months for D3)] - and at least weekly for D2

+Note: Infrequent dosing also causes unbalancing of the body's chemistry

Fails to provide a [tiki-index.php?page_id=326|loading dose], or had too short a duration to restore the vitamin D levels
Fails to use D3 form, instead uses the [tiki-index.php?page_id=2138| less effective D2 form]

  1. Fails to have a health range of [tiki-index.php?page_id=1446|Calcium] or other important [tiki-index.php?page_id=1270|cofactors] (especially for bone-related trials
    Also, differences in Magnesium can result in 30% change in response to vitamin D
    Magnesium is dependant on water, food, supplements
  2. Fails to notice the pre-existing vitamin D levels - only those who are low will likely show a benefit
  3. Fais to notice how/when the vitamin D was taken (which can change the response by as much as 2X)
  4. Fais to reports on compliance (in one case 40% of the participants did not take the supplements consistantly)

Many Meta-Analysis do not find a benefit because one or more of the above reasons

  • Many meta-analysis average together ALL of the trials
    Imagine a story about a meta-analysis if aspirin were being introduced now.
       There would be scores of RCT for aspirin not working with 3 mg doses
       There would be many RCT of aspirin not working with 30 mg doses
       There would be a few studies of aspirin WORKING with 300+ mg doses
       There would be many studies of small amounts of Willow bark (Vitamin D2 instead of Vitamin D3)
       Then were would be a meta-analysis of aspirin and Willow Bark
       - That meta-analysis would conclude that aspirin and bark do not work.

While about 200 RCTs will be published during 2014, I anticipate only adding 50 to the proofs table due to the reasons listed above
   Also, some trials will not get started due to lack of people willing to go for years with < 500 IU of vitamin D
Note: 95% of the proofs for vitamin D were published after the IoM stopped looking at data.

See also VitaminDWiki: Random Controlled Trials with vitamin D intervention

More intervention trials for Vitamin D than for the TOTAL of Vitamins A + C + E + K combined

Vitamin D= 915, Others = 798 [ Vitamin A 188 + Vitamin C 269 + Vitamin E 236 + Vitamin K 105 ]   as of Sept 2012

See also VitaminDWiki

Less Sun Less D Less Health

CLICK ON chart for more information and translation

Chart of Vitamin D benefits from 2012

Just a simple count, not any proof
Vitamin D benefits @ /is.gd/bURjHY


See also web

Short url of this page= is.gd/proofvitd

See any problem with this page? Report it (FINALLY WORKS)