Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Friday April 04 2014, @02:11AM   Printer-friendly
from the you-are-my-sunshine,-my-only-sunshine dept.

Two open access articles published in the British Medical Journal this week looked at Vitamin D.

The first study looked at evidence across systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies.

"The associations between vitamin D concentrations and various conditions and diseases have been assessed in a large and rapidly expanding literature". The conclusion was that there wasn't any significant links. "In conclusion, although vitamin D has been extensively studied in relation to a range of outcomes and some indications exist that low plasma vitamin D concentrations might be linked to several diseases, firm universal conclusions about its benefits cannot be drawn. Observational studies have identified links with several diseases, but these have either not been evaluated or not been replicated in randomised controlled trials. Randomised controlled trials for autoimmune and cancer related outcomes are clearly lacking."

Another study aimed to "evaluate the extent to which circulating biomarker and supplements of vitamin D are associated with mortality from cardiovascular, cancer, or other conditions, under various circumstances."

"The findings of this review indicate that a moderate, but significant, inverse association exists between circulating vitamin D concentrations and the risk of all cause mortality in the primary prevention cohort studies. The inverse association was evident generally for all broad causes of death and more specifically for deaths due to coronary disease, lymphoma, upper digestive cancer, and respiratory disorders. In all randomised controlled trials combined, vitamin D supplementation, when given alone, did not reduce overall mortality significantly among older adults. However, when stratified by type of supplementation, vitamin D3, given singly, reduced all cause mortality significantly by 11%. By contrast, supplementation with vitamin D2 alone had no overall effect on mortality."

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by clone141166 on Friday April 04 2014, @02:37AM

    by clone141166 (59) on Friday April 04 2014, @02:37AM (#26001)

    Given that the formation of vitamin D typically requires exposure to sunlight I think the majority of SoylentNews' basement dwelling nerd population should be relatively safe. :)

    • (Score: 2) by RamiK on Friday April 04 2014, @07:13AM

      by RamiK (1813) on Friday April 04 2014, @07:13AM (#26074)

      Nah, basement dwelling trolls are the purview of that other news site. Soylent is where the attic kobolders reside.

      --
      compiling...
  • (Score: -1) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 04 2014, @02:45AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 04 2014, @02:45AM (#26006)

    The last three stories have too much text on the front page. Summarize more!

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 04 2014, @02:59AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 04 2014, @02:59AM (#26016)

    I always expose the ladies to the D

  • (Score: 1) by starcraftsicko on Friday April 04 2014, @05:09AM

    by starcraftsicko (2821) on Friday April 04 2014, @05:09AM (#26049) Journal

    Mixed results for vitamin D

    Two open access articles published in the British Medical Journal this week described different, and possibly contradictory results ins studies of Vitamin D. One found that "highly convincing evidence of a clear role of vitamin D does not exist for any outcome" [bmj.com], while the second found that "Supplementation with vitamin D3 significantly reduces overall mortality among older adults." [bmj.com] Have you had your Vitamin D today?

    Since the news last year that Vitamins are a scam [salon.com], I do my best to avoid them.

    --
    META EDITING: If the submitter quotes more than one sentence from a medical journal, it's OK to chop it a bit. IMO

    --
    This post was created with recycled electrons.
  • (Score: 2) by Boxzy on Friday April 04 2014, @09:28AM

    by Boxzy (742) on Friday April 04 2014, @09:28AM (#26108) Journal

    Vitamin D does little for health, what it does is generally positive but lack of it won't kill you.

    (Good news for me!)

    --
    Go green, Go Soylent.
    • (Score: 1) by elgrantrolo on Friday April 04 2014, @01:30PM

      by elgrantrolo (1903) on Friday April 04 2014, @01:30PM (#26174) Journal

      Actually I read it: Vitamin D does not make you die more than anyone else who does not take Vitamin D supplements. Sounds about correct. In my case, my overall health and mood improved since starting to supplement Vit D when it was detected to be too low. My mortality levels have remained stable though.

  • (Score: 1) by fermento on Friday April 04 2014, @10:56AM

    by fermento (1069) on Friday April 04 2014, @10:56AM (#26126)

    Does this mean I should believe the weekend AM radio infomercial "Doctor", and buy his mega-vitamin D supplements (with super boron) for only $46.95 plus shipping and handling?

    http://www.purityproducts.com/purityEcommerce/cont rol/productDetail?productId=dr-cannells-advanced-v itamin-d [purityproducts.com]