Having recently signed in to Vit D council when I chanced upon the site.
I have self-studied nutrition for seventeen years thus far and conducted a fair number of experiments on myself in the last few years after having built what is now a giant spreadsheet “app“ to run trials on intake. In so doing my app clearly showed me not only that I was always lowest in D3 (still hopeless to get data on the others. Ridiculous!)
Sorry about the intro but needed to explain sone background because question is multi-pronged, which is . . .
Why is vitamin D on site spoken and discussed almost in complete isolation when we know there are key nutients that work in close association with D and indeed no known nutrients, be they vitamins, minerals, amino acids etc work alone? To mention calcium, we know that increasing vitamin D especially when supplementing in high dose, serious consideration must be given its ratio with D and it doesn't stop there because as we acknowledge those closely related and because they may need to be altered that this can spark an unintentioned spiral of increases across a range. It's one thing to acknowledge that it is now recognised that D has been 'light' in RDAs etc. and raise our intake without necessarily raising other minerals and vitamins but when supplementing 1000+ IU this could demand a review in the others or in a relatively short term could bring new problems from over compensation especially when looking at the common complaints see that a great deal of correlation has been found yet as your site very responsibly points out that so many of these findings need further investigation.
I would also like to put forward something I feel very strongly about which concerns human studies on health matters. There is an inherent weakness in all human trials where healthy humans represent the control group. What is a healthy human? The complexity is too great to know but I dont understand why those volunteers are not put on a strictly healthy diet for a minimum 3 months, obviously resident from the start, to ensure that the whole group whether given trial doses or placebos are all from a more accurate base-line.
Finally, in my opinion, the first problem is one of habitual portion sizes are just enormous in both the USA and Britain where I am. Its not just too much salt, sugar, but even.when the food is on the healthy side its still over-eating. I have recently finished my own 75day trial. I pace walk 25+ miles per week, work on scaffolding, in workshop cutting, etc. and decorate and fix everything that goes wrong in the five apartments I own. So more than moderately active, yet my trial has shown with healthy food choice I remained 120 calories under my recomnended basal rate of 1300. Five pounds of weight loss in first ten days then weight plateaued and varied +/-
1.5 pounds all the way. This is relative to Vit D intake and all nutients because this lowers the requirement. For those overweight the baseline is in the wrong place for measuring out increases.
I am so interested in your site and most especially if you can reflect on my comments for your feedback.
Many thanks in advance,