tanTALK - View Single Post

Don Smith · 07-25-2007, 11:45 AM

"It is recommended that all people, especially individuals at high risk for vitamin D deficiency, get vitamin D safely through a healthy diet that includes drinking milk, eating foods that are good sources of vitamin D (both natural and enriched), and taking vitamin D supplements if necessary."

The only "minor problem" to this recommendation is the "inconvenient fact" that you can't even maintain 50 nmol/L from these sources, let alone the optimal level of 150 nmol/L.

The reason that the derms have their panties in a wad can be seen in the closing statement of the article.

"The results of this study (which I will cover in a later post) coulb be misinterpred by the public as an encouragement to intentionally expose their skin to UV radiation (both solar and artificial). Let us not promote an unhealthy approach to this public health issue that could ultimately endanger lives when safe alternatives exist."

In other words, the derms are "locked into" a UVR-avoidance notwithstanding the fact that the risks of doing so far outweigh the alternative. This article shows just how "silly" and "out of touch with reality" their argument has become.

07-25-2007, 11:45 AM	#4 (permalink)
Don Smith Join Date: Feb 25 2000 Location: Tucson, AZ Posts: 1,578 Rep Power: 10	Re: Can you guess..... "It is recommended that all people, especially individuals at high risk for vitamin D deficiency, get vitamin D safely through a healthy diet that includes drinking milk, eating foods that are good sources of vitamin D (both natural and enriched), and taking vitamin D supplements if necessary." The only "minor problem" to this recommendation is the "inconvenient fact" that you can't even maintain 50 nmol/L from these sources, let alone the optimal level of 150 nmol/L. The reason that the derms have their panties in a wad can be seen in the closing statement of the article. "The results of this study (which I will cover in a later post) coulb be misinterpred by the public as an encouragement to intentionally expose their skin to UV radiation (both solar and artificial). Let us not promote an unhealthy approach to this public health issue that could ultimately endanger lives when safe alternatives exist." In other words, the derms are "locked into" a UVR-avoidance notwithstanding the fact that the risks of doing so far outweigh the alternative. This article shows just how "silly" and "out of touch with reality" their argument has become.