Paul Saladino· MD
some people do not appear to convert vitamin d in the same way as others you can give them lots of vitamin d3 and they do not always have a linear relationship with their 25 hydroxy vitamin d
Loading…
The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
some people do not appear to convert vitamin d in the same way as others you can give them lots of vitamin d3 and they do not always have a linear relationship with their 25 hydroxy vitamin d
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
The other thing that I've seen is that, you know, it's not a linear-response curve. So as you go up in supplementation, it's not like your nanograms per milliliter are going to go up linearly. What we notice actually, is that the first 1000 units that you supplement causes an increase of about 4.8 to 5 nanograms per milliliter. Whereas, when you get up to about 15,000, 20,000, 30,000 that each additional 1000 goes up by about a 10th of that. So it's a nonlinear relationship. It's exponential, but the reverse of exponential. As you go up higher and higher, the increment becomes less and less.
Yeah, The other thing that I've seen is that, you know, it's not a linear-response curve. So as you go up in supplementation, it's not like your nanograms per milliliter are going to go up linearly.