What is overlooked in this story is that the federal agencies that sponsored the study, the National Institutes of Health, the FDA, etc., severely limited the types of studies that could be considered by the panel. They permitted randomized controlled trials and prospective studies where a single value of blood level vitamin D was made and disease outcomes determined for up to 15 years of follow up. They did not permit case-control studies with blood level vitamin D measured at time of disease diagnosis or ecological studies that use solar ultraviolet B doses as the index of vitamin D production. The permitted studies are generally quite weak while the denied studies are generally strong. Thus, by setting the conditions of the study, the sponsors determined the findings. Many other reviews have found beneficial effects for vitamin D. The interested reader can find such reviews on the Web. There are about 100 diseases for which beneficial effects of vitamin have been identified.
"Vitamin" D is a steroid hormone when metabolized. Because it is a steroid hormone it is orders of magnitude more complex and essential in human function. The most difficult, troublesome medical conditions are often treated with such steroids as either a last resort, or lack of any other medication or procedure which will provide therapeutic benefit.
All other significant steroid hormone medications are available by prescription only. Thus vitamin D, essentially free, presents a problem to the general medical community because it is beyond their control.
Pharmaceutical companies clearly recognize mountains of compelling evidence that confirm vitamin D's obvious benefit in those suffering from a nearly endless list of chronic and acute diseases. This fact makes their profit projections unstable at best. The possibility of widespread use of a low cost alternative to expensive and marginally effective prescription medications is a threat unequaled on their collective radar.
Ultimately the Board has ignored evolution in a comical fashion. It is well know that the human body produces 10-20,000 i.u. in barely 15 minutes of high angle sun exposure. 10-20,000 i.u. naturally, daily, and yet the board cautions that "too much" vitamin D is harmful?
Profits and control are the real issues here.
Melissa - it's ironic that you present such a pre-concluded position on vitamin D BEFORE any of the very studies you mention are completed! Your argument is essentially reduced to name-calling as you arbitrarily label certain vitamin D doses as "mega doses" while making NO MENTION of actual 25(OH) vitamin D blood serum levels. It is nonsensical to establish dose recommendations or "limits" without looking at blood levels and the associated epidemiology. See www.uctv.tv/vitamind/ and watch actual scientists from recognized medical schools show the correlation of chronic diseases. They repeatedly show a drastic reduction of cancer incidence & mortality for those with a 25(OH) D level of 40-60 ng/ml, which is (post unfinished)