These next three blog posts concern the latest in attacks on vitamin D3 supplementation and ignores the benefits of better sleep, metabolism and immune system with the optimal dose of vitamin D3 as seen in thousands of my patients in Laredo, Texas. This article by Tim Spector on vitamin D and appeared in The Conversation, was based on a just-published large study in the British Journal of Medicine, see reference 1 below, and augmented by an older large study that he appears to use in his article, see reference 2.

In neither case does Spector reference to which study he is referring, though there is enough evidence to figure it out. I will split my opinion into three blog posts, first of the problem of both studies he uses as his proof. In my second post I’ll identify a problem with the second older study he appears to use. The final post will focus then on his comments in his article in The Conversation3,4 where I first saw it. Spector is listed as a professor of Genetic Epidemiology at King’s College, London.

The first study1 concerns the relationship between vitamin D and preventing fractures. Let’s call it the Fracture study. In the Fracture study they basically took multiple other studies (33 randomized trials), combined them and concluded vitamin D blood levels show no correlation with fracture risk. In other words, with higher blood levels of vitamin D the rate of fractures did not improve. Fair enough, as from these individual studies they used we already knew those results, but I guess with bigger numbers of patients it looks, well, bigger. More impressive. But if you had a hundred scattered rotten apples and then lumped them together you still have 100 rotten apples.

The main issue with the Fracture study is the blood levels of vitamin D being studied. If you have read my previous posts you know my thoughts about current dosing and blood levels.3 That every study, including the Fracture and Heart studies, that I have come across use daily doses, boluses (a large injection of a substance) and/or blood levels of vitamin D that even at their highest level are in my opinion so low, at best, a tenth of the dose, and blood levels less than a third of what I recommend, such that at these doses and levels they would not help. So of course, at such low blood levels (despite they are referencing them as high and low blood levels) of course there is no correlation and they will fail to show any improvement. Because at any of these levels they fail to initiate the Madison-HannaH effects

On a final note, Spector fails to note the vitamin D3 is actually a hormone, that can be made by the body, and not a true vitamin. So yes, vitamin D3 could actually be called a pseudo-vitamin!


  1. Trajanoska K, Morris J, Oei L, et al. Assessment of genetic and clinical determinants of fractures risk: genome wide association and mendelian randomization. BMJ 2018;362:K:3225.
  2. Durup D, Jorgensen HL, Christensen J, et al. A reverse J-shaped association between serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D and cardiovascular disease mortality: The CopD study. Journal Clin Endocrinology Metabolism, volume 100, issue 6, 1 June 2015, pages 2339-2346.
  3. Science Alerts, published on August 29, 2018
  4. The Conversation, published on September 9, 2018

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *