Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: puppypusher; decimon; austinmark; FreedomCalls; IslandJeff; JRochelle; MarMema; Txsleuth; ...
It was only a year ago that the CDC was reporting that men in their 50’s were in need of vitimin D supplements.Now they’re saying just the opposite.

The CDC is a different part of the gov't. The Institute of Medicine, another part, of the National Academy of Sciences, generated this opinion.

From the source:

The report's recommendations take into account nearly 1,000 published studies as well as testimony from scientists and stakeholders. A large amount of evidence, which formed the basis of the new intake values, confirms the roles of calcium and vitamin D in promoting skeletal growth and maintenance and the amounts needed to avoid poor bone health. The committee that wrote the report also reviewed hundreds of studies and reports on other possible health effects of vitamin D, such as protection against cancer, heart disease, autoimmune diseases, and diabetes. While these studies point to possibilities that warrant further investigation, they have yielded conflicting and mixed results and do not offer the evidence needed to confirm that vitamin D has these effects. Rigorous trials that yield consistent results are vital for reaching conclusions, as past experiences have shown. Vitamin E, for example, was believed to protect against heart disease before further studies disproved it.

Whose testimony from scientists and which stakeholders?

Based on available data, almost all individuals get sufficient vitamin D when their blood levels are at or above 20 nanograms per milliliter as it is measured in America, or 50 nanomoles per liter as measured in Canada.

How about some double blind, randomly controlled studies? IMHO, read the entire press release. Half of it is used to identify those on the board who agree with it.

FReepmail me if you want on or off the diabetes ping list.

8 posted on 12/01/2010 9:07:16 AM PST by neverdem (Xin loi minh oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]


To: neverdem
What's interesting is that we are not told what studies they looked at....were the studies just on D2....which we know does not work the same as D3 (cholecalciferol)??

Check out who is on the 'President's Club' of this outfit and then tell me there is another agenda....

http://www.iom.edu/Global/Directory.aspx?committee1=TPC

Brief rundown -

Norman Augustine - Lockheed Martin Corporation

Donald Beall - Rockwell International Corporation

Malin Burnham - Cushman & Wakefield

Richard Foster - Investment & Advisory Services, LLC

Jack Gill - Vanguard Venture Partners

Jane Hirsh - Collegium Pharmaceutical, Inc.

Charles Holliday - Bank of America

Christopher Ireland - Cheskin Associates, Inc.

Irwin Jacobs - Qualcomm Incorporated

John McDonnell - McDonnell Douglas Corporation

John Reed - Citicorp

Sara Schupf - Sara Lee Corporation

Thomas Sutton - Pacific Life Insurance Company

Judy Swanson - The Swanson Foundation

9 posted on 12/01/2010 11:57:32 AM PST by BossLady (Even Russia has a 13% Flat Tax!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: neverdem

Obfuscation is how they make the money.


10 posted on 12/01/2010 3:54:42 PM PST by Lady Jag (Double your income... Fire the government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson