- 12 minute video, Nov 2016 @ American Public Health Association
- Mistake #1: % of cadavers with poor bones with 20-30 ng of vitamin D
- Mistake #2: Not having enough data to conclude that >4,000 IU is too much (i.e. harm)
- Mistake #3: Institute of Medicine used data only for bone health, but the rest of the body needs higher levels
- Mistake #4): Incorrectly estimated dose needed to get 97.5 % of population to a vitamin D level
- Sharing Scientific Data and Replicability, Keith Baggerly 45 minute video, March 2017
- 3,000 IU is needed to get 97.5% of the population to 30ng
- Pregnant women in East Africa have vitamin D levels of about 60 ng
- See also VitaminDWiki
- There have been
23800 visits to this page
12 minute video, Nov 2016 @ American Public Health Association
Keith Baggerly is a Biostatistician, tenured professor and son of Carole Baggerly
kabagg@mdanderson.orgMistake #1: % of cadavers with poor bones with 20-30 ng of vitamin D
They computed the ratio of bad bones with 20-30 ng vs all cadavers, rather than just those with 20-30 ng
If they had used the correct denominator the result would have been 28-30 ng, not 20 ngMistake #2: Not having enough data to conclude that >4,000 IU is too much (i.e. harm)
Chart did not have any error bars
This next chart shows the tiny differences
Mistake #3: Institute of Medicine used data only for bone health, but the rest of the body needs higher levels
Mistake #4): Incorrectly estimated dose needed to get 97.5 % of population to a vitamin D level
His previously published study of the problem
Download the PDF from VitaminDWiki
Sharing Scientific Data and Replicability, Keith Baggerly 45 minute video, March 2017
|Arthur M. Sackler Colloquia, Published on Mar 22, 2017
This talk was given by Keith Baggerly, MD Anderson Cancer Center as part of the National Academy of Sciences Arthur M. Sackler Colloquium on Reproducibility of Research: Issues and Proposed Remedies held in Washington, D.C. on March 8-10, 2017
Note: A Parathyroid Hormone analysis of 2016-2017 independently found that a vitamin D level of 31 ng is needed
Note: 97.5% of the population = 2 sigma of an ideal bell curve distribution (the actual distribution is a very distorted bell curve)
3,000 IU is needed to get 97.5% of the population to 30ng
Note: 3,000 IU daily ==> 42,000 IU every two weeks. which is very close to the 50,000 IU proposed by VitaminDWiki 3 years before
3,000 IU is 5X more than the 600 IU erroneous conclusion of the Institute of Medicine in 2010
Pregnant women in East Africa have vitamin D levels of about 60 ng
Yellow = pregnant women
Baggerly's are hoping to get signicant progress on correcting the error by the end of Sept 2017
See also VitaminDWiki
- Vitamin D math mistake had been made, adults need at least 8000 IU – July 2017
- 1000 IU should be the new vitamin D RDA (if you think 20 ng is enough) - May 2017
- Vitamin D needs in 2004:1000 IU, 10 years later same author says 3,500 IU
- Review of vitamin D recommendations around the world – April 2017
Often their recommendations just echo the US math mistakes - Is 50 ng of vitamin D too high, just right, or not enough
- IoM again fails to look at interactions - Nov 2010
many other mistakes were made, such as not looking at interaction of Vitamin D and Calcium - Weak support of IoM position of Vitamin D – 2018
- Vitamin D RDA of 600 IU is not enough - global RCT meta-analysis March 2019
- IoM error: 8 percent, not just 1 percent, had bone loss when vitamin D higher than 20 ng 2011
same conclusion as was made in 2016 by K, Baggerly on this page
8%, not 1% of the people having >20 ng/ml had bone loss, so the 20 ng/ml voted level was incorrect
- Note: Even if you have a good blood level of vitamin D,
poor genes, low Magnesium, low Omega-3, etc restrict how much vitamin D actually gets to your cells
There have been
23800 visits to this page short URL = https://is.gd/VitDMath
Printer Friendly Follow this page for updates8339 visitors, last modified 22 Dec, 2023,
- There have been