This was posted 1 year 8 months 25 days ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

Related
  • out of stock

Swisse Ultiboost Vitamin D3 (1000IU), 400 Capsules $13.50 ($12.15 S&S) + Delivery ($0 with Prime/$39 Spend) @ Amazon AU

240
Swisse Ultiboost Vitamin D3 (1000IU), 400 Capsules $13.50 ($12.15 S&S) + Delivery ($0 with Prime/$39 Spend) @ Amazon AUAffiliate
Go to Deal
Cashback
O O on 03/08/2022 - 16:05 amazon.com.au (525 clicks)
Last edited 03/08/2022 - 16:05
This post contains affiliate links. OzBargain might earn commissions when you click through and make purchases. Please see this page for more information.

Yet another round of Vitamin D sale at Amazon.

About this item

  • Bone & Teeth Health: Supports the development and maintenance of healthy bones and teeth
  • Increased Absorption: Vitamin D3 assists the absorption and utilisation of calcium, which helps maintain healthy bone density. Vitamin D3 is retained in the bloodstream more effectively when compared to vitamin D2 (synthetic).
  • Muscle Health: Vitamin D helps support muscle function.
  • Immune Health: Supports a healthy immune system.
Price History at C CamelCamelCamel.
Health & Beauty Supplement Swisse Swisse Ultiboost Vitamin Vitamin D Vitamin D3

Related Stores

Amazon AU
Amazon AU
Marketplace

closed Comments

  • rrrrrrein on 03/08/2022 - 16:14

    Close to expiring?

  • Drakesy on 03/08/2022 - 16:15

    Minimum of 5000iu's is needed to make a difference.

    I'm on 10,000 and they do the job.

    • starbearer on 03/08/2022 - 16:17
      +1

      per week? per day?

      • OzSikh on 03/08/2022 - 16:18
        +2

        per day

      • Drakesy on 03/08/2022 - 16:27
        +1

        per day

    • OzSikh on 03/08/2022 - 16:18
      +1

      hi mate, where do you buy the 10000iu ones here in oz? thanks

      • Drakesy on 03/08/2022 - 16:27
        +2

        i have to get them from Iherb or ebay

      • xiaxk on 03/08/2022 - 17:02
        +2

        You can get 10,000IU form chemist warehouse over the counter. no prescription required.

    • INFIDEL on 03/08/2022 - 16:20
      +3

      Not supported by latest research
      Better & cheaper to take a placebo!

      • jv on 03/08/2022 - 16:29
        +1

        Tell that to your doctor.

        • INFIDEL on 03/08/2022 - 17:34

          No ASK your doctor about this important research finding.

          It's a major challenge to established thinking in Vit D supplementation.

          Obviously the negs & criticism show some don't like or want to know about the major research finding.

      • Drakesy on 03/08/2022 - 18:31

        Can't replace a notable mood difference
        And I can confirm this

        • INFIDEL on 03/08/2022 - 18:33

          Placebo effect??
          Many things affect mood.

          • Drakesy on 03/08/2022 - 18:33
            -1

            @INFIDEL: Trust me
            I know what an upper does
            This definitely has an effect.

            And yes I went from 1000 to 5000 to 10000 and eventually 15000

            Settled on 10000 because it showed the greatest benefit without going overboard

            • INFIDEL on 03/08/2022 - 18:36
              -1

              @Drakesy: So taking a capsule gets you high. Keep taking them😉

              Mood is self report - totally subjective. And easy to fool yourself & others.

              (As in the classic psych hospital experiment. Patients were rewarded for acting "sane". And were diagnosed sane.)

              Sounds like a classic Placebo effect.

              • Drakesy on 03/08/2022 - 18:43

                @INFIDEL: Maybe you should try it?
                I've done my scientific analysis maybe you should too?

                • INFIDEL on 03/08/2022 - 18:54
                  -1

                  @Drakesy: "scientific analysis"…
                  I designed research experiments & analysed the outcomes.
                  Dealing with / eliminating 'confounds' in experimental designs is crucial to getting good data.

                  As you are both the experimenter & experimental subject - you influence the outcome. Your thoughts are a confounding variable! You have an expectation of an outcome & get it!
                  And relying on poorly defined self report measures is always very dodgie!

                  Its very easy for an association to be made between an object, task, etc & an outcome… When no causal link exists. (I've done it through hypnosis.)

                  Same as some people believe wearing their "lucky" charm or clothing beings them luck or happiness. They totally believe in its affect. So too with placebos.

                  There are cheaper placebos you know. All you've got to do is believe😉

                  I'll stick with well researched peer reviewed studies for my evidence!

                  • Drakesy on 03/08/2022 - 19:48

                    @INFIDEL: Well it gets you Nobel prizes so can hardly discount it

                    • INFIDEL on 03/08/2022 - 20:13

                      @Drakesy: Ah the Helicobacter pylori breakthrough! Used to teach my research students about it because its an interesting rarity!

                      Yes, well designed, well controlled & scientifically measured experiments are (rarely) conducted by the experimenter on themselves. But it requires good planning to avoid bias, to be replicable, valid & reliable.

                      What strictly controlled measures did you put in place to ensure there was no bias, no confounds, and the results were valid & reliable??

                      Why did they do it?
                      No one believed their wild hypotheses. And there was no research funding. It was only a pilot study, confirmed by later by a full research study!

                      Its a great tale, but required righteous research design.
                      [I was known for my huge research manuals for experiments I designed & conducted.]

    • SirCH on 03/08/2022 - 16:21

      I got diagnosed with a Vitamin D deficiency via a blood test, the doctor prescribed me 1x 10000iu tablet per week for 4 weeks, then ongoing 1000iu ongoing.
      Every time I went to the pharmacy with my script they queried if the amount was correct.

      According to this website :

      According to the National Institutes of Health, the safe upper limit is 4,000 IU. Make sure not to take more than that without consulting with a healthcare professional

      Source: I am not a doctor. Seek your own medical advice for your own situation.

  • INFIDEL on 03/08/2022 - 16:15
    -3

    Save your money!
    Latest research doesn't support taking VitD supplements - podcast discussion on ABC Health Report yesterday.

    New England Journal of Medicine

    • jv on 03/08/2022 - 16:32
      +2

      The body needs vitamin D to absorb calcium. Without enough vitamin D, one can’t form enough of the hormone calcitriol

      https://www.bones.nih.gov/health-info/bone/bone-health/nutri…

      • INFIDEL on 03/08/2022 - 16:35

        Read the research / listen to the podcast.
        Supplements don't improve that! That's the importance of the findings!

        • jv on 03/08/2022 - 16:36
          +3

          Read the research / listen to the podcast.

          I'd rather follow the advice or a registered medical practitioner than random people on the internet.

          • INFIDEL on 03/08/2022 - 16:45

            @jv: The New England Journal of Medicine & Dr Swan are not "random people on the internet" - like you!

            • jv on 03/08/2022 - 16:47
              +2

              @INFIDEL:

              are not "random people on the internet"

              They are to me… That's why I pay a doctor for medical advice.

              • INFIDEL on 03/08/2022 - 16:48
                -1

                @jv: Its a new study - your GP may not have read yet.

                But when did you last ask your GP about supplemental Vit D??

                Stay up to date. Understand the research & save your money!!

                • jv on 03/08/2022 - 16:49
                  +2

                  @INFIDEL:

                  Its a new study - your GP may not have read yet.

                  Maybe they'll read it before my next visit… Until then, I'm not in a position to give out medical advice.

                  • INFIDEL on 03/08/2022 - 16:52
                    +1

                    @jv: The New England Journal of Medicine is one if the top medical journals in the world. Read by many medical professionals.

                    I'm not in a position to give out medical advice.

                    The idea is to take in advice like this. No one asked for your medical opinion!

                    We are giving access to the latest reputable research - so others can make an informed decision. And talk it over with their GP.

                    Your very dated & incorrect advice has been disproven & is useless!

                    • RobBoss on 03/08/2022 - 18:26
                      +1

                      @INFIDEL: You have your point, but one should not rely on a few studies to make a definitive conclusion, let alone judge others’ decisions. The beauty of research is that it welcomes contradicting hypotheses and there will always be papers that indicate supplements to be beneficial under certain circumstances.

                      If you want to disprove people who negs you, maybe do a scoping study and a literature review on the topic and map out the papers that suggest supplements are bogus. Here are hundreds of research arguing for or against Vitamin D supplements. My point being, people choose to believe in what they believe it. Shouldnt be your problem.

                      https://scholar.google.com/scholar?start=30&q=vitamin+d+supp…

    • Valowick on 03/08/2022 - 17:03
      +2

      My guess is people will have the wrong take away from this, as does seemingly the interviewee. Implying that vitamin D isn’t essential. That it shouldn’t be screened. That vitamin D deficiency isn’t a problem in the general population. The study itself will likely be picked apart by actually invested scientists.

      This person will be discredited and be considered malpractice by yet another study that provides inverse results because media disseminated science is borderline hogwash. You’d have better luck these days using a dart board for health advice.

    • RecklessMonkeys on 03/08/2022 - 17:13

      " … among generally healthy midlife and older adults who were not selected for vitamin D deficiency, low bone mass, or osteoporosis."

      By the end of Winter, Vitamin D deficiency is pretty common.

      • INFIDEL on 03/08/2022 - 18:01

        Not just By the end of Winter!

        Mass testing has shown Vitamin D deficiency is very common in the population. How can that be?
        (‘Vitamin D testing was getting out of control, just spiraling up very fast for no really good reason’ with over $100M/yr for path lab testing according to RACGP)

        But was it a real clinical problem? Or was it an artifact of testing standards, etc. Was Vitamin D deficiency suspected as causing more problems that reality? That's the difference!

        There was a lack of good evidence supporting supplementation of VIT D. It did not support massive public funding. So Medicare rebate for testing was restricted.

        Now very rare groups in the population will actually benefit from supplementation, as shown by the research.

        • RecklessMonkeys on 03/08/2022 - 20:18
          +1

          How can that be?

          By virtue of being indoors and using sunscreen when outdoors. And the fact that the lower latitudes receive less UV. Darker skin requires more time in the sun. And so on.

          I think we need to be very careful about throwing our definition of deficiency out the window because of one study.

          Just because a bureaucrat wants to save money, doesn't mean there isn't a problem to be addressed.

          • INFIDEL on 03/08/2022 - 20:27

            @RecklessMonkeys: Very little sun exposure is required to raise Vit D levels. (10–30 minutes, several times per week.)

            Many thought up your excuses. But there was no proof that was causing the enormous increase in Vit D "deficiency" cases here.
            It didn't make sense. People regularly exposed to sunshine were also VIT D "deficient"!!

            That's what made other researchers think there was something wrong with the levels set for Vit D "deficiency".
            Was there any benefit in lab tests? Medicare withdrew authority for multiple testing.

            This study looked at health benefits of raising Vit D levels. Except for rare conditions, they didn't find any.

            Its about evidence-based medicine - of having a measurable improvement in health outcomes, rather than just a rise in blood test results!!

            Not bureaucrat wants to save money as you claim!
            But there was no evidence $100M+ of path tests + enormous cost of supplementation was having any benefit other than raising Vit D levels in blood tests!!

            The study's results & methods will be debated (as they should be) in the medical community.
            It appears to be a groundbreaking study, overthrowing past beliefs.

            Of course the vitamin manufacturers (who often funded positive research) , will fight it to protect their profits…

            • RecklessMonkeys on 03/08/2022 - 21:03
              +1

              @INFIDEL:

              as you claim

              I was responding to your comment about cost, not the study.

              Very little sun exposure is required.

              In Summer. In Winter it's a different story.

              I would like to read the whole study, rather than just the abstract. What does it specifically say about the before and after levels of serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D?

              The latest study looks at over 50s with reference to fractures. It doesn't comment on it's role in the immune system. Can you think of a reason why having a healthy immune system in today's environment might be important?

              I'm just saying let's slow down in our assessment of what's going on.

              For example, this study found an affect in athletes who were at risk of stress fractures.
              https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3497950/

              • INFIDEL on 03/08/2022 - 21:08

                @RecklessMonkeys: Waiting for a GP friend to finish it, so I can have access. That way we debate the issues & learn from each others perspectives.
                Yes reading the full study is best. Seems you've got experience with medical research studies. Very handy.

                • RecklessMonkeys on 03/08/2022 - 21:11

                  @INFIDEL: Is that your field?

                  • INFIDEL on 03/08/2022 - 21:20

                    @RecklessMonkeys: My background was in research design. Involved reading a lot of research papers & pulling them to bits to find the errors. And designing experiments.
                    Taught research students (how to think & question) & redesigned a research masters course while still a student.
                    Also read & debated medical research for doctors.

                    As for Sun exposure, times are average for Australia. Amount of exposure time should not vary much across seasons or latitude. But number of sun hours available & amount of body exposed of course is less in colder weather.

                    But a min of 30min per week should not be difficult! Even prisoners in solitary confinement should get enough exposure.

                    • RecklessMonkeys on 03/08/2022 - 21:36

                      @INFIDEL:

                      Amount of exposure time should not vary much across seasons or latitude.

                      Yes, it does.
                      http://www.bom.gov.au/uv/

                      The other side of the coin is that UV exposure is correlated to skin cancer.

                      • INFIDEL on 03/08/2022 - 21:44

                        @RecklessMonkeys: Its not just about UV. And which UV?

                        As I said its averaged as a guide - There is little difference in the North between seasons. Overcast skies will also affect exposure. And so will time of day.
                        Exposure time to sun's rays (recommended 10-30 minutes, several days a week) is very different to the many hours sun shines per day, even in Winter!

                        And different people have different sun exposure depending on their activities.

                        So find a sunny spot to enjoy your lunch🌞
                        Problem solved!

                        • RecklessMonkeys on 03/08/2022 - 22:02

                          @INFIDEL: I don't really think anybody is claiming that vitamin D deficiencies aren't occurring in the lower latitudes, are they?

                          The debate is whether they matter.

                          • INFIDEL on 03/08/2022 - 22:21

                            @RecklessMonkeys: Obviously, a deficiency only occurs if the test result is below a certain level.
                            But as with other path tests - levels have changed. Australian levels for deficiency are reportedly different to overseas. Why?

                            So "deficiency" found in testing may not be the issue.

                            This study seems to suggest the level may not matter. Raising it by supplementation seems ineffective for health care.

                            It does raise the level in the blood. But that's likely why Medicare rebate was changed so multiple tests weren't able to be claimed.

                            • RecklessMonkeys on 03/08/2022 - 22:29

                              @INFIDEL:

                              This study seems to suggest the level may not matter.

                              Personally, I think the study is going to cause a shit storm.

                              I'd like to know how many people were deficient, where they lived and a million other things.

                              I can't see that from the abstract, so I'll reserve judgment.

                              • INFIDEL on 03/08/2022 - 22:35

                                @RecklessMonkeys: I love shit storms in Science😉
                                Helps people think differently & others to defend their territory.

                                My Uni paid me to chat with top researchers - to help them think. A great job as a curious undergrad! Developed a new way of conceptualising research in Ecology.

                                Yes, a proper reading of the full study is necessary. Discussion about it in medical media should be interesting.

                                Implications can't be extrapolated beyond the experimental group. It will be limited by the subjects chosen, their Vit D levels, & health issues.

                                Like the experiments I ran with Uni students as subjects - they weren't representative of the broader population! So the papers always recommended further research!

                                For now interesting, & promising.

          • Valowick on 03/08/2022 - 21:20

            @RecklessMonkeys: Not to mention this study isn’t worth jack until it’s peer reviewed and repeated many times over. Like science is supposed to be done BEFORE being heralded as truth handed down by the science gods chiselled on stone tablets.

            • INFIDEL on 03/08/2022 - 21:22

              @Valowick: So "knowledgeable"… Have you read the paper??

              It was peer reviewed - required before publishing in the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine!

              This is a groundbreaking research paper. That's why it's being discussed.

              But there is no TRUTH in Science… think you are thinking of religion😉

              The debate will go on as it needs to in Science.
              Methodology will be examined. Repeatability will be dealt with. That happens AFTER publication.

              How can other researchers debate or replicate the findings without it first being published??
              You have some strange ideas!!
              Seems your bias & lack of knowledge is showing😉

              Come back when you know more…

  • JoeyJoeJoe on 03/08/2022 - 16:20
    +1

    Good article in today’s Australian newspaper quoting a US study published in the New England Journal of Medicine suggests it would be far better to expose the skin to some sunlight every day instead.

    It’s behind a paywall - https://www.theaustralian.com.au/science/sun-key-to-vitamin-…

    Some key excerpts:
    - Providers should stop screening for 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels or recommending vitamin D supplements and people should stop taking vitamin D supplements in order to prevent major diseases or extend life
    - The trials show they have no benefit, even in people with vitamin D deficiency.
    - With very few exceptions, such as those in nursing homes deprived from sun and ordinary diets, everyone gets enough vitamin D to maintain the functions and balance they need

    • kehuehue on 03/08/2022 - 16:21
      -2

      such as those in nursing homes deprived from sun and ordinary diets

      so staying indoors and eating indomie all day, got it.

    • INFIDEL on 03/08/2022 - 16:21
      +1

      Link to podcast discussion on ABC Health Report - just above

    • jv on 03/08/2022 - 16:32
      +5

      it would be far better to expose the skin to some sunlight every day instead.

      yes, but some people can't do that…

    • Drakesy on 03/08/2022 - 16:34
      +8

      Can't really do that when you're in an office job and during winter ;)
      This is why the supplements exist.

      • jv on 03/08/2022 - 16:37
        +2

        Yep, my GP advised to take them through the winter months, but not needed other times of the year.

        • INFIDEL on 03/08/2022 - 16:41

          Better tell your GP to catch up latest research then!!

          You're just wasting your money!!

          There's been little evidence for Vit D supplementation for years! That's why funding for most Vit D blood testing was withdrawn.

          • jv on 03/08/2022 - 16:48
            +1

            @INFIDEL:

            Better tell your GP to catch up latest research then!!

            That's not my job. It's up to them to stay up to date.

            I'd say they are very likely more up to date than you are.

            • INFIDEL on 03/08/2022 - 17:03
              -3

              @jv: Lol! And how would you even know!
              You won't even consider being informed. But rather follow outdated advice.

              You seem to like being ignorant.

              • jv on 03/08/2022 - 17:06
                +2

                @INFIDEL:

                Lol! And how would you even know!

                Lol! And how would you know my doctor isn't aware!

      • INFIDEL on 03/08/2022 - 16:37

        💰💰💰 - This is why the supplements exist.

        Supplementing Vit D in those with "Vit D deficiency" has been debunked as useless!

        • Tehcookiemonsta on 03/08/2022 - 16:44
          +5

          Yeah I'd rather take the advice of my Endocrinologist.

          • jv on 03/08/2022 - 16:50

            @Tehcookiemonsta:

            I'd rather take the advice of my Endocrinologist.

            Not Dr. Google then ?

            • Tehcookiemonsta on 03/08/2022 - 16:53
              +3

              @jv: As someone who has loads of medical conditions I didn't end up living this long with Dr Google, so no. Although Dr. Google did help me detect a pulmonary embolism so ill give it that.

          • INFIDEL on 03/08/2022 - 17:08

            @Tehcookiemonsta: Next time you see them - ask about this latest research. They will tell you about the important findings. And any changes to your treatment. That's what I'll be doing.

            The New England Journal of Medicine is a major medical journal they would consult for the latest research.

            In the mean time, it would be wise to be informed.

    • Valowick on 03/08/2022 - 17:16
      +2

      everyone gets enough vitamin D to maintain the functions and balance they need

      Maintain. Almost every recommendation and RDI for nutrients are the minimum amounts needed to prevent sickness and disease. NOT the ideal. Not optimal amounts. I’m so sick of the bar being so low and it’s being lowered on a regular basis because the baseline of public health has dropped through the floor. My guess if we stay the course, we will only see more and more auto immune diseases caused by poor gut health and nutrient imbalances from modern life. When they say stop testing for vitamin D deficiency when it’s a key player in supporting tight junctions in your gut, they’re losing me.

    • TEER3X on 03/08/2022 - 17:46

      In what context does supplementing vitamin d have no benefit?

      I find it extremely hard to believe it's totally useless.

      Can't access that medical paper without signing up, did you even read it?

  • Mckenzie on 03/08/2022 - 16:21

    Oos

  • seamonkey on 03/08/2022 - 16:25
    +3

    Waiting for a comment that mentions that big light high in the sky.

    • bargaino on 03/08/2022 - 16:44
      +1

      I get sun, am not pale, and good diet. But blood vit-D levels are still a bit low - it can happen with aging. Have been taking supplements - for D only. It appears it was a waste of time.

      • INFIDEL on 03/08/2022 - 17:21
        +1

        Same here, taking Vit D supplements under instruction by my specialist!

        Luckily had almost run out. Was searching online for new stock, when I came across the podcast of the research.

        The research findings didn't come as a shock, as there was growing evidence that Vit D supplementation wasn't useful.

        So many in the population were diagnosed as deficient. If it's so persistent - maybe it's not really the problem once thought…
        There just wasn't the medical evidence to support public funding (over $100M/yr for path lab testing according to RACGP) So funding for blood tests became restricted to single tests a while back.

        But that almost no one benefits (except very rare cases) - was a surprise to me.
        [Read medical research in my work advising doctors, designed research experiments, & trained doctors in thinking.]

        • TEER3X on 03/08/2022 - 18:22
          +1

          There is much more evidence that Vitamin D supplementation is useful.

          It just depends on what you search for and want to find

          • INFIDEL on 03/08/2022 - 19:40
            -1

            @TEER3X: Ah, the manufacturers evidence!
            Links to your favourite studies?

            This study has debunked previous ideas that raising Vit D levels is beneficial!

            That's why this research study is exciting & groundbreaking! Likely a paradigm shift in health care!

            Like all important research papers, it will be debated.

  • BinnyC on 03/08/2022 - 18:57
    +2

    Well my levels went up from being deficient to normal levels taking supplements and will continue to do so.

    • INFIDEL on 03/08/2022 - 19:26
      -1

      That's the issue - reported Vit D levels vs any real benefit of higher levels, through supplementation.

      Yes the level goes up with supplementation… But what does that really mean for your health??

      Blood tests showed so many had Vit D "deficiency" in Australia. It didn't make sense - as short sun exposure increases Vit D levels. But it did support an industry!

      Medicare rebate was changed as there was little evidence of benefits of testing.

      This research has debunked a popularly held belief. It was assumed raising Vit D levels (found in blood tests) through supplementation - would result in many health benefits. But it showed no evidence, except in very rare conditions.

      Of course some may be upset or choose not to believe its evidence-based findings.

      Best to discuss it with your GP or specialist.

      • Drakesy on 03/08/2022 - 22:32

        If it means a different to your mood and less sleeping issues then it's quite an obvious benefit.

        And no, you can't go writing everything off down to 'placebo effect' there's a reason why summer holidays were prescribed to people in the UK that were deficient in vitamin D

        And now you can have it without the side of skin cancer
        win win

        • INFIDEL on 03/08/2022 - 23:02
          -1

          GPs used to prescribe many strange remedies - not long ago. None were evidence-based! But people believed they helped (placebos).
          And sometimes the GP was getting a nice kickback for the advice (like where to stay on holidays!).

          People expected a medicine when they visited the doctor. Especially when they had to pay.

          A friend told me a remedy must work - because the old family GP had told her it was true as a child… No evidence in research.

          Had doctors as clients, so we discussed these strange areas where patients believe what ever the Dr says.

          Just taking a break, going for a walk or exercise, & many more healthy suggestions - all recommended to improve mood & sleep. Found to work for many. Expensive supplements not needed.

          Seems you just want to believe (what you want to believe)😉

          • Drakesy on 03/08/2022 - 23:11

            @INFIDEL: Oh dear….
            Gaslighting if i ever saw it

            • INFIDEL on 06/08/2022 - 12:27
              -1

              @Drakesy: 'Gaslighting'… Oh dear…

              Your thinking was faulty, your personal belief does not accord with published reviews of research showing NO CAUSAL link between taking Vit D supplements & mood improvement - ie it doesn't work (published in reputable medical publications like The Lancet)!

              The Lancet Meta-analysis of hundreds of research studies found a link between low Vit D levels & ill health - but proposed that the ill health caused the low vit D level, not the other way round.

              An Hypothesis could be proposed that people with ill health (including mood disorders) may have less health & mood enhancing experiences & spend less time outside in the sun - resulting in a lower Vit D level🌞

              Yesterday, discussed this with medical professionals studying at my University. I designed the Research Masters course there. It made for a lively discussion!

              Looked at research into a link between supplication of Vit D & mood disorder. It is often shonky, but used to prove taking Vit D supplements helps improve mood… & sell supplements!

              For example, in a study with a large sample size of participants, it merely asked people's mood, gave Vit D over a period, & asked their mood after treatment.
              It reported an improvement in mood with Vit D supplementation.

              Now there are so many flaws with that "experiment"…

              Mood is self reported - not an accurate, reliable, objective measure. So caution is necessary in analysing any change. It can change at different time of day, weather, etc.

              Mood changes over a longer period of time (necessary for treatment to take effect) for various reasons.
              So any relationship found may be due to an outside variable (a confound), not the treatment. (Were people happier before COVID or economic troubles? Mood changes due to outside variables.)

              There was no CONTROL group! The effect of placebo, external factors affecting all, etc were not controlled for. A fundamental error!
              Should have included a control group using a similar looking simple placebo.
              And with experimenters not knowing what the subjects were receiving - a Double Blind trial!

              Early research into the effect of talking therapy on patients had the same flaw. But the results were used to show the positive effect!
              Just talking to a supportive person can make people happier!
              Same with the outcome of that Vit D - mood experiment.

              People with mood disorders may be more likely to be withdrawn from social activities (which would normally help improve mood in most). And would be less likely to go outside - & receive sun exposure.

              Participating in a Program looking into their mood issue, being given attention - plus an expectation of improvement - could just as likely lead to the published result!!

              But the result was simply a CORRELATION relationship between taking Vit D supplements & mood.
              It could not test if there was a CAUSAL relationship - that increasing Vit D leads to better mood!!

              Similarly with ignoring the reputable research into health care & believing the manufacturers advice!

              A Speech Therapist yesterday told me the research into the standard treatment of swallowing issues is from the manufacturer - Nestle. They have their own research Institute & offer research fellowships!

              The governing body won't accept other treatments, even though they exist & work. Likely that body receives funding from Nestle to have students at University only taught what Nestle wants!

              Busy GPs may be influenced more by Drug Reps than spending time reading up to date research!!

              Vested interest in research funding & influence on accepted treatment is a big problem!

              Same with your seaside holiday anecdote… The medical professionals saw so many issues with it!! But good experience for them, as their patients may have similar unfounded beliefs!

              First, there are so many positive effects of being on a holiday, so many changes. As I outlined. Not just sun exposure & Vit D levels!!

              I've spend rainy days inside, at English seaside towns like Hastings. Love the place, but little sun when it's pouring down in summer! No Vit D benefit then!

              I've seen how some Brits spend their seaside holidays in Britain. Was located near a Butlins holiday camp in Minehead. With its organised social activities, children kept entertained so the parents could enjoy themselves…
              People seemed to enjoy it! Their mood was improved!!
              So different to back home, work, & responsibilities!!

              What proof was there of sub-clinical Vit D deficiency to "prescribe" a holiday? How was it diagnosed long ago?

              British doctors have been sending patients to spa towns for hundreds of years on little evidence of illness or cure! It was not based on evidence of medical benefit for the treatment. And doctors often had financial stakes in those recommended holiday towns!!
              Even the Catholic Church has recorded "Miracles" at spas!
              Thermal baths are wonderful & feel relaxed & in a good mood afterwards. I enjoy them on my travels, spending days in traditional Onsen villages in Japan. Even "taken the waters" at Bath, UK. But I don't believe the hype!

              The holiday industry is really based around making people happier!
              People expect to be happier on holidays.
              People who ski, may be almost entirely covered during the day - so are they generally happier on their holiday?
              Of course!
              Obviously, it's not just due to Vit D!

              Lol! Received a very rapid neg vote a few minutes after posting.
              A knee jerk reaction, refusing any other view than their own!

              Obviously not even read or understood.

              As I said, the comment I am discussing, is just a strongly held personal belief (supported by the supplement industry), not based on the evidence-based medical research.

              As I previously commented…
              Seems you just want to believe (what you want to believe)😉

              Reminds me of a student in my Uni class studying Science, who would shout out "Evolution is a Fraud". It was his firmly held fundamentalist belief! Who knows why he was there? It changed nothing. I assume he felt better for doing it. But, no one paid him any attention. He didn't last long.

          • G-rig on 04/08/2022 - 03:25

            @INFIDEL: Not hard to fathom that a lot of office workers don't get enough sun, particularly in winter (yes even in Aus). Same goes for countries that don't see very much sun during winter for months.

            • INFIDEL on 04/08/2022 - 07:38

              @G-rig: What is enough sun?

              As already discussed, Recommended sun exposure is only 10-30 min several days a week for Vit D. Not much!
              As I suggested - grab lunch or a coffee while sitting in the sun. And show some skin.

              Sun is not the only way to obtain good levels. Vitamin D is fat-soluble, so consumed in some oily food. May be a little harder for vegetarians😉

              Traditional people in the Arctic with no sun for months a year, were found to obtain their Vit D through their seafood diet. https://www.newscientist.com/lastword/mg24733011-300-how-did…

              Egg marketers would say two eggs providing 82% of your daily recommended intake of vitamin D.
              Fish marketers… Oily fish such as salmon & some cheaper fish.

              There is some doubt about if so many Australians actually have Vit D deficiency, found in blood tests.
              Medicare removed the rebate for multiple blood tests. Those tests showed the effect of supplementation on the blood, not necessarily any real health effect!

              The just released research suggests supplementation does not have the health affect we have been told, despite showing as higher levels in blood tests.

              But some advocates, & businesses who make a fortune from it, swear by high dose supplementation…

              • G-rig on 04/08/2022 - 07:47
                +1

                @INFIDEL:

                What is enough sun?

                Yes was going to say 10-15min direct sunlight per day, but some people don't get that.

                Obviously you can top up in the summer if you are spending decent amounts of time in the sun, being conscience of burning and skin damage (which ages your skin).

                Doesn't hurt to get more vitamin D through supplements is the point. Better than not enough.
                Also I don't recommend those type of pill supplements anyway, usually just expensive urine.
                Better to get sublingual for a better chnace of being absorbed.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join