however, none of these studies can prove cause-and-effect, so they are
quickly discounted in many circles
. the small study from spain has been criticized for not using a double-blind placebo control group, relying on small sample sizes, and using multiple other treatment methods on top of calcifediol. challengers also note that they don’t take into account
confounding variables
, like obesity, or account for reverse causality.
vitamin d disappointment
the medical community is particularly sensitive to these experimental design flaws because of past disappointments with vitamin d. ten years ago, there was a wave of vitamin d enthusiasm — doctors and scientists thought it had the potential to revolutionize cancer,
diabetes, autoimmune illnesses, and more. then, a series of large clinical trials dashed these hopes, leaving behind a lingering resistance to overzealous claims.
“it’s absolute bullshit,” says dr. charles hardin at massachusetts general. “there is no good evidence that vitamin d is helpful in covid,” and it is bottom of the barrel in terms of clinical trial priority. he is frustrated by the newfound interest in vitamin d, because so many large studies have yielded null results and it draws attention away from more important treatment possibilities.
as an author of one of these failed clinical trials on vitamin d, professor adrian martineau at the queen mary university of london doubts that it could change the course of covid-19 infection. he describes two treatment opportunities: reduce virus proliferation in the first phase and suppress the inflammatory response in the second phase of the disease. to be a valuable treatment option, vitamin d has to
prove effective above and beyond antivirals
or immunosuppressants already prescribed.