/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15356713
Was the limit raised to 2500 IU or lowered there by that notice?

>>15356713
>Vitamin D is now available by prescription only in Canada
We all know why.
Global depopulation is their main goal, little here, little there. Of course they might as well grift some money off the sheeple while they are at it.

>>15356713
Democrats in the USA are banning hundreds of supplements soon, making them prescription only or totally banned. They already passed the "law".

>>15356742
I have been worried about this for a while. You know how easy it would be for guvfags to swap packages going to people and directly poison them. If you take vitamins, you better be paying cash at random stores. Force them to poison the entire population to get to you.
That's what I do.

let me guess. This happened during covid

>>15356713
Your post claims the opposite of what is stated in the picture.

>allow non-perscription status for vitamin d products containing more than 2500 IU

>>15356723
It was raised to 2500. It was lower before. Nothing stops you from just taking multiple pills or drops or whatever though.
>>15356895
The date is in the image.

I don't think there are any health benefits to Vitamin D supplementation, yet people keep taking tons of Vitamin D. I think it even causes some problems.

I don't think it should be prescription just because people are dumb about using it, I am just saying that is a plausible justification.

>>15356742
How are people going to make money if they are sick retard.

>>15356895
If you open the image OP posted you can see the date.

>>15356713
You image says that supplements above a certain level are by prescription only. That is not the same as Vitamin D at any level is by prescription only. And it isn't clear if it was lowered or raised to that level. This looks like it was making it more available.

>>15357117
>How are people going to make money if they are sick retard.
Because "treated" chronic illnesses are health by subscription.

>>15357131
So they are healthy or are they sick? If they are healthy it isn't clear was the problem it, since health is greatly desirable. You can't have it both ways to make your stupid argument.

>>15357140
what the problem is*

>>15357117
Facts don't care about what you think. Vitamin D has numerous benefits proven time and again. If you only supplement one vitamin, it should be D.

Also ignore the conspiracytards. It's less than 2¢ per 1000 IU (daily).

>>15357183
how much is more is it going to cost if you need to go to a doctor to get permission to get it?

>>15357140
You're apparently mentally retarded, which puts you in the sick category. But I have a pill for that if you give me $1000/mo.

>>15357214
Are you OP? because OP is a certified retard. The screenshot says above 2500 IU requires a prescription. That sounds reasonable to me. You shouldn't be self-supplementing Stoss doses of vitamin D.

>>15357183
this
D and fish oil are worth taking over anything else.

>>15357183
What benefits at what dosage for who?

Obviously it is an essential vitamin, so to that extent it is good and "has numerous benefits", but it is also true that for people who already get sufficient vitamin D, giving them _more_ vitamin D is likely deleterious.

You can't just be like "it is good therefore lots of vitamin D supplementation is also good".

I am jumping around google scholar on Vitamin D supplementation, here are just some random quotes:

>Among healthy postmenopausal women, calcium with vitamin D supplementation resulted in a small but significant improvement in hip bone density, did not significantly reduce hip fracture, and increased the risk of kidney stones
Kidney stones

>Vitamin D self-administration related adverse effects, such as hypercalcemia and hypercalciuria are rare, and usually result from taking extremely high doses of vitamin D for a prolonged time.

>Vitamin D3 combined with calcium increased the risk of nephrolithiasis
Nephrolithiasis means kidney stones

>Alfacalcidol and calcitriol increased the risk of hypercalcaemia

I don't mean to say this to say it is definitely bad, indeed it seems to be good for most people most of the time.

>>15357216
>But I have a pill for that if you give me $1000/mo.
Bad news. I don't want to buy it.

>>15357303
>fish oil shilling like it's not a meme

bro, fish oil is literally bait

>>15357351
Yup. All the cool kids are taking algae oil. It's cleaner.

>>15357347
Aren't the stones due to the calcium not D3?

I've suffered from psoriasis for years until I started taking high doses of vitamin D3.
>10 000IU vitamin D3
>300mg vitamin K2 mk7
>500mg Magnesium
>500mg tudca
didn't have a single flare up in last two years. I guess governments don't like that.

>>15356742
>there is no money in healthy people
lol
lmao even

>>15357347
>Bad news. I don't want to buy it.
Antivaxxer.

>>15357421
The only thing I'd do is monitor your calcium intake. Vitamin D increases calcium absorption so you're more at risk for kidney stones and other trouble like that if you have way too much calcium in your diet.

>>15357432
I agree with you technically, but this has literally been the fear mongering logic used for decades to tell people they only need 1000IU max.

>>15356713
Wait what? Kek

I take 1000 iu or mg whatever of lysine and magnesium everyday and 2000 iu of vitamin D

>>15358311
After a couple weeks of chugging 5k IU daily I gave myself symptoms of hypercalcaemia. Use with caution.

It's useful, especially if you live where winter sunlight is scarce. I'm more concerned about erm, what's the term... Chiril enantiomers. If the source of d is synthetic, right handed enantiomers will be present and will function differently to the organically produced left handed enantiomers. (As an aside this is commonly a result of methamphetamine production from inorganic precursors and is said to make the meth less effective. Yfw Mr white was really making shit meth the whole time.)

I'd be interested to learn if chirility was considered in the papers which study vitamin d supplementation and if it may be a factor in the research results.