Review questions vitamin D for reducing chronic disease risk


- Last updated on GMT

Review questions vitamin D for reducing chronic disease risk

Related tags Vitamin d levels Vitamin d

Low vitamin D levels may be a consequence of ill health and not the cause of chronic disease, says a new review, but industry groups have responded that supplementation is vital for bone health and should not be dismissed.

French researchers analyzed data from 290 prospective observational studies, and found that high blood levels of the sunshine vitamin might be protective. Indeed, the observational data indicated that high vitamin D levels were associated with a reduction in the risk of cardiovascular events of up to 58%, a reduction in the risk of diabetes of up to 38%, a reduction in the risk of colorectal cancer of up to 33%, and a reduction in the risk of so-called ‘all-cause mortality’ of up to 29%.

High vitamin D levels were also associated with improvements in cholesterol levels, markers of inflammation, glucose metabolism disorders, infectious diseases, weight gain, and cognitive function.

On the other hand, the overall data from 172 randomized clinical trials of vitamin D and non-bone health outcomes indicated no reduction in risk, leading the researchers to conclude that that low vitamin D is not a cause but a consequence of ill health

Professor Philippe Autier from the International Prevention Research Institute in Lyon, France and lead author on the review, said: “What this discrepancy suggests is that decreases in vitamin D levels are a marker of deteriorating health. Aging and inflammatory processes involved in disease occurrence and clinical course reduce vitamin D concentrations, which would explain why vitamin D deficiency is reported in a wide range of disorders.

“If the health benefits of high vitamin D concentrations shown by data from observational studies are not reproduced in randomized trials (the gold standard method for assessing a causal relation between an exposure and an outcome) then the relation between vitamin D status and disorders are probably the result of confounding or physiological events involved in these disorders.”


Vitamin D facts

Vitamin D refers to two biologically inactive precursors - D3, also known as cholecalciferol, and D2, also known as ergocalciferol.

Both D3 and D2 precursors are transformed in the liver and kidneys into 25- hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D), the non-active 'storage' form, and 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (1,25(OH)2D), the biologically active form that is tightly controlled by the body.

Vitamin D deficiency (less than 20 ng/mL) can cause a number of health issues, including rickets and other musculoskeletal diseases. 

Cara Welch, PhD, Sr Vice President, Scientific & Regulatory Affairs for the Natural Products Association (NPA), told us that: "We’re looking at a mother of all meta-analyses, but just on non-skeletal disorders because, as the authors state, they are looking outside vitamin D’s proven “importance in bone health and calcium homeostasis.”  So on the non-skeletal disorders, this study seems to confirm what the industry already acknowledges – vitamin D is not the magic pill for all diseases. 

"However, I think it also corroborates what we’ve been saying about proper supplementation.  There are populations that would benefit from supplementation, people who are prone to vitamin D deficiency and aren’t getting it from their diet.  Additionally, it’s important for those who are suffering from chronic health disorders that results in lowered vitamin D concentrations to consider supplementing their diet."

Duffy MacKay, ND, vice president, scientific and regulatory affairs for the Council for Responsible Nutrition (CRN), said: “Vitamin D is an essential nutrient for good health, and if you’re one of the many people who have low levels of vitamin D, supplementation is a safe and beneficial way to achieve healthy levels. The current Dietary Guidelines for Americans identify vitamin D as one of four nutrients of public health concern because consumers are falling short. Both doctors and consumers should take this into consideration and ensure vitamin D levels are checked during medical check-ups.

"This systematic review is important because it addresses the fact that when people get seriously ill, they often experience nutrient depletions, including low vitamin D levels. When this happens, dietary supplementation should be discussed by the patient and a team of healthcare practitioners because vitamin D is not easily obtained through food, and getting it through sunlight can pose risks—making supplementation a viable option. The authors of the review acknowledge this, specifically the importance of vitamin D supplementation in elderly women who are at risk for falls or fractures. Besides, people who are getting the nutrients they need are likely to respond better to the treatment of their condition—and generally feel better.

“Scientific research demonstrates that vitamin D, in combination with calcium, is critical for the prevention of skeletal diseases, such as osteoporosis. It may be unrealistic to expect vitamin D in isolation from other healthy habits to prevent a disease such as cancer or cardiovascular disease. But we know that one component of disease prevention involves a healthy diet, of which vitamin D is a vital part.”

Ongoing trials

An accompanying editorial in The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology​ said that the odds are stacked against vitamin D being of use in preventing non-skeletal disorders.

“[However] large [ongoing] clinical trials to assess the effects of vitamin D on non-skeletal health outcomes are therefore justified. It would be a real boon to patients if the results are positive, but unless effect sizes for clinically important outcomes are large, the results will only confirm the neutral effect reported by most clinical trials thus far.”

Currently, five big clinical trials are underway testing vitamin D3 for a variety of outcomes in participants over 50 years of age. The table below outlines the trials, the interventions, outcomes and expected completion date.

Trial name





Expected completion




2,000 IU D3/day

CVD & Cancer





60,000 IU D3 once per month





New Zealand

100,000 IU D3 once per month

CVD, fractures, & respiratory disease




8 EU cities

2,000 IU D3/day

Fractures, BP, cognitive function, infection





1,600 or 3,200 IU D3/day

CVD, cancer, & diabetes


(Source: K. Kuppferschmidt, Science​, 2012, Vol. 337, pp. 1476–7)

Prof Autier and his co-authors concluded: “These studies have the potential to test our hypotheses”​.

Source: The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology
Published online ahead of print, doi: 10.1016/S2213-8587(13)70165-7
“Vitamin D status and ill health: a systematic review”
Authors: P. Autier, M. Boniol, C. Pizot, P. Mullie

Related news

Show more

Related products

show more

Nootropics Report 2.0: Brain Health Insights

Nootropics Report 2.0: Brain Health Insights

Content provided by dsm-firmenich | 20-Feb-2024 | Insight Guide

The brain health market is constantly growing and evolving, with more consumers looking for innovative ways to support total mind and body wellness.

Sweetening solution for active nutrition

Sweetening solution for active nutrition

Content provided by ADM | 19-Feb-2024 | Case Study

When you add GrainSweet® Liquid Maltodextrin to your active nutrition applications, you get the production efficiencies, clean labels, and clean tastes...

Related suppliers


Personal experience with MS

Posted by Jorma Marttinen,

The daily dosage should be at least 100 mcg. I have personally taken 125 mcg/ day since 2003 and my MS(mild relapsing/remitting) symptons have stayed away. And no flus in ten years!

Report abuse

Insufficient daily dosages

Posted by Dr. Matti Tolonen,

The trials analysed by prof Autir´s group are mostly flawed, as the daily dosages of vitamin D have been too small to yield expected results. For instance, in the largest trial, Women's Health Initiative (WHI), which included 36,282 postmenopausal women, the dosage was just 10 mcg of D3 per day for 84 months. In addition, almost 60% of the women admitted that they had not taken the pills. I think prof Autier´s conclusions are not justified. We need clinical trials where at least 100 mcg per day will be given, preferably simultaneuously with strong fish oil.

Report abuse

Follow us


View more