Jeff,
Years ago I looked over your analysis of some of the more controversial issues, and I spent the time to look at the body of studies in question, to parse through what was meaningful, significant, and relevant to already-healthy people eating and living well. I did so to determine if you could be someone I could generally trust, since I do not usually have the time to go as in depth in a field that is not my expertise. For many reasons you established yourself as the least biased, most thorough, most realistic and level headed dietary and lifestyle research expert.
Could you give me your take on something that I am having trouble coming to my own conclusions on?
I've followed the thread on the vitamin D consensus now and then without studying it too hard. But I know that you have. I'm a little confused. It seems like the consensus is that vitamin D supplementation does not seem to help anyone in any way except maybe some extreme edge cases. At the same time, it seems that keeping vitamin D to a certain level is best. I seem to recall that achieving that adequate level (20 ng/ml if i remember) though, even primarily via supplementation, might be advisable. If supplementation is the primary route someone wants to go to assure that level, is that going to do any good for them, or no?
I know that adequate but minimal midday sun exposure is your typical preference, but I want to ask about that confusion about supplementing.