For healthy adults without diagnosed deficiencies, the healthiest nutrients come from food sources, not processed pills.
Tell that to vitamin D
this post was submitted on 21 Feb 2026
27 points (75.5% liked)
Today I learned
13194 readers
150 users here now
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Eat fish
I take as much D as I can
Exemplary behaviour.
That’s a very interesting conclusion you’ve drawn. Surely they will hold up under scrutiny when we read the actual survey papers and apply scientific analysis to them instead of pop science anti intellectual click baiting.
So why haven’t you linked them?
With any association study, there's always the risk of reverse causation, that people take multivitamins because they're unhealthy.
A good study would account for it,, but corporate news can’t be bothered to vet for things like that, so you have to read the study yourself, assuming you’re not paywalled from it.
I wish everyone understood this.
I still have a hard time wrapping my head around Bayes’ theorem 🤷
With "observational" studies, yes, but a formal study which has control over the study objects, and a vetting process to throw out dishonest samples accounts for that.
So if i take 25 pills every day my mortality will raise to 100%? 🤔
Yes, absolutely. You'd be dead in a month from various overdoses.
Edit: this was actually covered in a recent Ask Hank Anything. (Specifically the last question about what the healthiest candy would be to live on).
the healthiest candy would be to live on
Fruit?
No, candy.
I hate how inaccurate and illogical the title of this post is. But glad to see that at least some of the comments are filling in the gaps.
You are right. Using the word "increase" is highly unprofessional because it indicates causation. If we say the same thing scientifically correctly then the public would not even click on the title. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Correlation is not causality. Does it not make sense that people who are ill are more likely to take vitamins than healthy people?
A study does not necessarily prove causation. Assume the study was not "hacked" to mislead the public and benefit the corporation, finding that A is related to B is enough to encourage a further study about it.
Is it possible that healthy people typically also live lives that involves more dangerous activities such as mountain biking/hiking/watersports that would end in death prematurely?
Whereas unhealthy people might die of heart disease at 60 instead of 80, they also probably aren't dying from a sporting accident at 30-40
link?
Not OP obv, but based on the sample size and NIH reference I found the paper and the following down in the results section:
In the meta-analysis incorporating the time-varying estimates from all 3 cohorts, daily MV use, compared with nonuse, was associated with a 4% higher risk of all-cause mortality in FP1 (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.02-1.07) but not in FP2 (HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.93-1.04) (Figure 2).
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2820369
Thanks for finding the study.
I can't be bothered reading and understanding the whole paper, (and it's probably out of reach for me anyway), but it's notable that this quote is not from the abstract but from the results analysis.
The Abstract says:
MV use was not associated with lower all-cause mortality risk in the first (multivariable-adjusted HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.02-1.07) or second (multivariable-adjusted HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.99-1.08) halves of follow-up. HRs were similar for major causes of death and time-varying analyses.
The abstract doesn't say that MV use increases mortality.
That being the case the title to this post seems sensationalised at best.
Yup exactly I was quoting that part to point out that it was only found in the results of the meta analysis of all the studies in follow up period 1 but I wasnt very specific about that, i.e. I was not intending to validate the title's claim.
I'm curious if they're hard on the organs, maybe more specifically kidneys and liver.
What about specific vitamins? Eg D, B12
I was reading some breakdown recently, forget if it was the CDC or whoever, but basically they found that the vast majority of Americans were totally good on vitamin D when tested despite survey results indicating people didn’t get enough from their diet generally. This was attributed to sun exposure
Then I looked it up and in many cases you get your full dose of vitamin D from the sun in literally a few minutes lol. Honestly I think the whole supplement industry in general is just a very successful scam
Edit: found it, section of note is vitamin d intakes and status.
evidence suggests that the majority of people have sufficient serum concentrations of vitamin D based on the thresholds set by the Food and Nutrition Board
If your doctor literally told you to take it then that’s great. The constant fear mongering among the general public about supplements is the scam
https://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/VitaminD-HealthProfessional/
In the PNW, it's difficult to get sunny days for large parts of the winter. Plus, the sun in December is only up for like 5 or 6 hours, so if you have an indoor job, it's likely that you'll go to it when the sun is down and leave when it's coming up.
If you're white you probably still get enough, especially if you consume dairy. If you have dark skin and live in more northern latitudes, there's a higher chance of deficiency.
I don't know about that, I do know that I'm from the UK and I got tested and was actually deficient on vitamin D (and B12, but that's because of my diet)
Yeah incidents of rickets are actually increasing in northern latitudes, especially among darker skinned folks as they need more sun exposure than shiny white people. In the winter in Ireland / UK it's basically impossible to get enough sun exposure to make enough.
Also minimum levels necessary to avoid rickets don't mean optimal levels.
I would love to see a separate study on vitamin D supplementation.
yeah it was our doctor who pestered my wife and I to take them. there is actually a whol calcium, vitamin D, vitamin K chain and if not getting enough of all three the benefit is limited.
Not a link to the article, but you can at least find the citation here:
https://www.cancer.gov/news-events/press-releases/2024/multivitamins-do-not-lower-risk-of-death