Send to:

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2011 Nov;14(6):598-604. doi: 10.1097/MCO.0b013e32834be798.

Short-term and long-term consequences and concerns regarding valid assessment of vitamin D deficiency: comparison of recent food supplementation and clinical guidance reports.

Author information

  • 1Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.



The function and use of vitamin D supplementation has become very controversial. This review attempts to provide a balanced perspective with respect to the experimental findings published in the past 18 months.


The recent contrasts between the Institute of Medicine (IOM) report and the Endocrine Societies report have caused great confusion with respect to the dietary requirement for vitamin D as well as the amount of circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D that is desirable. Much recent data contradict the suggestions of the IOM report with respect to vitamin D's role in chronic disease such as cancer, cardiovascular function, immune function and autoimmune ailments such as multiple sclerosis.


Controversy regarding supplementation with vitamin D is fueled by the different purposes of the IOM (guidance for food fortification and not to individualized patient care) and the Endocrine Societies (patient care) reports. Healthcare providers should formulate their own opinions with respect to vitamin D as it pertains to the care of their patient.

[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk