Funny, I was just looking at the vitamin D literature (<a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.gwern.net&#x2F;Longevity#vitamin-d" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.gwern.net&#x2F;Longevity#vitamin-d</a>)... The short answer: No. If vitamin D were all that harmful, Spector would be able to point at increases in <i>all-cause mortality</i> from the meta-analyzed RCTs, the same way he could point at some other vitamins I won&#x27;t mention, not grab a few cherry-picked endpoints like fracture from a few small studies while ignoring the implications of consistently lower all-cause mortality in vitamin D groups.<p>For a great overview of all the vitamin D endpoints, I&#x27;d suggest the mega-review&#x2F;meta-analysis Theodoratou et al 2014, “Vitamin D and multiple health outcomes: umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies and randomised trials” <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bmj.com&#x2F;content&#x2F;348&#x2F;bmj.g2035.full" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bmj.com&#x2F;content&#x2F;348&#x2F;bmj.g2035.full</a>