[wwwtyro]

Seems like this is some kind of legal inevitability that is acknowledged to be counter-productive:

> The IASDA report stresses: “There is concern that this decision may cause consumers to mistrust vitamin D supplementation, which will be particularly problematic given the high prevalence of vitamin D deficiency among the population."

and

> “Even after ANSES publicly stated that while formally correct, the listing would be counterproductive, this legal mechanism proved impossible to stop,” he adds.

[marcosdumay]

Let's not compile databases of facts because people can't handle reading them.

That's exactly the kind of attitude that makes create distrust among the public. Kudos for the bureaucrats that insisted on classifying it.

[ip26]

Counterpoint: Prop 65 labels

[generalenvelope]

The glaring assumption here being that deficiency can be treated with supplementation. There are tons of reasons why you can be deficient, and many that don't respond at all to supplementation. More people should be talking to medical professionals about this stuff

[pixl97]

>this legal mechanism proved impossible to stop

Moloch wins again!