[uxp8u61q]

Did you even read the article? Here's what the main part of the article says (translated to English).

> Vitamin D in children: use medicines, not supplements, to prevent the risk of overdosing

> Cases of vitamin D overdosage have recently been reported in young children following the use of vitamin D-enriched dietary supplements. These cases manifest as hypercalcemia (excessive levels of calcium in the blood), which can have serious consequences, such as lithiasis/nephrocalcinosis (calcium deposits in the kidney).

> As a result, the Anses, the Agence nationale de sécurité du médicament (ANSM), learned pediatric societies, the collège national des sages-femmes and poison control centers are alerting healthcare professionals and parents to the risk of overdose associated with the administration of vitamin D-based dietary supplements to children, particularly infants.

This advisory is based on real, actual case of children overdosing on vitamin D complements.

[CodeWriter23]

> Did you even read the article? Here's what the main part of the article says (translated to English).

I read every word. It appears you failed to comprehend the article’s declarative nature and the complete lack of citing any scientific studies whatsoever. It is a direct line handwave from D3 to hypercalcemia that assumes since D3 is an agent in calcium uptake it must be the culprit (smoking gun fallacy) and completely lacks any critical thought about other factors that could block calcium uptake into the bones, for example all the sugar added to baby formula. It is also interesting they are targeting the 10,000 IU figure which is probably too much for an infant but is widely viewed by many practitioners to be the recommended adult dose.

I take it you’re one of those that does not trust Science.

[uxp8u61q]

That's a wild attack. I don't trust science? I'm literally a scientist...

I trust the ANSES and the ANSM, who actually employ scientists to make their recommendations, more than a rando on HN. My field is not medicine, so what good would links to medical studies do me? It's not like I'm going to read them or understand their methods or findings. I'd rather have specialized people summarize the findings for me. And it's not like you have provided links to medical studies for your comment.

[CodeWriter23]

So you're a scientist when it's your work, but you just take any authoritative body's word for it without any proof. This is the very nature of everything wrong with science in its current state.

[COM9]

Even in North America, it's the same thing: supplements aren't medicine.

And the major differentiating factor for that is not the same rules applies.

Pharma-grade Vit-D will get you pretty close to 10,000 IU. Supplements - as food-grade level reglementation applies - will totally will not.

[DoingIsLearning]

Apologies for the dumb question but what exactly are "vitamin D-based dietary supplements"?

You have vitamina D rich food and you have actual vitamine D droplets for children. Is dietary supplements in this case meant to have some specific meaning?

[uxp8u61q]

In French dietary supplements refers to these pills that you can buy over the counter in supermarkets (note that in France, unlike the US, you can't buy any kind of medicine in supermarkets) that contain vitamins, minerals, whatever.

[seec]

Yeah, I think it is just the start of another political problem created to protect a minority of extremely well-off people. Pharmacists and all associated "medicine" staff. They really don't like it when people take matters in their own hands and go take a small amount of risk to avoid the insane markup imposed by those gatekeepers (very often incompetent I might add).

I enjoy the opportunities and liberty brought by technology and open market, there are some risks but considering my own experience with France medicine apparatus I don't think they are any worse than the main road...

[DoingIsLearning]

I see thanks.