I also thought that was an odd statement given that most animals can

It seems to be mandatory for stories like this to include the accidental death of a cow bystander.

Pah, what does eternity mean to a headless time traveller?

In fairness to them they never abuse their powers and discover winning lottery numbers from the future.

Wasn't there that woman with a drink problem in one of the northern states alleging that vans turned up with either too much or not enough food for the vote counters?

Slam dunk evidence right there.

Translated to "It is so unfair that they are using evidence that shows we are absolutely guilty"

I gather there was a rather overwrought reply to this post of mine from now deleted user "modsarefascists42" alleging that I was upset about something, on re-reading I really can't see it. Anyhow as anyone who knows anything about the subject, not all papers and studies are created equal and a rather excellent resource called The Cochrane Library exists who do meta-analyses on the published research, carefully weeding out the dubious trials and poor methodology. So I have selected just two of their vitamin analyses - there are literally many dozens of these if you search their site.

https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD011906.pub2/full

> Vitamin and mineral supplementation for maintaining cognitive function in cognitively healthy people in mid and late life

> Authors' conclusions > We did not find evidence that any vitamin or mineral supplementation strategy for cognitively healthy adults in mid or late life has a meaningful effect on cognitive decline or dementia, although the evidence does not permit definitive conclusions

https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD007176.pub2/full?highlightAbstract=antioxid%7Cantioxidants%7Cvitamin

> Antioxidant supplements for prevention of mortality in healthy participants and patients with various diseases

> Authors' conclusions > We found no evidence to support antioxidant supplements for primary or secondary prevention. Beta‐carotene and vitamin E seem to increase mortality, and so may higher doses of vitamin A. Antioxidant supplements need to be considered as medicinal products and should undergo sufficient evaluation before marketing.

Again projection, I followed your first link that is simply re-stating the starting assumptions by referencing "studies". In the references there are links but on following the links we get more of the same, we don't get to see if they are randomised, double blind placebo controlled trials or simply observational studies perhaps funded by people with an interest in the outcome.

In my previous post, the YouTube link has a university professor calmly and rationally looking at the evidence in favour of routine vitamin supplements. Each case he presents at first looks very promising in support until his reveal of what happens when the data is subject to critical examination or a proper randomised trial is done. Over and over what we see is conventional "it must be beneficial, look at the data" overturned by "Actually the high quality studies show the opposite".

The other glaring flaw in what you present is addressed in my two original questions you fail to reply to: What actual clinical issues are documented in quality studies by these alleged deficiencies? For example are we seeing 25% of the world's population suffering from Rickets?

I don't have a problem with correcting a vitamin deficiency that has been demonstrated with peer reviewed science. However a very lucrative industry worth 151 Billion dollars in 2021 https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/dietary-supplements-market Has an obvious vested interest in convincing people that they must have deficiencies in something which is addressed by using their products daily. If this was merely a waste of money that would be one thing but what persuaded me to stop taking them several years ago was the mountain of evidence that they could be actively harmful and when not in the form of food didn't necessarily work in the same way inside the body.

That is just a claim on a website with no study referenced, hilarious that you are slinging insults, in this case a bit of a boomerang.

You still haven't answered three questions.

Edit here is some food for thought about vitamin consumption

https://www.google.com/search?q=vitamin+supplement+in+cancer+study+halted

Here is a professor giving a lecture where he examined the evidence from trials

https://youtu.be/2mDrAQi1SwU

Tremendous fake outrage to conceal not answering either of my questions.

Evidence that deficiencies are "absurdly common"?

That is three unanswered questions.

The doctor told you that your idea that vitamins are beneficial regardless of a deficiency is not placebo?

Let's be charitable and assume that your doctor told you that your vitamin D levels were low, how was that determined? What were the objective criteria assessing the consequences of this?

How did you rule out the placebo effect? How do you know clinically that you are low in vitamin D?

This is the story about every essential nutrient (including food itself), rectifying a deficiency is good, taking in excess looking for a greater beneficial effect ranges from pointless to harmful to health.

Sadly there is a huge supplements industry taking people's money due to this mistaken belief. Even more sadly such people will claim that evidence-based treatments are a scam.