Radical idea: go outside
Since 2006, type 1 diabetes in Finland has plateaued and then decreased after the authorities’ decision to fortify dietary milk products with cholecalciferol. The role of vitamin D in innate and adaptive immunity is critical. A statistical error in the estimation of the recommended dietary allowance (RDA) for vitamin D was recently discovered; in a correct analysis of the data used by the Institute of Medicine, it was found that 8895 IU/d was needed for 97.5% of individuals to achieve values ≥50 nmol/L. Another study confirmed that 6201 IU/d was needed to achieve 75 nmol/L and 9122 IU/d was needed to reach 100 nmol/L. The largest meta-analysis ever conducted of studies published between 1966 and 2013 showed that 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels <75 nmol/L may be too low for safety and associated with higher all-cause mortality, demolishing the previously presumed U-shape curve of mortality associated with vitamin D levels. Since all-disease mortality is reduced to 1.0 with serum vitamin D levels ≥100 nmol/L, we call public health authorities to consider designating as the RDA at least three-fourths of the levels proposed by the Endocrine Society Expert Committee as safe upper tolerable daily intake doses. This could lead to a recommendation of 1000 IU for children <1 year on enriched formula and 1500 IU for breastfed children older than 6 months, 3000 IU for children >1 year of age, and around 8000 IU for young adults and thereafter. Actions are urgently needed to protect the global population from vitamin D deficiency.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5541280/
Fourteen adult men volunteered to participate in an experiment to evaluate the potential for penile growth as a result of taking 50,000 units of vitamin D 3 and 100 mcg of vitamin K 2 daily. Penis length increased an average of 0.46 inches and circumference increased an average of 0.523 inches, both statistically significant. These results are comparable to those obtained with use of a vacuum pump or with surgical augmentation. We suggest that men interested in penis augmentation consider this much simpler and safer approach when they are interested in penis enlargement.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322071346_Enhanced_Growth_of_the_Adult_Penis_With_Vitamin_D_3
Why is it not a real study? Because you don't want to believe the results? Or because they published it without submitting it to a scam journal that charges you a couple thousand $ for publication? All the methodology is detailed and all the results are comprehensive. If you don't like it and want to dispute the results, you're welcome to show it's not repeatable.
Reminder that this is exactly how science has worked all the way up to the 60s, when Robert Maxwell (yes, that Maxwell) turned scientific publication into an extortion and money laundering scam by pushing the academia to define his and his friendly mafia journals as serious science and everything else as tinfoil shit. Which goes fully contrary to the concept of science: where identity doesn't matter, only content. Identity mattering is a position of scholasticism, which is exactly what science fought against in the 17th century.
Since you're going to be insufferable:
1.) What are you fucking talking about? It's not a "real" study because it's not formatted, written, or reviewed like one. This is an 8 page word document with one unformatted table and no other figures. No, there isn't a "methods" section that is remotely comprehensive. Where are serum ion results? What kind of supplements were given? 50K units is an extreme dose, how much is excreted in waste?
They don't even discuss one of the most controversial aspects of the penile enlargement field, do you measure your dick ylilauta style or from the balls?
I think STAR methods is overboard for many publications, but this doesn't even come close. I haven't read a paper, maybe ever, that had a methods section less than two pages and was condensed for space requirements so that anyone with the same materials, the same buffers, and the same organism could reach a similar result.
2.) I don't really care about the journal, or publication counts, and this is generally dick waving. For me, one of the most important papers in my dissertation field was in PLoS One. But, no, I don't think it's gauche or betraying "l'esprit de la science" when saying that shit scrawled on the bathroom wall (which this is approaches) is less, dare we say, valid, than the KcsA paper or even really anything that was just published on PLoS One.
>hurr durr it's not a real study because they didn't use correct fonts
lol, lmao
you do know that studies are submitted to journals in pretty much raw text version? (Physicists tend to use LaTeX, less serious studies just Word documents)
It's the journal that provides formatting. No, the tables in submitted materials are not formatted.
A large part of studies that get "peer reviewed" have comparable sample sizes too.
You're just seething because they simply posted what would otherwise be a "preprint" and let the entire scientific community scrutinise their findings, instead of paying several thousand dollars upfront for a sham process with "peers" who go through their study and reply back with "nice study but you should also cite those papers: (list of papers co-authored by them or other their faculty members)".
I'd know, I'm a STEMfag, this is how it works.
Btw, here's another study on vitamin D:
In this study, 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) was analysed in 58 Sweden-born sibling pairs, in which one child had autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and the other did not. The study group consisted of two representative samples; 47 Gothenburg sibling pairs with mixed ethnicities and 11 Stockholm sibling pairs with Somali background. 25(OH)D levels were analysed in the stored dried blood spots taken in the neonatal period for metabolic screening.
The collapsed group of children with ASD had significantly lower vitamin D levels (M = 24.0 nM, SD = 19.6) as compared with their siblings (M = 31.9 nM, SD = 27.7), according to a paired samples t-test (P = 0.013). The difference was - most likely - not only accounted for by a difference in season of birth between ASD and non-ASD siblings since the mean 25(OH)D levels differed with similar effect size between the sibling pairs born during winter and summer, respectively. All children with African/Middle East background, both the children with ASD and their non-ASD siblings, had vitamin D deficiency.
https://molecularautism.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/2040-2392-6-3
I have a PhD in biochemistry and I've never paid journal fees for my articles (the department does or I've had them waived). When I've gone through a peer review process or a grant review I've never encountered anything remotely as you've described. You're normally asked to provide more data or remove certain claims, or at worse a new set of experiments. Most journals publish decision letters now and I've never read anything you've described.
This isn't a pre-print, it's a 7 page document about guys giving their friends an extreme dose of vitamin D and not documenting anything. They don't discuss their methods, they don't discuss their materials, they don't present any results in a coherent fashion, and when it's formatted like an undergraduate 101 lab report it deserves to be tossed in the trash because of how little care the authors put into wanting to present a coherent view of their findings.
Also who gives a shit about latex formatting any more? You submit a pdf of your work for initial review and yes, you have figures at the end that are formatted and presentable for reviewers. You have delineated sections of how you did things and what you used. Once again this is a 700 word scrawling of shit and if for whatever reason this is the hill you want to die on that's fine, but this document doesn't deserve respect or consideration tbh.
Good.
So what will you say when I post this transversal and longitudinal study which is a "real paper" that supports that "700 word scrawling of shit"?
>In the whole sample, after performing logistic regression models, higher levels of 25(OH) vitamin D were significantly associated with high values of total testosterone and of all the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) questionnaire parameters. On the other hand, higher levels of total testosterone were positively and significantly associated with high levels of erectile function and IIEF total score. After vitamin D replacement therapy, total and free testosterone increased and erectile function improved, whereas other sexual parameters did not change significantly. At logistic regression analysis, higher levels of vitamin D increase (Δ-) were significantly associated with high values of Δ-erectile function after adjustment for Δ-testosterone.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5817208/
Off-topic: These priest clothes look fucking ebin. I recently moved to a catholic area and saw a guy dressed like this in the wild. Very ebin.
On-topic: The discussion about vitamins interestingly often seems to be driven by ideologies and ideas the people already hold, instead of the science, which seems inconclusive or conflicted.
But it's not only that about ideologies, authorities, professionals within countries keep debating about it and then they come up with completely different recommendations in different countries with similar climate & people. One would think that places such as the dark northern european countries would end up with the same daily recommendation along with a place like Canada, but no, they are all different.
I really don't care what the real end result and correct answer is, but I just want a damn answer, my autism requires it, I can't continue living in a world where all professionals and experts keep having different opinions and keep changing recommendations.
Human biology is not yet fully understood. That means you can come to different conclusions and recommendations when considering the imperfect data available. Every person has some set of biases, which I called ideology, and these inform decisionmaking especially when working on the basis of imperfect data.
Äuthorities here recommended vitamin D as helpful in case of corona. It was on the naitonal news
One explanation: diet.
Does finland eat fish? I know that Norway was thought to not need that much vitamin D despite climate due to eating fish.
No, it does not (because you don't know what baseline to compare it against?)
But it is known that improving erectile function by any means improves AN INDIVIDUALS penis size without actually growing it
You can test it on yourself, measure benis on 80% erection and on 100% erection and compare values