Well, I remain open to learning more about this topic.
The safety data sheet for D3 says it is highly dangerous and should not be swallowed or even touched:
https://www.fishersci.com/store/msds?partNumber=AAB2252406&productDescription=VITAMIN+D3+5G&vendorId=VN00024248&countryCode=US&language=enThis reminds me of the MSDS for fluoride:
https://www.fishersci.com/store/msds?partNumber=S299100&productDescription=SODIUM+FLUORIDE+CERT+ACS+100G&vendorId=VN00033897&countryCode=US&language=enIn fact, it takes less Vitamin D3 to kill a rat than sodium fluoride. Not saying a rat is a good test subject, but that's what is commonly used for toxicological information.
I've personally found it doesn't take much oral D3 to give me overdose symptoms: hot, sweaty, obviously stimulated, unable to sleep, loss of appetite, thirst, tightness in my spine/back, and I'm probably missing some things.
However, sunbathing is one of the things I enjoy most in life, so it could be that I am not a good test case for additional D3 supplementation.
Do have a look at the D3 MSDS. I've linked one above. Let me know what you think. It seems highly dangerous. I know the amounts suggested for supplementation are considered quite tiny, but we don't consider sodium fluoride ingestion beneficial at any dose. The MSDS is clear D3 is a potent poison.
Also, it wasn't until very recently that high doses of D3 were considered safe. What changed? I don't consider recent times any golden age in science. We have every reason to be skeptical and cautious.
Regarding the sun, it doesn't make sense to me that we can reduce the benefits down to one controversial chemical we can manufacture in labs. Testing blood levels for this chemical is not the same as supplementing orally with it since correlation is not causation. For example, my blood levels of so-called D3 could be very high after a wonderful summer spent enjoying myself in the sun, but this may be completely different than trying to feed someone regular doses of D3. In fact, the latter could prove more harmful than beneficial.
I will need to look over suitable studies before drawing any conclusions, not studies that simply say those with higher D3 levels are less at risk of X or are healthier.
By the way, Isaac Newton lived to 84 in the 18th century, in dreary England, and he didn't take vitamin D:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_NewtonRecently, one of our most privileged elites, Jacob Rothschild, died at 87:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_Rothschild,_4th_Baron_RothschildOne has to suppose Mr. Rothschild had the best available knowledge and wisdom, with the best available contacts, and of course unlimited financial resources.