Perspective

You have free access to this content

Why the IOM recommendations for vitamin D are deficient†

  1. Robert P Heaney1,*,
  2. Michael F Holick2

Article first published online: 18 FEB 2011

DOI: 10.1002/jbmr.328

Issue

Journal of Bone and Mineral Research

Journal of Bone and Mineral Research

Volume 26, Issue 3, pages 455–457, March 2011

Additional Information

How to Cite

Heaney, R. P. and Holick, M. F. (2011), Why the IOM recommendations for vitamin D are deficient. J Bone Miner Res, 26: 455–457. doi: 10.1002/jbmr.328

Author Information

  1. 1

    Creighton University , Omaha, NE, USA

  2. 2

    Department of Medicine, Division of Endocrinology, Boston University Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA

*Creighton University, 601 North 30th Street, Suite 4841, Omaha, NE 68131, USA.

  1. †

    For further discussion on this topic, please see Reid and Avenell (J Bone Miner Res. 2011;452–454. DOI: 10.1002/jbmr.327).

Publication History

  1. Issue published online: 18 FEB 2011
  2. Article first published online: 18 FEB 2011
  3. Accepted manuscript online: 4 JAN 2011 12:29PM EST
  4. Manuscript Accepted: 23 DEC 2010
  5. Manuscript Revised: 21 DEC 2010
  6. Manuscript Received: 6 DEC 2010

SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

ARTICLE TOOLS

View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (53K)

Keywords:

  • VITAMIN D;
  • NUTRITIONAL POLICY;
  • EVOLUTIONARY PHYSIOLOGY

Abstract

The IOM recommendations for vitamin D fail in a major way on logic, on science, and on effective public health guidance. Moreover, by failing to use a physiological referent, the IOM approach constitutes precisely the wrong model for development of nutritional policy. © 2011 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (53K)