The corporate buyout for short term profits
This page was created 10/09/25
Now this is quite well known, not really huge news, but I just wanted to put my thoughts out there. I thought of making this article when I was buying vitamin D at the supermarket.
In short, the package said 1000IU (25mcg) vitamin D per pill, which it claimed was "500%" of the NRV (National Recommended Value). It also mentioned that one should not take more than a pill a day. Upon researching this online, I found out that the NHS (UK National Health Service) recommended 400IU (10mcg) daily, which is above the recommended value of 166IU (1000/6) (4mcg) written on the box of pills. But research claims that the naked body generates 10000IU (250mcg) of vitamin D in the summer sun. Obviously, this depends on skin colour and various other factors but the consensus is that we generate far more vitamin D than the "recommended value". Surely this would be unhealthy as other studies have claimed that more than 4000IU can lead to an overdose where the body produces too much calcium. They also claim it can lead to kidney stones. But if the naked body produces 10000IU in 25 minutes (even in winter, etc in nature, the human body would create much more than at least 5000IU daily), can this be true? Maybe it depends on which form of vitamin D we take, but still, around 1000IU should be the bare minimum that we take which is far more than the 400IU the NHS recommends. If the "science approved" maximum is 4000IU, then why do we need to take a maximum of 100IU according to the "do not exceed recommended dose" on the pack of vitamin D pills. In reality, we should be taking at least 3000IU daily, as is written in the website "vitamindwiki". I reckon there are some studies out there to confirm this, but we will get onto that later.
The question as to why the information on all these different websites coming from a plethora of different "institutions" is fascinating. I think that the research of these institutions has been influenced by big pharma and government, as I am sure is has been proven before (find source). Of course, this benefits them as it leads to a sicker population which in turn enables more medicine to be sold at outrageous prices by rent-seeking corporations. This also enables the government to control its population more, as if you are sicker you are less likely to notice things happening. This is also the case with social media and other things which is whole different article. I wonder why there is so little research which really confirms other studies, why is everything so scattered? It should be easy to do studies on this topic.