The design flaw is common because they have to isolate just one single aspect and study it, in this case vitamin D, against the effect on or result of “future disorders”.

If the clinician understands the complexities of these disorders, he would have to include other factors like (in this study) magnesium, calcium, potassium, vitamin K2 as examples (there are more to it than these) since they ALL work together and lacking ANY ONE of them and your get poor results on preventing “future disorders”. This being the case, the clinician has to first understand ALL these factors and then to take these factors into account when they compare results. The clinician has to choose subjects that matches ALL other aspects except vitamin D for the study to be meaningful.

And this we did not even scratch the surface of the causes of these “future disorders” OTHER THAN Vitamin D and account for them too. Nor did the clinician state just what these “future disorders” he was referring to. Once graduated doctors often forget all about physiology and biochemistry.

This is not just a waste of time, this is giving wrong information to the uninformed public.