Letters
Calcium, vitamin D, and risk
Evidence of harm is unconvincing
BMJ 2011; 342 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d3541 (Published 07 June 2011) Cite this as: BMJ 2011;342:d3541
- Richard L Prince, professor1,
- Kun Zhu, adjunct associate professor1,
- Joshua R Lewis, research officer1
- 1School of Medicine and Pharmacology, University of Western Australia, Nedlands, WA 6009, Australia
- richard.prince{at}uwa.edu.au
We were surprised to read the latest meta-analysis by Bolland and colleagues,1 now including calcium and vitamin D,2 because it raises questions about study design, appropriate selection of adverse cardiovascular events, data management, and levels of significance.1
Firstly, in their reanalysis of the Women’s Health Initiative paper,3 Bolland …
Log in
Log in using your username and password
Log in through your institution
Subscribe from £173 *
Subscribe and get access to all BMJ articles, and much more.
* For online subscription
Access this article for 1 day for:
£38 / $45 / €42 (excludes VAT)
You can download a PDF version for your personal record.