Re: Circulating vitamin D concentration and risk of seven cancers: Mendelian randomisation study
Recent understanding of the association of vitamin D with several non communicable diseases from several published studies tends towards the inclination that vitamin D could be a factor as in diabetes mellitus, for cancers as analysed in the present study. Further analyses in separate cancer patients including genomic studies try to show the causal association with serum vitamin D levels.
It is interesting to know how this hypothesis of vitamin D with cancers has come up. Could there be any biological plausible answer to this? As a matter of fact, why can't we presume other micronutrient deficiencies to be associated with cancers? Epidemiological studies do provide some leads but for causal association several other factors listed in Hill's criteria also need due consideration. It seems vitamin D plays a major role in several diseases but we need caution while interpreting the results from epidemiological studies purely based on statistical analyses.
Competing interests: No competing interests