If one of the MP's arguments is correct, that exogenous 25(OH)D (from food and supplements) deactivates the VDR (which of course I disagree with due to scientific explanations I've come across to the contrary), then why is it that now that I'm taking mega-doses of exogenous D3 my skin is much more resilient against the exposure to UV rays from the sun? If the exogenous D were deactivating my VDRs, then I would logically expect to be seeing the opposite reaction given that there is evidence (presented previously) that D metabolites play a role in protecting the skin from UV radiation, resulting in less burning and damage and more tanning.

I just got inside from laying out in the noon-time sun and not even a trace of pink or redness. I'm tanning beautifully and can tolerate being outdoors much better now and my skin is looking and feeling its best now that I am feeling more 'D replete' (and also A replete, as it is essential for the full functioning of D). The cholecalciferol-phobia about going to high is rampant and unfortunate. It truly is all about balance. "Life in its fullest is Mother Nature obeyed."

Yes, I totally agree. It is also beneficial so that we as a group have the chance to dispel inaccuracies presented in such articles so that misinformation doesn't prevail to those who are serious about getting to the bottom of the subjects. Well done and keep up the good work!

Do you guys notice how I'm more upbeat and posting more frequently when I'm obtaining adequate, or optimal, fat soluble nutrients (especially D)?