It's a biomarker but does it really mean anything?
High vitamin D seems to be associated with everything good like income and your team winning the Superbowl and low vitamin D seems to be associated with everything bad like being a disadvantaged minority or getting cancer or living in a high crime neighborhood.
There are so many studies where they give people Vitamin D and it seems to do absolutely nothing so I hear "Vitamin D" and I'm skeptical particularly if the endpoint is some biomarker and not some outcome like strokes or heart attacks or cancer or something.
High vitamin D seems to be associated with everything good like income and your team winning the Superbowl and low vitamin D seems to be associated with everything bad like being a disadvantaged minority or getting cancer or living in a high crime neighborhood.
There are so many studies where they give people Vitamin D and it seems to do absolutely nothing so I hear "Vitamin D" and I'm skeptical particularly if the endpoint is some biomarker and not some outcome like strokes or heart attacks or cancer or something.
Omnilux Clinical Bibliography - https://omniluxled.com/pages/clinical-bibliography
Disregarding the difficulty of implementation is there any reason this wouldn't work internally?
Collagen isn't just for skin and a lot of more serious age related issues seem to be partially down to it's gradual loss.
Unlocking longevity with GLP-1: A key to turn back the clock? - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S03785... | https://doi.org/10.1016/j.maturitas.2024.108028
Research Advances on the Damage Mechanism of Skin Glycation and Related Inhibitors - https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/14/21/4588 | https://doi.org/10.3390/nu14214588
I'm dead then.