Scott Alexander critiques Ben Hoffman's arguments about Vitamin D dosing, maintaining that it is primarily a bone-related chemical with limited evidence for other benefits. Longer summary

Scott Alexander responds to Ben Hoffman's critique of his views on Vitamin D dosing. He argues that ancestral populations likely received much less Vitamin D from sunlight than Hoffman suggests, and that the doses used in most studies are appropriate. Scott reviews the literature on Vitamin D dosing, discusses various recommendations and debates within the medical community, and explains why he remains skeptical of claims about Vitamin D's non-skeletal benefits, including for COVID-19 treatment. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander examines the concept of 'Pascalian Medicine', weighing the pros and cons of taking multiple unproven but potentially beneficial treatments. Longer summary

Scott Alexander explores the concept of 'Pascalian Medicine', where one takes multiple unproven but safe treatments based on a small chance they might work. He discusses this in the context of COVID-19 treatments like Vitamin D and ivermectin, and extends it to other conditions. The post examines arguments for and against this approach, including safety concerns, societal impacts, and the risk of being exploited by bad actors. Scott concludes that while this strategy might work for individuals, it's problematic on a societal level, and reconciling inside and outside views on the probability of treatments working remains challenging. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander examines two cases of multiple hypothesis testing problems in medical and social science research, highlighting the complexities in interpreting results. Longer summary

Scott Alexander discusses two cases of multiple hypothesis testing problems. The first involves a Vitamin D study for COVID-19 where a significant difference in blood pressure between groups complicates the interpretation of results. The second case relates to Scott's own study on ambidexterity and authoritarianism, where he questions the applicability of traditional multiple hypothesis testing corrections. He explores the complexities of interpreting multiple tests of the same hypothesis and considers Bayesian approaches, ultimately acknowledging the limits of his statistical knowledge on this seemingly simple question. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander critically evaluates the evidence for Vitamin D's role in COVID-19 prevention and treatment, ultimately leaning towards skepticism while acknowledging the low risk of supplementation. Longer summary

Scott Alexander examines the evidence for and against Vitamin D's effectiveness in preventing or treating COVID-19. He reviews various studies, including observational data, randomized controlled trials, and Mendelian randomization studies. While some evidence suggests a potential link between Vitamin D levels and COVID-19 outcomes, Scott ultimately leans towards skepticism. He discusses possible confounding factors and methodological issues in some of the positive studies. Despite his skepticism, Scott acknowledges the low risk of Vitamin D supplementation and suggests it may still be beneficial for other reasons. Shorter summary