What was the IOM conclusion about the evidence for skeletal vs extraskeletal outcomes?

• A. Sufficient evidence exists to support a cause-and-effect relationship between calcium and vitamin D and skeletal health. Evidence was inconsistent for extraskeletal outcomes, including cancer, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and autoimmune disorders
• B. Sufficient evidence exists for extraskeletal outcomes
• C. No evidence to support any relationship
• D. Evidence is inconclusive for skeletal health

Answer: (A)

The main idea here is how solid the research is for calcium and vitamin D affecting different health areas. The IOM concluded there is sufficient evidence that calcium and vitamin D have a cause-and-effect relationship with skeletal health—meaning bone strength, mineralization, and fracture risk are clearly supported by adequate intake. For extraskeletal outcomes—things like cancer, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and autoimmune disorders—the evidence is inconsistent and not strong enough to establish a clear cause-and-effect relationship. So the statement that best fits is that calcium and vitamin D have solid support for bone health, while the evidence for non-bone (extraskeletal) outcomes is inconsistent.