Curie Brief
Turn on cookies to sign in
Signing in saves your progress to your Curie account. We can only do that with cookies on — turn them on to continue.
Not all vitamin D supplements are created equal. New research from the University of Surrey found that taking vitamin D2 can actually reduce the body's levels of vitamin D3 — the form naturally produced by sunlight and better at sustaining overall vitamin D status. Separate studies also suggest D3 may offer stronger immune defense against viruses and bacteria, making the choice of supplement more consequential than previously thought.
Most people assume vitamin D is vitamin D — but a growing body of research says the form you take really does matter. A 2025 meta-analysis published in Nutrition Reviews by researchers from the University of Surrey, John Innes Centre, and Quadram Institute Bioscience found that taking vitamin D2 supplements significantly lowers circulating levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D3, the D3-derived metabolite doctors measure to assess vitamin D status. The average reduction ranged from roughly 9 to 18 nanomoles per liter.
This doesn't mean D2 is useless — it still raises D2-derived metabolites and contributes to total vitamin D status. But the evidence increasingly favors D3 for producing a larger, longer-lasting boost. A separate 2026 systematic review confirmed D2 retains meaningful biological effects (reducing parathyroid hormone and slightly raising blood calcium), yet prior meta-analyses consistently show D3 outperforms D2 at improving overall vitamin D levels. Plant-based D3 derived from lichen is now widely available, making it accessible even for vegans.
Key Takeaways
Why it matters: Vitamin D deficiency is a significant public health concern, especially during winter months. If D2 and D3 aren't metabolically interchangeable — and evidence suggests they aren't — clinicians and patients may want to reconsider which form they're recommending or reaching for on the shelf.