can you trust Consumer Reports with vitamin D advice?

3.19: mag.health/diet/vit'd/
can you trust Consumer Reports with vitamin D advice?:
Consumer Reports [cr] on Health april 2019:
"do you really need more vitamin D?" [vd]
. new study with 2k IU for 5 years
didn't reduce risk of cancer or heart disease;
1600 IU in elders didn't prevent falls or build bone.
. this article implies that these are good studies
and that all prior studies showing benefits from vd supps
are all bogus or defective;
but this article has done nothing to prove that.
. if all the studies are good
it could mean that vd alone doesn't help;
you need other dietary and lifestyle changes too.
. cr calls 1k IU a high dose;
but I've been taking 10k IU for more than a year
and had 2 blood tests that showed
my vd levels were well within normal.
. cr's main point is that high vd
can raise the risk of kidney stones;
but, don't forget that vd increases calcium absorption
and to avoid calcifications such as kidney stones
you need vitamin k2 to put that extra calcium into bones
rather than into soft issues or arterial plaque
[Dr. Stephan Guyenet 2008,
Dr. Kate Rhéaume-Bleue 2012,
2013 (my review of her book)]
. one thing they may have right
is that the ideal source of vd is sunlight;
but it's not about preventing overdoses;
rather sunlight offers a better form of vd:
your skin synthesizes vitamin D3 sulfate
[Dr. Seneff 2011].