Ped. says bf babies need vitamin D supplement???

Here is a forum from 1999 discussing how important it is to supplement vitamin D to babies who are only breast fed. It also states that 1/240 children who are solely breast fed, without supplementation will have Rickets by 3 months.

"7 cases of rickets in an 18 month period in a city as small as 

Minneapolis seems shockingly high to me. [2] And we don't know how many
babies had lesser cases of bone deficiencies that weren't severe enough
to be noticed. How many babies we you think there even ARE in a city
that size who breastfeed without formula supplements for any length of
time? 

A back of the envelope calculation, starting from the Minneapolis
homepage, gives a population of about 1 million for the city and
surrounding county.  Assuming that 2% of the population is under the age
of 1, and that only 10% of babies are breastfed for more than 3 months
without formula supplements, we come up with an estimate of just 2000
breastfed babies.  If I take the San Diego study to estimate that 80% of
doctors recommend supplements to these babies, but assume that half the
parents ignore the advice, that brings me down to an estimate of just
1200 babies who are breastfed, and aren't getting either formula or
vitamin supplements.  Normalizing 7 babies in 18 months to a 12 month
period, we get about 5. 

So a very crude estimate comes up with 5/1200 or 1 in 240.  What do you
know, that's pretty close to the risk of Hemorrhagic Disease of the
Newborn that most babies get a vitamin K shot to prevent!  You can play
around with the number by changing some of my estimates, but my point is
that the risk of rickets may not be as low as you think, given the
fairly small number of babies that are breastfed for a significant
amount of time."