Bad News For Vitamins

dr_mabeuse

seduce the mind
Joined
Oct 10, 2002
Posts
11,528
From an article in the New York Times.

The best efforts of the scientific community to prove the health benefits of vitamins keep falling short.

This week, researchers reported the disappointing results from a large clinical trial of almost 15,000 male doctors taking vitamins E and C for a decade. The study showed no meaningful effect on cancer rates.

Another recent study found no benefit of vitamins E and C for heart disease.

In October, a major trial studying whether vitamin E and selenium could lower a man’s risk for prostate cancer ended amidst worries that the treatments may do more harm than good.

And recently, doctors at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York warned that vitamin C seems to protect not just healthy cells but cancer cells, too.

Everyone needs vitamins, which are critical for the body. But for most people, the micronutrients we get from foods usually are adequate to prevent vitamin deficiency, which is rare in the United States. That said, some extra vitamins have proven benefits, such as vitamin B12 supplements for the elderly and folic acid for women of child-bearing age. And calcium and vitamin D in women over 65 appear to protect bone health.

But many people gobble down large doses of vitamins believing that they boost the body’s ability to mop up damaging free radicals that lead to cancer and heart disease. In addition to the more recent research, several reports in recent years have challenged the notion that megadoses of vitamins are good for you.

A Johns Hopkins School of Medicine review of 19 vitamin E clinical trials of more than 135,000 people showed high doses of vitamin E (greater than 400 IUs) increased a person’s risk for dying during the study period by 4 percent. Taking vitamin E with other vitamins and minerals resulted in a 6 percent higher risk of dying. Another study of daily vitamin E showed vitamin E takers had a 13 percent higher risk for heart failure.

The Journal of Clinical Oncology published a study of 540 patients with head and neck cancer who were being treated with radiation therapy. Vitamin E reduced side effects, but cancer recurrence rates among the vitamin users were higher, although the increase didn’t reach statistical significance.

A 1994 Finland study of smokers taking 20 milligrams a day of beta carotene showed an 18 percent higher incidence of lung cancer among beta carotene users. In 1996, a study called Caret looked at beta carotene and vitamin A use among smokers and workers exposed to asbestos, but the study was stopped when the vitamin users showed a 28 percent higher risk for lung cancer and a 26 percent higher risk of dying from heart disease.

A 2002 Harvard study of more than 72,000 nurses showed that those who consumed high levels of vitamin A from foods, multivitamins and supplements had a 48 percent higher risk for hip fractures than nurses who had the lowest intake of vitamin A.

The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews looked at vitamin C studies for treating colds. Among more than two dozen studies, there was no overall benefit for preventing colds, although the vitamin was linked with a 50 percent reduction in colds among people who engaged in extreme activities, such as marathon runners, skiers and soldiers, who were exposed to significant cold or physical stress. The data also suggested vitamin C use was linked with less severe and slightly shorter colds.

In October 2004, Copenhagen researchers reviewed seven randomized trials of beta carotene, selenium and vitamins A, C and E (alone or in combination) in colon, esophageal, gastric, pancreatic and liver cancer. The antioxidant users had a 6 percent higher death rate than placebo users.

Two studies presented to the American College of Cardiology in 2006 showed that vitamin B doesn’t prevent heart attacks, leading The New England Journal of Medicine to say that the consistency of the results “leads to the unequivocal conclusion” that the vitamins don’t help patients with established vascular disease.

The British Medical Journal looked at multivitamin use among elderly people for a year but found no difference in infection rates or visits to doctors.

Despite a lack of evidence that vitamins actually work, consumers appear largely unwilling to give them up. Many readers of the Well blog say the problem is not the vitamin but poorly designed studies that use the wrong type of vitamin, setting the vitamin up to fail. Industry groups such as the Council for Responsible Nutrition also say the research isn’t well designed to detect benefits in healthy vitamin users.
 
Balderdash! These studies simply prove that Americans have the healthiest urine in the world!
 
Just the other day, I heard some researcher talking about vitamin B3, or niacinamite, as a cure - or maybe a preventative measure - for Alzheimer's. I promptly drove to the store to pick some up, but by the time I got there I had forgotten what it was I went there for.
 
Just the other day, I heard some researcher talking about vitamin B3, or niacinamite, as a cure - or maybe a preventative measure - for Alzheimer's. I promptly drove to the store to pick some up, but by the time I got there I had forgotten what it was I went there for.

BWAH! :D

But wait - I want healthy urine, too!

Unfortunately, they say that the best thing to prevent most diseases later in life is serious exercise.

I don't know.

I mean, I tried that stuff for ten minutes once and it didn't do dick.
 
I just don't feel healthy myself unless I'm taking as many pills as I possibly can.

I really want to start marketing Pla-C-Bo tablets for $12.99 for 6. These are guaranteed to give you a mental boost without any harmful drugs or dangerous stimulants. Entirely organic too, they're made from 100% lawn clippings.

Who wants to invest?
 
I just don't feel healthy myself unless I'm taking as many pills as I possibly can.

I really want to start marketing Pla-C-Bo tablets for $12.99 for 6. These are guaranteed to give you a mental boost without any harmful drugs or dangerous stimulants. Entirely organic too, they're made from 100% lawn clippings.

Who wants to invest?

I'm too broke to invest. Just bought Rock Band for the Wii for the kids for Christmas. ;)

I would, however, love to steal one of your cigarettes.:heart:
 
Is this study be true, the question then is why? Scientists need to find another way of delivering these vitamins and minerals more effectively.
 
In a perfect world, you should be getting most of your vitamins from food. But this world is far from perfect. There's precious little that's good for anyone in Cheetos. :eek:

If we had locally-grown, healthy, organic food available to us year-round, we wouldn't even have to think about or consider supplements to make us "feel better." We'd feel well enough to wonder why anyone would consider taking a vitamin.

What this proves, to me, is that FOOD should be our priority... and growing and tending that food should take precedence over producing more pills, or funding more studies.
 
Eh. It's another facet of the Great North American neurosis; we can't control death and as history's premier control freaks it scares the living shit out of us.
 
Is this study be true, the question then is why? Scientists need to find another way of delivering these vitamins and minerals more effectively.

Exactly. And we don't know anything about the quality of supplements given. A lot of commerical vitamins are crap. The bottom line is that probably 80% of Americans are malnourished, despite us being the fattest country in the world. They aren't getting proper nutrition from their food sources. Vitamins supplements aren't causing cancer, it's our environment and toxic food sources.
 
In a perfect world, you should be getting most of your vitamins from food. But this world is far from perfect. There's precious little that's good for anyone in Cheetos. :eek:

If we had locally-grown, healthy, organic food available to us year-round, we wouldn't even have to think about or consider supplements to make us "feel better." We'd feel well enough to wonder why anyone would consider taking a vitamin.

What this proves, to me, is that FOOD should be our priority... and growing and tending that food should take precedence over producing more pills, or funding more studies.

I keep getting the impression from your posts that you think the choice isn't ours, and I'm reasonably sure that's not the impression you want to give.

Personally, I eat for cheap on a completely healthy diet (and easy, which is my other key requirement)--low-sugar cereals (or not-so-low-yet-fairly-healthy ones, like granola) and steamed/microwaved meals (that include meat and veggies). It's cheaper or equal to McD's "value" slop, and readily available. I practice what I preach, so believe me when I say there's no excuses not to eat healthily in this age of choice (the vast majority of humans, historically, have not had the choice, FYI, unless you want to revise history).

ETA: I haven't touched a Cheeto since college days. ;)
 
I keep getting the impression from your posts that you think the choice isn't ours, and I'm reasonably sure that's not the impression you want to give.

Personally, I eat for cheap on a completely healthy diet (and easy, which is my other key requirement)--low-sugar cereals (or not-so-low-yet-fairly-healthy ones, like granola) and steamed/microwaved meals (that include meat and veggies). It's cheaper or equal to McD's "value" slop, and readily available. I practice what I preach, so believe me when I say there's no excuses not to eat healthily in this age of choice (the vast majority of humans, historically, have not had the choice, FYI, unless you want to revise history).

ETA: I haven't touched a Cheeto since college days. ;)

I think she was talking about organic food without pesticides, chemicals or additives. Sadly, eating natural isn't very cheap, unless you're growing it yourself. Just because you eat your veggies, doesn't mean they're healthy, unfortunately.

But, you're right when it comes to making healthier choices, you can do it, it just takes preparation and some planning and budgeting. Though, I think it's easier for most Americans to go the easy route.
 
I highly recommend Earl Mindell's Vitamin Bible I bought back when the supplement craze first got started, and learned, among other things, the difference between HDL and LDL cholesterol - years before cholesterol started getting a bad rap and avoiding eggs (it's not the eggs, it's the fat you use to fry them in).

It's a great book, Mindell describes each vitamin, what foods it naturally occurs in, contraindications, i.e., some vitamins interfere with the absorption of other nutrients - Green leafy vegetables are very high in Iron, but inhibit the metabolization of other nutrients, etc.

I got off the megadose routine fairly quickly, as I rapidly developed an ulcer from eating so many fucking pills - you have to pare it down to what you really need, things that are hard to get from natural sources locally. I take Ginko and Ginsing to combat the mental effects of aging, a Glucosamine complex for my bad joints, DHEA and Cal-Mag-Zinc to replace the minerals lost in ejaculation and keep it stiff, and that's too many pills already.

Vitamin C and E, and the rest of your vitamins are best gotten from natural sources, if you think you need them: nuts, fresh fruits and vegetables, etc. Prunes are very high in antioxidants, but be careful: too many and you'll be running for the toilet.

Sardines and shellfish are a good source of Omega-3 fatty acids, and organ meats are high in Co-Q10 - Liver and onions once in a while or a little paté as and appetizer will fix you up. That's what I like about the Vitamin Bible: there are megadose routines listed in the back of the book, but the vitamin references list the natural food sources.

If you're a vegan, you have to be particularly careful to get enough B-12 - animal proteins are the only sources, though that includes eggs, dairy, and certain yeasts.

Still, the vitamin/supplement industry isn't much different from the pharmaceutical industry in general, we're a country that like our pills.

Regular sex slows and delays osteoporosis in women, and is good for the male prostrate, but of course we also have pills for this stuff, etc.
 
Last edited:
I think she was talking about organic food without pesticides, chemicals or additives. Sadly, eating natural isn't very cheap, unless you're growing it yourself. Just because you eat your veggies, doesn't mean they're healthy, unfortunately.

Yes!

But, you're right when it comes to making healthier choices, you can do it, it just takes preparation and some planning and budgeting. Though, I think it's easier for most Americans to go the easy route.

You can make healthier choices - but not cheaply. How many people are you feeding, Kev? Do you think you could make the same choices, on the same budget, for a family of four? Five? Six? Seven? It's just not happening.

But it SHOULD be affordable, and it SHOULD be readily available.

In the city of Detroit, there are literally no stores that sell organic produce. None. And only a few who sell produce (full of toxic chemicals mind you) AT ALL. There are people who literally have to walk to get their groceries. Should they be shortchanged? Blamed for not "making better choices" when that's all that's available locally??

I just don't think so.
 
I fear you're getting into the poverty discussion, dear, and no one with a heart wants to stomp on the struggling/depressed. I must point out (and you forced this on me) that the choices are out there (except in Detroit?)--if we "cure" poverty somehow, we also allow those downtrodden to choose their food.

My situation (at least until I sell my house) must be far different than your experiences (or imaginings)--I live in a rural area, and it's cheap to live healthily (for one)--less than $100 per month for all the healthy food I can eat. I'd not multiply that by five unless I could afford it. That's not a slam on poor people who have lots of kids, but a statement of personal...choice. Detailing a sad situation one who has to walk (uphill both ways) to buy groceries does not change or dilute my point. In the meantime, we can dream and work on solutions that will allow everyone the choice (and if they choose poorly, they should not get an extra plane seat for free, heh).

But enough sidetracking, about the vitamins, this is only reinforcing what I've heard for years. Being a health-conscious person, I've avoided fads as best as I can, yet it saddens me that yet another industry springs up around placebo-like products.

Another related warning (and I'm sure you can find studies to back this up): beware of too much fiber. Excess fiber can really irritate the gut walls (especially the jagged kind like whole wheat and oat)--the trick is to find a balance by being as informed and responsive as possible. It's not easy, but it's so very worth it.



Yes!



You can make healthier choices - but not cheaply. How many people are you feeding, Kev? Do you think you could make the same choices, on the same budget, for a family of four? Five? Six? Seven? It's just not happening.

But it SHOULD be affordable, and it SHOULD be readily available.

In the city of Detroit, there are literally no stores that sell organic produce. None. And only a few who sell produce (full of toxic chemicals mind you) AT ALL. There are people who literally have to walk to get their groceries. Should they be shortchanged? Blamed for not "making better choices" when that's all that's available locally??

I just don't think so.
 
I keep getting the impression from your posts that you think the choice isn't ours, and I'm reasonably sure that's not the impression you want to give.

Personally, I eat for cheap on a completely healthy diet (and easy, which is my other key requirement)--low-sugar cereals (or not-so-low-yet-fairly-healthy ones, like granola) and steamed/microwaved meals (that include meat and veggies). It's cheaper or equal to McD's "value" slop, and readily available. I practice what I preach, so believe me when I say there's no excuses not to eat healthily in this age of choice (the vast majority of humans, historically, have not had the choice, FYI, unless you want to revise history).

ETA: I haven't touched a Cheeto since college days. ;)

Microwaved meals?

To me, eating a completely healthy diet means no packaged foods at all.

I make everything from scratch. I'm doing dessert this Thanksgiving and you bet your sweet ass I have an actual pumpkin I'll be using for the pumpkin pie. I make my own bread and my own bread crumbs (just try finding bread crumbs at the store that don't have trans fat, just give it a shot).

For me and my husband, it has become a part of our lives, something we enjoy and have fun doing. We don't mind starting on our pizza a few hours before hand so we can properly prove the dough and reduce the sauce.

But I would never tell people how cheap and easy it is. It would be a lie. If you want to do it right, it has to be a large part of your life.
 
I fear you're getting into the poverty discussion, dear, and no one with a heart wants to stomp on the struggling/depressed. I must point out (and you forced this on me) that the choices are out there (except in Detroit?)--if we "cure" poverty somehow, we also allow those downtrodden to choose their food.

My situation (at least until I sell my house) must be far different than your experiences (or imaginings)--I live in a rural area, and it's cheap to live healthily (for one)--less than $100 per month for all the healthy food I can eat. I'd not multiply that by five unless I could afford it. That's not a slam on poor people who have lots of kids, but a statement of personal...choice. Detailing a sad situation one who has to walk (uphill both ways) to buy groceries does not change or dilute my point. In the meantime, we can dream and work on solutions that will allow everyone the choice (and if they choose poorly, they should not get an extra plane seat for free, heh).

But you're ignoring (or not seeing?) the source of the problem isn't necessarily with the person making the choice, and that person may not even have a choice until it's too late.

Yes, there ARE limited choices (not just in Detroit, but other inner cities as well) but while adults have the ability gain knowledge and make "better choices" - they may have already been genetically and bodily damaged by the CULTURAL choice to provide crappy-but-more-profitable food to the young.

The tobacco industry hooking kids on cigarettes in the '50, targeting a young audience with Joe Camel, wanted to keep their addicted customers for life. I'd argue the sugar (and processed/fast food) industry is no different.

And this stuff is pushed on parents FROM THE BEGINNING. Baby formula. Processed baby food and cereal. Followed by school lunches, Kraft mac and cheese, spaghetti-o's, you name it. All of those things are actually deemed "nutritious" by dieticians and the federal government. (Anyone remember when ketchup was a vegetable in Reagan's era?) Soda is being sold in schools (less are stocking it, now, but still, it's widely out there) and fast food has taken over many cafeterias.

By the time a child, who perhaps already had a genetically predisposition to weight issues, gets to the adult stage and gleans enough information to "make better choices" - the damage is already done to the body.

And as for the "multiplying that by five" thing "being a choice"... you can make the choice to raise a large family in one economy, and turn around and have food prices be, in some cases, doubled, in another. *shrug* No one can predict the future, Kev.

Choice first involves information, yes. Warnings on cigarette labels, nutritional information on boxes and cans. But it isn't anywhere near enough. Because once you're dealing with a physical addiction (and sugar is, actually...) you've moved beyond "when you know better, you do better."

The government has moved to tax cigarettes out of existence, essentially, over the past 20 years or so... I'm not sure the same would work for the processed/fast food industry.

But if we, as a culture, don't make a COLLECTIVE decision about our food, our food sources, and what we're putting in our bodies, it isn't gonna matter. The scales, so to speak, are tipping. There are just not going to be any healthy people left to choose.
 
You can make healthier choices - but not cheaply. How many people are you feeding, Kev? Do you think you could make the same choices, on the same budget, for a family of four? Five? Six? Seven? It's just not happening.

But it SHOULD be affordable, and it SHOULD be readily available.

In the city of Detroit, there are literally no stores that sell organic produce. None. And only a few who sell produce (full of toxic chemicals mind you) AT ALL. There are people who literally have to walk to get their groceries. Should they be shortchanged? Blamed for not "making better choices" when that's all that's available locally??

I just don't think so.
It should absolutely be affordable and available. When I say you can do it with budget and preparation, I guess I'm not thinking in terms of availibility. It's definitely easier and cheaper in rural or suburban places than it is in a major city. Here, you can get involved in an organic gardening co-op for only the price of your labor.

In the city, a lot of stores count on people walking to buy their groceries and prices are gouged accordingly. :(
 
Microwaved meals?

To me, eating a completely healthy diet means no packaged foods at all.

I make everything from scratch. I'm doing dessert this Thanksgiving and you bet your sweet ass I have an actual pumpkin I'll be using for the pumpkin pie. I make my own bread and my own bread crumbs (just try finding bread crumbs at the store that don't have trans fat, just give it a shot).

For me and my husband, it has become a part of our lives, something we enjoy and have fun doing. We don't mind starting on our pizza a few hours before hand so we can properly prove the dough and reduce the sauce.

But I would never tell people how cheap and easy it is. It would be a lie. If you want to do it right, it has to be a large part of your life.

Heh, Shwenn, you have high standards, and I am somewhat envious, but I'd never trade my rare free time for from-scratch cooking. Next time you're in the supermarket, check out the Healthy Choice Cafe Steamers ($2.50 a pop where I live). Aside from the "we're going to die from unhealthy (poisonous), preprocessed food" argument, they are quite balanced and satisfying for the price (and 6 min prep time). And this is one example of many.


Selena said:
Yes, there ARE limited choices (not just in Detroit, but other inner cities as well) but while adults have the ability gain knowledge and make "better choices" - they may have already been genetically and bodily damaged by the CULTURAL choice to provide crappy-but-more-profitable food to the young.

Hey, you'll hear no argument from me--I'd jump right up on the soap box with you if you weren't hogging it. ;) I just didn't think this was the angle we were headed toward. The market simply must reverse the trend of sending shit to the inner cities and give them a choice, and we can hope the mounting awareness/public pressure changes this for the better.

The government cannot force the right decisions (in most cases), but it should strongly encourage availability of better foods (I must not know how bad some areas are, because I've never not had a choice in either country or city, well-off or poor). With the economy headed the way it is and the forecasts of food scarcity, what can we, as a society, do to address this problem alongside the related ones?
 
Next time you're in the supermarket, check out the Healthy Choice Cafe Steamers ($2.50 a pop where I live). Aside from the "we're going to die from unhealthy (poisonous), preprocessed food" argument, they are quite balanced and satisfying for the price (and 6 min prep time). And this is one example of many.

It's a better choice than cheetos :D, but I still wouldn't call it a healthy choice (in spite of the name ;) ) The amount of sodium alone in any frozen pre-packaged dinner is scary. Not to mention the rest of the preservatives.

And then, there's the idea that we should all be buying locally, organically grown food... ya know, in a perfect world and all. :eek:

We grow ours, or we buy it from local, trusted farms. We buy our milk unpasteurized from the Amish, and buy a cow (or go half with another family), a turkey, and a pig there every year. We're getting chickens soon... for eggs.

But like you, Kev, I live in a rural area where this is possible. But even when I lived in the suburbs of Detroit, we had "organics door to door" and organic produce co-ops that would deliver out to our area. It's really just the inner-city where things are so very limited, and people's choices restricted by their ability to go any further. (Or spend food stamps... although in Michigan, you can now spend food stamps at some Farmer's Markets...)

There are some vitamins and supplements (to get back to the topic :eek: ) I think are worth taking, things like fish or flax oil, the Omega 3's that can be unhealthy (mercury) in their natural form (non-farm-raised fish). But for the most part, it's our food choices that cause vitamin deficiency, and "adding" and "fortifying" our cereals and breads (Fruit Loops is "fortified" for pete's sake) isn't going to make up for not eating fresh blueberries or asparagus.

*off the soapbox*

And now I'm hungry! :D
 
I'm curious. All the evidence I've seen shows that we're a nation of over-nourished consumers. What evidence is there that we're undernourished? That we're not getting sufficient vitamins and minerals?
 
Heh, Shwenn, you have high standards, and I am somewhat envious, but I'd never trade my rare free time for from-scratch cooking.

Your situation is completely different because you are single. By that I mean, unmarried, living alone. You may have a girlfriend but that's not what I am talking about.

Most married couples I know spend the vast majority of their together time watching television. We spend far less time preparing our meals together than those other couples do watching television.

I firmly believe that our love of doing these basic things together is going to keep our relationship healthy and happy. It achieves a lot more than a healthy diet.

If I were single, it would be too much of a headache for me to go to all this trouble. I don't think I would do it.
 
Your situation is completely different because you are single. By that I mean, unmarried, living alone. You may have a girlfriend but that's not what I am talking about.

Most married couples I know spend the vast majority of their together time watching television. We spend far less time preparing our meals together than those other couples do watching television.

I firmly believe that our love of doing these basic things together is going to keep our relationship healthy and happy. It achieves a lot more than a healthy diet.

If I were single, it would be too much of a headache for me to go to all this trouble. I don't think I would do it.


Um... Kev's married. And has a child. :eek:
 
Back
Top