jimmylegs wrote:omg this lit review is going to make me cry (edit: check!), and then die.
check out this fun filled title: Pollution by psychoactive pharmaceuticals in the Rivers of Madrid metropolitan area (Spain).
and NO I don't need an antidepressant
Enough is Enough
Posted on December 19, 2013
Irvine Mason, MD
Neurology and Pain Management of the Palm Beaches
Conflict of Interest: None Declared
This letter is in response to your recent editorial stating there was no benefit from taking vitamins or mineral supplements. The authors proported [sic] their opinions as facts. They stated that most supplements “do not prevent chronic disease or death, and they should be avoided.”
The authors totally disregarded the best and most comprehensive study to date, the physician’s healthy study II published in the American Medical Association, November 2, 2012. That study followed nearly 15,000 male doctors older than 50 for up to 13 years. The study revealed that men taking centrum silver multivitamin alone reduced the risk of cancer by over 8% from any source except prostate. I quote from the study, “recent studies have looked at vitamins such as B, C, E and whether they can prevent cancer. They didn’t come up with any significant results, and some found a higher risk of certain illnesses. The researchers state that those studies were limited in scope and size. They also used single supplements at high doses, compared to how much a daily vitamin provides.”
The physicians health study II is the only large scale, randomized double blind, placebo-controlled trial testing the long term effects of common multi-vitamins.
If the authors are correct in their assumptions then every ophthalmologist in the free world who prescribes anti-oxidant vitamins with lutein to treat macular-degeneration are wrong. If the authors are correct then every OB/GYN in the free world who prescribes prenatal vitamins to prevent spina-bifida, meningomylocele and other neural-tube defects in the neonate are wrong. This regimen is factual and proven. If the authors are correct then the vast majority of urologists that prescribe time release vitamin C to their patients for recurrent UTI’s are wrong. This protocol obviates the need for chronic antibiotic use, which creates drug resistant bacterial strains. Bacteria have a very difficult time living in an acid environment ergo the vitamin C.
If the authors are correct then another excellent study dated May 20, 2013 out of Oxford University is wrong. “The delay was the subject of the latest research study showed that vitamin B (B6, B12, folic acid) is the first and only disease-modifying treatment that worked”. The study stated, “We have proven the concept that you can modify the disease”. The study showed that there was slowing of atrophy of the gray matter in the brain affected by Alzheimer’s disease.
This was a double blinded study which was two years of duration, discovered that the brain shrinkage slowed by 30%, and in some cases brain shrinkage slowed by more than 50%.
How do you know that your antioxidant vitamins are working? Your hair and nails will grow at a very rapid rate. Rapid cell turnover is what your body needs, it prevents GI cancers, which are activated by cell stagnation. Also rapid turnover of skin cells help prevent skin cancers.
I recommend to the authors that they be thought a fool, then to put it in print and remove all doubt. I recommend to the patients that if they find a doctor who states that one receives all the vitamins out of the food that they eat, to find another doctor.
Enough is enough!!!
Irvine Mason, M.D.
Board Certified Neurologist
The case is far from closed for vitamin and mineral supplements!
Posted on December 26, 2013
Balz Frei, Ph.D.
Oregon State University
Conflict of Interest: None Declared
In their recent editorial, “Enough Is Enough: Stop Wasting Money on Vitamin and Mineral Supplements,” the authors conclude that “we believe that the case is closed—supplementing the diet of well-nourished adults with (most) mineral or vitamin supplements has no clear benefit and might even be harmful” (1). It appears that the authors themselves weren’t quite convinced of their conclusions by adding numerous qualifiers, such as “we believe,” “well-nourished adults” and putting “most” in parentheses.
While a well-balanced diet is the best way to get all of one’s essential nutrients, the reality is that Americans don’t get enough of them through diet alone. From the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) we know that the large majority of the US population is not “well-nourished” and falls short of meeting many dietary intake recommendations by the Institute of Medicine’s Food and Nutrition Board (2). For example, more than 93% of US adults 19 years and older do not meet the Estimated Average Requirement (EAR) of vitamins D and E, 61% for magnesium, about 50% for vitamin A and calcium, and 43% for vitamin C (2). Other studies have shown that people who take a daily multivitamin/mineral (MVM) supplement with the Daily Value (DV) of most vitamins and minerals can fill most of these nutritional gaps safely and at very low cost (3,4)—a year's supply of a high-quality MVM can be purchased for less than a nickel a day, and daily MVM use has no adverse health effects (5,6).
In contrast, only a very small, non-significant fraction (0.1±0.1%, SEM) of US adults exceeds the Tolerable Upper Intake Level (UL) from diet and supplements combined for vitamin E (2). Similarly, only 1.1±0.2% of the US adult population exceeds the UL for vitamin A (2), the other vitamin that Guallar and colleagues singled out as possibly increasing mortality, together with β-carotene (pro-vitamin A) (1). Therefore, contrary to the impression that the authors give in their editorial (1), the US population is inadequate in many vitamins and minerals, a result of their energy-dense and nutrient-poor dietary pattern, rather than over-consuming MVM and other dietary supplements.
The known biological functions of vitamins and nutritionally-essential minerals are to maintain normal cell function, metabolism, growth and development through their roles as essential cofactors in hundreds of enzyme reactions and other biological processes (7)—not to prevent or treat chronic disease. Nevertheless, the largest and longest randomized controlled trial (RCT) of MVM supplements conducted to date, the Physicians’ Health Study II (PHS II), found a significant 8% reduction in total and epithelial cell cancer incidence in male physicians age 50 years and older, and a 12% reduction in total cancer incidence excluding prostate cancer (5). Furthermore, PHS II found a significant 9% lower risk of total cataract and a 13% lower risk of “any” nuclear sclerosis (nuclear cataract) (6). These findings of PHS II are consistent with those of several other RCTs (8,9), and are even more impressive given the fact that conventional RCT designs are strongly biased against showing any health benefits of essential nutrients (10,11).
Therefore, taking a daily MVM supplement will not only help fill the known nutritional gaps in the average American diet, thereby assuring normal biological function and metabolism and supporting good health, but may also have the added benefit of reducing cancer and cataract risk—which no existing pharmaceutical drug can do. To call “the case … closed” and label MVM supplements as useless, harmful or a waste of money is wrong and unscientific, and does not serve public health.
1. Guallar E, Stranges S, Mulrow C, Appel LJ, Miller ER III. Enough is enough: Stop wasting money on vitamin and mineral supplements. Ann Intern Med. 2013;159:850-1.
2. Fulgoni VL, III, Keast DR, Bailey RL, Dwyer J. Foods, fortificants, and supplements: Where do Americans get their nutrients? J Nutr. 2011;141:1847-54.
3. Sebastian RS, Cleveland LE, Goldman JD, Moshfegh AJ. Older adults who use vitamin/mineral supplements differ from nonusers in nutrient intake adequacy and dietary attitudes. J Am Diet Assoc. 2007;107:1322-32.
4. Shakur YA, Tarasuk V, Corey P, O'Connor DL. A comparison of micronutrient inadequacy and risk of high micronutrient intakes among vitamin and mineral supplement users and nonusers in Canada. J Nutr. 2012;142:534-40.
5. Gaziano JM, Sesso HD, Christen WG, Bubes V, Smith JP, MacFadyen J, Schvartz M, Manson JE, Glynn RJ, Buring JE. Multivitamins in the prevention of cancer in men. The Physicians' Health Study II Randomized Controlled Trial. JAMA. 2012;308:1871-80.
6. Christen WG, Glynn RJ, Manson JE, MacFadyen J, Bubes V, Schvartz M, Buring JE, Sesso HD, Gaziano JM. A multivitamin supplement and cataract and age-related macular degeneration in a randomized trial of male physicians. Ophthalmology 2013 Nov 20. pii: S0161-6420(13)00883-X. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.09.038. [Epub ahead of print]
7. Stipanuk MH, Caudill, MA (eds.) Biochemical, Physiological, and Molecular Aspects of Human Nutrition, 3rd Edition 2013; Elsevier Saunders, St. Louis, MI.
8. Maraini G, Sperduto RD, Ferris F, Clemons TE, Rosmini F, Ferrigno L. A randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled clinical trial of multivitamin supplementation for age-related lens opacities. Clinical trial of nutritional supplements and age-related cataract report no. 3. Ophthalmology. 2008;115:599-607
9. Hercberg S, Galan P, Preziosi P, Bertrais S, Mennen L, Malvy D, Roussel AM, Favier A, Briancon S. The SU.VI.MAX Study: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial of the health effects of antioxidant vitamins and minerals. Arch Intern Med. 2004;164:2335-42.
10. Heaney RP. Nutrients, endpoints, and the problem of proof. J Nutr. 2008;138:1591-5.
11. Blumberg J, Heaney RP, Huncharek M, Scholl T, Stampfer M, Vieth R, Weaver CM, Zeisel SH. Evidence-based criteria in the nutritional context. Nutr Rev. 2010;68:478-84.
Posted on December 26, 2013
Deborah Stepp, RN
Conflict of Interest: None Declared
My concern about the article questioning the usefulness of multivitamins is actually about the way it was presented in the press. I believe, there is a rather large set of individuals who should be taking their vitamins, that would be pregnant women. Any woman of childbearing age should be taking vitamins, as a matter of fact, as we don't always know if we will become pregnant, even if we use protection. Here's one abstract: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12163692
This problem was not addressed in the editorial. My concern is that if there is even one woman of reproductive age who may stop taking her multivitamin, to the detriment of any fetus she may be carrying.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users