- This topic has 14 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Hi,
Hope no one posted this elsewhere on the board (I didn't check that thoroughly).
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/17/health/17well.html?ref=science
But it is an interesting study. Interesting that it mentions “heart disease” and “cancer” as the chronic illnesses that vitamins do or don't treat. I thought it was a bit weird that they didn't talk about AI illnesses, which seem to me (in my bubble) to be the prevalent form of chronic illness in the country.
Still, its interesting.
This quote from the article struck me:
?I?m puzzled why the public in general ignores the results of well-done trials,? said Dr. Eric Klein, national study coordinator for the prostate cancer trial and chairman of the Cleveland Clinic?s Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute. ?The public?s belief in the benefits of vitamins and nutrients is not supported by the available scientific data.?
So either people don't believe the data, or don't care. Supplements are a 23 Billion dollar industry in the United States, so this is not small potatoes.
Joe,
I was thinking about that statement too and it carried great interest for me. Do people just not believe the data? This seems to be true of a lot of issues lately – ie, the autism advocates v. vaccine crowd, even the global warming vs. We-hate-Al-Gore crowd.
There was a very interesting part of the article where they talked about how the study of vitamins is difficult to fully measure because althought there may have been a control group which was taking a “placebo” vitamin, that same group may have been ingesting equal or similar amounts of vitamins through their daily food intake, whereas the other group may have been ingesting less vitamins through their daily food intake.
So I think its not that people don't BELIEVE the data, I think its more that people are skeptical sometimes of the method of collecting the data. Too often studies make assertions central to their premise that presuppose certain things that simply aren't true. Like the assumption that all our immune systems work the same (which I think is discussed on another thread here). Or in the case of the families of children with autism, they don't believe that ALL children are sensitive to vaccines, just some, so that's why they believe that a sampling of the general population doesn't do the subject justice.
Its not that I don't think data isn't important, I think its extremely important. But I think that science needs to make some advancements in their methodology in collecting data. And although it often gets relegated to the zone of “conspiracy theorism”, there are indeed conflicts of interest that skew data that make people skeptical of all sorts of data that comes out. The conclusions of a study are often manipulated by how one chooses to interpret them.
That said, I'm paying close attention to the vitamin thing. In the meantime, I'm going to continue making myself a nice big juice from my juicer every day and continue to feel good about the fact that I'm just stuffing myself full of the vitamins (if its a placebo effect, its a pretty good one :blush:).
[user=854]tainabell[/user] wrote:
So I think its not that people don't BELIEVE the data, I think its more that people are skeptical sometimes of the method of collecting the data. Too often studies make assertions central to their premise that presuppose certain things that simply aren't true.
Jen, you make some excellent points. It also occurred to me that investments in research will only be made if the anticipated outcome will potentially yield some type of payback. There is no money to be made by the pharmaceutical industry in natural supplements, because it's not possible to patent medicinal herbs or nature's own produce (unless it is a specially formulated pharmaceutical grade – e.g. prescription folic acid vs OTC folic acid):
http://www.googobits.com/articles/1325-how-to-patent-something.html
“What You Can?t Patent
Natural processes, such as laws of nature and physical phenomena.
Natural products, such as medicinal herbs or items found in rainforests.
Abstract ideas.”
So, effectively, non-pharmaceutical grade supplements are in direct competition. For example, statins vs. red yeast rice extract. However, the interesting thing about this is that Lovastatin is derived from red yeast rice extract, but just synthesized with other ingredients in order for the drug to be patented and profited from:
http://heartdisease.about.com/cs/cholesterol/a/Nrxcol_rry.htm
” Red yeast rice in the past reduced cholesterol levels because it contained (among many other chemicals), one of the statin drugs, namely lovastatin. (The statin drugs are the most effective cholesterol-lowering agents used in medicine today. They were originally derived from yeast products.)
Studies using the “original” form of red yeast rice accordingly confirmed significant reductions in cholesterol levels.”
Peace, Maz
PS Mind you, having said the above, seems that in the 1980s (according to one interviewee in the Under Our Skin documentary – can't remember her name off-hand), she said that it became legal to patent findings on live organisms!
Nothing to do with vitamins, per say, but just find it bizarre that one can't patent anything in nature, but one can patent one's findings of something in nature! 😯 Of course, the purpose of exposing this aspect of patent law was to demonstrate the hoarding of findings that has gone on amongst researches for personal gain.
I find there are so many levels to these types of things that it almost becomes too mind-boggling to really grasp the whole picture…so many twists and turns.
Peace, Maz
That's a great point Maz. I actually wasn't aware of those restrictions of patents and it makes a lot of sense.
You're right, the story does seem to always have a lot of twists and turns. For some reason, I am always very reluctant to believe that people would compromise others health for a motivation of simple profits. I know that sounds naive, and it is, and there have been times when I've had to capitulate and admit that there MUST be some conflict of interest going in. But it never ceases to suprise – and disappoint me greatly.
Our nutritionist when I was in nursing school told us that vitamins really aren't absorbed well unless they are taken with foods that contain the same vitamins – which kinda defeats the purpose of taking the vitamins in the first place. I always go back to the claims made on boxes of cereal, a staple of the American diet. If we really got all those vitamin and mineral benefits from one bowl of cereal, we'd be a much healthier nation than we are now. But we're not, maybe because the vitamins and minerals aren't in a readily absorbed form.
The same may be true of cheaply made supplements, esp if they are a “proprietary” mix ( I NEVER buy if it says that – if they're not going to tell me what's in their product, I'm not putting it in my body). The problem is that it's impossible to know the purity level, or other important information, on how the supplements we buy are manufactured. I'm guilty of paying $30 for a month supply of fish oil instead of a cheaper brand that sells at my grocer for $6, all because it's supposed to be better somehow. It did seem to work at first until I increased my zith. I'm also taking a Stress vitamin B complex for more energy, but have not noticed any change in this area. This is all conjecture on my part, I need to do more research but my computer time is short due to the burning monster in my neck and shoulders. I do know that it's not difficult to spend a fortune on supplements, I've tried them all, from emu oil to CoQ10, with little results.
It seems that when a good product does come out, e.g. Hoodia, immediately a bunch of products appear that do contain the important plant, mineral, whatever, but in a less concentrated amt or a less effective form. Then not only do we have to research to find a quality product, but inevitably also pay a higher price. It's very frustrating, :X esp when there are good products out there. But how much snake oil do we have to buy before we find one?
Linda,
Buy pharmacutical grade. They have to go through a lengthy process to meet this guideline.
I only buy the brands my doctor recommends. I figure she has done her homework on the manufacturers.
I don't know if this helps, Linda, but I believe that fish oil falls into the category of a supplement that has been thoroughly documented to be effective in reducing inflammation and heart disease…
http://circ.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/full/106/21/2747
So that's one thing you don't have to worry about being a waste of money. 🙂
As for purity, I feel exactly the same way. I buy the Nordic Naturals Pro-Omegas for my fish oil cause its scary out there with mercury and you never know what else in your supplements. I've found that the Pro-Omega is pretty awesome though. You can get it on the internet for about the same price as the regular NN fish oil and it has double the EPA/DHA. Just a little tip.
How very cool, that's exactly the brand I use! I love that they put lemon in the gel caps, it really cuts down on the fishy burps:shock::shock::shock:. Just wish they were a little cheaper, but you're absolutely right about the mercury. Do you take 2 or 3 a day?, I'm taking 3.
Check out this website http://www.iherb.com
I purchase a lot of my supplements from them. They have the same name brands and seem to be the best price on most things. They have been very reliable with delivery and they keep a record of all my purchases right online for me to review anytime.
This comes in very handy at tax time. Since my doctor directs me on which supplements to take, I am able to deduct them from my taxes.
Susan
I just saw a commercial for something called “krill oil”; it's supposed to be 3 times stronger than fish oil without the fishy after taste. Any one heard of this, or is it just another scam? And if it is true, is there enough krill in the oceans for humans and the whales that depend on it solely for food?
I've been hearing about krill oil for several years but I'm still taking fish oil. No reason other than habit.
Here's a very good article from Mercola summarizing the fish oil situation…
He likes krill, says not to take cod liver oil. Dr. Mercola is interesting, but today his e-mail had a video of a deer and a kitten snuggling each other. Sort of takes away from the medical authority of his correspondences. 😕 Still, it was amusing. :roll-laugh:
The topic ‘ Vitamin study’ is closed to new replies.