If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Are you taking your vitamins?
Haven't taken vitamins for years. They're a waste of money even if you take them as directed on the label, particularly if you're eating right. It has been known for about 15 years now that anti-oxidants don't work as well in supplements compared to getting them in food. Anti-oxidants also all have toxicity, even vitamin C. Check the DRIs. http://www.iom.edu/Object.File/Master/7/296/0.pdf "Ignoramus32242" wrote in message ... If so, you might find this article interesting... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3703498.stm Vitamins pills do not stop cancer Vitamin supplements do nothing to prevent gut cancers and may shorten life expectancy, research suggests. A review of 14 trials involving more than 170,000 people found antioxidant vitamins, like vitamin E, offered no protection against these cancers. People taking some supplements died prematurely, the European researchers said in the Lancet. Cancer Research UK cautioned the findings were preliminary and did not offer convincing proof of hazard. We could not find evidence that antioxidant supplements can prevent gastrointestinal cancers. Lead researcher Dr Goran Bjelakovic The study authors themselves emphasised that they had only studied the effect of certain antioxidant supplements. "The results should not be translated to the potential effects of vegetables and fruit, which are rich in antioxidants and other substances," they said. Antioxidants are thought to stop cancer by preventing or slowing damage caused by certain oxygen compounds. Dr Goran Bjelakovic and his colleagues, working at the Copenhagen Trial Unit in Denmark, looked at the supplements beta-carotene, vitamins A, C and E and selenium as different combinations or separately. They compared the rate of gastrointestinal cancers, such as stomach, liver or bowel cancer, among people taking the antioxidant supplements and people taking fake tablets with no active ingredient. Other than selenium, regular use of antioxidant supplements did not prevent gastrointestinal (GI) cancers. In half of the 14 trials reviewed, vitamin tablets appeared to shorten life expectancy. Food better than pills The combination of beta-carotene and vitamin A or vitamin E increased risk of premature death by 30% and 10%, respectively. Dr Bjelakovic said: "We could not find evidence that antioxidant supplements can prevent gastrointestinal cancers. There are no shortcuts to prevent bowel cancer. If you're taking vitamins to protect yourself against the disease, you're wasting your money. Dr Richard Sullivan of Cancer Research UK "On the contrary, they seem to increase overall mortality." He said the potential merits of taking selenium to prevent GI cancers should be further investigated. Dr Richard Sullivan of Cancer Research UK said the research could have been biased because many of the people in the study were smokers, who have a higher death risk anyway. "There are no shortcuts to prevent bowel cancer. If you're taking vitamins to protect yourself against the disease, you're wasting your money. "The best way to lower the risk is to eat a healthy diet and not smoke." He said the study added to the evidence that trials into the benefits of selenium are warranted. 'Scary speculation' "There is currently a study of the protective effects of selenium in prostate cancer in the US, but further research is needed into the wider role of selenium." Selenium is found in nuts, white fish, liver and kidney, shellfish, cereals, bread and dairy products. Douglas Altman from Cancer Research UK told the Lancet in an editorial: "If their findings are correct, 9,000 out of every million users would die prematurely as a result." He said this was a "scary speculation" given the vast quantities of vitamin supplements used. He said more research was needed and described the study as "work in progress" that offered no convincing proof of hazard. Martin Ledwick from CancerBACUP said: "Further investigation is needed into the effects of vitamin supplements. "In the meantime, it's probably sensible to avoid taking very large doses of vitamin supplements and to try to get the necessary vitamins from eating five or more portions of fruit and vegetables every day." Story from BBC NEWS: http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/h...th/3703498.stm Published: 2004/10/01 03:36:03 GMT BBC MMIV |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Patricia Heil wrote:
Haven't taken vitamins for years. They're a waste of money even if you take them as directed on the label, particularly if you're eating right. It has been known for about 15 years now that anti-oxidants don't work as well in supplements compared to getting them in food. Anti-oxidants also all have toxicity, even vitamin C. Check the DRIs. So, Igor and Patty are against taking vitamins. I could draw my own conclusions based on just that! Dally |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Ignoramus32242 wrote:
In article , Dally wrote: Patricia Heil wrote: Haven't taken vitamins for years. They're a waste of money even if you take them as directed on the label, particularly if you're eating right. It has been known for about 15 years now that anti-oxidants don't work as well in supplements compared to getting them in food. Anti-oxidants also all have toxicity, even vitamin C. Check the DRIs. So, Igor and Patty are against taking vitamins. I could draw my own conclusions based on just that! What is your opinion regarding that article? Have you read it? Yes. Vitamins didn't help a specific kind of rare cancer that comes on acutely and quickly kills you. It might even hurt you if you're taxing your digestive system at a time when your digestive system is already under attack. One datum, Igor. You have to add it to the entire scope of risks and benefits. Nutrition is important for health. To say "eat five servings of fruits and vegetables" and leave it smugly like that is a copout. I just saw a new brand of sparkling fruit juice. It says on the bottle that it counts as a serving of fruit. It also says it's 100% juice. I was given five sample bottles. I tried them and they were really sweet. I looked closer and all the flavors - no matter what sort of fruit flavor it is, have concentrated white grape juice as the primary ingredient (i.e., SUGAR). It's a 12 ounce bottle with 150 calories, 37 grams of sugar. And "it counts as a serving of fruit." Nutritional supplements help across the board. Folic acid supplements prevent spina bifada. Fish oil supplements help my skin. Calcium supplements help protect against osteoporosis. Selenium has some possible protection against alzheimers. Niacin lowers LDL and total cholesterol. Glucosamin/chondroitin helps my joints ache less. Are you just trolling again? Dally |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"Patricia Heil" wrote in message link.net...
Haven't taken vitamins for years. They're a waste of money even if you take them as directed on the label, particularly if you're eating right. It has been known for about 15 years now that anti-oxidants don't work as well in supplements compared to getting them in food. Anti-oxidants also all have toxicity, even vitamin C. Check the DRIs. Linus Pauling recommended 20gms of C a day, lets see.. 32000% of rda? I'd hate to think of what you think of as "eating right".. Let me guess- toxic factory meat daily, and mineral poor midwestern processed wheat as a staple, moderated with pesticide laden fruits and hydrogenated oils? Although of course you do have a point about them being better in food, and also that label directions often shouldn't be followed. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
In article , Ignoramus32242
wrote: In article , shevek wrote: "Patricia Heil" wrote in message link.net... Haven't taken vitamins for years. They're a waste of money even if you take them as directed on the label, particularly if you're eating right. It has been known for about 15 years now that anti-oxidants don't work as well in supplements compared to getting them in food. Anti-oxidants also all have toxicity, even vitamin C. Check the DRIs. Linus Pauling recommended 20gms of C a day, lets see.. 32000% of rda? I'd hate to think of what you think of as "eating right".. Let me guess- toxic factory meat daily, and mineral poor midwestern processed wheat as a staple, moderated with pesticide laden fruits and hydrogenated oils? That does not, necessarily, make chemical vitamins useful. They may or may not be useful, but your argument is not a proof that they are beneficial. It is a good reminder to look at what we eat. i Although of course you do have a point about them being better in food, and also that label directions often shouldn't be followed. The thing is that if your digestion is faulty you only absorb a small amount of mega vitamin supplements. -- Diva ***** The Best Man For The Job Is A Woman |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Carol Frilegh wrote in message ...
In article , Ignoramus32242 wrote: In article , shevek wrote: "Patricia Heil" wrote in message link.net... Haven't taken vitamins for years. They're a waste of money even if you take them as directed on the label, particularly if you're eating right. It has been known for about 15 years now that anti-oxidants don't work as well in supplements compared to getting them in food. Anti-oxidants also all have toxicity, even vitamin C. Check the DRIs. Linus Pauling recommended 20gms of C a day, lets see.. 32000% of rda? I'd hate to think of what you think of as "eating right".. Let me guess- toxic factory meat daily, and mineral poor midwestern processed wheat as a staple, moderated with pesticide laden fruits and hydrogenated oils? That does not, necessarily, make chemical vitamins useful. They may or may not be useful, but your argument is not a proof that they are beneficial. It is a good reminder to look at what we eat. Chemical vitamins.. is there any other kind? A better question is what form.. calcium ascorbate? Rose hip ascorbate complexes? etc. .. Yes, I conceed that Linus' word is not a proof. Unfortunately we must rely on epidemiology and anecdotal evidence.. and every animal (person) is different to make matters more complicated.. i Although of course you do have a point about them being better in food, and also that label directions often shouldn't be followed. The thing is that if your digestion is faulty you only absorb a small amount of mega vitamin supplements. I'd rather have expensive urine than be mineral or viatmin deficient. Cheers - |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Ignoramus24806" wrote in message ... http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.j...toryID=7910550 CHICAGO (Reuters) - Daily vitamin E supplements do not prevent cancer, strokes or heart attacks in older people with vascular disease or diabetes, and may increase their risk of heart failure, a study said on Tuesday. Snip good infor for brevity In an editorial commenting on the Canadian study and appearing in the same journal on Tuesday, experts at the University of Washington said the study "effectively closes the door on the prospect of a major protective effect of long-term exposure to this supplement, taken in moderately high dosage, against complications of atherosclerosis and overall cancer incidence." -- 223/173.3/180 Haven't seen this study yet, so take this with a grain of salt--I'll try to get to it this weekend. Most every study I have seen involved the application of alpha tocopherol (actually d-L alpha what is commonly called vitamin E). Real vitamin E is a mixture of alpha, beta, and gamma tocopherols (actually 8 different isomers in all). When given 10X the recommended dose of a single isomer it displaces the others and can lead to some problems. This is being recognized and corrected by some researchers, but the advance is slow. See here http://lpi.oregonstate.edu/ss03/vitamine.html for example. As usual it is best to get you vitamins naturally, but if you must supplement (especially with lipid soluble vitamins), keep the dose low and for vitamin E, look for complete tocopherols. The vitamin industry with MEGA doses is doing us no favor-IMHO. The Greeks had it right soooo long ago. Everything is moderation. -- Dr. Dickie Skepticult member in good standing #394-00596-438 Poking kooks with a pointy stick. "The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not 'Eureka!' ('I found it!'), but rather 'hmm....that's funny...'" - Isaac Asimov |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"Ignoramus1084" wrote in message ... On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 12:25:13 -0500, Dr_Dickie wrote: "Ignoramus24806" wrote in message ... http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.j...toryID=7910550 CHICAGO (Reuters) - Daily vitamin E supplements do not prevent cancer, strokes or heart attacks in older people with vascular disease or diabetes, and may increase their risk of heart failure, a study said on Tuesday. Snip good infor for brevity In an editorial commenting on the Canadian study and appearing in the same journal on Tuesday, experts at the University of Washington said the study "effectively closes the door on the prospect of a major protective effect of long-term exposure to this supplement, taken in moderately high dosage, against complications of atherosclerosis and overall cancer incidence." Haven't seen this study yet, so take this with a grain of salt--I'll try to get to it this weekend. Most every study I have seen involved the application of alpha tocopherol (actually d-L alpha what is commonly called vitamin E). Real vitamin E is a mixture of alpha, beta, and gamma tocopherols (actually 8 different isomers in all). When given 10X the recommended dose of a single isomer it displaces the others and can lead to some problems. This is being recognized and corrected by some researchers, but the advance is slow. See here http://lpi.oregonstate.edu/ss03/vitamine.html for example. As usual it is best to get you vitamins naturally, but if you must supplement (especially with lipid soluble vitamins), keep the dose low and for vitamin E, look for complete tocopherols. The vitamin industry with MEGA doses is doing us no favor-IMHO. The Greeks had it right soooo long ago. Everything is moderation. Very interesting thoughts. If you find out anything further, I will appreciate if you could share what you find. What interests me the most is calcium supplementation. I keep changing my mind on whether I should or should not do it. The reason why I am considering is it that I take thyroid supplements, which tend to interfere with calcium absorption, and do not eat much dairy, which probably means I do not get even close to 100% of the calcium RDA. Long term thyroid supplementation is known to reduce bone density. What I do get is plenty of vitamin D. The real question is, is whether calcium supplementation going to help me, in my specific circumstances. -- 223/173.3/180 Anything I have seen (not a lot) is that at worse, calcium supplementation is benign. I do not get dairy at all either (not full lactose intolerant, but I think I was on my way--Dad and Mom both are). I take calcium, magnesium, zinc--(lower than RDA--about 1/3) and do that for leg cramps at night--does it work? I really do not know, might help, might be placebo effect, but no harm done. Only thing I can add is stay away from soft drinks (colas mostly). Anything with phosphoric acid, forms calcium phosphate. Calcium phosphate is Highly insoluble and will not get picked up in the small intestine (where nutrients are absorbed). I like the diet Sprite (citric acid is okay). If I get some time, I'll hunt out info on calcium studies. -- Dr. Dickie Skepticult member in good standing #394-00596-438 Poking kooks with a pointy stick. "The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not 'Eureka!' ('I found it!'), but rather 'hmm....that's funny...'" - Isaac Asimov |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Diet Sprite ... thanks for that tip!
"Dr_Dickie" wrote in message ... "Ignoramus1084" wrote in message ... On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 12:25:13 -0500, Dr_Dickie wrote: "Ignoramus24806" wrote in message ... http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.j...toryID=7910550 CHICAGO (Reuters) - Daily vitamin E supplements do not prevent cancer, strokes or heart attacks in older people with vascular disease or diabetes, and may increase their risk of heart failure, a study said on Tuesday. Snip good infor for brevity In an editorial commenting on the Canadian study and appearing in the same journal on Tuesday, experts at the University of Washington said the study "effectively closes the door on the prospect of a major protective effect of long-term exposure to this supplement, taken in moderately high dosage, against complications of atherosclerosis and overall cancer incidence." Haven't seen this study yet, so take this with a grain of salt--I'll try to get to it this weekend. Most every study I have seen involved the application of alpha tocopherol (actually d-L alpha what is commonly called vitamin E). Real vitamin E is a mixture of alpha, beta, and gamma tocopherols (actually 8 different isomers in all). When given 10X the recommended dose of a single isomer it displaces the others and can lead to some problems. This is being recognized and corrected by some researchers, but the advance is slow. See here http://lpi.oregonstate.edu/ss03/vitamine.html for example. As usual it is best to get you vitamins naturally, but if you must supplement (especially with lipid soluble vitamins), keep the dose low and for vitamin E, look for complete tocopherols. The vitamin industry with MEGA doses is doing us no favor-IMHO. The Greeks had it right soooo long ago. Everything is moderation. Very interesting thoughts. If you find out anything further, I will appreciate if you could share what you find. What interests me the most is calcium supplementation. I keep changing my mind on whether I should or should not do it. The reason why I am considering is it that I take thyroid supplements, which tend to interfere with calcium absorption, and do not eat much dairy, which probably means I do not get even close to 100% of the calcium RDA. Long term thyroid supplementation is known to reduce bone density. What I do get is plenty of vitamin D. The real question is, is whether calcium supplementation going to help me, in my specific circumstances. -- 223/173.3/180 Anything I have seen (not a lot) is that at worse, calcium supplementation is benign. I do not get dairy at all either (not full lactose intolerant, but I think I was on my way--Dad and Mom both are). I take calcium, magnesium, zinc--(lower than RDA--about 1/3) and do that for leg cramps at night--does it work? I really do not know, might help, might be placebo effect, but no harm done. Only thing I can add is stay away from soft drinks (colas mostly). Anything with phosphoric acid, forms calcium phosphate. Calcium phosphate is Highly insoluble and will not get picked up in the small intestine (where nutrients are absorbed). I like the diet Sprite (citric acid is okay). If I get some time, I'll hunt out info on calcium studies. -- Dr. Dickie Skepticult member in good standing #394-00596-438 Poking kooks with a pointy stick. "The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not 'Eureka!' ('I found it!'), but rather 'hmm....that's funny...'" - Isaac Asimov |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
"Ignoramus1084" wrote in message ... On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 13:03:20 -0500, Dr_Dickie wrote: Anything I have seen (not a lot) is that at worse, calcium supplementation is benign. I can say the same thing about everything that I have seen. I do not get dairy at all either (not full lactose intolerant, but I think I was on my way--Dad and Mom both are). I take calcium, magnesium, zinc--(lower than RDA--about 1/3) and do that for leg cramps at night--does it work? I really do not know, might help, might be placebo effect, but no harm done. Only thing I can add is stay away from soft drinks (colas mostly). Anything with phosphoric acid, forms calcium phosphate. Calcium phosphate is Highly insoluble and will not get picked up in the small intestine (where nutrients are absorbed). I like the diet Sprite (citric acid is okay). If I get some time, I'll hunt out info on calcium studies. I avoid colas like the plague. -- 223/173.3/180 Good for you. Only other thing is the TYPE of exercise you get is very important. Pounding (running) is better than just weight lifting (IIRC the research I read). Of course, any better than none. Haven't looked into this for years (my mom used to be deputy director at FDA for endocrinology, so she used to keep me up to snuff on this stuff, but she retired years ago). -- Dr. Dickie Skepticult member in good standing #394-00596-438 Poking kooks with a pointy stick. "The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not 'Eureka!' ('I found it!'), but rather 'hmm....that's funny...'" - Isaac Asimov |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Vitamins 'increase cholesterol' | Anth | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 5 | May 5th, 2004 04:50 PM |
vitamins and minerals levels | steve | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 0 | March 25th, 2004 01:32 AM |
Questions regarding Ketosis & Vitamins | Jetman5467 | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 3 | January 19th, 2004 07:37 PM |
What daily vitamins to take? | Paul | General Discussion | 21 | January 6th, 2004 03:39 PM |