You saw the headlines: “Vitamins don’t work!” ”New studies show vitamins do nothing to prevent heart disease and cancer.” It makes me angry to see the “Chicken Little” headline writers again sowing seeds of fear and confusion. So this posting is really about two things: researchers who publish unhelpful findings using faulty methods, and journalists that take the easy road and follow the party line without making even a half-hearted attempt to uncover the truth.
I was about to write a long and scathing rebuttal of this trial, but then looked around online and found that someone else had done it for me. Please click here to read the Press Release from the Alliance for Natural Health, and click here to read their careful analysis.
For those of you who are in a hurry, here’s a quick summary: this latest “study” was really just a desk study (i.e. someone sat at their desk and looked at data collected elsewhere). It followed a large group of retired nurses over 8 years, so researchers looked to see if there was any difference in health outcomes if they took a multivitamin or not. However, anyone taking vitamins containing more than the RDA was EXCLUDED from consideration, and those that were included were counted even if they just took one vitamin pill once a WEEK. That’s exactly how you do a study that’s intended to fail: exclude anyone taking supplements that actually WORK!
If that wasn’t bad enough, the researcher then went on record as saying that it was a waste of time for people to take vitamins if they wanted to prevent heart disease and cancer. The obviously meek, uncritical journalists went right along with it, and the headline writers had a field day. The whole thing is an absolute disgrace, and as a former journalist, I am shocked that none of them pointed out the obvious flaws. No, clearly a good controversial headline beats telling the truth . . .
So here’s the truth: the study appears to show, not surprisingly, that if you intermittently consume low-grade store-bought RDA-level supplements, they don’t work well enough to prevent heart disease or cancer. No surprise there. That’s actually useful information, and should have formed the focus of the headline. Of COURSE those don’t work. All the cheap, low-grade store brands are manufactured and marketed by drug companies that want a piece of the vitamin pie. They’re the ones that are advertised the most, and now, the study shows, the ones that work the least. Again no surprise. After all, why would a drug company want to sell a vitamin that worked well enough to support human function that it reduced drug sales?
Here are several take-homes:
1. If you want vitamins that work, invest in medical-grade supplements at levels reflective of latest research in nutritional biochemistry, not the archaic, irrelevant RDAs.
2. Remember that potential for supporting the structure and function of the body so it is better able to remain healthy is only one function of supplements. Most people take them because they just plain feel and function better!
3. Be careful what you read, be careful what you hear, be careful what you watch. Always follow the money. Headlines are designed to sell, not inform.
And remember, I chose to come and work for the company because I love our programs and products, and the myriad ways in which they benefit people!!! While an outsider might suspect bias in my writing, I freely admit bias towards what is true, what works, and what benefits the greatest number of people.
You can also click here to watch some short comments from me on the study.
February 12, 2009
Another flawed vitamin study creates needless confusion
Posted by Dr. Mac under Media CommentaryLeave a Comment
You saw the headlines: “Vitamins don’t work!” ”New studies show vitamins do nothing to prevent heart disease and cancer.” It makes me angry to see the “Chicken Little” headline writers again sowing seeds of fear and confusion. So this posting is really about two things: researchers who publish unhelpful findings using faulty methods, and journalists that take the easy road and follow the party line without making even a half-hearted attempt to uncover the truth.
I was about to write a long and scathing rebuttal of this trial, but then looked around online and found that someone else had done it for me. Please click here to read the Press Release from the Alliance for Natural Health, and click here to read their careful analysis.
For those of you who are in a hurry, here’s a quick summary: this latest “study” was really just a desk study (i.e. someone sat at their desk and looked at data collected elsewhere). It followed a large group of retired nurses over 8 years, so researchers looked to see if there was any difference in health outcomes if they took a multivitamin or not. However, anyone taking vitamins containing more than the RDA was EXCLUDED from consideration, and those that were included were counted even if they just took one vitamin pill once a WEEK. That’s exactly how you do a study that’s intended to fail: exclude anyone taking supplements that actually WORK!
If that wasn’t bad enough, the researcher then went on record as saying that it was a waste of time for people to take vitamins if they wanted to prevent heart disease and cancer. The obviously meek, uncritical journalists went right along with it, and the headline writers had a field day. The whole thing is an absolute disgrace, and as a former journalist, I am shocked that none of them pointed out the obvious flaws. No, clearly a good controversial headline beats telling the truth . . .
So here’s the truth: the study appears to show, not surprisingly, that if you intermittently consume low-grade store-bought RDA-level supplements, they don’t work well enough to prevent heart disease or cancer. No surprise there. That’s actually useful information, and should have formed the focus of the headline. Of COURSE those don’t work. All the cheap, low-grade store brands are manufactured and marketed by drug companies that want a piece of the vitamin pie. They’re the ones that are advertised the most, and now, the study shows, the ones that work the least. Again no surprise. After all, why would a drug company want to sell a vitamin that worked well enough to support human function that it reduced drug sales?
Here are several take-homes:
1. If you want vitamins that work, invest in medical-grade supplements at levels reflective of latest research in nutritional biochemistry, not the archaic, irrelevant RDAs.
2. Remember that potential for supporting the structure and function of the body so it is better able to remain healthy is only one function of supplements. Most people take them because they just plain feel and function better!
3. Be careful what you read, be careful what you hear, be careful what you watch. Always follow the money. Headlines are designed to sell, not inform.
And remember, I chose to come and work for the company because I love our programs and products, and the myriad ways in which they benefit people!!! While an outsider might suspect bias in my writing, I freely admit bias towards what is true, what works, and what benefits the greatest number of people.
You can also click here to watch some short comments from me on the study.
To your very good health.
Dr. Mac