|
 Forget
the Headlines - Keep Taking Your
Vitamins, Minerals and Supplements
by Tony
Isaacs
Latest Industry
Backed "Study" Seriously Flawed and
Biased
A "new" study condemning the use of
vitamins and ineffective and
potentially dangerous is generating
headlines throughout the mainstream
media in the United States and
Europe. Apparently generating
headlines was the sole intention, as
the study is neither new, scientific
nor objective.
The "study" was led by Serbian
scientist and "visiting researcher"
at Copenhagen University Hospital,
Goran Bjelakovic, whose name is now
synonymous with vitamin
meta-analyses (studies of other
studies) which appear to show that
vitamin supplements either donīt
work or end up increasing your risk
of death. Two similar Bjelakovic
"studies" on vitamin supplements, in
October 2004 and February 2007,
resulted in similar outbursts of
negative international headlines.
Upon closer examination, the flaws
in the so-called study are apparent.
First of all, in evaluating studies
for inclusion, the authors omitted a
massive 405 potentially eligible
studies because there were no deaths
in the studies and another 69
studies were excluded because they
werenīt randomized controlled
trials.
In other words, instead of
conducting an honest review of all
the studies, the authors arbitrarily
eliminated all studies in which
vitamins prevented mortality and
kept people alive - leaving only the
studies in which people died from
various causes. Most of the trials
used pertain to already sick people
being given very high dose,
synthetic, isolated nutrients for
relatively short periods they
therefore have no relevance to the
vast majority of vitamin consumers.
When you select or reject studies on
criteria that only mean something to
statisticians, and ignore important
things like duration, how long the
study ran for which ranged from 28
days to 14 years your findings are
immediately meaningless. Even the
huge difference in dose of
supplements between different
studies was not deemed important -
for example, Vitamin E ranging from
10 to 5000 units daily.
The studies in the latest
meta-analysis not only relied on
synthetic forms of vitamins, in most
instances they relied on very high
dosages of pharmaceutical-grade,
synthetic forms of supplements
manufactured by the pharmaceutical
industry. The dosages used are
typically much greater than those
recommended on the labels of food or
dietary supplement products. In most
countries, the dosages used in the
trials would be considered
īmedicinalī by regulatory
authorities and therefore would not
legally be allowed for food or
dietary supplements.
As a result, these studies actually
apply only to synthetic forms of
vitamins produced by the
pharmaceutical industry in amounts
much larger than most consumers
would ever take. The authors of this
latest Cochrane review state: "The
present review does not assess
antioxidant supplements for
treatment of specific diseases
(tertiary prevention), antioxidant
supplements for patients with
demonstrated specific needs of
antioxidants, or the effects of
antioxidants contained in fruits or
vegetables." This shows that the
study has no relevance to natural
sources of vitamins and minerals or
antioxidants sourced from plants
(e.g. flavonoids, anthocyanins,
sulforaphanes, salvestrols/resveratrol,
etc.), which are included in many of
the leading-edge natural health
supplements claiming potent
antioxidant activity.
Make no mistake, this isnīt
research. This is a re-analysis of
studies that have been conducted and
reported on previously, by a group
of men with a known axe to grind,
who have never produced a study
favorable to supplements, which is
itself statistically unlikely unless
you have a bias.
There is extensive scientific
evidence that higher intakes of
vitamins in the forms and
combinations consumed in the diet
substantially reduce risk of killer
diseases such as cancer and heart
disease. In fact, it is this
research (some of which is
referenced in the introduction to
both the JAMA and Cochrane papers)
that has stimulated pharmaceutical
companies to undertake research on
pharmaceutical-grade, synthetic
forms of supplements, which they
manufacture. As is often the case
when pharmaceutical companies try to
synthesize or unnaturally isolate
compounds found in nature so they
can patent and profit from them,
their synthetic version have been
largely disappointing.
A good source to see why their
results have largely failed can be
seen in this paper by the Alliance
for Natural Health:
http://www.alliance-natural-health.org/_docs/ANHwebsiteDoc_231.pdf
As a final note on the study:
although presented as a "new", the
study is really no more than a
rehash of a paper by the very same
authors, published last year
(February 2007) in the Journal of
the American Medical Association (JAMA).
Extensive international media
followed the 2007 JAMA paper,
including a front page articles in
major newspapers telling consumers
that vitamin pills could cause early
death. The "new" study review relies
on 67 of the 68 studies used in the
JAMA paper.
The world pharmaceutical empire is a
trillion dollar juggernaut whose
continued profits depends on
continued illness as well as a
continued monopoly on approved
medications and suppression of any
alternatives which might provide
prevention and treatment more
effectively, more safely and less
expensively such as those found in
nature. And so there are a trillion
reasons why we see the repeated
headlines about misleading and
flawed studies like this one on
vitamins, minerals and other natural
supplements that represent billions
of dollars in potential lost profits
due to improved health and
competition with patented drugs.
The best possible model for profits
would be a monopoly on side-effect
laden drugs which lead to
complications requiring yet more
side effect laden drugs in a never
ending cycle so that by the time a
person reaches the age of 65 they
take an average of 15 prescribed and
over the counter medications daily
when it all started with one or two
conditions that could have been
treated naturally. A great model for
profits and a horrible one for
health and humanity.
The bottom line for all those who
reject such a model: donīt stop
taking your vitamins, minerals and
other supplements - especially those
derived from natural sources which
insure adequate amounts of daily
nutrition vital to your optimum
health.
Sources:
Alliance for Natural Health
Natural News
JAMA
Lancet
For the best in health information,
subscribe to
The Rose Laurel Press Newsletter
featuring articles by Tony M. Isaacs




|
|
Disclaimer:
The information on this page and on this website has not been evaluated by the
FDA. We do not diagnose, treat, cure or
prevent illness or disease - instead, we try to help people learn how to do so themselves.
Anyone who
believes they have a
serious medical condition or health issue should seek
diagnoses from a qualified medical professional before
making any decisions on how to best address their
health.
We do not sell or advocate drugs, nor do we make any
claims that anything advocated or sold on this website
is a drug.
Furthermore, anyone
contemplating using any products or information on this
website must accept such use as experimental and
voluntary. No claims are made regarding the
therapeutic use of the products or information on this
website and all products featured or sold on this
website must be considered nutritional supplements only. |