Do you remember Christmas as a child with that jolly red nosed
Santa who most kids idolized in every sense of the word? Or maybe for you it
was the tooth fairy, the great pumpkin or even Peter Cottontail. Any or all of
these myths seemed to be real to us and for some the realization that they
don't exist was quite the shock. Banished to the realm of make believe our
childhood idols went and now some would have us believe another one of our
cherished beliefs (that is actually a fact) should be relegated to the same
place we put St. Nick and the others.
Recently several studies were analyzed that purport to firmly
establish the "fact" that multivitamin supplementation is at best
useless and at worst detrimental to your health to the point of causing harm.
Harm from vitamins? Let us explore the article and the studies it cites in an effort to
keep vitamin supplementation out of the realm of make believe.
The Researchers
Eliseo Guallar and his colleagues recently analyzed three studies
and came to a shocking conclusion. They have stated, unequivocally, that
multivitamin supplementation has no clear benefit and could prove harmful to
your health. The group of researchers went on to say that multivitamins should
not be used in the prevention of chronic disease and that "enough is
enough" when it comes to the silly people who erroneously use these
vitamins (emphasis mine). After you get past the initial shock that vitamin
supplementation is harmful or useless and wrestle with the condescending tone
of the abstract written by the researchers you are left to ponder things that
you have held to be true: that vitamins are good for you. Should vitamins head
off to the island of misfit beliefs with the rest of our childhood idols?
Intuitively you know the answer but let us spell a few things out for the sake
of clarity and sound reasoning.
The conclusion of these researchers has been published in the Annals of Internal Medicine and is chock full of assumptions. One of these
assumptions provided by Guallar et al is that the average western
style diet provides adequate nourishment to the masses to the point that
vitamin and mineral supplementation is unnecessary. Surely, there are a
percentage of westerners who eat pretty healthy by consuming clean, pure water
and either natural or organic foods while limiting processed foods but this
does not pertain to the vast majority especially in America. In addition, due
to soil depletion and over-farming mineral and vitamin levels in fruits,
vegetables and grains have been on a decline for decades.
Aside from the assumption let us to take a look at what really
lies at the heart of the matter for the people who take great interest in their
health. An analysis of the three studies is appropriate and fundamental so we
can understand what the researchers saw and what the newspapers, online
publishers and television programs failed to report.
The Studies
Three studies were cited by the researchers and here is where we
really have to pay attention which is unfortunate. It is unfortunate because
there is a sense among most people in the general public that studies are
impartial, truthful and therefore should be taken as gospel. Since the word
gospel literally means "good news" some of these studies should be
taken as the anti-gospel. Let us review
Cardiovascular Disease and Cancer Study
The first study mentioned in the article is the "Vitamin and Mineral Supplements in the Primary
Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease and Cancer". I know it's a mouthful but bear with
me. Researchers in this study wanted to establish whether cardiovascular issues
and cancer was actually preventable through supplementation. It appears to be a
noble endeavor on the surface even with flawed results (an explanation on why
it is not noble will present itself a little later). It was acknowledged that
the results of this study did not pertain to individuals with nutrient
deficiencies or others that would be considered high risk. The article cited
above would have you believe the results of this trial pertained to everyone.
When you consider that most people are nutrient deficient the article becomes
just plain misleading.
At one point in the analysis of the trial the researchers had to
admit that the study was actually set up to measure results in a drug trial not
a nutrient trial which may skew the data. In addition, it was noted that the
difference between examining optimal levels of a nutrient intake and
"normal" levels may have established a different result. In other
words studying minimum nutrient supplementation may not be in the best interest
of the general public. Then the question becomes "Why do the study in this
way if the results do not apply to most people"? Great question!
Cognitive Function in Men
This study was a misnomer from the very start. Called "Long Term Multivitamin Supplementation and
Cognitive Function in Men: A Randomized Trial" it looked at a very particular group
of men: doctors. The importance of this will become clear in a moment. The
intent of this study was to assess cognitive function in men and whether
multivitamin supplementation would improve it. The conclusion was that
multivitamin supplementation does not improve cognitive function or prevent
dementia.
There are three interesting points to consider regarding this
study. The first is that physicians were studied and this poses a problem. It
has been long established that people who pursue academics have a lowered risk
of developing dementia. Secondly, most older physicians generally eat very
healthy and are able to afford the best, most nutritious foods. Proper
nourishment combined with a high level of education diminishes the likelihood
of developing dementia which is a great thing but it makes you wonder why this
study was used to attack multivitamin use. There was not much of any chance to
see any improvements from multivitamin use because of the group of men that
were studied. The third, and perhaps the most disturbing aspect of this study was
the fact that actual dementia or any cognitive dysfunction was never tested
for. None of the participants were assessed for any level of dementia either
before, during or after. How do you purport that something does not work
(multivitamins) if you never test for the dysfunction you are looking to
improve (cognition)?
Trial to Assess Chelation Therapy
This study set out to assess whether or not high
doses of vitamins and minerals help prevent a another occurrence of a second
myocardial infarction (heart attack). Two things of import to note for this
one.
The first is that the people studied had a high incidence
non-adherence. This is a fancy way of saying more than enough people failed to
do what was requested of them ultimately affecting the data collected. In
addition, the participant dropout rate was also high. It becomes a
difficult task to honestly document and extract accurate information to convey
to the public when so many people involved in the study fail to comply with the
instructions or complete the program. It puzzles me that Eliseo Guallar and his
colleagues used this study or any of the previously mentioned ones to attack
vitamins and minerals.
