OT - Vitamin supplements: I don't get the amounts

[bill5]

Looking to buy some and was comparison shopping and how much of a given vitamin is in each....they make no sense to me. Some are way (way) over 100%, some are as little as 2%. ? I don't get the logic at all. The key word is supplement....most people don't need 100% of something, let alone more, in a pill, because their diet covers it already, at least partly. Vitamin B12 seems to be a favorite to "megadose" you on. I've seen as much as 4000%+ of it in a supplement. wth? And why only give 2-4% of something else? If it's something people don't really need a supplement for, then don't include it. Part of it is no doubt adverising and preying on the stupidity of people, i.e. "look we give you way more of this than our competitors" and people have this "more is better" mentality. smh

 

I wish I could find a "vitamins for people with at least a half decent diet" that has say about 75% of everything across the board.

[Anderton]

Different vitamins are targeted toward different people, who have different deficiencies. The best way to deal with this is to find out if you're deficient in particular vitamins. There are tests for that, which aren't particularly expensive. Then, you get individual vitamins that you can target for specific needs. For example, if you don't get outside much, or it's winter, you might be low on vitamin D. If you're stressed out or drink a lot of alcohol (although I guess the two are kind of a team), you probably need B vitamins but I'm not sure which ones. If your red blood cell count is low, you may need iron; get the slow-dissolving kind. Zinc seems to be good for prostate health, and it's cheaper than Viagra, LOL.

 

Standard disclaimer: None of the above substitutes for medical advice. You can get tested and know for sure if you are deficient in particular vitamins. However, there are also schools of thought that larger than recommended doses of a vitamin can help solve issues, rather than just maintain health. But, excessive doses can be harmful - another reason to go to people who know what they're doing.

 

Personal opinion: High-quality multi-vitamins for a particular age group are probably all you need, unless you have specific issues.

[bill5]

True, they vary somewhat (like the women's vitamins often include iron, but men's dont) but they all tend to be similar, esp in the odd amount of a lot of one thing and little to nothing of another with as far as I can tell little if any logic to it. Almost all that I saw do the megadose B12 thing and pile on the B vitamins in general, but skimp on things like Calcium and Potassium. You'd think those vitamins targeting the 50+ age group would be higher in calcium for ex.  

 

[nursers]

Great summary on the science of vitamin supplements here:

 

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/wellness-and-prevention/is-there-really-any-benefit-to-multivitamins

 

 

[AnotherScott]

44 minutes ago, Dr Nursers said:

Great summary on the science of vitamin supplements here:

 

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/wellness-and-prevention/is-there-really-any-benefit-to-multivitamins

 

The last sentence is why I wouldn't necessarily take the rest of the article at face value:

 

“If you follow a healthy diet, you can get all of the vitamins and minerals you need from food.”

 

This is true. And you can go to your doctor who may very well tell you, "nah, no need to bother with vitamins, just eat a healthy diet." And you leave the office believing supplements are a waste of money. BUT.... a very large percentage of people do NOT eat a healthy diet. Armed with the facts that you don't need supplements, many will then leave the doctor and continue to eat the same junky diet so many Americans eat, full of fast food and processed food, light on fruits and vegetables... So I think that, before you write off multivitamins as a waste, or unnecessary since you have the equivalent of a New Year's resolution to start eating healthier, you should take stock of your actual diet, how many servings of fruits and vegetables you eat, etc., and then decide whether or not you should bother with a multi.

[o0Ampy0o]

25 minutes ago, AnotherScott said:

...take stock of your actual diet, how many servings of fruits and vegetables you eat, etc., and then decide whether or not you should bother with a multi.

 

That is so true. You ask people about their diet and they probably tell you something inaccurate because they are not conscious of their actual diet.

 

I used to work with a woman who was a huge nature buff. Supposedly she ate healthy foods and so on. She drove their off road Jeep tp work one day and had to make a big deal about being used to driving it off road. Yet every day she had a donut on her desk fro the roach coach. I pointed it out one day and she said "Oh that's just when I am at work." You are at work more days than home.

 

It used to be that doctors were the least informed about vitamins. For years now there has been a push to get everyone doing things to be healthier and to take some load off the medical system. So I see a lot of BS pushed by doctors as well.  Melatonin is more like a hormone than a sleeping pill. It can get you balanced if you get off balance from something like time zone adjustments or working odd shifts. But it does not put you to sleep. Yet they market it as though it is a sleeping drug. AND hospitals give you Melatonin nightly.

 

[Anderton]

Their conclusion is "The researchers concluded that multivitamins don’t reduce the risk for heart disease, cancer, cognitive decline (such as memory loss and slowed-down thinking) or an early death."

 

That's a small group of serious issues. I wouldn't expect vitamins to prevent, for example, heart disease or cancer. But, tests can show if you're deficient in certain vitamins, as well as other important nutritrional elements like potassium. For example, vitamin B12 is important for creating red blood cells, and having sufficient B12 is important for people over 50. Doctors can check for vitamin B deficiencies. Did the studies include whether vitamins affect eyesight? Complexion? Prevent colds (e.g., zinc)? Promote prostate health? 

 

Only one researcher is listed, and no links to studies. The doctor's main specialty is hypertension, and his interests include lifestyle modification. That's fine, and I'm glad he's putting an effort into finding out how to modify lifestyles for better health. But heart disease is just one aspect of health. If you check other references about vitamins, unless they're trying to sell you something, usually the first statement is that a proper diet will take care of most peoples' needs. But even though I wouldn't necessarily trust anything on WebMD compared to John Hopkins, their piece on vitamins starts with "Eating a balanced diet with plenty of vegetables, fruits, and whole grains should provide the vitamins your body needs. However, it's not always possible to eat healthy meals. If that's the case, taking supplements might help." Then they explain the nutritional gaps that vitamins are supposed to fill. That seems like a more realistic attitude.

 

But also, the guy graduated in 1981. That means he was probably raised on food as a child that still had mineral content, wasn't from depleted soil, and wasn't as loaded with pesticides. I think that  especially over the past few decades, the nutritional value of food has plummeted and it may not be true anymore that you can get what you need from food. Here's just one quote:

 

A Kushi Institute analysis of nutrient data from 1975 to 1997 found that average calcium levels in 12 fresh vegetables dropped 27 percent; iron levels 37 percent; vitamin A levels 21 percent, and vitamin C levels 30 percent. A similar study of British nutrient data from 1930 to 1980, published in the British Food Journal,found that in 20 vegetables the average calcium content had declined 19 percent; iron 22 percent; and potassium 14 percent. Yet another study concluded that one would have to eat eight oranges today to derive the same amount of Vitamin A as our grandparents would have gotten from one.

 

Several other studies support these general conclusions. This is not fringe thinking at all.

 

Yeah, if you have a great diet of healthy food from stores accessible in your area, and you don't expect vitamins to compensate for genetic preconditions (and aren't taking any prescriptions that sap vitamins), food may be all you need. But to draw the conclusion that since food can, or at least used to, provide everything you need, then vitamins are a waste of money seems like a flawed logical construct to me. 

[nursers]

All great points - I didn't see the article's intent as being that black and white, more some useful guide posts.

 

I also forget that outside of where I live, there's even more processed foot and lack of access to decent fruit and vegetables. After three trips to the US I now get why it's obesity capital of the world (although Australia is not far behind, and in some demographics may even be leading. I also understand the US is not #1 but as far as population numbers it is).

 

Each time after a week or so I was willing to walk miles to any restaurant offering something fresh vegetable-wise (rather than salads).

[Mighty Motif Max]

22 minutes ago, Anderton said:

...

 

But also, the guy graduated in 1981. That means he was probably raised on food as a child that still had mineral content, wasn't from depleted soil, and wasn't as loaded with pesticides. I think that  especially over the past few decades, the nutritional value of food has plummeted and it may not be true anymore that you can get what you need from food. Here's just one quote:

 

A Kushi Institute analysis of nutrient data from 1975 to 1997 found that average calcium levels in 12 fresh vegetables dropped 27 percent; iron levels 37 percent; vitamin A levels 21 percent, and vitamin C levels 30 percent. A similar study of British nutrient data from 1930 to 1980, published in the British Food Journal,found that in 20 vegetables the average calcium content had declined 19 percent; iron 22 percent; and potassium 14 percent. Yet another study concluded that one would have to eat eight oranges today to derive the same amount of Vitamin A as our grandparents would have gotten from one.

 

Several other studies support these general conclusions. This is not fringe thinking at all.

 

Yeah, if you have a great diet of healthy food from stores accessible in your area, and you don't expect vitamins to compensate for genetic preconditions (and aren't taking any prescriptions that sap vitamins), food may be all you need. But to draw the conclusion that since food can, or at least used to, provide everything you need, then vitamins are a waste of money seems like a flawed logical construct to me. 

 

This ^^. Which is super unfortunate for many reasons, and isn't likely to improve any time soon.

[o0Ampy0o]

"Eating a balanced diet with plenty of vegetables, fruits, and whole grains should provide the vitamins your body needs."

 

You can eat a balanced diet and not get a lot of value out of it if you prepare the food poorly, and that if it had anything of value to begin with before it got to you. Baked, fried, boiled, microwaved, any over cooked vegetables don't do much for you. Removing the skin and or soaking fruits and vegetables in water is going to impact value.

 

Down the street is a popular restaurant known for healthy stir-fry and offering many vegan and vegetarian options. I gave it a try. I was there waiting and all they had to do was call out my name or number and I would grab it within 1 minute. But they called my name and then placed my carton of food on an extremely hot warming plate.  The couple of minutes on that plate massacred the vegetables into pungent mushy oblivion.

 

 

[bill5]

  

50 minutes ago, Anderton said:

Their conclusion is "The researchers concluded that multivitamins don’t reduce the risk for heart disease, cancer, cognitive decline (such as memory loss and slowed-down thinking) or an early death."

 

That's a small group of serious issues. I wouldn't expect vitamins to prevent, for example, heart disease or cancer. But, tests can show if you're deficient in certain vitamins, as well as other important nutritrional elements like potassium. For example, vitamin B12 is important for creating red blood cells, and having sufficient B12 is important for people over 50. Doctors can check for vitamin B deficiencies. Did the studies include whether vitamins affect eyesight? Complexion? Prevent colds (e.g., zinc)? Promote prostate health? 

 

Only one researcher is listed, and no links to studies. The doctor's main specialty is hypertension, and his interests include lifestyle modification. That's fine, and I'm glad he's putting an effort into finding out how to modify lifestyles for better health. But heart disease is just one aspect of health. If you check other references about vitamins, unless they're trying to sell you something, usually the first statement is that a proper diet will take care of most peoples' needs. But even though I wouldn't necessarily trust anything on WebMD compared to John Hopkins, their piece on vitamins starts with "Eating a balanced diet with plenty of vegetables, fruits, and whole grains should provide the vitamins your body needs. However, it's not always possible to eat healthy meals. If that's the case, taking supplements might help." Then they explain the nutritional gaps that vitamins are supposed to fill. That seems like a more realistic attitude.

 

But also, the guy graduated in 1981. That means he was probably raised on food as a child that still had mineral content, wasn't from depleted soil, and wasn't as loaded with pesticides. I think that  especially over the past few decades, the nutritional value of food has plummeted and it may not be true anymore that you can get what you need from food. Here's just one quote:

 

A Kushi Institute analysis of nutrient data from 1975 to 1997 found that average calcium levels in 12 fresh vegetables dropped 27 percent; iron levels 37 percent; vitamin A levels 21 percent, and vitamin C levels 30 percent. A similar study of British nutrient data from 1930 to 1980, published in the British Food Journal,found that in 20 vegetables the average calcium content had declined 19 percent; iron 22 percent; and potassium 14 percent. Yet another study concluded that one would have to eat eight oranges today to derive the same amount of Vitamin A as our grandparents would have gotten from one.

 

Several other studies support these general conclusions. This is not fringe thinking at all.

 

Yeah, if you have a great diet of healthy food from stores accessible in your area, and you don't expect vitamins to compensate for genetic preconditions (and aren't taking any prescriptions that sap vitamins), food may be all you need. But to draw the conclusion that since food can, or at least used to, provide everything you need, then vitamins are a waste of money seems like a flawed logical construct to me. 

Exactly......I've finding that what vitamins can or can't be successfully absorbed and used in pill form varies, with many unproven. Vitamin C is one that can, and I think Vitamin E. The rest are mostly a mixed bag. 

[bill5]

4 minutes ago, o0Ampy0o said:

 

You can eat a balanced diet and not get a lot of value out of it if you prepare the food poorly, and that if it had anything of value to begin with before it got to you. Baked, fried, boiled, microwaved, any over cooked vegetables don't do much for you.

That's quite a generalization which isn't true across the board. Micro-ing in particular doesn't generally detract from nutritional value and boiling doesn't impact fat-soluble vitamins. 

[o0Ampy0o]

2 hours ago, bill5 said:

That's quite a generalization which isn't true across the board. Micro-ing in particular doesn't generally detract from nutritional value and boiling doesn't impact fat-soluble vitamins. 

 

Even ignoring the context as you have done my isolated sentences are not saying what you think.

 

You certainly can use any of the approaches I listed to overcook and destroy nutritional value.

 

You have to take care of things from growth to consumption as eating a well balanced diet is not enough.

 

Not all carrots are equal.

 

 

  

2 hours ago, o0Ampy0o said:

"Eating a balanced diet with plenty of vegetables, fruits, and whole grains should provide the vitamins your body needs."

 

You can eat a balanced diet and not get a lot of value out of it if you prepare the food poorly, and that if it had anything of value to begin with before it got to you. Baked, fried, boiled, microwaved, any over cooked vegetables don't do much for you. Removing the skin and or soaking fruits and vegetables in water is going to impact value.

 

Down the street is a popular restaurant known for healthy stir-fry and offering many vegan and vegetarian options. I gave it a try. I was there waiting and all they had to do was call out my name or number and I would grab it within 1 minute. But they called my name and then placed my carton of food on an extremely hot warming plate.  The couple of minutes on that plate massacred the vegetables into pungent mushy oblivion.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[bill5]

9 hours ago, o0Ampy0o said:

Even ignoring the context as you have done my isolated sentences are not saying what you think.

 

What you said is " Baked, fried, boiled, microwaved, any over cooked vegetables don't do much for you," which I took to mean "Baked, fried, boiled, microwaved, any over cooked vegetables don't do much for you." Which as I already said is a generalization that isn't always true. If you really meant "over-cooking using any of these methods can detract from a food's nutrional value," then yes, of course. Although frying vegetables takes away from their nutrional value no matter how long you fry it. 

[o0Ampy0o]

@bill5 the point wasn't comparing cooking approaches in general it was that just eating certain foods ("a well balanced diet") is not enough you have to grow and prepare them properly too. As stated, you can destroy value using any of those approaches.

[Shamanzarek]

The thing about most vitamins is that the source or how it was processed is almost never listed on the container. Unlike food vitamins seem to be exempt from listing the ingredients. That alone would put me off on using supplements because I always read the labels on anything I eat or drink. Instead of taking a pill I recommend using nutritional yeast. Yeast is usually grown on a medium like Sugar Beets. Since yeast is natural grown it contains almost all B vitamins in their balanced form along with some protein, and several trace minerals. Typically yeast contains B2, B2, B3 (not the organ), B6, and B12. B12 especially is rarely found outside of animal sources. Minerals in yeast include Zinc, Selenium, Manganese, and Molybdenum. It also contains all nine amino acids so is a non-animal complete protein source. There are different strains of yeast and each has a distinctive flavor if you want to use in it flake or powdered forms in smoothies or as an ingredient in other foods. It also can be found in capsule form for those who prefer to take pills. Yeast derived foods include Vegemite and Marmite which have long been popular in Australia/New Zealand and Britain respectively. Many people add yeast to their pet's food. Most dogs seem to like the taste and will often eat it alone. I've topped our cat's food with it and he eats it.

 

Another natural supplement is kelp powder. Several types of seaweed are widely used in Japanese cuisine. Kelp is one of the few reliable sources of Iodine which is necessary for proper Thyroid function. Kelp is abundant in every known trace mineral including Iron, Calcium, Magnesium, and Potassium. It also provides vitamin B12, Omega 3 fatty acids, and anti- inflammatories.

Kelp can be found in several forms but the most convenient is kelp powder which can be used unobtrusively in combination with many other foods. It is also available in capsule form.

 

I have been using both yeast and kelp since the late 70s with no ill effects.

[o0Ampy0o]

Have not tried kelp powder but yeast powder is inedible to me. It alters whatever it is mixed with so there us no burying it in something. Even capsule form gets nasty once the casing dissolves in your stomach. 

[Nowarezman]

Big topic, this.  I'm no expert, but my best opinion is that eating a great diet that includes a variety of high quality vegetables (add your other favorite vita/minerals here) is a better road to good health than eating a lousy, typically American diet and trying to make up for it by taking multivitamins and other supplements.  

 

Anecdotal testimonies of this and that supplement - let your inner skeptic guide you to research stuff (reasonably, not obsessively).

 

Also perhaps worthy to mention is that, especially for the older crowd, certain medications can block, to varying extents, the absorption of certain vitamins, minerals, et al.   So it's best to do some research and if need be, develop a schedule for taking stuff in time-order to minimize this sort of blocking.   For example, proton pump inhibitors (e.g. Prilosec) can be a gut saver, no question, but can also block other meds that need a certain ph to be absorbed properly.   Your PCP may or may not be well-versed or particularly inclined to discuss these issues (they want to lose "patients" in 7 minutes or so - pun intended).

 

There are always trade-offs and there are smart and dumb ways to take your pills.  

 

nat

 

[analogika]

On 8/26/2023 at 7:10 PM, bill5 said:

Looking to buy some and was comparison shopping and how much of a given vitamin is in each....they make no sense to me. Some are way (way) over 100%, some are as little as 2%. ? I don't get the logic at all. The key word is supplement....most people don't need 100% of something, let alone more, in a pill, because their diet covers it already, at least partly. Vitamin B12 seems to be a favorite to "megadose" you on. I've seen as much as 4000%+ of it in a supplement. wth? And why only give 2-4% of something else? If it's something people don't really need a supplement for, then don't include it. Part of it is no doubt adverising and preying on the stupidity of people, i.e. "look we give you way more of this than our competitors" and people have this "more is better" mentality. smh

 

I wish I could find a "vitamins for people with at least a half decent diet" that has say about 75% of everything across the board.

 

Every study and serious research work makes it pretty clear that, unless you have a very specific medical indication, vitamin supplements are more or less bullshit. 

If it's one of the vitamins that doesn't actually harm you when you overdose it and it's cheaper than whatever else you'd use instead, why not add 4000% of it? It's not going to make a difference, either way. 

[AnotherScott]

6 minutes ago, analogika said:

If it's one of the vitamins that doesn't actually harm you when you overdose it and it's cheaper than whatever else you'd use instead, why not add 4000% of it? It's not going to make a difference, either way. 

 

Assuming for the moment that there is a certain amount that is considered "sufficient," why would you want to take more, unless there was some indication that the higher amount could be helpful? It would just make the pills larger (or you'd have to take more of them) and more expensive.

[Anderton]

16 minutes ago, analogika said:

Every study and serious research work makes it pretty clear that, unless you have a very specific medical indication, vitamin supplements are more or less bullshit.

 

But it's important to remember that specific medical conditions are commonplace. They may not necessarily be life-threatening, but do need attention. Again, doctors can confirm any deficiencies.

 

The problem with a lot of people who swear by particular vitamins is that the results are anecdotal, and don't translate easily to larger studies. For example, I was deficient in zinc. When I started taking a zinc supplement, I stopped getting colds. Coincidence? It's not a scientific study, so I have no idea. All I know is I got colds a lot, but I didn't after taking zinc regularly.

[RABid]

I have a vitamin D deficiency, most likely a result of Sjögren's syndrome. My doctor wrote me a prescription for Vitamin D. I mentioned to her that I could just buy over the counter vitamin supplements. She had a one word reply. ... "Worthless."

[Notes_Norton]

15 hours ago, AnotherScott said:

“If you follow a healthy diet, you can get all of the vitamins and minerals you need from food.”

But how many can follow the optimum diet? Where do donuts, soft drinks, pop tarts, potato chips, and so on come in?

 

With industrialized farming, the fertilizer gives the plants what they need, but not necessarily what the human needs and would get if the crops were grown more naturally, are you getting all you need?

 

Add processed foods that have so many non-food ingredients in them.

 

I don't know, but I figure a multivitamin might insure you are getting enough. But I'm not a health professional, so what do I know?

 

I do know, from mother-in-law's experience, that B12 and iron are very difficult to absorb unless they come from red meat sources. So the supplements give mega amounts, but only a small percentage make it to the blood stream. They ended up giving her B12 pills that she had to dissolve under her tongue in order to get enough, and heme iron pills that came from beef blood. Note: it was under doctor's advice and specific to her specific health challenges.

 

Notes ♫

 

[analogika]

1 hour ago, Anderton said:

For example, I was deficient in zinc. When I started taking a zinc supplement, I stopped getting colds. Coincidence? It's not a scientific study, so I have no idea. All I know is I got colds a lot, but I didn't after taking zinc regularly.

 

I was talking about vitamins, specifically. Zinc is not a vitamin. I tend to cramp more easily as I get older, and my doctor recommended Magnesium. That works. But not the regular supermarket stuff. 

But that's what I'm saying: You had a diagnosed deficiency. So did I. 

[bill5]

4 hours ago, Shamanzarek said:

The thing about most vitamins is that the source or how it was processed is almost never listed on the container. Unlike food vitamins seem to be exempt from listing the ingredients. 

Not sure what you mean by "processed," but every vitamin container I ever saw listed the ingredients in great detail.

[bill5]

4 hours ago, Nowarezman said:

Big topic, this.  I'm no expert, but my best opinion is that eating a great diet that includes a variety of high quality vegetables (add your other favorite vita/minerals here) is a better road to good health than eating a lousy, typically American diet and trying to make up for it by taking multivitamins and other supplements.  

 

Of course. But it's not that simple. As Craig pointed out, the nutritional value of some foods has declined, in some cases dramatically, due to soil overuse or whatever.

 

 

[bill5]

3 hours ago, analogika said:

 

Every study and serious research work makes it pretty clear that, unless you have a very specific medical indication, vitamin supplements are more or less bullshit. 

ah, no. But again it's not as simple as that, or as simple as saying "vitamins give you everything you need" either. Some vitamins, but not all, have been proven can be successfully obtained via supplements, such as Vitamin C. 

[bill5]

3 hours ago, RABid said:

I have a vitamin D deficiency, most likely a result of Sjögren's syndrome. My doctor wrote me a prescription for Vitamin D. I mentioned to her that I could just buy over the counter vitamin supplements. She had a one word reply. ... "Worthless."

In the case of Vitamin D, I can't say. Seems rather dismissive though. And I'm curious why she thinks her prescription works but getting it in over the counter supplements isn't? 

[bill5]

PS there have been studies that show harm can come from overdosing, but only for certain things and it has to be a lot. I'm just not a fan of "more is better." 

[RABid]

56 minutes ago, bill5 said:

And I'm curious why she thinks her prescription works but getting it in over the counter supplements isn't? 

The prescription is a mega dose that I take once a week.