Supplements: Good/Bad? Necessary/Unnecessary?

Goldenwoof

HI all,

I currently take a few OTC supplements. Omega 3-6-9 (for heart, cardivascular), chondroitin/glucosamine (joint health) and ginkgo biloba (for memory...whenever I remember to take it, that is). But as I walk through the vitamin/supplement aisle of the store, I see so many things that make me think, "Yeah, I should probably take that, too," or, "Yeah, that makes sense," etc.

So really...which supplements make the most sense to take? Which are just overkill? I could talk myself into taking nearly everything on the shelf for one reason or another, but realize that's just plain ridiculous.

Thanks for any thoughts on this!

jacksonpt

A lot of it will depend on an individual's need.

Most people will see benefits from fish oil, and a multivitamin is good insurance for most. After that, it's hard to make generalizations.

linzchapates

A good ole fashioned multivitamin should just about cover anything you could need if you're lacking in your diet... as for the rest I think it's a money grab, sure it may not harm you and may even help you but if it's not broken why fix it, right?

HikerRR50

I avoid pills of any type but I guess it would depend on your blood work. Have you talked to a doctor/ had a physical etc. to see if any suppliments are needed that can't be obtained through dietary changes?

jacksonpt

Here are a couple of good articles:

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/supplements-part-1.html
and
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/supplements-part-2.html

rileamoyer

I have RA and Osteo Arthritis along with family history of other health issues. Every OTC supplement I take is approved by my Dr. and many recommended. So, it depends on the individual and their needs.

devilwhiterose

Depends on your needs.

I don't take anything. I found that when I took a multivitamin (more than one brand), my hair began falling out. I felt worse.

VitaBailey

I'm not completely sold on supplements so I take the basics: a multi, Omega 3 fish oil, calcium and recently added Vitamin D because of blood work results.

willdob3

I strongly believe in the benefits of supplements. High quality supplements make a huge difference in how I feel & function on a daily basis.

I don't believe in taking supplements for the sake of taking supplements. Supplementation should be based on personal need. Additionally, the supplements should be high quality and taken in the appropriate dose at the correct time. timing & dosage can mean the difference between seeing no results & getting great results.

richardheath

A few have some evidence suggesting they may be worth it: most do not.

The higher up the chart, the more evidence there is to suggest it works. The lower; the less evidence. Note - the evidence is for the listed condition only - not for general effectiveness. Bubble size represents Google hits (i.e. a measure of popularity).



(open in new tab to see the whole thing!)

See: http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/play/snake-oil-supplements/ for more info.

ETA - or this page, as the above one didn't load just now http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/snake-oil-supplements/

just_Jennie1

I take a lot of supplements daily. I have my blood work done every year (going to start doing it twice a year) and adjust what I need if necessary.

AllanMisner

There are two answers to this one.

If you have blood work done, you can identify certain deficiencies that you have. A change in diet or supplementation can be beneficial.

There are other micronutrients that you can't measure through standard blood tests, but they've been shown to benefit health, memory, etc. My advice on this is to try something for three to four weeks and see how it affects you. Also, you can consider your family history and make some additional adds (i.e., family history of prostate issues could have you taking certain prostate protective supplements).

Yes, most supplements are a waste, especially if you haven't analyzed your particular needs. But there are things you need that you cannot get from a standard diet (especially if you're restricting calories).

iechick

I'm not a big fan of supplements because of all the things I've read pointing to evidence that many don't work and some may even be harmful (vitamin E supplements for example). Like others have said, I would only take condition specific ones after talking to your doctor/having blood work done.

I take a high dose of D several times a week because I'm deficient (most of us are and a simple blood test can tell you how your level is), and I also take a B12 supplement once a week, because I eat a mostly whole foods, plant based diet and while I do still eat a bit of meat and dairy, I want to make sure my level is adequate. That's it.

just_Jennie1

I'm not a big fan of supplements because of all the things I've read pointing to evidence that many don't work and some may even be harmful (vitamin E supplements for example).

Sure, when taken in extremely high doses it's harmful.

There are a plethora of health benefits from vitamin E.

As far as supplements "not working" what kind of proof are you looking for? Supplements benefit you internally. You're not going to physically see that they're working on your heart, mind, bones, etc.

chatipati1

Do you get yearly bloodwork? Did any doctor say you needed a supplement? Vitamins are a business in my opinion and you can buy anything and the industry will love you..Get your nutrition out of food and save some bucks.

richardheath

I'm not a big fan of supplements because of all the things I've read pointing to evidence that many don't work and some may even be harmful (vitamin E supplements for example).

Sure, when taken in extremely high doses it's harmful.

There are a plethora of health benefits from vitamin E.

As far as supplements "not working" what kind of proof are you looking for? Supplements benefit you internally. You're not going to physically see that they're working on your heart, mind, bones, etc.

Kind of a general statement, isn't it, that "Supplements benefit you internally"? Are you saying all supplements benefit all people all the time in all possible ways???

I'd be looking for proof in clinical trials. And if the supplements did work as advertised, then yes, you would expect to see their claims verified. Trouble is, most of them don't benefit most people internally, externally, or anywhere else.

jacksonpt

I'm not a big fan of supplements because of all the things I've read pointing to evidence that many don't work and some may even be harmful (vitamin E supplements for example).

Sure, when taken in extremely high doses it's harmful.

There are a plethora of health benefits from vitamin E.

As far as supplements "not working" what kind of proof are you looking for? Supplements benefit you internally. You're not going to physically see that they're working on your heart, mind, bones, etc.

Kind of a general statement, isn't it, that "Supplements benefit you internally"? Are you saying all supplements benefit all people all the time in all possible ways???

I'd be looking for proof in clinical trials. And if the supplements did work as advertised, then yes, you would expect to see their claims verified. Trouble is, most of them don't benefit most people internally, externally, or anywhere else.

And not everything can be proven in a lab.

richardheath

I'm not a big fan of supplements because of all the things I've read pointing to evidence that many don't work and some may even be harmful (vitamin E supplements for example).

Sure, when taken in extremely high doses it's harmful.

There are a plethora of health benefits from vitamin E.

As far as supplements "not working" what kind of proof are you looking for? Supplements benefit you internally. You're not going to physically see that they're working on your heart, mind, bones, etc.

Kind of a general statement, isn't it, that "Supplements benefit you internally"? Are you saying all supplements benefit all people all the time in all possible ways???

I'd be looking for proof in clinical trials. And if the supplements did work as advertised, then yes, you would expect to see their claims verified. Trouble is, most of them don't benefit most people internally, externally, or anywhere else.

And not everything can be proven in a lab.

Um - if you are making a health claim like most supplements make, then it should be possible to prove it in a clinic (not a lab) with double blind trials.

If you are making a health claim that can't be tested in any way, then you have absolutely no place making that claim in the first place!

jacksonpt

I'm not a big fan of supplements because of all the things I've read pointing to evidence that many don't work and some may even be harmful (vitamin E supplements for example).

Sure, when taken in extremely high doses it's harmful.

There are a plethora of health benefits from vitamin E.

As far as supplements "not working" what kind of proof are you looking for? Supplements benefit you internally. You're not going to physically see that they're working on your heart, mind, bones, etc.

Kind of a general statement, isn't it, that "Supplements benefit you internally"? Are you saying all supplements benefit all people all the time in all possible ways???

I'd be looking for proof in clinical trials. And if the supplements did work as advertised, then yes, you would expect to see their claims verified. Trouble is, most of them don't benefit most people internally, externally, or anywhere else.

And not everything can be proven in a lab.

Um - if you are making a health claim like most supplements make, then it should be possible to prove it in a clinic (not a lab) with double blind trials.

If you are making a health claim that can't be tested in any way, then you have absolutely no place making that claim in the first place!

Not necessarily. like you eluded to in your previous post, some things may affect 1 person or 1 group of people while having no affect (or to a different degree) to a different group of people. To prove something like that without exception is nearly impossible to do. There are just too many variables.

My point is simply that just because there isn't a study proving something doesn't mean it's not true, especially when considered under certain conditions/circumstances.

But conversely (and to your point), just because something is claimed doesn't mean it is true.

EddieHaskell97

As already stated, it depends upon the individual. I'm in a state of heavy ketosis and I'm not eating a "nutritionally adequate" level of vitamins. So yeah, I take a multivitamin / multimineral because I feel like hammered, refried #@*! if it don't. YMMV.

richardheath

I'm not a big fan of supplements because of all the things I've read pointing to evidence that many don't work and some may even be harmful (vitamin E supplements for example).

Sure, when taken in extremely high doses it's harmful.

There are a plethora of health benefits from vitamin E.

As far as supplements "not working" what kind of proof are you looking for? Supplements benefit you internally. You're not going to physically see that they're working on your heart, mind, bones, etc.

Kind of a general statement, isn't it, that "Supplements benefit you internally"? Are you saying all supplements benefit all people all the time in all possible ways???

I'd be looking for proof in clinical trials. And if the supplements did work as advertised, then yes, you would expect to see their claims verified. Trouble is, most of them don't benefit most people internally, externally, or anywhere else.

And not everything can be proven in a lab.

Um - if you are making a health claim like most supplements make, then it should be possible to prove it in a clinic (not a lab) with double blind trials.

If you are making a health claim that can't be tested in any way, then you have absolutely no place making that claim in the first place!

Not necessarily. like you eluded to in your previous post, some things may affect 1 person or 1 group of people while having no affect (or to a different degree) to a different group of people. To prove something like that without exception is nearly impossible to do. There are just too many variables.

Oh there could be a certain genetic background etc that means a certain supplement only works in a certain ethnic lineage, for example.

How do we find that out though?

My point is simply that just because there isn't a study proving something doesn't mean it's not true, especially when considered under certain conditions/circumstances.

And my point is - if you don't have a study showing it, how can you possibly make a claim that a product you are trying to sell to the public actually works? People can (and do) claim all sorts of things for all sorts of things. Which is why we need truth in advertising laws and the FDA. Supplements should be held to the same standard as any other consumer product. Would you buy a TV if there was no guarantee it could get a picture?

But conversely (and to your point), just because something is claimed doesn't mean it is true.

Right. Now if only there was a way of sorting out the ones that do work from the ones that don't... something that involved clinics and trials maybe... if only we could do that!!!!

jacksonpt

Oh there could be a certain genetic background etc that means a certain supplement only works in a certain ethnic lineage, for example.

Right. Now if only there was a way of sorting out the ones that do work from the ones that don't... something that involved clinics and trials maybe... if only we could do that!!!!

You're contradicting yourself.

or I'm confused.

or both.

richardheath

Oh there could be a certain genetic background etc that means a certain supplement only works in a certain ethnic lineage, for example.

Right. Now if only there was a way of sorting out the ones that do work from the ones that don't... something that involved clinics and trials maybe... if only we could do that!!!!

You're contradicting yourself.

or I'm confused.

or both.

Not contradicting myself.

There is a heart medication (not a supplement, I know) that was tested in a cross section of the population and found to have no benefit to the majority of people. In fact, looking at the raw data, it was a bust. However, a closer look at the data indicated that it did in fact work for a subset - in this case, people of recent African descent. And thus was born the first Blacks-only medicine.

How did they figure that out?

By running a clinical trial and crunching the data.

So yes, it is possible (although not probable) that one supplement could only work in a subset of the population. But the way to figure it out is still to do trials.

Without trials (which give you evidence), all you have is a guess, a hope, a belief.

I prefer evidence.

jacksonpt

Oh there could be a certain genetic background etc that means a certain supplement only works in a certain ethnic lineage, for example.

Right. Now if only there was a way of sorting out the ones that do work from the ones that don't... something that involved clinics and trials maybe... if only we could do that!!!!

You're contradicting yourself.

or I'm confused.

or both.

Not contradicting myself.

There is a heart medication (not a supplement, I know) that was tested in a cross section of the population and found to have no benefit to the majority of people. In fact, looking at the raw data, it was a bust. However, a closer look at the data indicated that it did in fact work for a subset - in this case, people of recent African descent. And thus was born the first Blacks-only medicine.

How did they figure that out?

By running a clinical trial and crunching the data.

So yes, it is possible (although not probable) that one supplement could only work in a subset of the population. But the way to figure it out is still to do trials.

Without trials (which give you evidence), all you have is a guess, a hope, a belief.

I prefer evidence.

Right, but my point is that it's impossible to test all possible people/groups/conditions to know if any given medication/supplement might work for a singular person.

So again... Just because there isn't proof doesn't mean it doesn't work.

richardheath

Right, but my point is that it's impossible to test all possible people/groups/conditions to know if any given medication/supplement might work for a singular person.

Well, that heart medicine is the only case I know where such a result was found. And that was a medicine. A dietary supplement is likely to be much more general than a specialized medicine.

So again... Just because there isn't proof doesn't mean it doesn't work.

So I will grant you that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Except for the ones where they HAVE looked and found them not to work.

Or are you really a special snowflake? Do raspberry ketones work for your weight loss?

But even if there is no negative evidence (and no positive evidence either) for a specific claim, why would you take a supplement? Do you take EVERY single supplement on the off chance that it might work for you? If not, why not? How do you decide which ones to take?

jacksonpt

Just to close up our discussion so the thread can get back on topic (if people want it to)...

Well, that heart medicine is the only case I know where such a result was found. And that was a medicine. A dietary supplement is likely to be much more general than a specialized medicine.

Admittedly, I'm speaking outside my realm of knowledge, so this is based on some logic and a bit of common sense only... When talking about vitamins and minerals, as was the original question, isn't it reasonable to think that they will have a greater impact the more extreme an individual's intake is of that vitamin. Someone who is VERY deficient in vitamin C will benefit greatly from a vitamin C supplement, while someone who isn't won't. Also, someone who has an excess would be affected even more so (or at least more apparently) by a greater excess, no? And in cases of excess, the problems would be magnified (potentially) with things that aren't water soluble.

If that makes sense, then you've got a whole range of supplements that are beneficial for a large group of people (people deficient in a given vitamin/mineral), a large group of people it will have no meainingful impact on (those with "reasonable" intake), and another group of people where it could have a detrimental impact (those already with an excess).


As for the rest of your post...
When people have looked but not found proof - that may disproove something, or it may simply suggest. They aren't the same thing.

lol... no, I'm not a special snowflake by any means. I'm about as average/typical as they come.

Because for $6 I can buy a small bottle of magnesium pills based on the recommendations of several and the readings of what appear to be credible articles stating mg can help with sleep problems. I can try it for a week with no real dangers and see if it has any noticeable impact. If it does, I can follow up with my doctor or do more thorough research about potential long term side effects of mg supplementation and at what doses those side effects occur.