Iron and calcium

jonnythan

A post of mine from August:

Check your vitamin D and calcium intake. I'd recommend a D3 supplement (700-1500 IU) if you don't spend a lot of time in the sun, and calcium if you're not getting enough in your diet. I recommend most people take fish oil as well.

You can toss a multi in there too. Shouldn't hurt anything, but I wouldn't sweat it too much.

Another, from April:

There are only a few supplements I think are really worthwhile.

Fish oil and vitamin D are at the top of the list. If you don't spend time in the sun every day, take a vitamin D3 supplement. Everyone should take fish oil.

Most women should be getting a calcium supplement if they don't have enough calcium in their diets.

Beyond that... meh. A multivitamin won't hurt anything.

I'd say my tune on supplements hasn't changed much. I don't recommend the fish oil anymore, I guess. I'm actually taking several mineral supplements right now.

I'm guessing Wendy just confused me with someone else.

So that whole "Call to heavily regulate the supplement industry" last November was just a troll thread? Nicely done! Cheers! :drinker:

I support a call to more heavily regulate the supplement industry. Supplement manufacturers should be required to establish safety and efficacy before bringing a new compound to market, and supplement manufacturers should be subject to periodic self-funded independent testing to verify that the supplements being sold actually contain what is advertised.

Safety and efficacy of calcium and iron have been scientifically established for decades, and I have no problem with calcium and iron supplement manufacturers having to establish that their products contain the quantity and type of iron indicated on the label.

So........ I guess you took the call to regulate the supplement industry as me stating that supplements are bad, or something? You were clearly horrendously misunderstanding everything I've said on the subject. Was it 4:20 at the time of the thread, perhaps?

quad64bit

Latest research shows multivitamins do nothing. The best thing you can do is eat well.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/multivitamin-researchers-say-case-is-closed-supplements-dont-boost-health/

just_Jennie1

I support a call to more heavily regulate the supplement industry. Supplement manufacturers should be required to establish safety and efficacy before bringing a new compound to market, and supplement manufacturers should be subject to periodic self-funded independent testing to verify that the supplements being sold actually contain what is advertised.

Regulated or made available by prescription only?

The supplement industry is regulated:

In the United States, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has regulatory responsibility for dietary supplements. FDA regulates dietary supplements under a different set of regulations than those covering "conventional" foods and drug products (prescription and over-the-counter). Under the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994, the dietary supplement manufacturer is responsible for ensuring that a dietary supplement is safe before it is marketed. FDA is responsible for taking action against any unsafe dietary supplement product after it reaches the market.

Manufacturers must make sure that product label information is truthful and not misleading. FDA's post-marketing responsibilities include monitoring safety, e.g. voluntary dietary supplement adverse event reporting, and product information, such as labeling, claims, package inserts, and accompanying literature.

The issue is that the FDA does do their own studies on supplements to "prove" how "harmful and dangerous" they are by giving amounts that are toxic to lab animals to prove that they need further regulation and should be available only through prescription. Why? Because they're not getting any money from the sale of supplements like they do with the sale of drugs. If they can prove they're harmful and push for stricter laws and regulations and take them off the shelves then bonus to them because then they can jack up the prices as much as they want and force you to jump through hoops to get them. Why should I have to go through my doctor to get my fish oil, Co10, multi-vitamin, vitamin D, calcium etc.?

jonnythan

I support a call to more heavily regulate the supplement industry. Supplement manufacturers should be required to establish safety and efficacy before bringing a new compound to market, and supplement manufacturers should be subject to periodic self-funded independent testing to verify that the supplements being sold actually contain what is advertised.

Regulated or made available by prescription only?

The supplement industry is regulated:

In the United States, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has regulatory responsibility for dietary supplements. FDA regulates dietary supplements under a different set of regulations than those covering "conventional" foods and drug products (prescription and over-the-counter). Under the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994, the dietary supplement manufacturer is responsible for ensuring that a dietary supplement is safe before it is marketed. FDA is responsible for taking action against any unsafe dietary supplement product after it reaches the market.

Manufacturers must make sure that product label information is truthful and not misleading. FDA's post-marketing responsibilities include monitoring safety, e.g. voluntary dietary supplement adverse event reporting, and product information, such as labeling, claims, package inserts, and accompanying literature.

The issue is that the FDA does do their own studies on supplements to "prove" how "harmful and dangerous" they are by giving amounts that are toxic to lab animals to prove that they need further regulation and should be available only through prescription. Why? Because they're not getting any money from the sale of supplements like they do with the sale of drugs. If they can prove they're harmful and push for stricter laws and regulations and take them off the shelves then bonus to them because then they can jack up the prices as much as they want and force you to jump through hoops to get them. Why should I have to go through my doctor to get my fish oil, Co10, multi-vitamin, vitamin D, calcium etc.?

Let's not turn this into the "regulate the supplement industry" thread. Please start a new thread or comment in the existing (but old) thread instead of polluting this woman's question about iron and calcium with it.

PS: No one said anything about prescriptions.

WendyTerry420

A post of mine from August:

Check your vitamin D and calcium intake. I'd recommend a D3 supplement (700-1500 IU) if you don't spend a lot of time in the sun, and calcium if you're not getting enough in your diet. I recommend most people take fish oil as well.

You can toss a multi in there too. Shouldn't hurt anything, but I wouldn't sweat it too much.

Another, from April:

There are only a few supplements I think are really worthwhile.

Fish oil and vitamin D are at the top of the list. If you don't spend time in the sun every day, take a vitamin D3 supplement. Everyone should take fish oil.

Most women should be getting a calcium supplement if they don't have enough calcium in their diets.

Beyond that... meh. A multivitamin won't hurt anything.

I'd say my tune on supplements hasn't changed much. I don't recommend the fish oil anymore, I guess. I'm actually taking several mineral supplements right now.

I'm guessing Wendy just confused me with someone else.

So that whole "Call to heavily regulate the supplement industry" last November was just a troll thread? Nicely done! Cheers! :drinker:

I support a call to more heavily regulate the supplement industry. Supplement manufacturers should be required to establish safety and efficacy before bringing a new compound to market, and supplement manufacturers should be subject to periodic self-funded independent testing to verify that the supplements being sold actually contain what is advertised.

Safety and efficacy of calcium and iron have been scientifically established for decades, and I have no problem with calcium and iron supplement manufacturers having to establish that their products contain the quantity and type of iron indicated on the label.

So........ I guess you took the call to regulate the supplement industry as me stating that supplements are bad, or something? You were clearly horrendously misunderstanding everything I've said on the subject. Was it 4:20 at the time of the thread, perhaps?

Why would you take ANY supplement then? Or, if safety and efficacy has been established, why new regs that will only raise the price? Now you are just contradicting yourself. I thought you might have learned something, but no, again, you are arguing just for the sake of argument, logic be damned. *sigh*

jonnythan

Why would you take ANY supplement then? Or, if safety and efficacy has been established, why new regs that will only raise the price? Now you are just contradicting yourself. I thought you might have learned something, but no, again, you are arguing just for the sake of argument, logic be damned. *sigh*

The purpose of taking a supplement is generally to correct a deficiency. I have no problem paying a little more for a supplement knowing that the extra money funds science and reliability.

Not sure where the contradiction is.

Anyway, this all started because you accused me of changing my tune on supplements. You laughed at me for it, in fact. Truth is my position has not changed and the entire argument is completely offtopic. It's not me who is arguing just to argue. You started by attacking me, not the other way around.

bcattoes

Iron supplements are easy to come by and apparently have good bioavailability. There anything wrong with just taking a supplement instead of trying to "eat a ton of spinach"?

There can be, yes. Too much iron can have negative health effects. I have always run low on iron. Several times I've been turned away from giving blood. But my doctor advised against supplements because I was only moderately low and a supplement could cause problems. As she put it, I have enough iron, just not enough to share.

bcattoes

I never seem to get my daily amount of iron and calcium, any tips so I increase this and not go over my daily calories. :frown:

More veggies, more dairy.

Can't see your diary so I can't recommend anything specific.

A calcium citrate + vitamin D supplement isn't a bad idea either.

Should be noted that the veggies and dairy shouldn't be consumed at the same time if you're trying to get the iron out of the vegetables. Calcium inhibits absorption of non-heme (basically non-meat) iron sources.

Fascinating, didn't know that.

Yeah, I've learned a few things about iron in 20 years of being a vegetarian. Like, you're shooting yourself in the foot if you're eating a ton of spinach to increase your iron but you're always adding cheese to your spinach salads to up the protein.

But spinach inhibits absorption of calcium. So, if the calcium is not absorbed, would it still inhibit absorption of the iron??

Dugleik

I've noticed that there are to many mistakes and missing entries for the micros to pay them attention. Go to your doctor and ask to be tested for deficiencies.

WendyTerry420

Why would you take ANY supplement then? Or, if safety and efficacy has been established, why new regs that will only raise the price? Now you are just contradicting yourself. I thought you might have learned something, but no, again, you are arguing just for the sake of argument, logic be damned. *sigh*

The purpose of taking a supplement is generally to correct a deficiency. I have no problem paying a little more for a supplement knowing that the extra money funds science and reliability.

Not sure where the contradiction is.

Anyway, this all started because you accused me of changing my tune on supplements. You laughed at me for it, in fact. Truth is my position has not changed and the entire argument is completely offtopic. It's not me who is arguing just to argue. You started by attacking me, not the other way around.

1) The supplement industry is run by liars and cheats and need even more regulation than what already exists

2) The supplements that *I* purchase are safe and effective and have been proven as such


:laugh:

jonnythan

Why would you take ANY supplement then? Or, if safety and efficacy has been established, why new regs that will only raise the price? Now you are just contradicting yourself. I thought you might have learned something, but no, again, you are arguing just for the sake of argument, logic be damned. *sigh*

The purpose of taking a supplement is generally to correct a deficiency. I have no problem paying a little more for a supplement knowing that the extra money funds science and reliability.

Not sure where the contradiction is.

Anyway, this all started because you accused me of changing my tune on supplements. You laughed at me for it, in fact. Truth is my position has not changed and the entire argument is completely offtopic. It's not me who is arguing just to argue. You started by attacking me, not the other way around.

1) The supplement industry is run by liars and cheats and need even more regulation than what already exists

2) The supplements that *I* purchase are safe and effective and have been proven as such


:laugh:

At some point you grossly misunderstood my call to have more regulation in the supplement industry as some sort of denouncement of all supplements under all circumstances.

You then took the opportunity to pounce on a post I made months later recommending a supplement as your chance to belittle and laugh at me for "changing my tune."

I hope you now understand that you completely misunderstood my position, and I don't wish to turn this thread concerning iron and calcium into a debate about the merits of regulating the supplement industry.