Vitamins
jr825
Posts: 7 Member
What would be the best brand of vitamins to buy ???
0
Replies
-
This content has been removed.
-
Depends purely upon your specific nutritional needs. I personally just plan on going back to Centrum tablets until I start lifting again. Once I do that, I'll probably switch back to Animal Pak.2
-
Unless you have a specific deficiency, the answer is none
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/more-evidence-that-routine-multivitamin-use-should-be-avoided/14 -
I buy the brand that's on sale and near expiry at my pharmacy. If you are in the US, look for the USP logo.
http://www.usp.org/usp-verification-services/usp-verified-dietary-supplements4 -
I take D because I'm deficient, any high quality brand will suffice.
I take a multi because they are cheap enough, so why not.
I take anything else I get for free from work because I like free stuff. As long as it's water soluble, I don't worry.
Would I take anything more than D and a multi if I had to pay for it? No... just a waste of money if my body doesn't need it.2 -
I started out with Centrum Silver. When they ran out I changed to the Equate One-A-Days. I found that I felt better with Equate (generic Walmart brand) and haven't been sick once since taking them. Since supplements aren't regulated, it's hard to tell which ones are really effective. Simply choose one that's made for men in your age bracket.2
-
I'm no expert, but have been working with supplements for 3 years. I prefer Nature's Way Alive. They're whole food based with extra blends to help support your specific needs and it's very cost effective. You can take a one-a-day or multiple. The more active you are the higher the dose of each nutrient you'll need. If you're an athlete or have a specific goal in mind aside from weight loss, there are many options, such as Animal Pak, that can help you acheive your goals.
Please just don't take Centrum. It's not worth the bottle it comes in.2 -
[quote="CaptainJoy;36936078"Since supplements aren't regulated, it's hard to tell which ones are really effective. Simply choose one that's made for men in your age bracket.[/quote]
Supplements are regulated by the FDA. They are just not allowed to make claims regarding treatment of specific illnesses. I wouldn't recommend picking just any vitamin. Last year there were several companies who got in trouble by the FDA for not meeting purity and/or potency standards.3 -
Excuse me for saying they are not regulated. I meant to say that the manufacturer is responsible for ensuring they contain what the label claims, not the FDA. The manufacturer is looking at the profit margin and can easily mislead or deceive the consumer, in my opinion.1
-
Centrum is pretty much useless, the active ingredients are far below RDI. In saying that, there is counter-evidence to show that supplements are in fact useful, particularly multivitamins. In fact they can be necessary for some people. Be careful of two opposing industries sponsoring research and propaganda in their power games against each other ;-)2
-
Yes - I used Centrum as well0
-
-I take a prescription vitamin D megadose once per week. I'm always deficient in this.
-I take the equate one-a-day for women. Some calcium, iron and the Bs are the main reason. I flip around as deficient in these from year to year, so I supplement now to prevent that. If I stay on keto, we'll see if I continue to need these.
-I take a cal/mag/zinc and extra salt and potassium because I'm still new to keto.
Lots of supplements right now! My body doesn't like being in a deficit, and goes haywire whenever I am. So to prevent my doctor from pulling her hair out, I work with her on where my deficiencies are on average.0 -
Vitamin B and D are definitely the key ones. Most people are deficient in vit D, and some 20% of the population is deficient in the natural form of Vit B-12 (methylcobalamine) which leads to depression, anxiety and insomnia. Funnily enough these people are also put on SSRI's, zolpidem and other medications when B-12 deficiency is the cause. PM me if you want me to get into it more.
I recommend a good brand like Life Extension for B12 and VitD. Whatever brand you choose, make sure the B12 is in the natural form (methylcobalmine) and NOT the synthetic, artificial mass-produced form of cyanocobalamin. The artificial version is not properly absorbed by the body and, additionally, is taxing on the liver. Quite simply the body doesn't know what to do with it since it doesn't exist naturally.2 -
Multivitamins usually don't contain a high enough dose to show a difference. When I want a minimum of vitamins I take Rainbow Light One a day Men's. For the vitamins separately: Vitamin A should be acquired by food(eggs,butter,liver) or beta carotene(spinach,lettuce,kale,sweet potatoes,carrots,etc). The B vitamins are usually low in most people and they should take a B-100 complex or the vitamins separately like I do. Vitamin C can be acquired by food easy if you eat fresh fruit but can be supplemented too. Most people are deficient in D since they don't get enough sun and should be supplemented. Most people are also low on vitamin E and should take mixed tocopherols. It's also good to supplement Vitamin K especially K2 since that is not in a lot of foods(natto,certain cheeses,eggs especially Pasture Raised.)
Don't forget minerals:
Most people are deficient in Magnesium, Zinc, Selenium, Iodine and Chromium.0 -
Vitamin B and D are definitely the key ones. Most people are deficient in vit D, and some 20% of the population is deficient in the natural form of Vit B-12 (methylcobalamine) which leads to depression, anxiety and insomnia. Funnily enough these people are also put on SSRI's, zolpidem and other medications when B-12 deficiency is the cause. PM me if you want me to get into it more.
I recommend a good brand like Life Extension for B12 and VitD. Whatever brand you choose, make sure the B12 is in the natural form (methylcobalmine) and NOT the synthetic, artificial mass-produced form of cyanocobalamin. The artificial version is not properly absorbed by the body and, additionally, is taxing on the liver. Quite simply the body doesn't know what to do with it since it doesn't exist naturally.
I eat sardines almost every day since they are so high in B-12, omega 3 and protein.0 -
FunkyTobias wrote: »Unless you have a specific deficiency, the answer is none
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/more-evidence-that-routine-multivitamin-use-should-be-avoided/
Science based medicine is a joke. Skeptics don't know what they are talking about.3 -
TheDevastator wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Unless you have a specific deficiency, the answer is none
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/more-evidence-that-routine-multivitamin-use-should-be-avoided/
Science based medicine is a joke. Skeptics don't know what they are talking about.
Please elaborate why you believe this. What actual critiques you have about their methodology, apart from the fact that many of their conclusions conflict with your beliefs?
4 -
TheDevastator wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Unless you have a specific deficiency, the answer is none
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/more-evidence-that-routine-multivitamin-use-should-be-avoided/
Science based medicine is a joke. Skeptics don't know what they are talking about.
Science bad........
3 -
I'll chime in here, since I agree with TheDevastator. These are my beliefs though.FunkyTobias wrote: »Please elaborate why you believe this. What actual critiques you have about their methodology, apart from the fact that many of their conclusions conflict with your beliefs?
If you look into the primary influence behind "Science Based medicines" war on supplement brands, it's pharmaceutical companies. Follow the money trail behind any major clinical review or meta analysis targeted against supplement products and you'll find it is, in some way, sponsored by a university board with ties to pharmaceutical companies, or is conducted by some organization sponsored by pharmaceutical companies.
The great irony is that these studies are critical of supplement brands and yet they themselves fall into a heavy bias by promoting prescription drugs instead, which, you guessed it - funded the research indirectly.
In fact an impartial review study found that the conflict of interest and bias is LOWER in published peer-reviewed papers that tout the benefits of supplements than those studies touting the benefit of prescription drugs. Be wary of who's really behind the "science based medicine" that critiques supplements.
4 -
I'll chime in here, since I agree with TheDevastator. These are my beliefs though.FunkyTobias wrote: »Please elaborate why you believe this. What actual critiques you have about their methodology, apart from the fact that many of their conclusions conflict with your beliefs?
If you look into the primary influence behind "Science Based medicines" war on supplement brands, it's pharmaceutical companies. Follow the money trail behind any major clinical review or meta analysis targeted against supplement products and you'll find it is, in some way, sponsored by a university board with ties to pharmaceutical companies, or is conducted by some organization sponsored by pharmaceutical companies.
The great irony is that these studies are critical of supplement brands and yet they themselves fall into a heavy bias by promoting prescription drugs instead, which, you guessed it - funded the research indirectly.
In fact an impartial review study found that the conflict of interest and bias is LOWER in published peer-reviewed papers that tout the benefits of supplements than those studies touting the benefit of prescription drugs. Be wary of who's really behind the "science based medicine" that critiques supplements.
From the article
Which is an odd statement to make, as I don’t see the Annals or any “scientist” suggesting we should substitute vitamins with drugs for any of the conditions studied. The science is in fact very clear on this point: The healthiest approach, and the science-based approach, is to obtain your vitamins from your food – not from supplements.
If you had bothered to read the article you would have seen that several of the studies that failed to show any benefit were funded by the makers of the supplements themselves5 -
.0
-
FunkyTobias wrote: »From the article
Which is an odd statement to make, as I don’t see the Annals or any “scientist” suggesting we should substitute vitamins with drugs for any of the conditions studied. The science is in fact very clear on this point: The healthiest approach, and the science-based approach, is to obtain your vitamins from your food – not from supplements.
If you had bothered to read the article you would have seen that several of the studies that failed to show any benefit were funded by the makers of the supplements themselves
You're right, I didn't bother to read it since I'm tired of propaganda from both sides of the spectrum. I had hope when it said that those suffering from deficiencies may find use in specific supplementations, but then it went on to state that the vast majority of people within the US wouldn't need such supplementation. This just isn't true. Looking at Vit D alone and RDI levels, up to 40% of the population may be deficient 1 2 3, and if you read into these you'll see mentions of lack of multivitamin use as being correlated to this Vit D deficiency. That's just one vitamin I picked out, we could do it for many others.
Hardly the case that the majority of people don't need a multivitamin.0 -
FunkyTobias wrote: »From the article
Which is an odd statement to make, as I don’t see the Annals or any “scientist” suggesting we should substitute vitamins with drugs for any of the conditions studied. The science is in fact very clear on this point: The healthiest approach, and the science-based approach, is to obtain your vitamins from your food – not from supplements.
If you had bothered to read the article you would have seen that several of the studies that failed to show any benefit were funded by the makers of the supplements themselves
You're right, I didn't bother to read it since I'm tired of propaganda from both sides of the spectrum. I had hope when it said that those suffering from deficiencies may find use in specific supplementations, but then it went on to state that the vast majority of people within the US wouldn't need such supplementation. This just isn't true. Looking at Vit D alone and RDI levels, up to 40% of the population may be deficient 1 2 3, and if you read into these you'll see mentions of lack of multivitamin use as being correlated to this Vit D deficiency. That's just one vitamin I picked out, we could do it for many others.
Hardly the case that the majority of people don't need a multivitamin.
Targeted supplementation is not the same as indiscriminate multivitamin use.
From the same site
But there are also many situations in which targeted supplementation is evidence-based and appropriate. There is increasing evidence to support the use of vitamin D supplementation for many populations. Many elderly have borderline or low B12 levels, which correlates with dementia. Pregnant women should take prenanatal vitamins. (To give just a few examples.)
https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/vitamins-and-mortality/
ETA You might want to look up the definition of majority. (Hint: it's not 40%)1 -
https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/more-evidence-that-routine-multivitamin-use-should-be-avoided/
Conclusion
Three new papers published in the Annals of Internal Medicine add to an accumulated body of research that has studied the health effects of routine vitamin and mineral supplements in healthy populations. The best available evidence gives us good, reliable information to conclude that multivitamins offer no meaningful health benefits to the generally healthy consumer. It’s time to bring an end to the era of indiscriminate multivitamin use.
https://examine.com/faq/do-i-need-a-multivitamin/
Healthy or dangerous?
Neither, really.
There is insufficient evidence to suggest a multivitamin is associated with less risk of cancer and disease,[6] and this holds true when investigating the most popular compounds in multivitamins, the anti-oxidants.[7][8][9]
Some studies note higher mortality associated with multivitamin use, but the relative risk ratios tend to not surpass 2.00 (in which a number greater than 1, or no difference, suggests a stronger possible relation). This is not strong evidence for causation.[10] This weak association is also found when cherry-picking some other studies,[11] but strong relationships between multivitamins and harm have not been found.
Some studies that investigated both benefit and harm, report neither.[12][13]
Although nutrients in multivitamins may confer benefits when used for a specific purpose, (as some studies note high variability, suggesting some people benefit and others do not)[14][15][16] the idea of taking a pill that contains all of the vitamins and minerals to better one's health does not appear to be supported by the literature. However, it does not appear to be significantly harmful either.
http://www.businessinsider.com/what-vitamins-should-i-take-2015-10
Multivitamins: Skip them — you get everything you need with a balanced diet.
For decades, it was assumed that multivitamins were critical to overall health. Vitamin C to "boost your immune system," Vitamin A to protect your vision, Vitamin B to keep you energized.
Not only do you already get these ingredients from the food you eat, but studies suggest that consuming them in excess can actually cause harm. A large 2011 study of close to 39,000 older women over 25 years found that women who took them in the long term actually had a higher overall risk of death than those who did not.4 -
I will state that I take a number of vitamina and minerals based on blood testing and I take a multi for the hell of it. Bias aside I am not sure the text above is meaningful to the discussion.
I agree that a balanced diet will give most people what they need. No argument there. The problem is that people don't always have a balanced diet. If a balanced diet was commonplace then we wouldn't have quite the obesity problem we do. A better study would be to look at a "typical" diet and determine if a multi is effective.
Regarding the consumption in excess, I believe it to be true but we are talking a daily multi and not an overdose of vitamins. The statement is confusing and tends to contradict the earlier statement about multis not being harmful. Why throw in the last paragraph to confuse the issue. It is now a comparison of apples and oranges for shock value in my opinion.
If you eat a healthy, balanced diet then a multi is probably not necessary. For the rest of us it doesn't sound completely clear. I choose to take a multi because I don't see any downside.1 -
I take specific vitamins when I feel I need them. I, like a LARGE percent of the population am deficient in vitamin D I know this because I had labs done. If I don't get enough sunlight that day I pop a vitamin D. I also make sure I don't take it with anything else that can block it's absorption. I do this with other vitamins the exact same way. I don't generally do a multi just because it seems in my mind that everything would block the absorption of everything else. But I think vitamins are very useful when used correctly. I should also note that since I started taking Vitamin D I have had labs done again and my levels have come up significantly so I know they are working and not just BS.2
-
I got my blood tested and found I was deficient in vitamin d, and calcium. My doctor also recommended I take coq10 to help bring my good cholesterol number higher (my bad cholesterol was low, but she thought that my good one should be higher). I take a fish oil to help me absorb them and the vitamin e I take. That's all I do. On occasion I will take 1/2 a b complex tablet (my chiropractor suggested that and/or b6 would help with my uterine cramps).0
-
A vitamin D test costs $150 and up. Insurance only pays for it if it is medically necessary (perhaps obesity is a reason, maybe depression or fatigue - I really don't know).
Careful if you start asking doctors for tests !
Blood calcium test is not a measure of bone density (two completely different things).
Having low calcium in blood is probably a very good thing.
I take a multi, and I'm done.1 -
Now foods brand0
-
All I know is that you can't get all your required micronutrients from food without going way over on calories.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions