The mass media have done it again. Another news story reported on every network that Vitamins C and E are useless–might even do you harm though they didn’t even pretend to have any evidence for that claim. Of course, these reports are delivered by M.D.s who have no training in nutrition and journalists who evidently have no knowledge of nutritional supplements nor do they know how to evaluate scientific studies.

The sensationalized story may have boosted ratings during the “sweeps week” in November when network audiences are measured in order to set advertising rates. The latest antioxidant study involved some 14,000 men (male physicians) taking various combinations of vitamin C and/or E or placebo. After eight years there was no reported difference in heart attack or stroke incidence among the groups. Vola! The simpletons in the media, supported by the AMA of course, tell consumers they shouldn’t bother spending their money on these supplements.

If Memory serves me–over 8 years
Now in reviewing this study, we’ll cut to the chase and look at the methodology used in the study. And Vola! At the conclusion of the study 28% of the subjects admitted they hadn’t taken the supplements even two-thirds of the time. And the researchers were relying solely on the participants’ MEMORY of their compliance for the past eight years! Yet when the calculations for heart attack or stroke incidence were made, those who took as little as 66% of their low-dose vitamin C and or E supplements were counted as having taken the entire dose.

On editorial review boards on which I serve, the methodology alone would have drawn a “thumbs down” or rejection for publication. But even with poor methodology that shouldn’t have made it past the reviewers, the study was set up for the effectiveness of the supplements to fail by choices made in dosage, frequency, and type.

Vitamin C>700mg for Cardiovascular Effects
Several published studies documenting vascular benefits in response to Vitamin C use doses of 1000-6000mg DAILY. The authors alluded to this in their study, that Vit C intakes exceeding 700mg/day significantly reduce heart attack rate. Yet they limited their subjects to 500mg.

Vitamin E–Synthetic vs. Natural forms
In every single study involving Vitamin E, the first factor to examine is whether the form of E is natural or synethetic. With most vitamins natural or synthetic makes no significant difference; in fact, the synthetic is the only form available for most. Not so with Vitamin E, where the natural form has proven far superior. Natural Vit E is distributed through the body much better (2x-3x) than the synthetic form.

Do the researchers actually not know the difference or choose to ignore it? I have yet to see a study bashing Vit E that used the natural form. When shopping, look for the “d” form of E (d-alpha tocopheryl acetate). The “dl” form (dl-alpha…) is the synthetic form. I remember it as the “damned-liar” form. I’ve inadvertently bought the dl-alpha form and experienced first-hand the inadequacy of synthetic E.

So the participants in this study were told to take one 400IU capsule of synthetic Vit E every other day. As the director of the Life Extension Foundation writes in his rebuttal, ”
First of all, we don’t take our vitamins every other day. Free radicals are constantly being generated in our bodies, and supplement users today seek to take their antioxidants with most meals, as oxidative damage is generally the greatest after eating.
It is rather ludicrous to think that these study subjects would reduce their vascular disease risk by taking modest dose, every other day, of a form of vitamin E with inferior anti-oxidant capacity.”

So this study that had such media fanfare used critically poor methodology to record compliance with the study, used dosages known to be insufficient, a synethic version of Vit E known to be inferior in absorption, and frequency known to be inadequate. Could it be more blatant that the study was designed to show the supplements fail to improve health?

We could ask, Why is there such a die-hard, hell-bent drive in the USA for poor health? The answer, of course, is Profits, Business, the profits of pharmaceutical companies and insurance companies (which are sick-care insurance, not health-care). The members of the AMA are in the pockets of Big Pharma, and these same MDs serve on government committees so the government ends up working on behalf of the trioka–Big Pharma, AMA, Insurance industry. But I’m ranting… (Have you read The China Project by Colin Campbell yet? The insider report from an eminent scientist which proves the validity of my–and your–ranting.)

You are the Experiment of One
With every pharma, herb, or supplement you (and I) take we are an experiment of one. I have a methodology that works for me: if a nutritionist or Phylis Balch’s Prescription for Nutritional Healing or my mother recommends a supplement (and she wisely reminded me of Omega 3-fish oil recently which quickly resolved skeletal pain), I try it and watch for improvements or reactions. If, after a 30-day supply is finished, I go without it a few days to test whether it’s still needed before getting a refill. When all is said and done, your own health is all that really matters, not the results of studies! Respond to this post and tell us what your method is or your results.

Salud!
Beverly A Jensen, Ph.D.
President, www.WomensMedicineBowl.com
“You are an Experiment of One”