August 20, 2014

Are Vitamin Supplements Dangerous?

pin it button Are Vitamin Supplements Dangerous?

various vitamins 300x200 Are Vitamin Supplements Dangerous?

by Alliance for Natural Health

New info about last week’s horribly flawed vitamin study. This story keeps getting worse and worse. A new Action Alert!

Last Monday the Archives of Internal Medicine released a study claiming that vitamin use might lead to an earlier death. This set off a major media feeding frenzy, wave after wave of scary stories. Fox’s headline was typical: “Are Your Supplements Killing You?”

In our article last Tuesday, we pointed out that the study was “junk science” at its worst. The data were “observational”: women in Iowa were asked what supplements they were taking three times over eighteen years—that is every six years. Who remembers what they have taken over six years?

In addition, it was all anecdotal: you didn’t have to say what you were taking specifically, just vague terms like “multivitamin.” Were the vitamins synthetic or natural? How much did they take? Did they really take it, and for how long? Did they take it to stay healthy or because they had become very ill, perhaps with cancer? No one knows.

The next day, Dr. Robert Verkerk, our scientific director, weighed in. His analysis reveals, among many other interesting points, that all of the data was “adjusted” by the authors using methods of their own choice. If you look at the study itself, the first thing you see is an adjustment for “age and energy,” whatever “energy” means in this case. After this adjustment, vitamins C, B complex, E, D, as well as calcium, magnesium, selenium, and zinc all appear to add to years lived.

This evidently wasn’t an acceptable conclusion. So two more adjustments were made. First, if you had a healthy lifestyle and took vitamin C and lived longer, the longer life was attributed largely to the healthy lifestyle and not to the vitamin C. That put everything except B complex and calcium into neutral or negative territory.

Still the authors weren’t satisfied. They adjusted again, this time for healthy eating, with the result that every supplement except calcium, B complex, and vitamin D became a contributor to an earlier death, according to this undocumented and completely loony math, and only calcium actually lengthened life. Not surprisingly, almost none of this—except possibly for the the use of copper supplements taken by 24 women at the end of the study—could be claimed to be statistically significant, even using the authors’ own methods.

The only accurate conclusion that can be drawn from this data is that supplement users are generally healthier people. The why and how and whether it is meaningful is really unknown

The authors of the study admitted they started out with a hypothesis that supplements wouldn’t add to life. It appears, although it is not revealed, that the supplement users actually lived longer than the non-supplement users. But the authors just manipulated the data until they got what they wanted and more: Supplements not only didn’t help—they were killers! And the lazy, biased, or naïve major media took it from there.

Life Extension Foundation also did its own scientific analysis of the Archives of Internal Medicine study. Among other things, it pointed out that copper and iron are pro-oxidants, so their overuse should be expected to lead to earlier mortality. It also noted that many people start taking supplements only after they become ill, which is not controlled for in any way, and that a sizeable minority of the supplements users were also taking drugs that have since been proved to be highly dangerous—patented hormones in particular—although no attempt whatever was made to control for drug use.

To pretend to control for so many factors but not to control for drug use—and to get through peer review this way—is a sad commentary on the state of medical research today. Could this be related to the overwhelming influence of drug companies on medical research in general?

Mike Adams’ also offered a close analysis of the junk science. In addition to covering what it referred to as the study’s “statistical voodoo,” it also reminded us that the Archives of Internal Medicine “receives millions of dollars in advertising from drug companies,” part of the $400 million that goes from drug companies to medical journals, and that the major media trumpeting the study in scary headlines also stay afloat from the $4.7 billion spent in Pharma-to-consumer ads (all of this data is from 2008, and is actually higher now).

As Dr. David Brownstein noted in a video interview with Adams: “This study says absolutely nothing about vitamins. If this study was done in reverse, where vitamins were shown to be effective [easily accomplished with some further data manipulation], no journal would have printed [it] because it was so poorly done.”

It might also be worth mentioning that the results of this so-called study contradict another Archives of Internal Medicine study from 2009, with four times as many participants, which showed that vitamins neither helped nor hurt mortality. We have to point out, however, that the earlier study from the same journal was also junk science. The main difference between the two is that in 2009 the apparently biased authors thought they would generate controversy be saying that popular supplements didn’t help, while the clearly biased authors in 2011 took their screwy methodology right over the cliff.

After offering such shoddy work, the authors even had the temerity to advise people: “We recommend that [supplements only] be used with… symptomatic nutrient deficiency disease.” The problem is that, having set out to prove this point, the authors have only demeaned themselves with their methods.

Two other researchers, invited to comment by the journal, say that the study findings “add to the growing evidence demonstrating that certain anti-oxidant supplements, such as vitamin E, vitamin A, and beta carotene, can be harmful.” The trouble with this glib statement is that even the most “adjusted” data about these three supplements in the study is not statistically significant.

If you take a look at our web archive, you will see many articles about outrageous medical research studies and media distortions of even good studies. We can’t afford to let these pass by. At this very moment, the FDA is trying to revise the regulations governing supplements (see our Action Alert!) in a way that could raise supplement prices sky high and greatly restrict your choice. Senator Durbin has a bill in the Senate (see our Action Alert!) that would do the same. This phony Archives of Internal Medicine study will be used by the FDA and Durbin. It will fan the flames. We need to get the truth out there in response.

To do so, we have two new Action Alerts.

The first one is for doctors and scientists and will go to the editor of the Archives of Internal Medicine.

The second is for consumers, doctors, and scientists (note that we need doctors and scientists as well as consumers), and it will go to major media outlets—places like Bloomberg, AP, Reuters, NPR, Time, the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, NBC, USA Today, the Daily Beast, and Fox, among others. It will also go to Congress because of the connection to new FDA regulations and the Durbin bill.

Read the Full Article Here:

0 commentsback to post

Other articlesgo to homepage

Unapproved but Effective Cancer Cures

Unapproved but Effective Cancer Cures

Pin It

The conventional cancer treatment system and the pharmaceutical companies that control it are dedicated to limiting the development of all other forms of cancer treatment. They have a chokehold on the development of alternative treatments, and they ruthlessly work together with the US FDA and various US government cancer research funding agencies to prevent new treatments from being approved for use by physicians. The reason is that most alternative cancer treatments are much less expensive than surgery, radiation, and chemo. They are also more effective and have many fewer (if any) unwanted side effects.

The great fear of the pharmaceutical industry, and the vast cancer treatment system that it controls, is that a non-patentable and inexpensive cure for cancer might put them out of business. Sadly, these organizations exist to turn a profit from cancer treatment, which is measured in the billions of dollars every year. They are in the business of treating cancer not curing it.

Alternative treatments for cancer have a history of curing cancer and it is this fact that big pharma wants to hide from the American public. Historically, many successful approaches have been developed for curing cancer. We give a review of many of the most popular ones here.

Report: FDA Deliberately Deceptive – Poisoning Millions of Americans

Report: FDA Deliberately Deceptive – Poisoning Millions of Americans

Pin It

US consumers are in dark about mercury in dental products—and they are kept there deliberately by the government. This is documented in a new report being released this week by Consumers for Dental Choice called “Measurably Misleading: Evidence the FDA and Dental Industry are Deliberately Deceiving American Families about Mercury Dental Fillings and Why That Now Has International Consequences.”

Mercury is a known neurotoxin, yet mercury fillings presents one of the largest consumer consumption of mercury worldwide, and dental amalgam represents the largest use of mercury in consumer products in the US. We’ve also been kept in in the dark about mercury in other consumer products because of the FDA. Thimerosal, a mercury compound often found in flu vaccines, is being ignored as a danger.

Detox Your Liver with Homemade Lemon Water

Detox Your Liver with Homemade Lemon Water

Pin It

One of the drinks I routinely make for myself and my family in the mornings is lemon water. Not to be confused with “lemonade,” a sweetened beverage, lemon water is a detoxifying health drink consisting of nothing but one whole lemon and warm water.

Much of the research on lemon water’s ability to detoxify the liver is centered around the antioxidant D-Limonene, which is more concentrated in the peel of the lemon. D-limonene has been shown to activate enzymes in the liver that lead to detoxification. It has also been shown to treat cancer.

The Healing Properties of Clove Essential Oil

The Healing Properties of Clove Essential Oil

Pin It

The ancient texts all seem to agree on the many therapeutic properties of clove – it is a stimulant and has stomachic, expectorant, sedative, carminative, antispasmodic and digestive qualities. It helps flatulence, stimulates digestion and restores appetite, so is good for convalescence. It is a general tonic for both physical and intellectual weakness; and for those suffering from frigidity.

Its principal therapeutic value, though, is antiseptic because of the high proportion of eugenol. This is used for intestinal parasites, and for prevention of virus infections. It is good for the immune system, and particularly effective in mouth and tooth infections.

Here is a review of some of scientific studies published around the world regarding the healing properties of clove essential oil.

How Tart Cherries Reduce Inflammation and Oxidative Stress

How Tart Cherries Reduce Inflammation and Oxidative Stress

Pin It

Tart cherries are known to have among the highest anti-inflammatory content of any food in the world. Daily consumption of tart cherry juice or concentrate leads to a reduction in markers of inflammation and oxidative stress and allows people with specific diseases to manage their pain long-term without medications.

read more

Get the news right in your inbox!