PDA

View Full Version : Vitamins are no good?????


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums

Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!



F.tuley
Fri, Aug-09-02, 05:37
I was watching the news on tv the other day,an they said it has been proved that taking vitamins will make no difference at all,and the only way we can get vitamins is to get them directly from the food we eat.I would like to know if someone else new this,since then i have stopped all my vitamins.
I would like to know if this is true or not,but was some university that proved vitamins tablets dont do nothing to us.
Someone let me know,please.
Fatima :wave:

doreen T
Fri, Aug-09-02, 06:54
hi Fatima,

I can understand your confusion. There are as many "studies" showing vitamins DON'T work as there are showing that they do. Often the studies/ experiments showing that they have no effect use low and insufficient doses of the nutrient.

We had a discussion recently about this. Check out Are Vitamins useless?..found this write-up on my home page. (http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=49980)

On Studies showing Vitamin Supplements as worthless (http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=52854)hth,

Doreen

squidgy
Sat, Aug-10-02, 09:38
I recently altered my vitamin supplements - in particular, I upped my intake of vitamin C and chelated magnesium. And the constipation problems that I had been having went away. Oh, and my hayfever has eased off too, I haven't had to keep on taking antihistamines. I suppose these people would say I was imagining that, then?

I used to be of the opinion that if it makes a difference, Holland & Barrett don't sell it (eg paracetamol and cigarettes), if it makes a noticeable difference, you need a prescription for it (eg Prozac and Valium) and if it makes a big difference, it's illegal (eg cocaine). My attitude has totally changed now that I've started to see real differences.

Vitamins, minerals and oils appear in food, so to say that they don't make a difference is a bit like saying that food doesn't make a difference either. And if food doesn't make a difference, then that rather defeats the point of going on a diet, and it makes nonsense of the idea of the existence of such a thing as an "eating disorder".

That Oxford research cited in the article Voyajer quoted at http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?threadid=52854 doesn't prove that vitamins have no effect. All it proves is that there are other causes of cancer and heart disease besides deficiencies in antioxidants. But we knew that already, otherwise we wouldn't have started low carb diets, or made such a fuss about quitting smoking. Tell us something we don't know! :lol:

I think there definitely is a point. Nutrients make a difference. However, I think it's not unreasonable to think that some of the effect of some nutrients, either from food or supplements, may be somewhat lost on you if you also happen to be eating lots of refined sugar, drinking coffee or cola, smoking, or taking guarana, ephedra, yohimbe, SSRI's, MAOI's, benzodiazepines or illegal drugs.

In order for the brain to work and minimise the chance of depression, anxiety and insomnia, I believe it helps to ensure you're having a good dose of all the B complex vitamins, vitamin C, magnesium, calcium, zinc and omega-3. Not all the off-the-shelf multivitamins can be relied upon to have adequate amounts of these nutrients by themselves, and you'll definitely have to take oils separately - fish oil is best but if you're a veggie you'll have to make do with flaxseed. Once you've got that far, there are other vitamins and minerals that can help with other specific things about your health that you want to improve.

Few nutrients are dangerous on overdose, and those which are are usually labelled. A deficiency is usually more dangerous. Do you really want to risk your health by relying on getting all the nutrients you need from your diet, just to save a bit of money? Besides, even ignoring health concerns, sometimes it's a false economy. Sure, you eat when you're hungry, but you don't want to force feed yourself, especially if you're otherwise restricting your diet to try to lose weight. Finding adequate food sources of particular nutrients can sometimes be more expensive than taking the equivalent supplement anyway.

gary
Tue, Aug-13-02, 08:24
I think what we have to discriminate between are vitamins that we do not get enough from food and vitamins that we can get from food. This is not easy to determine. The general consensus is that we all should take a one a day vitamin that contains at least 400mcg of folic acid. Folic acid or folate is one supplement that it is difficult to get enough from food. The other thing is minerals. The Federal Government said in the 1930's that our soil is depleted of minerals. Farmers do not spend money to put minerals back into the soil. So we can not get enough minerals from the food we eat.

One more slant on this is - I have been asking for examples of actual improvements people feel when taking a supplement. For example I had a problem with soreness/fatigue in my back muscles between the diet and excersise - my back was not getting better. Jinkster recommended Potassium - I feel this has definitely helped me. Getting Potassium from food is easier but with the Atkins diet we should supplement. Others cited Calcium and Vitamin C. My doctor takes 2G of Vitamin C a day based on his research. I would be careful with that much.

I am following a minimalist approach taking a one a day plus supplementing with 100-400mg potassium as needed. Will probably start a 500mg time release vitamin C