I guess Sheldon stands in as Cecil … “The common perception”.
Conventional medicine says “eat good food, not vitamin pills”, and yet gives iron supplements and so on. GP type doctors want the cure ‘state’… do they inject iron into the muscles to make it slow release ?
And so the answer to the question is "no, because there are no slow release vitamin pills "
I should patent the idea…
Depends on what else you eat. If your diet consists of pop tarts, tater tots, diet Mountain Dew and McNuggets, you need a supplemental source of vitamins. that cannot be found in sugar, fat and salt.
Another problem with multivitamins is it gives some people the idea that they have the license to eat whatever they want and nutritionally they are ok, as long as they pop their multi. They can actually worsen a person’s health in the sense that they can cause a person to deprive themselves of even more whole-food nutrition than they would sans multivitamin.
I bet the diet you posit isn’t as nutritionally deficient as you think. High in sugar, fat, and salt, yes, but probably also containing enough of what you need to keep you from getting rickets, scurvy, or goiter. Severe vitamin deficiencies are extremely uncommon in the United States. If your diet consists of little more than rice because that’s all that you can afford, then yes, vitamin deficiencies are a real problem. In the U.S. the problem is usually that you’re getting too much of something (calories, at the end of the day), not that you’re not getting enough of something.
The issue of whether or not to take a multi-vitamin is a personal one and I don’t think there’s a generic right answer. I do, but that’s me. FWIW: I was in the health food biz (in a manner of speaking), have dealt with clients with deficiencies of various kinds; also, pain, inflammation and a host of other problems and vitamins, minerals and botanicals (echinacaia, ginger supplements, cranberry caps and oregano oil, just for starter, can make a huge difference in the quality of one’s life (I use ginger and curry for inflammation rather than NSAIDs).
To return to the OP, I advise researching health and nurrition yourself, buy a book on nutrition, visit websites run by doctors ( admittedly some of them ate quacks) and learn, learn, learn. Nutrition is something that really should be taught in school, starting in junior high/middle school. With a solid grounding in the subject it would be much easier to form an opinion. Another thing (and then I promise to stop), when buying supplements braind names are very important. What brand you buy, the potential of each pill, the source of the vitamin (natural or synthetic) ; whether the pills themselves contain soy, yeast or sugar, are serious issues and need looking into. The best consumer is an educated one.
In some areas of the UK the problem is a lot worse than you’re stating. I’m vitamin d deficient because it goes along with rheumatoid arthritis, but my doctor said that 40% of the residents in my borough are vitamin d deficient. I’m also iron deficient for the same reason, calcium deficient for some unknown reason and vitamin b deficient because I don’t eat meat.
Apart from the vitamin b, which I assumed would be a problem and take supplements for anyway, I would never have known about the others if I hadn’t been tested.
But that’s the real question. Just because you get 50% or 80% of the optimum amount doesn’t mean you will break out with ricketts and goiters. It just means some of your body processes will run at a sub-optimum level; for example, many people are diagnosed with mild anemia. Not getting or retaining enough iron is not fatal. The same could be said for other nutrients. Vitamin D deficiency may be linked to seasonal depression in northern latitudes. Insufficient calcium results in osteoporosis. etc.
If you could use 100mg of vitamin D, a pill with 500mg is better for you than 0. I’m not suggesting the body “stores” any leftovers. In fact, the result that you make pretty pee suggests the body did not need or could not absorb all these nutrients… or a bit of both.
The whole “take vitamins” recommendation is grounded on the theory that while a normal diet will provide sufficient levels of nutrients (vitamins, minerals) to prevent problems, it will not provide the optimum amount. Plus, taking a bit more than necessary suggests you are more likely to end up absorbing the optimum amount.
the question I’m asking is, does taking with a meal a pill with say, 35mcg chromium picolinate, mean your body will absorb at least some of that chromium? Or is that simply label decoration for the manufacturer? I assume if the chemical is mixed in with the contents of a meal that your body will absorb a decent amount of what it needs from that mix.
Sure, it’s a nice theory. But research shows that routine, indiscriminate use of vitamins does not extend lifespans, does not prevent chronic disease (see the 6th post, and references therein). Maybe it “should”, by your reasoning, but it doesn’t.
It’s not really a strange concept. Ezetimibe is a drug that lowers cholesterol. High cholesterol levels are linked to cardiovascular disease. We would (and people did) expect ezetimibe to improve outcomes for people with cardiovascular problems. We even know that statins, which also lower cholesterol, do improve outcomes (i.e. fewer heart attacks). But when a study was done, exetimibe didn’t improve outcomes,
The responses were also similar. I would like to think, that in the face of such data, people would stop routinely taking multivitamins/doctors would stop prescribing ezetimbe. But neither has occurred. We have this idea in our heads that they should work, for perfectly logical reasons. They don’t. It might be interesting to find out why they don’t work like they “should”. The proper response is not to keep taking them.
But if the food you eat has too low a vitamin/mineral concentration, you have a constant urge to eat more. If all you get is calorie-heavy, then yes, you get the good stuff, but at the cost of having to consume way too much bad stuff in order to stave off ricketts and scurvy.
Americans are rich enough and have capacious enough bellies to consume enough tonnage of fat and sugar and starch to get the tag-along RDA of nutrients . Alternatively, they can consume supplements, and get enough nutrients without the junk food load.
Furthermore, some of the junk food we do eat (like sugar frosted flakes and sliced white bread) is fortified with the same supplements that come in bottles of caplets, which encourages people to eat even more junk…
Actually, in the case of vitamin D the body DOES store leftovers. It is possible to have too much vitamin D. So if “you could use” 100mg and take 500mg every day you might well be storing an additional 400mg every day. Now, doing that once in awhile isn’t going to harm you - in the natural world nutrients don’t arrive in the body in precisely measured amounts so critters have evolved ways to smooth out the day-to-day differences - but doing so every day long term potentially could harm you.
In general, water soluble vitamins like C don’t build up in the body, excess is quickly excreted. Fat soluble vitamins DO accumulate in the body, so vitamins like A, D, and E can build up to toxic levels if you take too much.
Define “optimal amount”. I haven’t heard that an uncontroversial “optimal amount” has been determined for most vitamins, minerals, and micronutrients. There are levels known to prevent outright disease but not to “optimize” functioning.
And, purely anecdotally - several years ago during a routine blood test I was found to have excessively high potassium levels. I got a frantic call from my doctor and the end result is that I am absolutely NOT allowed to take multi-vitamins - because they all contain potassium and adding more potassium on top of my already high levels could be life-threatening. As in, sudden heart attack threatening. Also, I am absolutely forbidden to consume things like “no-salt” which are potassium chloride, for the same reason.
This has occasionally resulted in bizarre arguments with people - such as when I was visiting my dad and he kept insisting I take a multi-vitamin (fortunately, my-sister-the-doctor was able to back me up and got dad off my back on this) or people insisting I not use salt but rather salt substitute.
The good news is that since I stopped with the multi-vitmains and avoid salt substitutes now my potassium levels, while still higher than average, are no longer bordering on dangerous.
WHY are my potassium levels elevated? Damn if I know - sure, I eat a lot of vegetables and fruits, many out of my own garden, but most vegetarians don’t have this problem so that can’t be the whole of it. Sure, our well water is high in minerals but, again, other people drinking out of the same aquifer, or even the same building plumbing, are not having this problem. Maybe it’s just a quirk of my own biology combined with a diet that actually is better-than-adequate in potassium.
The bottom line is that while my diet is not perfect there is a definite, diagnosed medical reason why I shouldn’t be taking multi-vitamins. It wouldn’t surprise me if there are a lot other people in the same position. (In fact, I know someone for whom normal dietary levels of iron are toxic - unfortunately, this was discovered AFTER his liver was largely destroyed. He’s now on the transplant list.) Yes, they’re usually harmless, but not always. In cases where they aren’t harmless they could, in fact, be quite harmful.
The best rule of thumb is to go to a competent doctor and take targeted supplements only for specific issues, such as a properly diagnosed vitamin D deficiency. Vitamin C is probably the one least likely to be harmful, but some of the others really shouldn’t be played with.
As I have heard about Vitamins
Those who need them, don’t take them
Those who take them, don’t need them.
Yes, almost certainly.
This about sums it up right here. Those people who are health-conscious enough to worry about taking vitamins are also probably those who are health-conscious enough to eat a good-enough diet as to make any vitamin supplementation largely unnecessary.
Now, if we could get crackheads to take their vitamins, that might be something. 
Previous thread on the subject: Multivitamins - Great Debates - Straight Dope Message Board
Anti-Vitamin Myths
Multivitamins only make expensive pee. Not so. Multivitamins are incredibly cheap at Cosco either directly or via Amazon. That said, many do overpay for vitamins.
There’s no scientific evidence supporting the use of multivitamins. Not so. See this study as well as DSeid’s skeptical take.
I say:
Multivitamins are cheap. There is mild evidence indicating benefit. Example. But there’s also mild evidence of harm. Before I read last year’s thread I used to try to take a multi-V daily. Now I take 'em sporadically. I think I swallowed one on Tuesday.
There’s the perception that vitamins and minerals embody that which is healthy in foods. That perception seems to be unfortunate.
There is a school of thought that says, “if you are going to take a vitamin, you may as well take a multivitamin”. It is known that vitamins and minerals work together in the body. Isolating the one particular vitamin that you are deficient in and taking that as a supplement is unlikely to fully address the problem you are experiencing.
Taking this idea a little further, if you are deficient in something then the best remedy is food – of a balanced variety containing all of the constituents that our bodies require — vitamins, minerals, proteins, an assortment of carbohydrates of various kinds, water, a variety of lipids, fibre, bioflavinols and probably a whole gamut of things that we are yet to discover.
Having said that, I do have a container of multivitamins in my cupboard at home. I will take them for a few days when
It is a stop-gap measure. I am pretty confident that my body is only absorbing and using a small proportion of what I am taking and that it is pretty much expensive pee. But for a short-term physiological crisis I am giving my body a bit of a fighting chance. It would be better to eat some salad and rest properly. If I can’t (don’t) do that, then a few days of pills won’t hurt and might help a little.
Now I can see a case for targeting a known condition with a specific supplement if there is good scientific evidence to show that it will alleviate that particular problem. Emphasis on the word, “known”. Addition of iodine to salt, fluoride to drinking water, calcium supplements to address osteoporosis and iron for anaemia — all a good idea. Even then, I am confident in a lot of cases we are providing our bodies with more than they can reasonably use. Multivitamins in most cases give us an excess of nearly everything they contain.
I think multivits have a role to play, but it is a very small one. They certainly don’t deserve to be the multibillion dollar industry that they have become. Good food is a much better idea.
I might be wrong (you will have figured out I am not a big buyer), but I have not seen cheap multivitamins readily available in this part of the world. $18 AUD for a 30 day supply from the supermarket is not unusual, and pharmacies tend to be even pricier.
If it was a couple of cents a day as a form of insurance I might think it was worthwhile. But adding an extra hundred dollars to my family’s monthly food budget – I would prefer to buy a vegetable or two.
Again, my anecdote - I used to get splitting headaches regularly. At about age 30. when I started taking multivitamins, these headaches stopped. I simply don’t get them. That’s the only lifestyle change that I can think of that happened about that time.
Similarly, I used to get several minor colds (sore nose sore throat hurt to swally working its way down from sinus to lungs and bad cough over a few days. That too stopped once I began taking a multivitamin.
I don’t subscribe to the “good vitamins are organic” stuff, I use the Costco Centrum knock-off; It costs about $20 for almost a year’s supply. I may be wasting my money, but it’s worth it obviously for the possible placebo effect. (But I doubt that’s the case - I started for general health, those two benefits were something I realized a year or two down the road. )
What is optimal? I gave you an example in my post. People can survive just fine with mild anemia - but optimally, it’s nice to have enough iron. Vitamin D deficiency is common in northern latitudes. Osteoporosis is common in elderly, and in “cool” adolescents and anorexics who don’t drink enough milk and mess up their diets in various ways.
So “adequate” means enough to get by without becoming seriously unhealthy. “Optimal” means you body has enough to perform whatever functions it needs.
If you eat plenty of spinach or broccoli you will get more than the optimal iron, let’s say. Whatever your body does not need, is flushed. Same with vitamin pills containing iron. If you do NOT have enough iron, your body cannot make enough hemoglobin (among other things, IANAD) and so you are more tired, you don’t get as much oxygen transport to the muscles, etc.
It is possible to eat 7-11 food and get sufficient nutrients, but then again, it is possible to get your groceries at a supermarket and still not get the correct nutrition. All that a vitamin pill does, when taken with food, is ensure that you have the opportunity to absorb more of the nutrients you need. If you claim that everyone is already getting that from their regular diet and the pills are unnecessary, I will disagree. If you claim that pills are not a substitute for a good diet, I agree. If you claim that the body will not absorb the nutrients from a pill, but will from the meal taken with that pill, I will be skeptical. If you claim that it is impossible to survive without the “correct” or “optimum” or “appropriate” (or whatever label) of nutrients, I will disagree. If you say that a diet consists of more than vitamins and minerals, you need a healthy mix of other substances (carbohydrates, proteins, fats, in assorted proportions) I agree.
Costco Kirkland brand “Formula Forte for Men” about $C25 for 365 tablets. These are pretty much a Centrum knock-off, about the same ingredients and proportions. I sure as hell wouldn’t want to be paying Aussie prices - everything’s more expensive than a wallaby’s arse down there.
Adolescents with osteoporosis? Common with those who don’t drink enough milk? :dubious: Ya got a cite?
If you live in an environment that is unusually sterile, say where homogenised milk is a legal requirement; i.e. a city, then perhaps about 1/2 to 1/4 of the recommended dose of some of these things are advisable.
The problem if that the companies that make them are so intent on marketing so many of them to females with period pain, or seniors with arthritic problems, etc. that you will invariably experience information overload, and be convinced you will die if you dont take at least 4 a day.
If they are even required to print the contents on the bottle (quite rare), just get the one with the most ‘crap’, and take about 1/2 the recommended dose.
If you have access to real food in the first place, forget it entirely. I’m talking food that farmers made and sold to you at least semi-directly. These supplements are pretty much the consequence of GMO/long term refrigerated/mass marketed food. The strange vitamins etc. you see in these supplements normally degenerate in fresh foods pretty quickly.
They DO work if youre lacking, but if you already have a healthy, fresh diet, they’re a complete waste of money. And boy, do they cost a LOT!