Hmmm… I’m envisioning a computer matching service for doctors and patients… “MatchDoc.com”
Doctors and patients both enter the kind of stuff you believe in, e.g., organic, pure science, woo-woo, aliens, natural only, Christian Science, drugs from the Rain Forest, herbal teas, pills with looooong names, FDA-approved only, stuff you can only get in Canada/Mexico, etc., along with city, price range, insurance (or not), pre-existing conditions, and the computer picks out your matches!
Yeah, I was cautioned about limiting high potassium foods as well - the doc’s consistent, at least. Unfortunately (in this context) of the 10 foods highest in potassium 6 are my favorites. Quite a few others I like are still in the +200mg/serving category. It’s possible that, between eating a lot of this stuff fresh out of my garden and eating a lot of these fruits and vegetables in general my diet alone was pushing it up pretty darn high - but if the choice is “take this pill” or “eat favorite foods” I’ll save my potassium “ration” for actual food, thank you very much.
Anyhow, it’s an illustration of how individual personal quirks can cause issues. If you’re having a problem the doctor needs to know if you’re supplementing. If you don’t want to let your doctor know what you’re doing well, your choice.
The doctors I’ve said it to always have the attitude like “okay, that’s good”, not “whatever, psycho”.
Of the ones I said I think I should be taking, the chart someone posted earlier says vitamin D, calcium, and folic acid are all worth it to take, my doctor said I should take B12 for depression (she’s also having me get my levels checked), iron is an obvious for anemics, and zinc is something vegetarians are often deficient in. I’m not going to take all those things separately.
I’m not saying my diet is that bad. It’s better than a lot of people’s. But I think I should eat a wider variety of vegetables. I mostly just stick with the same 5 or so.
And again, your link is talking about large doses being potentially harmful.
No, it’s not. It about how vitamins can in some cases be helpful, but how they are not for most people. It’s about common misconceptions. If you can’t read a short article and get the main points correctly, why should I credit your opinions?
We’re talking about different things. I’ve been trying to make plain that if your doctor says you should take vitamins or whatever, you should probably go along. On the other hand, if you decide to just happy asshole around with supplements, you could be doing yourself harm beyond just literally pissing money away.
Most healthy people don’t need vitamin pills, I think the cites I provided establish that. I’m guessing that most unhealthy people don’t either.
But the only ones it’s saying may be *harmful *are large doses. I wasn’t saying that was the only thing the article said. What I am saying is that I know I can use some of the vitamins and minerals found in my multivitamins, and for the ones I don’t need, I don’t see any evidence of them being bad for me at the levels they are. I would take them even if I didn’t have a doctor.
I don’t dispute any of the main points of the article:
But I’d say most people’s diets are inadequate to some extent. I’ve never seen a study that shows that most Americans eat as many vegetables as they should (plus a lot of people count canned vegetables and super processed ones…for the most part I don’t).
This does not mean that they are deficient in specific vitamins and minerals to any great extent, or that using “nutritional supplements” is a good way to compensate for suboptimal diet.
Actually, canned vegetables DO count. While they’re not as good in some respects as fresh or frozen they really are vegetables and really do contain fiber and nutrients. For people with depressed or non-existent immune systems they can actually be preferable to fresh if the canned are less likely to carry pathogens. In recent years people have caught E. coli from fresh greens, not from canned as just one example.
As I don’t know what you mean by “super processed” I can’t speak on that one.
But canned vegetables get some of the nutrients beat out of them, plus they usually contain a lot of sodium (I know you know that) so I’d count them as a net negative for the most part. I like canned peas but I never eat them for that reason.
By super processed I mean things like Spaghettio sauce or the little dried things found in Cup-o-Noodles.
Understood - as noted, they aren’t as good as fresh - nonetheless better to eat canned vegetables than none at all. Modern canning techniques are probably more sparing of nutrients than 100 years ago, and lower sodium versions are available of some things.
I do stock them in my emergency pantry and use them from time to time, usually in combination with other items. A small can of mushrooms in a meal to which I don’t add any other salt isn’t going to be an issue.
The “little dried things” in cup-o-noodle type things are often just dehydrated, which is a perfectly fine preservation technique, only a bit more advanced than what gives us prunes and beef jerky. It doesn’t preserve vitamin C well, but does allow retention of other nutrients as well as fiber. In fact, it’s better at preserving water soluble nutrients than, say, canning is because water isn’t leaching out the water-solubles. (By that argument it should preserve vit. C, but the heat usually used to dehydrate these things can degrade it. Some vacuum drying processes will leave C largely intact but they tend to be more expensive and not suited to home use.) My main quibble with those is not the processing but the quantity, which is miniscule. Not sufficient amounts to make up a serving of vegetables.
Spaghettios, of course, are a different matter - very little vegetable, mostly pasta, water, and salt.
“Require” is not “ideal” or even “recommended” … the fact that “most of us” survive, on average into our later 70s in the US (and higher in most other developed countries like France, Italy, Switzerland, Israel, Canada, etc …), is sufficient proof that most of us eat what we “require.” Hitting RDAs? No.