Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by mrpg on Wednesday May 30 2018, @03:26AM   Printer-friendly
from the same-thing-for-systemd dept.

Most popular vitamin and mineral supplements provide no health benefit, study finds

The most commonly consumed vitamin and mineral supplements provide no consistent health benefit or harm, suggests a new study led by researchers at St. Michael's Hospital and the University of Toronto.

Published today in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology, the systematic review of existing data and single randomized control trials published in English from January 2012 to October 2017 found that multivitamins, vitamin D, calcium and vitamin C -- the most common supplements -- showed no advantage or added risk in the prevention of cardiovascular disease, heart attack, stroke or premature death. Generally, vitamin and mineral supplements are taken to add to nutrients that are found in food.

"We were surprised to find so few positive effects of the most common supplements that people consume," said Dr. David Jenkins*, the study's lead author. "Our review found that if you want to use multivitamins, vitamin D, calcium or vitamin C, it does no harm -- but there is no apparent advantage either."

The study found folic acid alone and B-vitamins with folic acid may reduce cardiovascular disease and stroke. Meanwhile, niacin and antioxidants showed a very small effect that might signify an increased risk of death from any cause.

What about people who would otherwise eat an incredibly nutrient-deficient diet (e.g. junk food, rice, bread, pasta, french fries, hot dogs, etc.)?

Supplemental Vitamins and Minerals for CVD Prevention and Treatment (DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2018.04.020) (DX)


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 30 2018, @05:37AM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 30 2018, @05:37AM (#686104)

    If even you (and I) have heard about this many times in the past, why did the lead author say they were surprised at the results? Shouldn't they have at least looked up the past research?

  • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 30 2018, @05:32PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 30 2018, @05:32PM (#686365)

    > Shouldn't they have at least looked up the past research?

    It was probably paywalled.