Blog

4

1

With the news this week about multivitamins increasing risk of death, it's probably worth asking the question now about whether people on Paleo diets should stop taking multivitamins. Given that our diets are rich in fruits and vegetables, we're probably getting more vitamins than the typical person would on the SAD. Is it enough and if so, with the multivitamin might we be exceeding maximum safe levels in some places? If we stop taking multivitamins, then should we replace them with other targeted supplements? Soil quality is just not what it used to be 10k years ago nor did our ancestors live in these northern climates. I'm thinking at least Vitamin D (I'm in MA) and occasional iodine through salt. Fish oil still makes sense since eating a large quantity of fish will expose you to a lot of pollution that didn't used to exist. Are there others?

flag
2 
 Yes, stop! Only vit D in my opinion. Maybe occasional use of other supplements but nothing regular... – Jay Oct 13 2011 at 20:49
2 
 Only others I can think of are K2 and Magnesium. – Nutritionator Oct 14 2011 at 14:45
No, don't stop it. Use hi q supplements. – majkinetor Oct 14 2011 at 19:04
Here is rebutal from orthomolecular news: orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/v07n10.shtml – majkinetor Oct 24 2011 at 14:21
Paul Jaminet has written well: Around the Web; The Case of the Killer Vitamins perfecthealthdiet.com/?p=4895 I wouldn't supplement with iron or calcium. Red meat, liver, and magnesium work much better! – Lady_Arwen Apr 13 2012 at 15:34

9 Answers

19

http://news.yahoo.com/vitamins-may-increase-womens-risk-dying-research-finds-212402256.html Is this the article you are referring to?

I take a multi and other targeted supplements that I am just not going to get through diet or environment. Like you I am in an area in which I will not get much D - WA state. I take high quality vitamins though. I would not take any made in China or sold for pennies at WalMart for instance. One thing I for sure would not supplement is iron. That can be problematic.

I question the source of this study. I think it said that there was a 1% increase in death among the women who took vitamins. Also by the end of the study these ladies would have been over 80 years old. Since no compounds were isolated, who is to say that vitamins killed these women. Since we know 100% of us who live to be old enough will die of old age, who is to say that they did not die of that? Not to mention I saw no breakdown of diet, exercise or smoking status.

I am leery about this article for another reason. There is a push to take over the counter supplements off the market so that they can be regulated. Would this have anything to do with big Pharma? I don't know, but I think it sucks.

link|flag
2 
 +1 -Agreed on all counts! – Atkins-witha-loincloth Oct 14 2011 at 0:08
2 
 Agreed. Another aspect is the posssbility that some of the multi vitamin takers use that as a licence to engage in bad diet choices elsewhere. – PrimalAspie Oct 14 2011 at 1:16
The article said it was mostly the iron that caused death, but I don't think anyone here supplements iron (or they get constipated). I wonder if the supplements were the problem or rather the quality of the supplements. Most supplements in pharmacies have a nasty ingredients list (sorbitol, canola oil, soybean oil, ...) – Korion Oct 14 2011 at 13:37
I didn't see that part on iron. It is pretty risky IMHO. I would never take it unless I had a diagnosed deficiency, and even then I may reconsider. – none Oct 14 2011 at 14:01
Here's a response from LEF to that article. Since they sell supplements they are also probably biased, but it's a pretty good read: lef.org/featured-articles/… – none Oct 14 2011 at 14:15
show 1 more comment
4

If your multi has Folic Acid in it, then I would stop taking it. Folic Acid is not a natural form of Folate, and I believe it has been correlated to negative outcomes.

Here is a link to a discussion about the “best” multivitamin; the top answer has a link to one of the best multivitamins I have seen: http://paleohacks.com/questions/62893/best-multi-ideally-with-good-d3-magnesium-chelate-citrate-taurate-folate

link|flag
3

That article smacks of Big Pharma and politics. I do supplement but its random not on a daily basis, but we do take VitD daily.

link|flag
The other Jay here...this is my though and my same routine. My supplementation is pretty random except for D right now. – JayJay Oct 13 2011 at 22:50
3

There are articles coming out every day. Best to not take them all too urgently, in my opinion, without knowing of some of the research and who is doing the research.

link|flag
3

Iron was the main one that was associated with increased death. Why were post-menopausal women taking a supplement with iron? Were they anemic? Had their doctor told them to take a multi with iron? If not, and they were taking iron, could iron overload have been a problem. Either way, iron overload or anemia could have accounted for the increase in deaths??? Just a thought.

link|flag
3

I don't think that "take at least vitamin D" attitude is completely valid. You need resources to work. You can not work correctly on "at least vitamin D", you might even harm yourself.

So, take hi quality supplements and don't worry about those few negative studies which are probably flawed. For each negative paper I can pair you hundred positive ones and hundred neutral ones. With high q supplements and proper dose the worst thing that can happen to you is if nothing happens. Most high grade supplements are exceptionally safe even in very large doses.

link|flag
plus one........ – The Quilt Oct 14 2011 at 22:22
2

I personally needed magnesium to counter-effect cramps and muscle pain in my legs a few weeks into Paleo. K2 is important too, in order to maximize calcium absorption.

link|flag
2

Here's a recent study that found that baseline users of supplements had better health outcomes than non-users. It also found that baseline non-users who began supplementing after being diagnosed with something had worse outcomes, suggesting a "sick-user effect."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21779961

After an average follow-up time of 11 years, 1,101 deaths were documented (cancer deaths = 513 and cardiovascular deaths = 264). After adjustment for potential confounders, neither any vitamin/mineral supplementation nor multivitamin supplementation at baseline was statistically significantly associated with cancer, cardiovascular, or all-cause mortality. However, baseline users of antioxidant vitamin supplements had a significantly reduced risk of cancer mortality (HR: 0.52; 95% CI: 0.28, 0.97) and all-cause mortality (HR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.38, 0.88). In comparison with never users, baseline non-users who started taking vitamin/mineral supplements during follow-up had significantly increased risks of cancer mortality (HR: 1.74; 95% CI: 1.09, 2.77) and all-cause mortality (HR: 1.58; 95% CI: 1.17, 2.14).

I wouldn't worry.

link|flag
1 
 Those confounding factors a hard to unravel when people are choosing to take the supplements. Baseline users were probably also leading generally healthier lives. – Matt Oct 14 2011 at 15:38
Yep, it goes both ways, eh? Good point. – Erik Cisler Oct 14 2011 at 15:48
1 
 The "sick-user" effect was actually the first thing that came to mind when I heard this "report" about vitamins "causing" early death. – FED at LiveCaveman.com Oct 14 2011 at 18:55
1

http://www.anh-usa.org/shame-on-ama-archives-of-internal-medicine/

link|flag
The article you linked to claimed that the data gathered is not reliable and that there is no plausible reason why these supplements would do harm. The article is right on the first point but quite wrong on the second. Give me any bio-active compound and I will deliver studies showing a plausible mechanism for harm. To say that there is no such plausibility for something as common as vitamin E or copper is silly. – Jay Oct 13 2011 at 21:19
1 
 This is not something they are guessing. There is huge amount of research related to safety of those compounds. You can show plausible mechanism for harm for everything. You can not erase decades of positive research not only on humans, but basically all animals, just because of occasional negative one, many to be highly suspicious in design. – majkinetor Oct 14 2011 at 19:40
plus one Maj.... – The Quilt Oct 14 2011 at 22:22

Your Answer

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.