Hey all, sorry to bombard the forums lately but this has been on my mind for a while and it's nice to have an outlet filled with smart folks.
More so than any other supplement I see multis recommended as "an insurance policy" or "to round out nutritional gaps". The logic is sound and I love the idea of so many important nutrients in one bottle but are there any studies that actually point to the efficacy of these products?
This is pure bro science on my part but I feel like slapping together various quantities of synthetic vitamins and minerals in their isolated forms makes for something that looks good on the label but does it actually stave of deficiency? Particularly in the forms commonly seen in multi formulas (e.g. magnesium oxide). It really seems like we're being enticed to shotgun mico nutrients in hope that they all just wind up doing what they're supposed to do.
I've taken a lot of different multis over the years including "Raw" food based versions and have never noticed any benefit or felt any different when I go without.
Does anyone have any thoughts on the matter or know of any literature to support their benefits? I have a weird love/hate thing going on with supps and just like to hear what's worth it and what's not.
Are multi vitamins actually effective?
Yes, they are effective. Reference: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23895706.
I see no reason to think that the uptake from pills ("synthetic") would be any different from uptake from food. It's generally identical molecules and your uptake transporters in your intestines don't know what source it all comes from, seeing how it has all been seperated from whatever delivery carrier (pill or food) when the uptake is done anyway.
Some vitamins are fat soluble and need a bit of fat for optimum uptake though. And some minerals (magnesium) are sold in chelated (making uptake impossible) form.
A good book to check out is "Advanced nutrition & human metabolism" (Smith & Gropper). It's pretty pricey tho so unless you can get some library to buy it for ya then it's probably not worth the cost.
I see no reason to think that the uptake from pills ("synthetic") would be any different from uptake from food. It's generally identical molecules and your uptake transporters in your intestines don't know what source it all comes from, seeing how it has all been seperated from whatever delivery carrier (pill or food) when the uptake is done anyway.
Some vitamins are fat soluble and need a bit of fat for optimum uptake though. And some minerals (magnesium) are sold in chelated (making uptake impossible) form.
A good book to check out is "Advanced nutrition & human metabolism" (Smith & Gropper). It's pretty pricey tho so unless you can get some library to buy it for ya then it's probably not worth the cost.
Thanks for the feedback. That's an interesting study, especially considering it was a pretty low-dose multi.
I guess I've been (perhaps wrongfully) under the impression that there are a lot of synergistic compounds and "co-factors" in food that allow for proper uptake and utilization vs. isolated synthetics. It would be interesting to see studies comparing the physiological effects of both sources.
We do know that the man-made dl-alpha form of vitamin E is not very effective and folic acid is not the same as folate for example but it would seem they're far better than nothing which is encouraging.
I guess I've been (perhaps wrongfully) under the impression that there are a lot of synergistic compounds and "co-factors" in food that allow for proper uptake and utilization vs. isolated synthetics. It would be interesting to see studies comparing the physiological effects of both sources.
We do know that the man-made dl-alpha form of vitamin E is not very effective and folic acid is not the same as folate for example but it would seem they're far better than nothing which is encouraging.
Right. These vitamins tend to be a whole set of different molecules that get metabolized to the same end product, so for sure it can matter.WinskiG wrote:Thanks for the feedback. That's an interesting study, especially considering it was a pretty low-dose multi.
I guess I've been (perhaps wrongfully) under the impression that there are a lot of synergistic compounds and "co-factors" in food that allow for proper uptake and utilization vs. isolated synthetics. It would be interesting to see studies comparing the physiological effects of both sources.
We do know that the man-made dl-alpha form of vitamin E is not very effective and folic acid is not the same as folate for example but it would seem they're far better than nothing which is encouraging.
Take home message of this all it seems that using multivitaminerals as a failsafe to complement your regular eating.
I think I'm starting to see the light brother, just needed to talk it throughTake home message of this all it seems that using multivitaminerals as a failsafe to complement your regular eating.
I'm not sure if anyone's had experience with MASS's Multi Life but that seems like a good value given its profile.
-
BrainSquirt
- Posts: 362
- Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2009 12:45 pm
fwiw...
my ‘vote’ = fake vitamins damaging to you long term . real vitamins are not (unless you take excessive amounts...)
In some areas I’m a fan of ‘better living through chemistry’
In some areas I’m not.
This is one where I’ve settled on not
I don’t do fake / fabricated
vit a’s
vit b’s
vit c’s
vit d’s
vit e’s
vit k’s
etc.
whether they are (supposedly) ‘bio-identical’ or not!
fwiw, in my own personal model, ‘vitamins’ are really just highly specialized organic mineral chelates…still… no fakes jmo
my ‘vote’ = fake vitamins damaging to you long term . real vitamins are not (unless you take excessive amounts...)
In some areas I’m a fan of ‘better living through chemistry’
In some areas I’m not.
This is one where I’ve settled on not
I don’t do fake / fabricated
vit a’s
vit b’s
vit c’s
vit d’s
vit e’s
vit k’s
etc.
whether they are (supposedly) ‘bio-identical’ or not!
fwiw, in my own personal model, ‘vitamins’ are really just highly specialized organic mineral chelates…still… no fakes jmo
-
thicketman
- Posts: 112
- Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2010 1:43 pm
-
BrainSquirt
- Posts: 362
- Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2009 12:45 pm
Hey guys,
I’m not really comfortable with all these PM's...
... I don't really even know what the site's policy is on this stuff... but the only reason I am using PM's is not to be posting links, etc. for other brands, etc... since askmass is selling a multi, etc.
Would prefer it to be wide open... but those days may be over.
I think I've replied to everyone and hope the PM's get approved / passed through...
just saying…
brainsquirt
I’m not really comfortable with all these PM's...
... I don't really even know what the site's policy is on this stuff... but the only reason I am using PM's is not to be posting links, etc. for other brands, etc... since askmass is selling a multi, etc.
Would prefer it to be wide open... but those days may be over.
I think I've replied to everyone and hope the PM's get approved / passed through...
just saying…
brainsquirt
We do not approve nor disapprove any PM's, for the record.
We could not access nor read a single one if we even wanted to (and we do not want to).
It is 110% private, period.
This isn't the NSA.
I wasn't about to come on this thread and use it to whore out Multi-Life (which gets rave reviews for good reason).
That said, it isn't right to whore out something else or post links to other sites, so thanks for being a respectful and stand up guy, Brain.
We could not access nor read a single one if we even wanted to (and we do not want to).
It is 110% private, period.
This isn't the NSA.
I wasn't about to come on this thread and use it to whore out Multi-Life (which gets rave reviews for good reason).
That said, it isn't right to whore out something else or post links to other sites, so thanks for being a respectful and stand up guy, Brain.
