I like to read what other newsletters and magazines write about vitamin supplements. The Tufts Health & Nutrition Letter, Reader’s Digest, and even Prevention recently published long articles attacking multivitamins. These rabid attacks cited widely criticized scientific articles, and by repeating misinformation, they may have misguided and harmed millions of people.
As one example, the Tufts newsletter claimed to investigate the “top 20” multivitamin supplements (apparently those sold in drug stores) and warned that they don’t contain enough calcium and vitamin D for bone health, not enough antioxidants for eye health, not enough DHA (one of the omega-3s), not enough ginkgo, not enough bilberry, and not enough probiotics.
First, I could quibble about ingredients in multivitamins, but these formulas have never been intended as the end all of
supplements. They’re basically a form of nutritional insurance, one that’s needed more than ever given the disastrous state of malnutrition in the United States and other Western nations. It’s physically impossible to pack ideal amounts of every nutrient into a capsule or tablet.
Second, in its diatribe against multivitamins, the nutritionally conservative Tufts newsletter indirectly suggested that, if people wanted higher potencies of some nutrients or herbs, they should go buy standalone supplements of calcium and D, lutein, antioxidants, DHA, ginkgo, bilberry, and probiotics. After all, if you can’t get enough of these nutrients in a multivitamin, it only makes sense to make up the difference with whatever individual supplements are important to your health.
There is so much good research supporting the benefits of taking a high-potency multivitamin. Taking a daily multi reduces inflammation and your risk of heart disease, cancer, mood problems and many other health problems.

I have long recommended that people take at least a high-potency multivitamin, and I continue making this recommendation. Given the millions of Americans (and others) who do not get adequate nutrition, it only makes sense.
Thursday, August 12, 2010
Who Says You Don’t Need Supplements?
A recent article on supplements in the New York Times said what we’ve all heard a hundred times before: “Doctors and nutritionists say that people who eat a normal diet generally don’t need nutritional supplements, even if they exercise vigorously.”
The problem is such statements have absolutely no foundation.
First, what exactly is a normal diet? The definition varies among cultural and ethnic groups. Is it normal to eat the typical American (Western) diet, rich in sugars, starches, and unhealthy oils? Is it normal to eat on the run, out of boxes and microwave ovens?
Second, even if you assume that a normal diet is one consisting of fish, chicken, veggies, and other whole foods, are you really absorbing adequate amounts of the nutrients in foods? Eating healthy foods is certainly important, but poor absorption means you may not be getting those nutrients.
Third, drugs almost always interfere with nutrient absorption and utilization – and half of Americans take at least one prescription drug. Acid blockers (where prescription or over the counter products) reduce absorption of vitamins B12 and C and probably others. Antibiotics, oral contraceptives, and other common medications interfere with many of the B vitamins.
If you want to take the guesswork out of what you need and don’t need, find a nutritionally oriented doc who can measure your blood levels of nutrients. Such measurements aren’t perfect, but they do provide an idea of what you’re absorbing.
The idea that eating right means you don’t need supplements belongs in the wastebasket, along with another stupid idea: taking supplements and you’ll just make expensive urine. The truth is that everything that goes into the body eventually exits in one form or another. So if someone tells you that vitamins only make expensive urine, remind them that the $30 steak and $50 bottle of wine they had in a restaurant made even more expensive urine.
The problem is such statements have absolutely no foundation.
First, what exactly is a normal diet? The definition varies among cultural and ethnic groups. Is it normal to eat the typical American (Western) diet, rich in sugars, starches, and unhealthy oils? Is it normal to eat on the run, out of boxes and microwave ovens?
Second, even if you assume that a normal diet is one consisting of fish, chicken, veggies, and other whole foods, are you really absorbing adequate amounts of the nutrients in foods? Eating healthy foods is certainly important, but poor absorption means you may not be getting those nutrients.
Third, drugs almost always interfere with nutrient absorption and utilization – and half of Americans take at least one prescription drug. Acid blockers (where prescription or over the counter products) reduce absorption of vitamins B12 and C and probably others. Antibiotics, oral contraceptives, and other common medications interfere with many of the B vitamins.
If you want to take the guesswork out of what you need and don’t need, find a nutritionally oriented doc who can measure your blood levels of nutrients. Such measurements aren’t perfect, but they do provide an idea of what you’re absorbing.
The idea that eating right means you don’t need supplements belongs in the wastebasket, along with another stupid idea: taking supplements and you’ll just make expensive urine. The truth is that everything that goes into the body eventually exits in one form or another. So if someone tells you that vitamins only make expensive urine, remind them that the $30 steak and $50 bottle of wine they had in a restaurant made even more expensive urine.
Food Addictions and Overweight
Each new year prompts millions of people to go on diets and sign up for gym memberships to lose weight and get back into shape. Within a month or two, most people resume their former eating and sedentary habits, leading to an annual weight gain.
Why are the vast majority of Americans now overweight or obese? There are many reasons, including the lipogenic effects of high-fructose corn syrup, trans fats, and simply eating too many empty calories, most of which are cheap mass-produced carbohydrates and fats.
A commentary in the Canadian Medical Association Journal focused on what I have long believed: that unrecognized food addictions are a major factor in overweight and obesity. The concept of food addictions, the authors wrote, is controversial – but there are many similarities to drug and alcohol addictions. Powerful cravings and withdrawals symptoms are signs of food addictions. And interestingly enough, anti-opioid drugs seem to reduce food cravings.
There are many factors behind food addictions. Some foods, such as wheat and dairy, contain trace amounts of natural opioids. Sweet foods stimulate the brain’s production of its own opioids. Some foods lead to increased dopamine levels – one of the brain’s pleasure neurotransmitters.
Breaking food addictions is like dealing with any other addiction: It’s going to be rough for a little while. But once an addiction is broken, most people gain a renewed sense of well being. During this process, it certainly helps to be mindful of what you put into your mouth – and to stop rationalizing that a little bit of this and a little bit of that won’t hurt. Just as a little bit of tobacco, alcohol, or cocaine will sabotage some people, little bits of problematic foods will reestablish food addictions.
Why are the vast majority of Americans now overweight or obese? There are many reasons, including the lipogenic effects of high-fructose corn syrup, trans fats, and simply eating too many empty calories, most of which are cheap mass-produced carbohydrates and fats.
A commentary in the Canadian Medical Association Journal focused on what I have long believed: that unrecognized food addictions are a major factor in overweight and obesity. The concept of food addictions, the authors wrote, is controversial – but there are many similarities to drug and alcohol addictions. Powerful cravings and withdrawals symptoms are signs of food addictions. And interestingly enough, anti-opioid drugs seem to reduce food cravings.
There are many factors behind food addictions. Some foods, such as wheat and dairy, contain trace amounts of natural opioids. Sweet foods stimulate the brain’s production of its own opioids. Some foods lead to increased dopamine levels – one of the brain’s pleasure neurotransmitters.
Breaking food addictions is like dealing with any other addiction: It’s going to be rough for a little while. But once an addiction is broken, most people gain a renewed sense of well being. During this process, it certainly helps to be mindful of what you put into your mouth – and to stop rationalizing that a little bit of this and a little bit of that won’t hurt. Just as a little bit of tobacco, alcohol, or cocaine will sabotage some people, little bits of problematic foods will reestablish food addictions.
Up and Down Media Reports
The media roller coaster continued with recent news reports on the good and bad of nutritional supplements – all without providing any real context.
In one study, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, researchers combined either niacin (a form of vitamin B3) and a statin drug or the drug Zetia with a statin (a combination known as Vytorin). The niacin combination worked far better in terms reducing the thickening of the carotid artery, a major blood vessel.
As good as niacin is, the finding was neither new nor surprising. Abram Hoffer, MD, PhD, discovered that niacin lowers cholesterol back in 1955 – and it has been approved by the FDA for that purpose for more than 50 years.
Meanwhile, the Journal of the American Medical Association published a study claiming that supplements of the B-vitamin folic acid increased the risk of cancer. The study was a statistical shell game. Folic acid allegedly increased the risk of cancer by 38 percent, but the results were not statistically significant.
If you read the actual study, not just the panicky newspaper and web news, you would have learned that 70 percent of the subjects were current or former smokers, all of the subjects had a high risk of cancer, and nearly all of the cases were lung cancers. Omitting this information was nothing less than sloppy journalism. So, if you smoke, should you stop taking your vitamins or stop smoking?
In one study, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, researchers combined either niacin (a form of vitamin B3) and a statin drug or the drug Zetia with a statin (a combination known as Vytorin). The niacin combination worked far better in terms reducing the thickening of the carotid artery, a major blood vessel.
As good as niacin is, the finding was neither new nor surprising. Abram Hoffer, MD, PhD, discovered that niacin lowers cholesterol back in 1955 – and it has been approved by the FDA for that purpose for more than 50 years.
Meanwhile, the Journal of the American Medical Association published a study claiming that supplements of the B-vitamin folic acid increased the risk of cancer. The study was a statistical shell game. Folic acid allegedly increased the risk of cancer by 38 percent, but the results were not statistically significant.
If you read the actual study, not just the panicky newspaper and web news, you would have learned that 70 percent of the subjects were current or former smokers, all of the subjects had a high risk of cancer, and nearly all of the cases were lung cancers. Omitting this information was nothing less than sloppy journalism. So, if you smoke, should you stop taking your vitamins or stop smoking?
Saturday, January 2, 2010
Gotta Answer That Call? Check That Email? Read That Text?
In the 1970s—and yes, in a galaxy far away—I discovered the addictive power of Space Invaders, one of the first digital precomputer games.
I was at a holiday corporate retreat. One of my coworkers, Rob, and I discovered what was essentially an electronic pinball machine. The screen showed wave after wave of attacking enemy space ships. Our job was to blast them into oblivion.
Space Invaders practically became an addiction. We probably spent every quarter at the resort destroying digital aliens from outer space.
Flash forward. Space Invaders has morphed into email, texting, and twittering. We don’t need huge pinball-like machines anymore, just a cell phone and apps to experience the same dopamine rush and addiction.
Calls, emails, and texts are so addictive that California and a few other states have banned all but hands-free cell phone use when driving a car.
But you can multitask, you say? Think about that painfully slow driver in front of you, yacking on her cell phone and oblivious to the fact that she really can’t multitask. (Hint: you’re probably no better.) There’s the texter who killed a bicyclist. And yes, there’s the pedestrian whose emailing stopped when he was run over crossing the street.
But it’s not just bad habits states are trying to ban. And it’s not just stupidity. It’s addiction.
The New York Times has published several articles in a “driven to distraction” series, focusing on how drivers screw up when they’re making calls, emailing, or texting while driving. Another article focused on the absurdity of the Type n Walk app, which uses the iPhone’s camera to track the sidewalk ahead while you’re looking at your phone.
On one level it’s silly and absurd. On another it’s totally neurotic.
Technology has helped fuel what I call impulse-addictive behavior in my book, The Food-Mood Solution. Think obsessive-compulsive disorder or gambling addiction. You know it’s bad, but you can’t stop.
For many people it’s near impossible to resist the electronic ping. It has to be read and responded to immediately.
We’ve forgotten our basic prerogative: Just because a telephone rings doesn’t mean we have to answer it. That’s what Caller ID is for. Ditto for emails, texts, and twitters.
So why can’t we just ignore the beckoning technology?
A both a social scientist and a nutritionist, I naturally see connections between society, food, and mood. Our brain’s biochemistry ultimately depends on nutrition.
Technology has also changed the way we eat. Faster. Cheaper. Junkier. Yep, fast food is the nutrition equivalent of a twitter.
But junk food doesn’t give the brain the nutrients it needs to function.
So many of us get shortchanged when it comes to B-complex vitamins and omega-3s (fish oils), two of the most important groups of nutrients influencing mood and behavior.
So, if you have impulsive-control problems, I have a couple of suggestions. Consider slowing down enough to eat some real food. And taking a B-complex vitamin formula or one or two fish oil capsules in the morning. And, yeah, being a little more mindful.
You might just find that you’re back in control of your technology. Not the other way around.
I was at a holiday corporate retreat. One of my coworkers, Rob, and I discovered what was essentially an electronic pinball machine. The screen showed wave after wave of attacking enemy space ships. Our job was to blast them into oblivion.
Space Invaders practically became an addiction. We probably spent every quarter at the resort destroying digital aliens from outer space.
Flash forward. Space Invaders has morphed into email, texting, and twittering. We don’t need huge pinball-like machines anymore, just a cell phone and apps to experience the same dopamine rush and addiction.
Calls, emails, and texts are so addictive that California and a few other states have banned all but hands-free cell phone use when driving a car.
But you can multitask, you say? Think about that painfully slow driver in front of you, yacking on her cell phone and oblivious to the fact that she really can’t multitask. (Hint: you’re probably no better.) There’s the texter who killed a bicyclist. And yes, there’s the pedestrian whose emailing stopped when he was run over crossing the street.
But it’s not just bad habits states are trying to ban. And it’s not just stupidity. It’s addiction.
The New York Times has published several articles in a “driven to distraction” series, focusing on how drivers screw up when they’re making calls, emailing, or texting while driving. Another article focused on the absurdity of the Type n Walk app, which uses the iPhone’s camera to track the sidewalk ahead while you’re looking at your phone.
On one level it’s silly and absurd. On another it’s totally neurotic.
Technology has helped fuel what I call impulse-addictive behavior in my book, The Food-Mood Solution. Think obsessive-compulsive disorder or gambling addiction. You know it’s bad, but you can’t stop.
For many people it’s near impossible to resist the electronic ping. It has to be read and responded to immediately.
We’ve forgotten our basic prerogative: Just because a telephone rings doesn’t mean we have to answer it. That’s what Caller ID is for. Ditto for emails, texts, and twitters.
So why can’t we just ignore the beckoning technology?
A both a social scientist and a nutritionist, I naturally see connections between society, food, and mood. Our brain’s biochemistry ultimately depends on nutrition.
Technology has also changed the way we eat. Faster. Cheaper. Junkier. Yep, fast food is the nutrition equivalent of a twitter.
But junk food doesn’t give the brain the nutrients it needs to function.
So many of us get shortchanged when it comes to B-complex vitamins and omega-3s (fish oils), two of the most important groups of nutrients influencing mood and behavior.
So, if you have impulsive-control problems, I have a couple of suggestions. Consider slowing down enough to eat some real food. And taking a B-complex vitamin formula or one or two fish oil capsules in the morning. And, yeah, being a little more mindful.
You might just find that you’re back in control of your technology. Not the other way around.
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
Mmm Mmm Mmm Bad … Campbell’s Soup is Mmm Mmm Bad
Campbell’s is like the Microsoft of the soup world. The company dominates the soup business, but it’s products…well…taste like crap.
Their soups are at best bland and mushy. Some contain so much salt that they’re the human equivalent of a salt lick. For example, Campbell’s Chicken Noodle Soup provides a whopping 890 mg of sodium per serving, and 2,225 grams of sodium for a standard 10.75-ounce can.
Campbell’s now owns Swanson, the maker of various chicken broths and stocks. Until recently, Swanson spiked its tasteless products with monosodium glutamate (MSG), a flavor enhancer. But MSG is well documented as a cause of Chinese Restaurant Syndrome.
I’m not joking. Every Chinese restaurant used to boost the flavor of its meals by adding MSG. But a fair number of customers complained of neck and muscle aches afterwards, the result of MSG. So now, a lot of Chinese restaurants don’t use MSG anymore.
But I digress.
Swanson recently introduced organic chicken, beef, and vegetable broths. Sounds like a great idea, right?
Well, on the company’s web site, the Swanson folks fess up to the fact that their broths contain 550 mg of sodium for each one-cup serving. A typical bowl of soup would contain about two cups, so that would add up to 1,100 mg of sodium. And maybe one blood-pressure cuff.
But no where on the Swanson website is a full listing of the products’ other ingredients. Ditto for the Campbell website. This is more than just peculiar, because even such junk-food hustlers as McDonalds, Pizza Hut, and Starbucks list all of the ingredients in all of their products on their websites. (For example, a venti-size Starbucks banana coconut frappuccino with whipped cream provides 730 calories, including a quarter-pound of sugars.)
So that left me wondering what Swanson and Campbell might be hiding.
So I clicked to contact customer service and wrote a brief email asking for a complete list of ingredients for the Swanson Organic Chicken Broth. Sounds simple enough, right?
A few days later, campbellsoup@casupport.com responded:
“All of our products have nutritional labels that include the calorie, sodium, fat, cholesterol and carbohydrate content for a single serving. However, it is important to note that product recipes change frequently and ingredients are periodically added or replaced. Therefore, we suggest that you check each package for the most current nutritional information...
“I hope I've been able to answer your question. Please contact the Consumer Response Center or visit Campbell's website if you have additional questions.”
So I wrote back and said that they had NOT answered my question. And I also wondered, adding a list of full ingredients to the website can’t be all that difficult, could it? After all, it’s got to be easier to update a web page compared with…say, reformulating the ingredients in an industrial-size soup manufacturing facility.
Finally I went to both my local supermarket and Whole Foods, but did not find Swanson’s organic broths on the shelf. So their ingredients remain a mystery to me.
And after all this, I’m left wondering: Why couldn’t Campbell’s just be more up front about their ingredients and list them on the company’s website. Unless they really want to hide what’s in them.
Their soups are at best bland and mushy. Some contain so much salt that they’re the human equivalent of a salt lick. For example, Campbell’s Chicken Noodle Soup provides a whopping 890 mg of sodium per serving, and 2,225 grams of sodium for a standard 10.75-ounce can.
Campbell’s now owns Swanson, the maker of various chicken broths and stocks. Until recently, Swanson spiked its tasteless products with monosodium glutamate (MSG), a flavor enhancer. But MSG is well documented as a cause of Chinese Restaurant Syndrome.
I’m not joking. Every Chinese restaurant used to boost the flavor of its meals by adding MSG. But a fair number of customers complained of neck and muscle aches afterwards, the result of MSG. So now, a lot of Chinese restaurants don’t use MSG anymore.
But I digress.
Swanson recently introduced organic chicken, beef, and vegetable broths. Sounds like a great idea, right?
Well, on the company’s web site, the Swanson folks fess up to the fact that their broths contain 550 mg of sodium for each one-cup serving. A typical bowl of soup would contain about two cups, so that would add up to 1,100 mg of sodium. And maybe one blood-pressure cuff.
But no where on the Swanson website is a full listing of the products’ other ingredients. Ditto for the Campbell website. This is more than just peculiar, because even such junk-food hustlers as McDonalds, Pizza Hut, and Starbucks list all of the ingredients in all of their products on their websites. (For example, a venti-size Starbucks banana coconut frappuccino with whipped cream provides 730 calories, including a quarter-pound of sugars.)
So that left me wondering what Swanson and Campbell might be hiding.
So I clicked to contact customer service and wrote a brief email asking for a complete list of ingredients for the Swanson Organic Chicken Broth. Sounds simple enough, right?
A few days later, campbellsoup@casupport.com responded:
“All of our products have nutritional labels that include the calorie, sodium, fat, cholesterol and carbohydrate content for a single serving. However, it is important to note that product recipes change frequently and ingredients are periodically added or replaced. Therefore, we suggest that you check each package for the most current nutritional information...
“I hope I've been able to answer your question. Please contact the Consumer Response Center or visit Campbell's website if you have additional questions.”
So I wrote back and said that they had NOT answered my question. And I also wondered, adding a list of full ingredients to the website can’t be all that difficult, could it? After all, it’s got to be easier to update a web page compared with…say, reformulating the ingredients in an industrial-size soup manufacturing facility.
Finally I went to both my local supermarket and Whole Foods, but did not find Swanson’s organic broths on the shelf. So their ingredients remain a mystery to me.
And after all this, I’m left wondering: Why couldn’t Campbell’s just be more up front about their ingredients and list them on the company’s website. Unless they really want to hide what’s in them.
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
‘Tis the Season: Sugar ‘n Stress
It’s baaccccckkkkkkk…
That time of year, that is.
From Halloween through New Year’s Eve, all too many of us find excuses to be gluttons, from nibbling on leftover Halloween candies to all-out binging. I call it, ominously, the “SS” time — for sugar and stress.
There’s no denying that we expose ourselves to way too many holiday stresses, not the least of which are family, traffic, and shopping at the mall. When we’re stressed, our eating habits slide almost immediately. We delay eating or skip meals entirely. Then, when we’re crashing, we overeat, usually on junk foods.
And that’s a perfect prescription for making stress even worse.
Our brain’s biochemistry depends on what we eat. Or don’t eat. Neurotransmitters are built upon nutrients, particularly amino acids (protein building blocks) and B-complex vitamins. Even our genes depend on nutrients to work properly.
When our blood sugar falls and we crash, ancient parts of our brain light up. We become aggressive, irritable, impatient. Eating a sugary or starchy food solves the problem quickly, but starts a new up-and-down blood sugar cycle.
So, what can you eat to stress proof yourself?
A little bit of quality protein, such as fish or chicken, stabilizes blood sugar. So do high-fiber veggies, which include almost anything except potato.
Protein provides the amino acids you need to make serotonin and GABA (gamma amino butyric acid), which are calming neurotransmitters. They also provide the amino acids to make dopamine and adrenaline, two energizing neurotransmitters. Sugar and starches don’t provide any of this, so the more junk food you eat, the more you starve your brain.
We were all taught that breakfast is the most important meal of the day. So begin the day with a little protein, and you’ll be more even tempered much of the day. An egg will do the job. So will a bowl of steel-cut (not instant!) oatmeal. Add some high-fiber fruit, such as an apple or some berries. Then be sure to include a little protein at lunch and dinner too.
If you’re taking prescription antidepressants or anxiolytics, better eating habits will help your meds do a better job.
To convert those amino acids to neurotransmitters, your brain needs the B-complex vitamins and vitamin C.
The Bs have been known as anti-stress vitamins since the 1940s. They are nature’s mood lifters and also take the edge off stress-induced anxiety. The B vitamins also play roles in breaking down food for energy, important if the season’s pressures and obligations tend to wear you down.
If you manage your stress and eating habits now, you just might not need to make a resolution about weight loss come January 1. That alone could put you in a better mood.
Copyright 2009 Jack Challem, www.nutritionreporter.com
That time of year, that is.
From Halloween through New Year’s Eve, all too many of us find excuses to be gluttons, from nibbling on leftover Halloween candies to all-out binging. I call it, ominously, the “SS” time — for sugar and stress.
There’s no denying that we expose ourselves to way too many holiday stresses, not the least of which are family, traffic, and shopping at the mall. When we’re stressed, our eating habits slide almost immediately. We delay eating or skip meals entirely. Then, when we’re crashing, we overeat, usually on junk foods.
And that’s a perfect prescription for making stress even worse.
Our brain’s biochemistry depends on what we eat. Or don’t eat. Neurotransmitters are built upon nutrients, particularly amino acids (protein building blocks) and B-complex vitamins. Even our genes depend on nutrients to work properly.
When our blood sugar falls and we crash, ancient parts of our brain light up. We become aggressive, irritable, impatient. Eating a sugary or starchy food solves the problem quickly, but starts a new up-and-down blood sugar cycle.
So, what can you eat to stress proof yourself?
A little bit of quality protein, such as fish or chicken, stabilizes blood sugar. So do high-fiber veggies, which include almost anything except potato.
Protein provides the amino acids you need to make serotonin and GABA (gamma amino butyric acid), which are calming neurotransmitters. They also provide the amino acids to make dopamine and adrenaline, two energizing neurotransmitters. Sugar and starches don’t provide any of this, so the more junk food you eat, the more you starve your brain.
We were all taught that breakfast is the most important meal of the day. So begin the day with a little protein, and you’ll be more even tempered much of the day. An egg will do the job. So will a bowl of steel-cut (not instant!) oatmeal. Add some high-fiber fruit, such as an apple or some berries. Then be sure to include a little protein at lunch and dinner too.
If you’re taking prescription antidepressants or anxiolytics, better eating habits will help your meds do a better job.
To convert those amino acids to neurotransmitters, your brain needs the B-complex vitamins and vitamin C.
The Bs have been known as anti-stress vitamins since the 1940s. They are nature’s mood lifters and also take the edge off stress-induced anxiety. The B vitamins also play roles in breaking down food for energy, important if the season’s pressures and obligations tend to wear you down.
If you manage your stress and eating habits now, you just might not need to make a resolution about weight loss come January 1. That alone could put you in a better mood.
Copyright 2009 Jack Challem, www.nutritionreporter.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
