How To Evaluate News About Supplements--Both Positive and Negative.

[Guest guest]

How To Evaluate News About Supplements--Both Positive and

Negative. JoAnn Guest

May 21, 2007 15:22 PDT

 

Risk to Benefit? Common Sense?

 

http://www.willner.com/radio_04-04-04.aspx?id=57

 

The following is an excerpt from The Willner Window Radio Program,

originally airing Feb 4, 2007. The Willner Window can be heard every

Sunday, from 2 to 4 pm, on WOR Radio, 710 AM.

 

 

 

Arnie:Good afternoon everyone, this is .... Welcome to The Willner

Window. For those of you who might be first-time listeners, the

focus of this show is nutritional supplements–vitamins, herbs,

homeopathic remedies–and their proper usage. With me this afternoon

is . .

 

Don: Sometimes we start off the program with information on a

particular nutrient in the news, maybe in response to a recently

published study.

Sometimes we focus on a particular health problem, and talk about

those vitamins and minerals that might be helpful to people with

that health problem

 

At other times, we try to make a more broad point, and show the

value of nutritional supplements in a general sense. In other words,

we try to point out the need for everyone--regardless of your health

status, regardless of your age, etc–to take a basic regimen of

nutritional supplements.

 

There are many ways to make that point. We could talk about the

prevalence of various vitamin deficiencies, for example, based on

surveys. We could talk about the vital roles these nutrients play in

the normal function, growth and metabolism of the body.

 

Arnie:But there is another way we can make the point. We can tell

you about the remarkable role individual vitamins play in the

prevention of

serious, life-threatening disease. And then ask you to stop for a

moment, and consider what you have just heard. If this particular

vitamin reduces the risk of that disease, and another particular

vitamin

reduces the risk of this disease, doesn't it stand to reason that

insuring optimal intake of the whole gamut of these vitamins and

minerals is a good bet to reduce the risk of disease, or health

problems, in general?

 

Don: What we are trying to say is that you should try to see both

the

forest and the trees. We are going to tell you about a study dealing

with kidney cancer. And my point is that this study does not affect

only those of you who have reason to worry about kidney cancer–it

has meaning and significance to everyone.

 

Dr. Podell: OK, we are talking about a study published in the

International Journal of Cancer. It looked at 767 renal cell cancer

patients and 1534 controls. They had these people fill out detailed

food

frequency questionnaires, from which micronutrient intakes were

calculated. This study took place in Europe, by the way.

 

Here is what they found: Increased intake of the antioxidant

vitamins C and E appeared to cut the risk of kidney cancer by 28 and

44 per cent, respectively!

 

That bears repeating. In the words of the lead author of the

article, I quote:

 

" In the present study, based on a large dataset and with

extensive information on major sources of vitamins and

micronutrients in

the Italian population, an inverse relation was observed between

vitamin

E and vitamin C intake and RCC risk. "

 

Arnie:Amazing, isn't it. Higher intake of a couple of vitamins may

reduce the risk of renal cell cancer.

 

What's also amazing is that this is not an isolated case. We have

seen a

steady stream of studies like this, with B Vitamins shown to reduce

heart disease, herbs and vitamins shown to ward off Alzheimer's

disease,

and so on.

 

Don: Now, back to the point. What are we to learn from this study,

and

those we have talked about in the past. Is this the final word? No.

This study, like most others, whether dealing with vitamins or

drugs, is open

to challenge, review, confirmation and so forth.

 

One study is never the final answer. But that's ok. Remember what

we always talk about–risk vs

benefit. . . . and common sense.

 

Dr. Podell: In this particular case, the study dealt with diet, not

supplements. And it was based on food frequency questionnaires to

gather

dietary information. So it is certainly not definitive. But that

doesn't

mean we cannot learn from it.

 

Does it pass the common sense test? Yes, it does. Vitamin E and

Vitamin

C are antioxidant vitamins. There is solid scientific evidence that

supports the concept of antioxidant nutrients exerting this type of

protective action.

 

So even though this one study is far from proof, it certainly merits

serious consideration.

 

Arnie:Serious consideration, or more? Here is where the risk to

benefit

evaluation comes into play.

 

Lets say we have a study that says those people who only eat acorns

and

mung bean sprouts will reduce their risk of cancer by 25%. Or, let's

say

that we have a study saying that taking a $2,000 per day drug, not

covered by health insurance, with potential liver toxicity, will

reduce

risk of cancer by 25%.

 

Well, in both cases, we might not be too quick to adopt these

approaches. We might want to wait for more convincing evidence

before we

make such drastic changes to our diet and lifestyle. Before we shell

out

$2,000 a day to reduce our risk of cancer, even if we could afford

it,

we might demand more proof.

 

Don: That is only reasonable. Why? Is it risk to benefit? Is it

common

sense?

 

Yes. The benefit is certainly worthy–a 25% reduced risk of cancer.

But

the price is too high.

 

We see such examples all the time. Take smoking, exercise, or weight

loss, for example. It's hard to argue that there is not significant

benefit to one's health if we stop smoking, get more exercise, or

lose

weight. But for many people, that is too high a price to pay.

 

But on the other hand, what if we are talking about taking a

multivitamin supplement? Or taking some extra antioxidant vitamins?

Or

taking a fish oil supplement? The potential benefit of doing this is

great. What is the cost?

 

How much proof do we need when the cost is so small, and the

possible

benefit is so great? How many studies such as the one we just told

you

about, where it seems that those with higher intake of vitamins C

and E

have 28 to 44% lower risk of kidney cancer do you need to hear about

before you say " hey, maybe I should take a few extra nutritional

supplements every day. Maybe I'll live longer. Maybe I will be less

likely to become ill. Maybe I will better enjoy my later years if I

take

steps now to improve my bone status, and reduce my risk of heart

disease

and cancer. "

 

Arnie:OK, so to recap, we have told you about the most recent of

many

studies showing the power of vitamins. In this case, vitamins C & E

significantly reducing the risk of kidney cancer . But, more to the

point, we are pointing out that there is a more important lesson to

be

learned–how much support there is to the use of vitamin supplements

in

general.

 

 

JoAnn Guest

mrsjo-

www.geocities.com/mrsjoguest/