Vitamins (Which Side Are You On)

oo7

Hi,

I've been into fitness and nutrition for over 10 years, and would consider myself to have considerable knowledge in this area, however I have not studied either fitness or nutrition at an academic level.

One contradicting area that continues to pop up across many other forums, websites and magazines, is "Vitamins are good for you"... "Stay clear of vitamins".

It is also something that friends and colleagues ask me a lot about, but I don't advise them as I don't know enough about this area, due to all of the contradicting material that I read.

I guess the question depends on what Vitamins you plan on taking, and for what benefits.

I personally take Echinacea and Spirulina at this time of the year.

Can anyone recommend any credible articles on vitamins, or chime in with you own advice... either for or against vitamins.

Thanks in advance for your help.

Dtp1979

As far as I know, a lot of them are useless. I personally only take vitamin D and magnesium. It may be a coincidence but I haven’t had a cold or flu since I started taking them over a year ago

oo7

I also take Berocca Boost each day... which I'm quite sure is just a placebo effect and a hit of caffeine too lol :-)

martyoo

If they worked they'd be banned. Saying that I do take Vitamin D and fish oil.

Tar.Aldarion

I think multivitamins are a bad idea. I think eating a good diet, getting your blood tested and then targeting your own circumstances with certain vitamins you need can be helpful.

Most people in the EU are vit D deficient for instance, so people can take that. I personally take iodine depending on what I've eaten. Also take Omega 3, D3, B12 (again depending on diet at the time as some food is fortified) because I know I need them.

I try to take vit d and calcium, and vit b cos i get the crack in my mouth if i don't. I think most of it is in berocca

Mellor

martyoo wrote: »

If they worked they'd be banned.

I'm not sure what you're expecting them to do.

Wesser

Echinacea and spurulina are not vitamins.
Vitamins are vital for health. It's in the name. Vita......
If your diet is plentiful in vitamins than you do not need to take them in tablet form. If your diet is not plentiful then yes you do need them.
Supplements and homeopathy on the other hand... waste of time and money.

Alf Veedersane

Wesser wrote: »

Echinacea and spurulina are not vitamins.
Vitamins are vital for health. It's in the name. Vita......
If your diet is plentiful in vitamins than you do not need to take them in tablet form. If your diet is not plentiful then yes you do need them.
Supplements and homeopathy on the other hand... waste of time and money.

You've just described vitamins as supplements in the previous line. Supplements supplement your intake of certain nutrients from food.

PMBC

Wesser wrote: »

Echinacea and spurulina are not vitamins.
Vitamins are vital for health. It's in the name. Vita......
If your diet is plentiful in vitamins than you do not need to take them in tablet form. If your diet is not plentiful then yes you do need them.
Supplements and homeopathy on the other hand... waste of time and money.

Everybody's shouting .....!

LuckyLloyd

Someone needs to explain why multivitamins are bad in of themselves. Sure, eat a balanced diet, but that is a separate matter to the efficacy of vitamins.

dastardly00

I'm of the belief that they can be worth taking. I don't think they work miracles but I do think the vitamins I take do provide some benefit to me.

I take Alpha Men multi-vitamins from MyProtein (cringe at the name), omega-3, and vitamin C powder.

BloodBath

Berocca is poison. The vitamins and minerals in them are chemically produced low quality versions that are not easily absorbed. Along with a load of other crap. Total trash and overall damaging to your health.

Good supplements are a must especially Vit D3, Vit C and Magnessium. They are the big 3 most people are lacking in. Holland and Barrett have good supplements that contain those 3.

Mellor

BloodBath wrote: »

Berocca is poison. The vitamins and minerals in them are chemically produced low quality versions that are not easily absorbed. Along with a load of other crap. Total trash and overall damaging to your health.

Sayign they have no benefit or are sub-optimal is maybe debatable. But damaging? Gonna need to back to that with evidence tbh.

If something synthetic or natural - how does it differ on a molecular level.

BloodBath

I'm stating facts. Do your own research into what's in it. Just because it has some good doesn't change the fact that overall they are bad for you.

They contain aspartame for a start.

The difference is how your gut can break down and absorb them and what they turn in to.

Nothing is a good substitute for good food.

Mellor

BloodBath wrote: »

I'm stating facts.

No you aren't. You are stating opinion. Misguided ones at that. Examples

Berocca is poison.

Nothing in berocca is poisonous that I am aware of. Where is the facts there.
Same applies to your comments about damaging to health.

Do your own research into what's in it.

That's not how it works. You made the claims, I've ask for proof. Otherwise anyone can claim anything.

Just because it has some good doesn't change the fact that overall they are bad for you.

There's that fact word again. Not sure you understand it. I could just as easily say.

Just because supplements aren't a substitute for real food doesn't change the fact that overall they are good for you.

They contain aspartame for a start.

So?
Aspartame has been shown time and time again to not be harmful.
There are no benefits to aspartame of course, but don't confuse no benefits with harmful. There is a neutral middleground.
Sugar on the other hand is has many negative aspects.

The difference is how your gut can break down and absorb them and what they turn in to.

You are going to have to give an example, as the above means nothing tbh.

If a synthetic substances is identical to a a natural one on a molecular one the body can't tell the difference. Nor can it turn into something else - simply not chemically possible. As an example, synthetic hormones are treated the same.

I'm not claiming that artificial vitamins are chemically identical btw. I'd have thought that was obvious, but just want to be really clear.

BTW the Vit D3, Vit C and Magnessium from H&B that you recommended are likely synthetic.

Nothing is a good substitute for good food.

Bit of a strawman that. Nobody claimed otherwise tbh.

dastardly00

^^^^

Fair play Mellor for taking the time to respond to that cr*p post.

ford2600

If you want to do a bit of reading on fat soluble vitamins and their role in health Chris Materjohn has a lot of interesting writings on the interplay between A,D and K vitamins.

BloodBath

Haha, you are all a bit defensive aren't you. I'll stand by my opinion that Berocca is total crap. You keep taking it.

And no Aspartame has not been proven to be safe. You think because it passed some clinical trials it's fine? Because it's in drinks it's fine? The sugar is less harmful.

Upon ingestion, aspartame breaks down into residual components, including aspartic acid, phenylalanine, methanol and further breakdown products including formaldehyde[52] and formic acid

If you're all such experts why don't don't you tell me how methanol is good for you. Or more so the substance it breaks down into, formaldehyde. The fact of the matter is you don't know.

Maybe I don't either but anyone ingesting Aspartame as a sugar substitute is doing more harm than good. Like anything in food and nutrition people will debate that. That's fine. There are other artificial sweeteners in there as well. Their safety is also debatable.

Or do you just think because it's legal it's safe? If you really want supplements why would you take a product that is full of artificial sweeteners, crap salts and low grade artificial forms of Vitamins when there are better products out there.

Maybe the process of turning this stuff into tablets/soluables just makes it unavoidable that they will contain crap but at the very least you can avoid the artificial sweeteners.

There is also the fact that it's a low PH liquid which is very high in citric acid which will damage your teeth over time almost as badly as drinking fizzy sugary drinks. Again avoidable with a good tablet supplement.

draiochtanois

This post has been deleted.

Mellor

BloodBath wrote: »

Haha, you are all a bit defensive aren't you. I'll stand by my opinion that Berocca is total crap. You keep taking it

So, it's only opinion now. What happen to the facts?

And no Aspartame has not been proven to be safe. You think because it passed some clinical trials it's fine? Because it's in drinks it's fine? The sugar is less harmful.

I disagree. Overall, sugar is more harmful for obvious reasons.

If you're all such experts why don't don't you tell me how methanol is good for you. Or more so the substance it breaks down into, formaldehyde. The fact of the matter is you don't know.

Methanol isn't good for you, nor is aspartame - remember what I said above; just because something is not good, that doesn't mean it is bad for you. Your last line above is very odd. How could possibly be aware of what I know or don't know?

You are correct about aspartame breaking down into aspartic acid, phenylalanine, methanol. "Acid" sounds nasty right? Not quite.

Phenylalanine is an essential amino acid. It's not synthesised by humans, which is probably why it is found in breast milk.

Aspartic Acid is another animo acid. Used in the synthesise other aminos, energy systems and it is a key requirement in the production of healthy DNA.

Methanol. Basically a simple alcohol. Not needed or usable by out body. In large quantities is absolutely harmful. Key part of that is large quantities. Endogenous metabolism of tiny amounts of methanol is an entirely normal part of a healthy metabolism. Such production is a result as from eating fruit for example.

A can of diet coke produces about 18mg of methanol.
A berocca produces about 2.5mg.
Eating a 100g apple produces 140mg of methanol.

Just to really spell it out, that means an apple is 50 times more poisonous that a berocca.

Maybe I don't either but anyone ingesting Aspartame as a sugar substitute is doing more harm than good. Like anything in food and nutrition people will debate that. That's fine. There are other artificial sweeteners in there as well. Their safety is also debatable.

Or do you just think because it's legal it's safe? If you really want supplements why would you take a product that is full of artificial sweeteners, crap salts and low grade artificial forms of Vitamins when there are better products out there.

The fact you admit you don't understand thus pretty much makes your claim that it's doing more harm than good completely baseless.

I think it's safe because we have literally thousands of scientists, smart individuals who do this for a living, have determined it to be safe. If new evidence comes to light, that determination may well change. That's how science works.

Buying into ignorant statements due to buzzwords like artificial is how scaremongering works.

Maybe the process of turning this stuff into tablets/soluables just makes it unavoidable that they will contain crap but at the very least you can avoid the artificial sweeteners.

There is also the fact that it's a low PH liquid which is very high in citric acid which will damage your teeth over time almost as badly as drinking fizzy sugary drinks. Again avoidable with a good tablet supplement.

Vitamin C is an acid, ascorbic acid. By definition it's low PH. Most vitamins and aminos taste awful due to being acidic. Which is why they are sweeten or flavoured - to make them palatable. If you want to go with an unflavoured tablet, go for it. But if somebody doesn't like the taste of ass, masking that taste via a sweetened drink is not significantly changing anything.

dastardly00

Mellor wrote: »

But if somebody doesn't like the taste of ass, masking that taste via a drink is not significantly changing anything.

Post of the year!

BloodBath

Mellor wrote: »

So, it's only opinion now. What happen to the facts?


I disagree. Overall, sugar is more harmful for obvious reasons.


Methanol isn't good for you, nor is aspartame - remember what I said above; just because something is not good, that doesn't mean it is bad for you. Your last line above is very odd. How could possibly be aware of what I know or don't know?

You are correct about aspartame breaking down into aspartic acid, phenylalanine, methanol. "Acid" sounds nasty right? Not quite.

Phenylalanine is an essential amino acid. It's not synthesised by humans, which is probably why it is found in breast milk.

Aspartic Acid is another animo acid. Used in the synthesise other aminos, energy systems and it is a key requirement in the production of healthy DNA.

Methanol. Basically a simple alcohol. Not needed or usable by out body. In large quantities is absolutely harmful. Key part of that is large quantities. Endogenous metabolism of tiny amounts of methanol is an entirely normal part of a healthy metabolism. Such production is a result as from eating fruit for example.

A can of diet coke produces about 18mg of methanol.
A berocca produces about 2.5mg.
Eating a 100g apple produces 140mg of methanol.

Just to really spell it out, that means an apple is 50 times more poisonous that a berocca.



The fact you admit you don't understand thus pretty much makes your claim that it's doing more harm than good completely baseless.

I think it's safe because we have literally thousands of scientists, smart individuals who do this for a living, have determined it to be safe. If new evidence comes to light, that determination may well change. That's how science works.

Buying into ignorant statements due to buzzwords like artificial is how scaremongering works.



Vitamin C is an acid, ascorbic acid. By definition it's low PH. Most vitamins and aminos taste awful due to being acidic. Which is why they are sweeten or flavoured - to make them palatable. If you want to go with an unflavoured tablet, go for it. But if somebody doesn't like the taste of ass, masking that taste via a sweetened drink is not significantly changing anything.

At least I'm not cocky enough to claim I know it all. You don't know it all either. Typical clicky echo chamber bull**** in here full of condescending cocky know it alls. As soon as someone says something that goes against your personal beliefs you freak out and attack them.

You don't know crap. It's a lot more complicated than that. Gut health is a major field that is only recently being tested and is far from understood but you know it all right?

If you are so smart you would be aware that these same scientists have okayed lot's of crap in that past that turned out to be lethal. Just because aspartame doesn't kill you quickly doesn't mean it's not doing harm.

There have been several tests into aspartame that show severe negative side effects as well but you wouldn't know about that because your a typical bullish mainstream believer who never does his own research. You're calling it safe in low dosages now rather than just safe? So what about the people who are consuming several aspartame products a day.

You didn't have to go listing off all the crap I didn't even mention either. I know that's not harmful. Coke and Apples containing Methanol doesn't change the fact that Methanol is bad for you.

Here's a study into artificial sweeteners and their effect on the gut. A field I'm sure you know nothing about.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4615743/

But hey it's a lot safer to sit on the accepted mainstream view like a bunch of sheep right?

I bet you think the Fluoride in the water and other products is perfectly safe too when in fact it's a neurotoxin that also wipes out the gut bacteria, as does the Chlorine, which has many negative knock on effects. I'm pretty sure you drink a lot of it.

dastardly00 wrote: »

^^^^

Fair play Mellor for taking the time to respond to that cr*p post.

dastardly00 wrote: »

Post of the year!

Do you have anything interesting to say or are you too busy ramming your tongue up Mellor's ass?

BB, calm down and don't attack other posters please
Cheers

BloodBath

I would call it defense rather than attack but whatever.

martyoo

BloodBath wrote: »

I would call it defense rather than attack but whatever.

You need some ZMA.

Kuva

BloodBath wrote: »

There have been several tests into aspartame that show severe negative side effects as well but you wouldn't know about that because your a typical bullish mainstream believer who never does his own research. You're calling it safe in low dosages now rather than just safe? So what about the people who are consuming several aspartame products a day.

Bang on, the original guys that OK'ed these things did so based on that only small amounts were to be added/consumed, they weren't expecting it to be added to everything.

You nearly can't even buy a Mi Wadi type drink now without this sh1te in it.

Tar.Aldarion

"Aspartame has been found to be safe for human consumption by the regulatory agencies of more than ninety countries worldwide, with FDA officials describing aspartame as “one of the most thoroughly tested and studied food additives the agency has ever approved” and its safety as “clear cut."

When the European Commission’s Scientific Committee on Food evaluated aspartame, they found over 500 papers on aspartame published between 1988 and 2001. It has been studied in animals, in various human populations including infants, children, women, obese adults, diabetics, and lactating women. Numerous studies have ruled out any association with headaches, seizures, behavior, cognition, mood, allergic reactions, and other conditions. It has been evaluated far more extensively than any other food additive.

When new rat studies by the Ramazzini Foundation in Italy appeared to show an association with tumors, the European Food Safety Authority examined Ramazzini’s raw data and found errors that made them discredit the studies. Their updated opinion based on all the data available in 2009 said there was no indication of any genotoxic or carcinogenic potential of aspartame and that there was no reason to revise their previously established ADI (Acceptable Daily Intake) for aspartame of 40 mg/kg/day. Studies have shown that actual consumption is well below that limit.

People who are absolutely convinced they get adverse effects from aspartame have been proven wrong. For instance, the New England Journal of Medicine published a study of people who reported having headaches repeatedly after consuming aspartame. When they knew what they were consuming, 100% of them had headaches. In a double blind crossover trial, when they didn’t know what they were getting, 35% had headaches after aspartame, and 45% had headaches after placebo.

The acceptable daily limit is actually quite high.

Mellor

BloodBath wrote: »

At least I'm not cocky enough to claim I know it all.

I never claimed I know it all. Is making up ways the attack me the best argument you have.

Typical clicky echo chamber bull**** in here full of condescending cocky know it alls. As soon as someone says something that goes against your personal beliefs you freak out and attack them.

Where did I attack you. I just pointed out, politely, your misconceptions.

If you are so smart you would be aware that these same scientists have okayed lot's of crap in that past that turned out to be lethal. Just because aspartame doesn't kill you quickly doesn't mean it's not doing harm.

As I same, if new evidence comes to light opinions change. That what science is.

There have been several tests into aspartame that show severe negative side effects as well but you wouldn't know about that because your a typical bullish mainstream believer who never does his own research. You're calling it safe in low dosages now rather than just safe? So what about the people who are consuming several aspartame products a day.

The dangerous dose is pretty high. Many multiples even a high user.
Everything is dangerous in high doses. Even water (pure without fluorine :rolleyes: )

You didn't have to go listing off all the crap I didn't even mention either. I know that's not harmful. Coke and Apples containing Methanol doesn't change the fact that Methanol is bad for you.

You listed aspartic acid, phenylalanine and Methanol.

Are you actually suggesting that an apple is bad for you?

But hey it's a lot safer to sit on the accepted mainstream view like a bunch of sheep right?

Actually it's easier to just believe everything you read on facebook

I bet you think the Fluoride in the water and other products is perfectly safe too when in fact it's a neurotoxin that also wipes out the gut bacteria, as does the Chlorine, which has many negative knock on effects. I'm pretty sure you drink a lot of it.

I don't believe the world is flat. That will probably rustle your jimmies too.

retro:electro

I take starflower oil and magnesium capsules every morning. Have to crush the magnesium one cos it's huge. I read somewhere that magnesium was meant to make you less cranky but im still a crank, tbh.
I took fish oil for a while but didn't see any noticeable effects.

Sandor Clegane

I think vitamins have their place, but aren't a substitute for a healthy diet.

For instance I know a lot of people who eat poorly and take a multi-vitamin or something to substitute it, not the way to go imo. Supplements are just that, supplements, fine to supplement things like B12, D3 and some others but the majority of your vitamin/micro nutrient intake can be achieved by just eating properly.

Id use them to fill the gaps, bit like protein powders and the like, fine if you really struggle to get it all from food but for the most part should be minimally used.

LostYourNerve?

My lecturer (Tom Cotter of UCC) used to always say that there was no need if you have a balanced diet, and that it was all marketing.