Re: Antioxidants don't help you live longer

[Guest guest]

WHAT ABOUT THE DAILY HALF GLASS OF RED WINE???? EVEN SOME INFECTIOUSE DOCTORS WILL TELL YOU ABOUT IT......Elias <vaeagle2@...> wrote: Antioxidants don't help you live longer By CARLA K. JOHNSON, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 21 minutes

ago CHICAGO - Antioxidant vitamins taken by tens of millions of people around the world won't lead to a longer life, according to an analysis of dozens of studies that adds to evidence questioning the value of the popular supplements. The large review of separate studies on thousands of people found no long-life benefit from vitamins A, E and C and beta carotene and selenium. However, some experts said it's too early to toss out all vitamin pills — or the possibility that they

may have some health benefits. Others said the study supports the theory that antioxidants work best when they are consumed in food rather than pills. An estimated 80 million to 160 million people take antioxidants in North America and Europe, about 10 to 20 percent of adults, the study's authors said. And last year, Americans spent $2.3 billion on nutritional supplements and vitamins at grocery stores, drug stores and retail outlets, excluding Wal-Mart, according to Information Resources Inc., which tracks sales. The new study, appearing in Wednesday's Journal of the American Medical Association, was led by the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group at Copenhagen University Hospital in Denmark. The Cochrane organization is a respected international network of experts that does systematic reviews of scientific evidence on health interventions. For the new report on antioxidants, the researchers first analyzed 68 studies involving 232,606 people and found no significant effect on mortality — neither good nor bad — linked to

taking antioxidants. When they eliminated the lower-quality studies and looked only at the most trustworthy ones, they actually found a higher risk of death for people taking vitamins: 4 percent for those taking vitamin E, 7 percent for beta carotene and 16 percent for vitamin A. The actual cause of death in most studies was unknown, however. Those findings are based on an analysis of 47 studies involving 180,938 people who were randomly assigned to get real vitamins or dummy

pills. Some involved superdoses far exceeding the recommended daily amount of the compounds; others involved normal doses. Some experts who reviewed the research were dismissive of the increased death risk and the analysis overall, saying it pooled studies that were too diverse. However, the study's senior author, Dr. Christian Gluud of Copenhagen University Hospital, said, "The main message is that prevention by beta carotene, vitamin A and vitamin E cannot be recommended.

These three antioxidant supplements may increase mortality." Gluud said most of the studies didn't reveal why those taking supplements died, but "in all likelihood, what they died from is what people normally die from, maybe accelerated artherosclerosis, maybe cancer." Antioxidant supplements have been tested repeatedly by many clinical trials with no consistent clear evidence for their health effects, Gluud said. "We have had this huge industry really wanting to demonstrate an intervention effect that has gone to lengths to do so," Gluud said. "Sadly enough for the industry, and for us as consumers, it has failed to do so." Preliminary studies suggested antioxidants might block the heart-damaging effects of oxygen on arteries and the cell damage that might encourage some kinds of cancer. But some researchers now believe antioxidants work only when they are in food, or that people who eat vitamin-rich food are healthier simply because they take better care of themselves. And beta carotene supplements have been found to increase lung cancer risk in smokers. Meir Stampfer, professor of nutrition and epidemiology at the Harvard School of Public Health, said the new analysis hasn't discouraged him from taking his vitamins. Stampfer said the studies were too diverse to pool together because they looked at various combinations and doses of antioxidants tested in different groups of people. The trials ranged from a three-month study of 109 elderly nursing home residents to a 12-year study of 22,071 male doctors. "This study does not advance our understanding, and could easily lead to misinterpretation of the data," said Stampfer, who was not connected to the new report. The complaints were echoed by Shao, a scientist at the Council for Responsible Nutrition, a supplement trade association. "Only when they included and excluded certain trials were they able to find this alleged increase in mortality, which they themselves can't explain," Shao said. "There is plenty of data out there that show regular use of antioxidant supplements help to maintain health." Berry, chairman of the

department of biostatistics at the University of Texas M.D. Cancer Center, said the analysis persuades him antioxidants have no measurable health benefits, but he disagrees with the researchers' finding of an increase risk of dying. "There are so many choices you can make when you're doing these analyses," he said. Alice Lichtenstein, a professor of nutrition science and policy at Tufts University who was not involved with the research, said the study's main message

is: "Rely on food to get your nutrients." http://news./s/ap/20070228/ap_on_he_me/diet_antioxidant_vitamins

Need Mail bonding?Go to the Q&A for great tips from Answers users.

[Guest guest]

WHAT ABOUT THE DAILY HALF GLASS OF RED WINE???? EVEN SOME INFECTIOUSE DOCTORS WILL TELL YOU ABOUT IT......Elias <vaeagle2@...> wrote: Antioxidants don't help you live longer By CARLA K. JOHNSON, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 21 minutes

ago CHICAGO - Antioxidant vitamins taken by tens of millions of people around the world won't lead to a longer life, according to an analysis of dozens of studies that adds to evidence questioning the value of the popular supplements. The large review of separate studies on thousands of people found no long-life benefit from vitamins A, E and C and beta carotene and selenium. However, some experts said it's too early to toss out all vitamin pills — or the possibility that they

may have some health benefits. Others said the study supports the theory that antioxidants work best when they are consumed in food rather than pills. An estimated 80 million to 160 million people take antioxidants in North America and Europe, about 10 to 20 percent of adults, the study's authors said. And last year, Americans spent $2.3 billion on nutritional supplements and vitamins at grocery stores, drug stores and retail outlets, excluding Wal-Mart, according to Information Resources Inc., which tracks sales. The new study, appearing in Wednesday's Journal of the American Medical Association, was led by the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group at Copenhagen University Hospital in Denmark. The Cochrane organization is a respected international network of experts that does systematic reviews of scientific evidence on health interventions. For the new report on antioxidants, the researchers first analyzed 68 studies involving 232,606 people and found no significant effect on mortality — neither good nor bad — linked to

taking antioxidants. When they eliminated the lower-quality studies and looked only at the most trustworthy ones, they actually found a higher risk of death for people taking vitamins: 4 percent for those taking vitamin E, 7 percent for beta carotene and 16 percent for vitamin A. The actual cause of death in most studies was unknown, however. Those findings are based on an analysis of 47 studies involving 180,938 people who were randomly assigned to get real vitamins or dummy

pills. Some involved superdoses far exceeding the recommended daily amount of the compounds; others involved normal doses. Some experts who reviewed the research were dismissive of the increased death risk and the analysis overall, saying it pooled studies that were too diverse. However, the study's senior author, Dr. Christian Gluud of Copenhagen University Hospital, said, "The main message is that prevention by beta carotene, vitamin A and vitamin E cannot be recommended.

These three antioxidant supplements may increase mortality." Gluud said most of the studies didn't reveal why those taking supplements died, but "in all likelihood, what they died from is what people normally die from, maybe accelerated artherosclerosis, maybe cancer." Antioxidant supplements have been tested repeatedly by many clinical trials with no consistent clear evidence for their health effects, Gluud said. "We have had this huge industry really wanting to demonstrate an intervention effect that has gone to lengths to do so," Gluud said. "Sadly enough for the industry, and for us as consumers, it has failed to do so." Preliminary studies suggested antioxidants might block the heart-damaging effects of oxygen on arteries and the cell damage that might encourage some kinds of cancer. But some researchers now believe antioxidants work only when they are in food, or that people who eat vitamin-rich food are healthier simply because they take better care of themselves. And beta carotene supplements have been found to increase lung cancer risk in smokers. Meir Stampfer, professor of nutrition and epidemiology at the Harvard School of Public Health, said the new analysis hasn't discouraged him from taking his vitamins. Stampfer said the studies were too diverse to pool together because they looked at various combinations and doses of antioxidants tested in different groups of people. The trials ranged from a three-month study of 109 elderly nursing home residents to a 12-year study of 22,071 male doctors. "This study does not advance our understanding, and could easily lead to misinterpretation of the data," said Stampfer, who was not connected to the new report. The complaints were echoed by Shao, a scientist at the Council for Responsible Nutrition, a supplement trade association. "Only when they included and excluded certain trials were they able to find this alleged increase in mortality, which they themselves can't explain," Shao said. "There is plenty of data out there that show regular use of antioxidant supplements help to maintain health." Berry, chairman of the

department of biostatistics at the University of Texas M.D. Cancer Center, said the analysis persuades him antioxidants have no measurable health benefits, but he disagrees with the researchers' finding of an increase risk of dying. "There are so many choices you can make when you're doing these analyses," he said. Alice Lichtenstein, a professor of nutrition science and policy at Tufts University who was not involved with the research, said the study's main message

is: "Rely on food to get your nutrients." http://news./s/ap/20070228/ap_on_he_me/diet_antioxidant_vitamins

Need Mail bonding?Go to the Q&A for great tips from Answers users.

[Guest guest]

At 11:02 PM 2/27/2007, you wrote:

>Antioxidants don't help you live longer

>

>By CARLA K. JOHNSON, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 21 minutes ago

>

>CHICAGO - Antioxidant vitamins taken by tens of millions of people around

>the world won't lead to a longer life, according to an analysis of dozens

>of studies that adds to evidence questioning the value of the popular

>supplements. The large review of separate studies on thousands of people

>found no long-life benefit from vitamins A, E and C and beta carotene and

>selenium.

Probably not if you take them individually--it's better to take them in the

form of a multi--that way they provide the body an opportunity to BALANCE

the redox system, not merely throw one antioxidant into the mix.

More misleading, brain dead reporting from US media.

M.

[Guest guest]

At 11:02 PM 2/27/2007, you wrote:

>Antioxidants don't help you live longer

>

>By CARLA K. JOHNSON, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 21 minutes ago

>

>CHICAGO - Antioxidant vitamins taken by tens of millions of people around

>the world won't lead to a longer life, according to an analysis of dozens

>of studies that adds to evidence questioning the value of the popular

>supplements. The large review of separate studies on thousands of people

>found no long-life benefit from vitamins A, E and C and beta carotene and

>selenium.

Probably not if you take them individually--it's better to take them in the

form of a multi--that way they provide the body an opportunity to BALANCE

the redox system, not merely throw one antioxidant into the mix.

More misleading, brain dead reporting from US media.

M.

[Guest guest]

, I'm surprised at you. You sound like you buy into SOME of this nonsense. Vitamins, taken alone have over 100,000 studies showing that they do good things for health and longevity with reduced risk of various diseases. There are very few of these studies that have looked at any kind of combinations. So, basically all of the solid data that says they work were generated as single nutrient studies.

Balanced combinations are even better, but ALL vitamins, in food, in supplements, whatever, are good for humans. Vitamins, by definition are essential for like and health.

CHECK IT OUT!

Mooney

www.michaelmooney.net

www.medibolics.com

>Antioxidants don't help you live longer>>By CARLA K. JOHNSON, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 21 minutes ago>>CHICAGO - Antioxidant vitamins taken by tens of millions of people around >the world won't lead to a longer life, according to an analysis of dozens >of studies that adds to evidence questioning the value of the popular >supplements. The large review of separate studies on thousands of people >found no long-life benefit from vitamins A, E and C and beta carotene and >selenium.Probably not if you take them individually--it's better to take them in the form of a multi--that way they provide the body an opportunity to BALANCE the redox system, not merely throw one antioxidant into the mix.More misleading, brain dead reporting from US media. M.

[Guest guest]

, darling--no argument at ALL.

I guess what I " buy " is that there are some limitations. For

example, giving beta carotene alone to aging smokers ain't probably gonna

do much. And I'm actually not so surprised at the (yet unreplicated but

who would want to?) findings of increased risk of cancer. An aging smoker

needs a lot more than just beta carotene, nutritionally

speaking!

Also, the beta carotene alone studies in HIV--no benefit, but a HUGE

benefit for a multivitamin for slowing progression (30%) and reducing

morbidity and mortality.

Otherwise, you're right: this is just hysterical media bullshit. I am

VERY sad the responses won't be heard very loudly.

But then--maybe it's a side effect of this weird cold--I am getting so

burned out and disgusted by the fight. CROI is making me so sad.

Here's one nauseating example. Ezetimibe as cholesterol managing agent is

no better (in terms of efficacy) than a bowl of oatmeal. That’s what

actually came out of the presenter’s mouth.

But what do all the ASOs report? The same nonsense conclusions that the

investigators put on the title­it’s a marvelous success!

Yet it is a drug no better than a bowl of oatmeal but one that

Merck/Schering-Plough undoubtedly charges a huge amount for and that can

be extremely toxic. (In terms of charges, one estimate is $78/month

though prices are as arbitrary as the wind and a thief’s victim

selection: “A one-month supply of colesevelam at a dosage of six tablets

daily will cost patients approximately $161. The monthly cost of

ezetimibe is $78, atorvastatin 20 mg is $108, lovastatin 20 mg is $37-71,

and ezetimibe 10 mg/simvastatin 20 mg (Vytorin) is

$86.”[see

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3225/is_2_72/ai_n14919971

] )

Apparently NATAP, EATG, AIDSmeds, NAM and all the rest are so busy

applying for more pharma grants, they no longer give a rat’s ass about

the truth, lest it interfere with their access to information, their

funding flow, the niche of power they enjoy. Gee. JUST like the worthless

White House press corps!

Who cares if people take a pointless drug that might hurt them physically

and will hurt financially in this brave new world of donut holes and

marketing lies?

Most people in Africa still aren’t getting meds. We learn that the big

problem is herpes. Any acyclovir over there? Not a whisper. Breastfeeding

is good but they admit that exclusive breastfeeding doesn’t generally

happen. So what about clean water for formula? Micronutrient

supplementation or fortified whey proteins? Treatment for the babies’

diarrhea so they don’t die (or better yet, never get it)?

No, then you start to pick at the chronic, systemic rape of Africa by its

own governments in some cases (aided and abetted by the US and EU) or oil

companies (look at the shithole of Nigeria as stellar example of lots of

resources and money being stolen by the west while slums fester). Little

wonder no one gives a crap about the babies.

At 10:58 PM 3/3/2007, Mooney wrote:

, I'm surprised at you.

You sound like you buy into SOME of this nonsense. Vitamins, taken alone

have over 100,000 studies showing that they do good things for health and

longevity with reduced risk of various diseases. There are very few of

these studies that have looked at any kind of combinations. So, basically

all of the solid data that says they work were generated as single

nutrient studies.

Balanced combinations are even better, but ALL vitamins, in food, in

supplements, whatever, are good for humans. Vitamins, by definition are

essential for like and health.

CHECK IT OUT!

[Guest guest]

The article appears to be trying to spark some controversy, IMHO (in my humble opinion.) From the standpoint of " truth " to the article, antioxidants *don't* necessarily make you live longer. (Keep reading, or you'll miss the point.) They just prevent you from living shorter than you might possibly live without them. From the same standpoint that we're living to over 70 these days, when our ancestors were only living to mid-30s, modern foods/medicines/access to vitamins and nutrients really help aid our longevity. Sure, they might not make us live beyond our genetic limitation -- they just bring us closer to maximizing it. If I supplement 4g of Vitamin C per day versus 2g, I'm not going to live longer. But, if I supplement 2g of Vitamin C per day over not having enough in my body, I won't die of scurvy, as was common in days before citrus foods were made readily available throughout the grocers of the modern world. Foods are still the best source of vitamins and antioxidants, but one cannot discount the importance of supplementation, as our foods are becoming less nutritious from over-farming and use of pesticides and chemicals (which, in and of themselves can be toxic and artificially induced free-radicals.) To recap, so long as you're getting enough of what your body needs, vitamins probably won't help. But, in the age where our bodies are constantly bombarded with cell phone radiation, electrical currents, pesticides and chemicals in our drinking water and food supply, cancer causing agents, antibiotic resistance, and a plethora of other immune-busting and aging free-radicals, toxins, bacteria, and increasingly strong virii, the importance of supplementation cannot be understated.

ChrisOn 3/3/07, Mooney <mmooney@...> wrote:

, I'm surprised at you. You sound like you buy into SOME of this nonsense. Vitamins, taken alone have over 100,000 studies showing that they do good things for health and longevity with reduced risk of various diseases. There are very few of these studies that have looked at any kind of combinations. So, basically all of the solid data that says they work were generated as single nutrient studies.

Balanced combinations are even better, but ALL vitamins, in food, in supplements, whatever, are good for humans. Vitamins, by definition are essential for like and health.

CHECK IT OUT!

Mooney

www.michaelmooney.net

www.medibolics.com

>Antioxidants don't help you live longer>>By CARLA K. JOHNSON, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 21 minutes ago>>CHICAGO - Antioxidant vitamins taken by tens of millions of people around >the world won't lead to a longer life, according to an analysis of dozens >of studies that adds to evidence questioning the value of the popular >supplements. The large review of separate studies on thousands of people >found no long-life benefit from vitamins A, E and C and beta carotene and >selenium.Probably not if you take them individually--it's better to take them in the form of a multi--that way they provide the body an opportunity to BALANCE the redox system, not merely throw one antioxidant into the mix.More misleading, brain dead reporting from US media. M.

[Guest guest]

At 08:47 AM 3/5/2007, M. wrote:

snip...Apparently NATAP, EATG,

AIDSmeds, NAM and all the rest are so busy applying for more pharma

grants, they no longer give a rat’s ass about the truth, lest it

interfere with their access to information, their funding flow, the niche

of power they enjoy. Gee. JUST like the worthless White House press

corps!

I take it back about AIDSmeds--I had written to my good friend Tim and it

looks like they're updating it. He hadn't heard the oatmeal comment that

the investigator made. At least, the initial report that repeated the

same glowing pharma propaganda bullshit was gone as of last

night.

And I think a lot of people do a lot of good work too. But there is a

boosterism that is NOT healthy. Jules--check your own report out:

http://www.natap.org/2007/CROI/croi_04.htm

At the top you say:

" .... A 1% drop in LDL corresponds to a 1% drop in CVD risk. So a

10% or so decline in LDL is nothing to dismiss, especially in patients

who can not or will not take a statin..... "

Cool. That means even policosanols and garlic work. And they're cheaper

and much safer!

If you want REAL benefit, try things like fish oil and niacin.

Someone else here put it well--more or less go with the diet/exercise and

supplements to manage lipid problems. Resort to the drugs as the last

resort.

But beyond THIS issue--the flood of information is overwhelming--but then

it allows for the flood of bullshit.

And I do not retract the concern about AIDS treatment reporting turning

into the White House press corps. The BIG difference is that I know a lot

of you guys--and I do respect you. That's why it hurts and freaks me out

so much when I see this kind of glib crap--it places the bulk of the good

work in jeopardy of being viewed as less reliable.

if we do NOT have the ability to stand up and speak the truth--we're in

the wrong business. And I know JUST how fucking cruel and vicious the

shits in pharma can be.

They are going to kill me after all.

Melodramatic?

No. Because pharma charges so much for drugs, devices and diagnostics,

they have destroyed the last bits of US healthcare. I lack healthcare. I

am facing illness. I will not survive because no one gives a fuck about

the uninsured.

If I do survive, it'll be because of antioxidants and natural therapies.

That's all I've got (but it is NOT all I want access to.)

So I expect to be another casualty of this grinding machine of corporate

shit.l Just like so many of our friends who have died of AIDS were

murdered as often by medical indifference and stigma (esp in the early

days).

M.