4

votes

Should I throw away my Vitamin E?

Answered on August 19, 2014
Created October 12, 2011 at 5:22 AM

Saw on the news--a study of 35,000 men showed a 17% increase in prostate cancer for men that took Vit E over placebo...

Medium avatar

(5639)

on September 07, 2013
at 01:28 AM

Lovaza, what a joke.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 24, 2011
at 02:23 PM

Some new events: http://orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/v07n12.shtml

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 24, 2011
at 02:20 PM

Here is the response from orthomolecular news: http://orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/v07n11.shtml

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19245)

on October 14, 2011
at 03:03 PM

I argue with you because you have a good brain and a lot of knowledge :) and i'd hate to see you lost to the woo.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19245)

on October 14, 2011
at 03:01 PM

RDA's are also really just a best estimate based upon the interpretation of available evidence, that is why they often change. There is never enough data available and what there is is usually less certain than you'd like it to be.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19245)

on October 14, 2011
at 02:52 PM

The RDA is a minimum level that can be applied to a whole population below which the risk of outright deficiency (rickets) increases. It is not a maximum level you should take. The UL (upper limit) is defined as an intake above which the risk of toxicity begins to increase. The new UL for vitamin D is 4,000 iu which is a good start but could be improved upon. As more solid scientific evidence accumulates for the benefits and low risks of vitamin D you can expect to see the RDA and UL increase further. I believe the current UL for vitamin E is 1,500 iu. This may need reducing in future.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 14, 2011
at 02:33 PM

@Matthew: *that you do not understand what an RDA even is* : Thx god you understand it and can enlighten us all. Actually I don't understand why are you so aggressive. Some deficiency perhaps? Self esteem issues ? I am not a shrink, sorry, nor I have time for your nonsense.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 14, 2011
at 02:30 PM

**@Matthew**: that you do not understand what an RDA even is : Thx god you understand it and can enlighten us all. Actually I don't understand why are you so aggressive. Some deficiency perhaps? Self esteem issues ? I am not a shrink, sorry. I suggest you take your boring nonsensical stories out of this site.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 14, 2011
at 02:28 PM

@Matthews: *that you do not understand what an RDA even is* : Thx god you understand it and can enlighten us all. Actually I don't understand why are you so aggressive. Some deficiency perhaps ? I suggest you take your boring nonsensical stories out of this site.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 14, 2011
at 02:28 PM

@Matthews: *that you do not understand what an RDA even is*: Thx god you understand it and can enlighten us all. Actually I don't understand why are you so aggressive. Some deficiency perhaps ? I suggest you take your boring nonsensical stories out of this site or at least out of my posts.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 14, 2011
at 02:27 PM

@Matthews: *The government cannot recommend that everyone takes 1000's of iu's of vitamin D a day irrespective of sunlight exposure*. They can recommend it for pregnancy for instance yet they didn't. Its never observed that even 10 000 IU per day induce negative effects so you are clearly not informed. Also, the shameful RDA for vitamin C of less then 90mg per day is enough to see how much RDA makes sense

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 14, 2011
at 02:27 PM

@Matthews: *that you do not understand what an RDA even is*: Thx god you understand it and can enlighten us all. Actually I don't understand why are you so aggressive. Some deficiency perhaps ? I suggest you take your boring nonsensical stories out of this site.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 14, 2011
at 02:27 PM

@Matthews: The government cannot recommend that everyone takes 1000's of iu's of vitamin D a day irrespective of sunlight exposure. They can recommend it for pregnancy for instance yet they didn't. Its never observed that even 10 000 IU per day induce negative effects so you are clearly not informed. Also, the shameful RDA for vitamin C of less then 90mg per day is enough to see how much RDA makes sense.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19245)

on October 14, 2011
at 02:25 PM

Its never observed that even 10 000 IU of supplemental vitamin D per day induce negative effects because there has been no large scale testing of that kind of dose.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19245)

on October 14, 2011
at 02:23 PM

"Now, I don't claim Vitamin E megadose is harmless. This research actually does make some sense to me" So you do agree with me after all? :)

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 14, 2011
at 02:22 PM

@Matthews: _The government cannot recommend that everyone takes 1000's of iu's of vitamin D a day irrespective of sunlight exposure._ They can recommend it for pregnancy for instance yet they didn't. Its never observed that even 10 000 IU per day induce negative effects so you are clearly not informed.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19245)

on October 14, 2011
at 02:19 PM

"Vitamins/Minerals were there before everything, before life..." - This is indeed the case in food, however bottles of pills containing 400 iu of vitamin E have not been around very long.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19245)

on October 14, 2011
at 02:16 PM

I never said the FDA weren't a f**ked up mess on many issues. The FDA doesn't take any of my money. I said the FDA were not lying to you about the vitamin D RDA and that you do not understand what an RDA even is. The government cannot recommend that everyone takes 1000's of iu's of vitamin D a day irrespective of sunlight exposure.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 14, 2011
at 07:58 AM

LOOK, A BIRD: "Pay careful attention to what is happening with dietary supplements in the legislative arena... If these efforts are successful, there could be created a class of products to compete with approved drugs. The establishment of a separate regulatory category for supplements could undercut exclusivity rights enjoyed by the holders of approved drug applications." *(FDA Deputy Commissioner for Policy David Adams, at the Drug Information Association Annual Meeting, July 12, 1993)*

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 14, 2011
at 07:57 AM

LOOK , A BIRD: "The task force considered many issues in its deliberations including to ensure that the existence of dietary supplements on the market does not act as a disincentive for drug development." **(FDA Dietary Task Force Report, released June 15, 1993)**

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 14, 2011
at 07:22 AM

Yeah, my hard drive is great place :) When my previous hard drive died many years ago and I didn't have backup, entire neighborhood came to declare condolences :P

3864f9a2af09b1b447c7963058650a34

(3703)

on October 14, 2011
at 12:28 AM

Seriously Maj, you need to let me have access to your hardrive.

3864f9a2af09b1b447c7963058650a34

(3703)

on October 14, 2011
at 12:27 AM

Plus one quilt! Plus one Melissa!

3864f9a2af09b1b447c7963058650a34

(3703)

on October 14, 2011
at 12:26 AM

Thanks for the question because there is so much bad, dishonest science out there that deceives sheeple and clueless, law abiding citizens.

3864f9a2af09b1b447c7963058650a34

(3703)

on October 14, 2011
at 12:24 AM

Excellent response. Really diet is best but because the soils are so depleted, the nutrient density is not the same as 100 yrs ago. Synthetic vitamins don't bind the receptors in the same fashion as naturallly derived onces and the adverse effects can be bad, just synthetic progestins killed more women in the WHI study. Lurotin is a synthetic beta carotene associated with higher mortality in nearly every study (ATBC, CARET, HATS). It is made from a benzene ring from cheap petroleum derivatives. HATS is another trial that used synthetic vitamin E with negative results. Get R-E-A-L. *haaa aha!*

3864f9a2af09b1b447c7963058650a34

(3703)

on October 14, 2011
at 12:19 AM

The RDA was established to prevent diseases of deficiency like scurvy or beriberi. It's correct -- they are not the standards for 'best living' or thriving, only barely surviving.

3864f9a2af09b1b447c7963058650a34

(3703)

on October 14, 2011
at 12:16 AM

Matthew, Do you read either Freetheanimal.com or Gnolls.com? The Fed takes your hard-earned tax money and gives it to Big Pharma (not Big Vitamins), Big Agra, Big Processed Foods, Monsanto and Halliburton. Stop drinking the koolaid dude...

3c997ffae3db9464325b96979346d9e9

(1290)

on October 13, 2011
at 11:47 AM

Actually it's refined, rancid oil...eat up Maj!

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 13, 2011
at 08:02 AM

Yes, Futureboy, Lovaza is the name. 840 DHA/EPA for $150 per month. FDA approved of course. I can get the same amount for $20. Here is Marinol comparison: http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=000091

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 13, 2011
at 07:53 AM

Yes, thats tiny amount, lol. Also, rancidity could actually be tasted. Also, all those come with some antioxidant, mostly E or ascorbyl palmitate.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 13, 2011
at 07:51 AM

Yes, palm oil is great, but there is that orangutan thing .... http://www.cmzoo.org/conservation/palmOilCrisis/

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 13, 2011
at 07:49 AM

Now, I don't claim Vitamin E megadose is harmless. This research actually does make some sense to me and its worth remembering. I claim its far less harmless then almost any drug out there.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 13, 2011
at 07:46 AM

*Consuming any vitamin at levels many times greater than have ever occurred before certainly raises the possibility that harmful effects might occur* Sure, but - and please print this and put it on the wall - DRUGS AT ANY LEVELS **NEVER** OCCURED BEFORE - Thats why Linus Pauling made orthomolecular medicine, because its observed that when you use vitamins in megadoses *to threat disease* you don't have adverse reactions that could be compared to drugs. You can take 0.5kg of Vitamin C in a day (I took half of it once) without any ill effect, and taking 20g of aspirin will kill you for sure.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 13, 2011
at 07:41 AM

*The FDA are not lying to you, they are however very conservative in their approach to incorporating new scientific evidence into their recommendations* **I LOLed**. You should really reconsider your attitude toward this for your own sake. Conservative ? Vitamins/Minerals were there before everything, before life, mate. Contrary, drugs that they put forward were never there, and kill millions. Lets only look at the ones that are used the most: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=19388724

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 13, 2011
at 07:40 AM

*The FDA are not lying to you, they are however very conservative in their approach to incorporating new scientific evidence into their recommendations* I LOLed. You should really reconsider your attitude toward this for your own sake ? Conservative ? Vitamins/Minerals were there before everything, before life, mate. Contrary, drugs that they put forward were never there, and kill millions. Lets only look at the ones that are used the most http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=19388724

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 13, 2011
at 07:40 AM

*The FDA are not lying to you, they are however very conservative in their approach to incorporating new scientific evidence into their recommendations*: **I LOLed**. You should really reconsider your attitude toward this for your own sake ? Conservative ? Vitamins/Minerals were there before everything, before life, mate. Contrary, drugs that they put forward were never there, and kill millions. Lets only look at the ones that are used the most: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=19388724

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 13, 2011
at 07:38 AM

*The FDA are not lying to you, they are however very conservative in their approach to incorporating new scientific evidence into their recommendations*: **I LOLed now**. Are you insane ? Conservative ? Vitamins/Minerals were there before everything, before life, mate. Contrary, drugs that they put forward were never there, and kill millions. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=19388724 – majkinetor

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 13, 2011
at 07:38 AM

_The FDA are not lying to you, they are however very conservative in their approach to incorporating new scientific evidence into their recommendations_: I LOLed now. Are you insane ? Conservative ? Vitamins/Minerals were there before everything, before life, mate. Contrary, drugs that they put forward were never there, and kill millions. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=19388724

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 13, 2011
at 07:36 AM

Also, water is not harmless too. Drink 3L ASAP and you can probably say hello to Jesus. I don't see your point.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 13, 2011
at 07:35 AM

_"all vitamins are not harmless" This is true_ Yes, vitamin D is used as a rat poison. It will effectively turn it into a statue. Other then that, the problematic is mostly iron (lets not talk only about vitamins, but supplements in general) you should probably see this info: http://orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/v07n05.shtml. Now, compare that to millions of deadh from pharmaceutical drugs: http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/04/14/medication-related-injuries-on-the-rise/ http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2003/11/26/death-by-medicine-part-one.aspx

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19245)

on October 13, 2011
at 07:19 AM

Quilt: No one makes more axiomatic statements than you do.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117

(25472)

on October 13, 2011
at 02:07 AM

Unless youre a post menopuasal women. Context is critical. Anyone who makes axiomatic statements best be ready for the exception. And i have hundreds of these exceptions in my office.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117

(25472)

on October 13, 2011
at 02:05 AM

Travis.....i like palm oil source best.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117

(25472)

on October 13, 2011
at 02:04 AM

The sutdy in jama only used alpha vitamin E......total bullshit study.

3c997ffae3db9464325b96979346d9e9

(1290)

on October 13, 2011
at 01:04 AM

"Tiny amount"?...you're holding a bottle of rancid oil with 100 vitamin E capsules.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad

on October 12, 2011
at 11:29 PM

I would ask Chris masterjohn. He told me that the rda was based on prisoner studies where they fed the people mainly corn oil.

Medium avatar

(39821)

on October 12, 2011
at 10:53 PM

The tiny amount of (even rancid) oil in a capsule would be worth consuming compared to, say, a vitamin D deficiency.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19245)

on October 12, 2011
at 08:22 PM

Consuming any vitamin at levels many times greater than have ever occurred before certainly raises the possibility that harmful effects might occur, though it does not mean they will. Is there any evidence that 400 iu per day of natural mixed tocopherols and tocotrienols would have no ill effects?

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19245)

on October 12, 2011
at 08:15 PM

I'm not a hypocrite. The FDA are not lying to you, they are however very conservative in their approach to incorporating new scientific evidence into their recommendations. Also you have no idea of the complexity of recommending a nutrient intake that can be applied to every adult in the USA without risk of harm to any of them. If people came with a usage label everything would be a great deal simpler.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19245)

on October 12, 2011
at 08:03 PM

"all vitamins are not harmless" This is true.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 12, 2011
at 07:56 PM

For healthy people yes, but keep in mind that E is used therapeutically in larger doses. It looks like people can't differ supplemental and curative doses.

61a27a8b7ec2264b1821923b271eaf54

(3175)

on October 12, 2011
at 07:22 PM

The only Vit E I take is in my multi-vitamin and it's only 30IU. I fully concur with pitching the 400IU pills. Doesn't sound like anybody needs them, even if the bottle says "Promotes Prostate Health!"

61a27a8b7ec2264b1821923b271eaf54

(3175)

on October 12, 2011
at 07:20 PM

What's funny is that the study was designed to show that Vit E and/or Selenium would LOWER the risk of prostate cancer, but after a time they realized it was having the opposite effect.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 12, 2011
at 05:32 PM

@Matthew: What is normal ? Its not like our bodies come with usage label - take this amount of C, that amount of D. Are you implying that FDA is lying to people because they set the RDA at 600 ? Don't be a hypocrite.

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d

(17969)

on October 12, 2011
at 05:32 PM

I only know of one significant food source of tocotrienols and that's palm oil. So I'm not about to say that they are a vitamin, merely a little something extra. And yes Jim I know about those, I mentioned that. It is probably best for them not to be extremely high dose, though. 100IU or even 50 seems like it would be best.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 12, 2011
at 05:29 PM

@Matthew: Real paper would and for instance like: "Its concluded that 400IU/day alpha tocopherol taken as the only supplement rises probability of prostate cancer in healthy adult men" without those useless propaganda. Little things....

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 12, 2011
at 05:26 PM

@Matthew: Vitamin business can not be compared to pharmoaceutical business. As I said it, its not patentable and you have to share profit with everybody who makes it. Yes, I am suggesting they might have fabricated results - removing some subjects for instance or using improper placebo. It happened many times before. Also, their conclusion tells you everything. They concluded basically that "all vitamins are not harmless" while testing specific synthetic forms of only 2 of them: *..underscore the need for consumers to be skeptical of health claims for unregulated over-the-counter products*

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 12, 2011
at 05:19 PM

@Matthew: What is normal ? Its not like our bodies come with usage label - take this amount of C, that amount of D. Physiologically sufficient level is defined as 600 IU. Period. That is RDA. 5K - 10K IU IS megadose.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19245)

on October 12, 2011
at 04:53 PM

I really don't know why those running the SELECT trial chose such a high level of supplementation.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19245)

on October 12, 2011
at 04:41 PM

Are you suggesting that the study authors are lying about their results because of their conflicts of interest? Who do you think makes vitamin E anyway? Pharmaceutical companies do... I expect they would make a good income if they could prove that every man should mega dose vitamin E to prevent prostate cancer.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19245)

on October 12, 2011
at 04:33 PM

Are you suggesting that the study authors are lying about their results because of their conflicts of interest? Who do you think makes vitamin E anyway? Pharmaceutical companies do...

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19245)

on October 12, 2011
at 04:25 PM

Large supplement doses of vitamin D are physiologically normal, if more commonly from sun exposure. Daily intakes of 400 iu of vitamin E are not normal under any circumstances.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 12, 2011
at 02:28 PM

I don't see you complaining about megadoses of Vitamin D which are 10 - 20 times higher then RDA which virtually everybody on this forum takes. You don't see any mind blowing conflict ? Question - is there any pharmaceutical industry not in disclosure ? Do you know that vitamins are not patentable ? Do you know that analogs sell as pharmaceuticals by 10000 price of natural stuff ? For instance Alpha Vitamin D or Marinol or I-forgot-the-name-of-100x-more-expensive-fish-oil-for-heart-disease.

4781cf8ae1bfcb558dfb056af17bea94

(4359)

on October 12, 2011
at 02:16 PM

So cavalier... Why in the world would you think that taking a mega dose (i.e., an order of magnitude more than would be obtained naturally) of a fat soluble vitamin (or any vitamin for that matter) is is a good idea? Also, while there might be a slight bias against natural remedies, I don't see any mind-blowing conflict of interest here

4781cf8ae1bfcb558dfb056af17bea94

(4359)

on October 12, 2011
at 02:15 PM

So cavalier... Why in the world would you think that taking a fat a mega dose (i.e., an order of magnitude more than would be obtained naturally) of a soluble vitamin is is a good idea? Also, while there might be a slight bias against natural remedies, I don't see any mind-blowing conflict of interest here.

Acc38052c1efe7fc4338dc55f2428bfe

(242)

on October 12, 2011
at 01:36 PM

There are a number of supplements out there, like Jarrow's Toco-Sorb, that are not just alpha tocopherol. They're basically concentrated palm kernel oil (heavy on tocotrienols).

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19245)

on October 12, 2011
at 10:55 AM

I'd say it is more likely an effect of the dosage. They were taking 400 iu per day and that is quite a lot of vitamin E. I do not think it is impossible that vitamins can have adverse effects when taken at a level far above that possible though any dietary food.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 12, 2011
at 10:36 AM

Well said. However, vitamin E is not only tocopherols but also tocotrienols... so even mixed tocopherols may not be enough. Thats one reason low carbers should do as many vegetable portions as possible.

  • 61a27a8b7ec2264b1821923b271eaf54

    asked by

    (3175)
  • Views
    3.4K
  • Last Activity
    1429D AGO
Frontpage book

Get FREE instant access to our Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!

8 Answers

4
27361737e33ba2f73ab3c25d2699ad61

(1880)

on October 12, 2011
at 01:39 PM

If we lived in a pristine world with no pollution and chemicals etc that are completely overwhelming our bodies' natural antioxidant capabilities, I would say ditch the vitamins. But since we live in our modern chemical soup world, I would suggest you take a quality naturaly high gamma e product such as the one by A.C. Grace ("Unique E") in a dose based on your body weight in the AM with breakfast and then a separate tocotrienol complex product with your evening meal -- I like Solgar's tocotrienol complex -- that or Twin-Lab's product.

Caveat -- if you currently take any medication such as blood thinners, do research and check with a physician knowledgeable about supplements (most are not -- so not an easy task, but persevere).

Vitamin supplements may not be "natural" but neither is living in a heavily polluted environment.

4
Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d

(17969)

on October 12, 2011
at 06:15 AM

Uh ohs, not equivocation. As Majkinetor mentioned, synthetic vitamin e can compete with real vitamin e and steal its role, while being much less effective. Furthermore, natural alpha tocopherol in large doses competes with gamma tocopherol and the other forms that we would be getting from food for the job, which all serve unique functions in the antioxidant network. It's like a sports team, you don't just want one kind of player. It is gamma tocopherol that is most prevalent in food, but most of the supplements are alpha. But say you were to get natural mixed tocopherols, that would be a whole new ball game, that's what you get in food, and that's what your body uses best.

If we can, getting vitamin e from diet makes the most sense, but I would read this as all vitamin e is bad, just that whatever vitamin e these people mostly took is potentially bad.

Also, when people take supplements they often experience a licensing effect from them. They think that the supplements give them a get-out-of-poor-health-free pass and somehow counteract that trans-fat-laden doughnut, so you can get people who take multivitamins who eat worse than they would have otherwise.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 12, 2011
at 10:36 AM

Well said. However, vitamin E is not only tocopherols but also tocotrienols... so even mixed tocopherols may not be enough. Thats one reason low carbers should do as many vegetable portions as possible.

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d

(17969)

on October 12, 2011
at 05:32 PM

I only know of one significant food source of tocotrienols and that's palm oil. So I'm not about to say that they are a vitamin, merely a little something extra. And yes Jim I know about those, I mentioned that. It is probably best for them not to be extremely high dose, though. 100IU or even 50 seems like it would be best.

Acc38052c1efe7fc4338dc55f2428bfe

(242)

on October 12, 2011
at 01:36 PM

There are a number of supplements out there, like Jarrow's Toco-Sorb, that are not just alpha tocopherol. They're basically concentrated palm kernel oil (heavy on tocotrienols).

3864f9a2af09b1b447c7963058650a34

(3703)

on October 14, 2011
at 12:24 AM

Excellent response. Really diet is best but because the soils are so depleted, the nutrient density is not the same as 100 yrs ago. Synthetic vitamins don't bind the receptors in the same fashion as naturallly derived onces and the adverse effects can be bad, just synthetic progestins killed more women in the WHI study. Lurotin is a synthetic beta carotene associated with higher mortality in nearly every study (ATBC, CARET, HATS). It is made from a benzene ring from cheap petroleum derivatives. HATS is another trial that used synthetic vitamin E with negative results. Get R-E-A-L. *haaa aha!*

2
Medium avatar

on October 12, 2011
at 07:06 PM

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117

(25472)

on October 13, 2011
at 02:05 AM

Travis.....i like palm oil source best.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 12, 2011
at 07:56 PM

For healthy people yes, but keep in mind that E is used therapeutically in larger doses. It looks like people can't differ supplemental and curative doses.

61a27a8b7ec2264b1821923b271eaf54

(3175)

on October 12, 2011
at 07:22 PM

The only Vit E I take is in my multi-vitamin and it's only 30IU. I fully concur with pitching the 400IU pills. Doesn't sound like anybody needs them, even if the bottle says "Promotes Prostate Health!"

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 13, 2011
at 07:51 AM

Yes, palm oil is great, but there is that orangutan thing .... http://www.cmzoo.org/conservation/palmOilCrisis/

2
4781cf8ae1bfcb558dfb056af17bea94

(4359)

on October 12, 2011
at 12:42 PM

I've seen results like this for years and wonder why anyone would still be taking such large doses of vitamin E. The problem could be the form (i.e., synthetic vs natural) or type (single or full spectrum) but I think the most likely problem is the MASSIVE dose.

A vegetable-oil-free paleo diet might contain about 10-20 IU of vit E. Not sure what the argument would be for taking 20-40 times that amount in a day. Of course it causes problems!

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19245)

on October 12, 2011
at 04:53 PM

I really don't know why those running the SELECT trial chose such a high level of supplementation.

2
77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 12, 2011
at 05:41 AM

More info: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/10/111011163043.htm

Hm... so, they started to blame vitamin E for mortality and cancer issues. If the effect exists its probably small and may be related to the form of vitamin. Synthetic version of vitamin E shouldn't be used, only natural as it is very large complex of natural substances (some form of alcohol actually).

Perhaps taking easy on vitamin E until we know more is not a bad idea.

=== EDIT ===

ZOMG, wow, why do I smell BS in the air...

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: All authors have completed and submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Dr Thompson reported receiving research support from the National Cancer Institute for a randomized controlled trial testing finasteride against placebo, both of which are supplied by Merck. Dr Gaziano reported receiving grant support (to his institution) from Wyeth (now Pfizer) in the form of vitamin and placebo pills and packaging. Dr Karp reported receiving grants to his institution from Pfizer. Dr Klotz reported receiving travel support for meetings from sanofi-aventis, Merck, and AstraZeneca and research support for investigator-initiated trials from Abbott and GlaxoSmithKline, and institutional grants pending. Dr Chin reported receiving consultancy fees from Janssen, Amgen, Novartis, and Firmagon; receiving payment for lectures from Firmagon; and payment for development of educational presentations from AstraZeneca, Novartis, and Firmagon. Dr Meyskens reported being a co-founder of Cancer Prevention Pharmaceuticals. Dr Baker reported board membership for Merck for which he receives no compensation. Otherwise there were no other conflicts of interest disclosed.

http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/306/14/1549.full

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19245)

on October 12, 2011
at 10:55 AM

I'd say it is more likely an effect of the dosage. They were taking 400 iu per day and that is quite a lot of vitamin E. I do not think it is impossible that vitamins can have adverse effects when taken at a level far above that possible though any dietary food.

Medium avatar

(5639)

on September 07, 2013
at 01:28 AM

Lovaza, what a joke.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 12, 2011
at 05:32 PM

@Matthew: What is normal ? Its not like our bodies come with usage label - take this amount of C, that amount of D. Are you implying that FDA is lying to people because they set the RDA at 600 ? Don't be a hypocrite.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19245)

on October 12, 2011
at 08:03 PM

"all vitamins are not harmless" This is true.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 13, 2011
at 07:40 AM

*The FDA are not lying to you, they are however very conservative in their approach to incorporating new scientific evidence into their recommendations*: **I LOLed**. You should really reconsider your attitude toward this for your own sake ? Conservative ? Vitamins/Minerals were there before everything, before life, mate. Contrary, drugs that they put forward were never there, and kill millions. Lets only look at the ones that are used the most: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=19388724

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19245)

on October 12, 2011
at 04:25 PM

Large supplement doses of vitamin D are physiologically normal, if more commonly from sun exposure. Daily intakes of 400 iu of vitamin E are not normal under any circumstances.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 13, 2011
at 07:46 AM

*Consuming any vitamin at levels many times greater than have ever occurred before certainly raises the possibility that harmful effects might occur* Sure, but - and please print this and put it on the wall - DRUGS AT ANY LEVELS **NEVER** OCCURED BEFORE - Thats why Linus Pauling made orthomolecular medicine, because its observed that when you use vitamins in megadoses *to threat disease* you don't have adverse reactions that could be compared to drugs. You can take 0.5kg of Vitamin C in a day (I took half of it once) without any ill effect, and taking 20g of aspirin will kill you for sure.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 12, 2011
at 02:28 PM

I don't see you complaining about megadoses of Vitamin D which are 10 - 20 times higher then RDA which virtually everybody on this forum takes. You don't see any mind blowing conflict ? Question - is there any pharmaceutical industry not in disclosure ? Do you know that vitamins are not patentable ? Do you know that analogs sell as pharmaceuticals by 10000 price of natural stuff ? For instance Alpha Vitamin D or Marinol or I-forgot-the-name-of-100x-more-expensive-fish-oil-for-heart-disease.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19245)

on October 12, 2011
at 04:41 PM

Are you suggesting that the study authors are lying about their results because of their conflicts of interest? Who do you think makes vitamin E anyway? Pharmaceutical companies do... I expect they would make a good income if they could prove that every man should mega dose vitamin E to prevent prostate cancer.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 12, 2011
at 05:29 PM

@Matthew: Real paper would and for instance like: "Its concluded that 400IU/day alpha tocopherol taken as the only supplement rises probability of prostate cancer in healthy adult men" without those useless propaganda. Little things....

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19245)

on October 12, 2011
at 08:15 PM

I'm not a hypocrite. The FDA are not lying to you, they are however very conservative in their approach to incorporating new scientific evidence into their recommendations. Also you have no idea of the complexity of recommending a nutrient intake that can be applied to every adult in the USA without risk of harm to any of them. If people came with a usage label everything would be a great deal simpler.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 13, 2011
at 07:38 AM

_The FDA are not lying to you, they are however very conservative in their approach to incorporating new scientific evidence into their recommendations_: I LOLed now. Are you insane ? Conservative ? Vitamins/Minerals were there before everything, before life, mate. Contrary, drugs that they put forward were never there, and kill millions. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=19388724

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 13, 2011
at 07:49 AM

Now, I don't claim Vitamin E megadose is harmless. This research actually does make some sense to me and its worth remembering. I claim its far less harmless then almost any drug out there.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 12, 2011
at 05:19 PM

@Matthew: What is normal ? Its not like our bodies come with usage label - take this amount of C, that amount of D. Physiologically sufficient level is defined as 600 IU. Period. That is RDA. 5K - 10K IU IS megadose.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 12, 2011
at 05:26 PM

@Matthew: Vitamin business can not be compared to pharmoaceutical business. As I said it, its not patentable and you have to share profit with everybody who makes it. Yes, I am suggesting they might have fabricated results - removing some subjects for instance or using improper placebo. It happened many times before. Also, their conclusion tells you everything. They concluded basically that "all vitamins are not harmless" while testing specific synthetic forms of only 2 of them: *..underscore the need for consumers to be skeptical of health claims for unregulated over-the-counter products*

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 13, 2011
at 07:41 AM

*The FDA are not lying to you, they are however very conservative in their approach to incorporating new scientific evidence into their recommendations* **I LOLed**. You should really reconsider your attitude toward this for your own sake. Conservative ? Vitamins/Minerals were there before everything, before life, mate. Contrary, drugs that they put forward were never there, and kill millions. Lets only look at the ones that are used the most: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=19388724

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19245)

on October 12, 2011
at 04:33 PM

Are you suggesting that the study authors are lying about their results because of their conflicts of interest? Who do you think makes vitamin E anyway? Pharmaceutical companies do...

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19245)

on October 14, 2011
at 03:03 PM

I argue with you because you have a good brain and a lot of knowledge :) and i'd hate to see you lost to the woo.

4781cf8ae1bfcb558dfb056af17bea94

(4359)

on October 12, 2011
at 02:15 PM

So cavalier... Why in the world would you think that taking a fat a mega dose (i.e., an order of magnitude more than would be obtained naturally) of a soluble vitamin is is a good idea? Also, while there might be a slight bias against natural remedies, I don't see any mind-blowing conflict of interest here.

61a27a8b7ec2264b1821923b271eaf54

(3175)

on October 12, 2011
at 07:20 PM

What's funny is that the study was designed to show that Vit E and/or Selenium would LOWER the risk of prostate cancer, but after a time they realized it was having the opposite effect.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 13, 2011
at 07:38 AM

*The FDA are not lying to you, they are however very conservative in their approach to incorporating new scientific evidence into their recommendations*: **I LOLed now**. Are you insane ? Conservative ? Vitamins/Minerals were there before everything, before life, mate. Contrary, drugs that they put forward were never there, and kill millions. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=19388724 – majkinetor

4781cf8ae1bfcb558dfb056af17bea94

(4359)

on October 12, 2011
at 02:16 PM

So cavalier... Why in the world would you think that taking a mega dose (i.e., an order of magnitude more than would be obtained naturally) of a fat soluble vitamin (or any vitamin for that matter) is is a good idea? Also, while there might be a slight bias against natural remedies, I don't see any mind-blowing conflict of interest here

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 13, 2011
at 08:02 AM

Yes, Futureboy, Lovaza is the name. 840 DHA/EPA for $150 per month. FDA approved of course. I can get the same amount for $20. Here is Marinol comparison: http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=000091

3864f9a2af09b1b447c7963058650a34

(3703)

on October 14, 2011
at 12:28 AM

Seriously Maj, you need to let me have access to your hardrive.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 14, 2011
at 02:27 PM

@Matthews: *The government cannot recommend that everyone takes 1000's of iu's of vitamin D a day irrespective of sunlight exposure*. They can recommend it for pregnancy for instance yet they didn't. Its never observed that even 10 000 IU per day induce negative effects so you are clearly not informed. Also, the shameful RDA for vitamin C of less then 90mg per day is enough to see how much RDA makes sense

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19245)

on October 12, 2011
at 08:22 PM

Consuming any vitamin at levels many times greater than have ever occurred before certainly raises the possibility that harmful effects might occur, though it does not mean they will. Is there any evidence that 400 iu per day of natural mixed tocopherols and tocotrienols would have no ill effects?

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 13, 2011
at 07:40 AM

*The FDA are not lying to you, they are however very conservative in their approach to incorporating new scientific evidence into their recommendations* I LOLed. You should really reconsider your attitude toward this for your own sake ? Conservative ? Vitamins/Minerals were there before everything, before life, mate. Contrary, drugs that they put forward were never there, and kill millions. Lets only look at the ones that are used the most http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=19388724

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 14, 2011
at 02:27 PM

@Matthews: The government cannot recommend that everyone takes 1000's of iu's of vitamin D a day irrespective of sunlight exposure. They can recommend it for pregnancy for instance yet they didn't. Its never observed that even 10 000 IU per day induce negative effects so you are clearly not informed. Also, the shameful RDA for vitamin C of less then 90mg per day is enough to see how much RDA makes sense.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19245)

on October 14, 2011
at 02:16 PM

I never said the FDA weren't a f**ked up mess on many issues. The FDA doesn't take any of my money. I said the FDA were not lying to you about the vitamin D RDA and that you do not understand what an RDA even is. The government cannot recommend that everyone takes 1000's of iu's of vitamin D a day irrespective of sunlight exposure.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19245)

on October 14, 2011
at 02:52 PM

The RDA is a minimum level that can be applied to a whole population below which the risk of outright deficiency (rickets) increases. It is not a maximum level you should take. The UL (upper limit) is defined as an intake above which the risk of toxicity begins to increase. The new UL for vitamin D is 4,000 iu which is a good start but could be improved upon. As more solid scientific evidence accumulates for the benefits and low risks of vitamin D you can expect to see the RDA and UL increase further. I believe the current UL for vitamin E is 1,500 iu. This may need reducing in future.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 13, 2011
at 07:36 AM

Also, water is not harmless too. Drink 3L ASAP and you can probably say hello to Jesus. I don't see your point.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 14, 2011
at 02:22 PM

@Matthews: _The government cannot recommend that everyone takes 1000's of iu's of vitamin D a day irrespective of sunlight exposure._ They can recommend it for pregnancy for instance yet they didn't. Its never observed that even 10 000 IU per day induce negative effects so you are clearly not informed.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 13, 2011
at 07:35 AM

_"all vitamins are not harmless" This is true_ Yes, vitamin D is used as a rat poison. It will effectively turn it into a statue. Other then that, the problematic is mostly iron (lets not talk only about vitamins, but supplements in general) you should probably see this info: http://orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/v07n05.shtml. Now, compare that to millions of deadh from pharmaceutical drugs: http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/04/14/medication-related-injuries-on-the-rise/ http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2003/11/26/death-by-medicine-part-one.aspx

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19245)

on October 14, 2011
at 02:25 PM

Its never observed that even 10 000 IU of supplemental vitamin D per day induce negative effects because there has been no large scale testing of that kind of dose.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19245)

on October 14, 2011
at 03:01 PM

RDA's are also really just a best estimate based upon the interpretation of available evidence, that is why they often change. There is never enough data available and what there is is usually less certain than you'd like it to be.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 14, 2011
at 07:22 AM

Yeah, my hard drive is great place :) When my previous hard drive died many years ago and I didn't have backup, entire neighborhood came to declare condolences :P

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19245)

on October 14, 2011
at 02:19 PM

"Vitamins/Minerals were there before everything, before life..." - This is indeed the case in food, however bottles of pills containing 400 iu of vitamin E have not been around very long.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 14, 2011
at 02:33 PM

@Matthew: *that you do not understand what an RDA even is* : Thx god you understand it and can enlighten us all. Actually I don't understand why are you so aggressive. Some deficiency perhaps? Self esteem issues ? I am not a shrink, sorry, nor I have time for your nonsense.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 14, 2011
at 07:58 AM

LOOK, A BIRD: "Pay careful attention to what is happening with dietary supplements in the legislative arena... If these efforts are successful, there could be created a class of products to compete with approved drugs. The establishment of a separate regulatory category for supplements could undercut exclusivity rights enjoyed by the holders of approved drug applications." *(FDA Deputy Commissioner for Policy David Adams, at the Drug Information Association Annual Meeting, July 12, 1993)*

3864f9a2af09b1b447c7963058650a34

(3703)

on October 14, 2011
at 12:16 AM

Matthew, Do you read either Freetheanimal.com or Gnolls.com? The Fed takes your hard-earned tax money and gives it to Big Pharma (not Big Vitamins), Big Agra, Big Processed Foods, Monsanto and Halliburton. Stop drinking the koolaid dude...

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 14, 2011
at 02:28 PM

@Matthews: *that you do not understand what an RDA even is* : Thx god you understand it and can enlighten us all. Actually I don't understand why are you so aggressive. Some deficiency perhaps ? I suggest you take your boring nonsensical stories out of this site.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19245)

on October 14, 2011
at 02:23 PM

"Now, I don't claim Vitamin E megadose is harmless. This research actually does make some sense to me" So you do agree with me after all? :)

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 14, 2011
at 02:30 PM

**@Matthew**: that you do not understand what an RDA even is : Thx god you understand it and can enlighten us all. Actually I don't understand why are you so aggressive. Some deficiency perhaps? Self esteem issues ? I am not a shrink, sorry. I suggest you take your boring nonsensical stories out of this site.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 14, 2011
at 07:57 AM

LOOK , A BIRD: "The task force considered many issues in its deliberations including to ensure that the existence of dietary supplements on the market does not act as a disincentive for drug development." **(FDA Dietary Task Force Report, released June 15, 1993)**

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 14, 2011
at 02:27 PM

@Matthews: *that you do not understand what an RDA even is*: Thx god you understand it and can enlighten us all. Actually I don't understand why are you so aggressive. Some deficiency perhaps ? I suggest you take your boring nonsensical stories out of this site.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 14, 2011
at 02:28 PM

@Matthews: *that you do not understand what an RDA even is*: Thx god you understand it and can enlighten us all. Actually I don't understand why are you so aggressive. Some deficiency perhaps ? I suggest you take your boring nonsensical stories out of this site or at least out of my posts.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 24, 2011
at 02:23 PM

Some new events: http://orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/v07n12.shtml

1
3c997ffae3db9464325b96979346d9e9

on October 12, 2011
at 10:50 PM

I don't trust or like any supplement in an oil base including CoQ10. The oil is often soy but even if it isn't the potential of rancidity is not worth it to me. I feel the same way about fermented cod liver oil...the intense burning in my throat from this at times ended my relationship with it. I look to foods for the nutrition though I do take some vitamin C and magnesium malate.

3c997ffae3db9464325b96979346d9e9

(1290)

on October 13, 2011
at 11:47 AM

Actually it's refined, rancid oil...eat up Maj!

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 13, 2011
at 07:53 AM

Yes, thats tiny amount, lol. Also, rancidity could actually be tasted. Also, all those come with some antioxidant, mostly E or ascorbyl palmitate.

3c997ffae3db9464325b96979346d9e9

(1290)

on October 13, 2011
at 01:04 AM

"Tiny amount"?...you're holding a bottle of rancid oil with 100 vitamin E capsules.

Medium avatar

(39821)

on October 12, 2011
at 10:53 PM

The tiny amount of (even rancid) oil in a capsule would be worth consuming compared to, say, a vitamin D deficiency.

1
Ef4c5b09fdccf73be575d3a0c267fdd9

(2539)

on October 12, 2011
at 06:23 AM

That's interesting. Vitamin E seems to lower prolactin

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1490755

This is a good thing btw... Prolactin is not a hormone you want... makes you fat, depressed, in excess that is.

This patients had a deficiency of course... but E seems to relatively hard to get through diet unless you are eating nuts or avocados... but then doesnt the E just get used to protect oxidation from the fats in these foods? (MUFAS and PUFAS).

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117

(25472)

on October 13, 2011
at 02:07 AM

Unless youre a post menopuasal women. Context is critical. Anyone who makes axiomatic statements best be ready for the exception. And i have hundreds of these exceptions in my office.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19245)

on October 13, 2011
at 07:19 AM

Quilt: No one makes more axiomatic statements than you do.

0
3f11b5fda91063846bba45daac3541bd

(1186)

on October 12, 2011
at 03:41 PM

Folks interested in avoiding cancer have a lot of other things to worry about other than Vit E. Who knows what other risk factors these men had.

Answer Question


Get FREE instant access to our
Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!