Mult-vitamins a must!

[Iamme]

The article aboput this was in this last weekends newspaper insert "USA Weekend". Any of you get that publication?

The need for mult-vitamins and diputes over their absorbancy have come under fire through the years. Some say that by eating good, you don't NEED multi-vitamins. And, or as of late, a company who makes the supplement product called Seasilver, claims that our bodies only absorb 10-20% of pills! Now THIS article!

Here is some of what they say: 10 out of 13 studies show that giving children multi-vitamins raises their non-verbal I.Q. scores as much as 30%. That taking MV's for a year boosted immune system function and cut infections, such as flu, 40% in diabetics and 50% in the elderly, when compared with placebos. In a new Swedish study, men who took multi-vitamins had a 20% lower risk of heart attack, and women, 35%, compared with those not taking them. Colon cancer is shown to be cut 50% in women who have a family history of the disease. Fewer cataracts. Vitamin deficiency = DNA damage, they say. The damage can cause you to age prematurely, get cancer, Alzheimer's and Parkinson's. The groundbreaking discovery about this DNA business was made by researcher Bruce Ames and his group.

I have been taking either Centrum or a Centrum copy/generic for the last couple years...and I haven't been sick. And I used to be...regularly. Luck? Other things? Who knows. But after reading this...I guess we stick with it.

[MoeFaux]

A friend caught me munching on some Vitamin C tablets (they make good candy), and remarked, "you're just making expensive piss".
The only thing I worry about is getting enough folic acid.

[El Greco]

Ok, now you come to my fields :)

First of all, there is a way to check what vitamins / minerals you get in a particular day from food. Just go to the Nutrition Analysis Tool (http://nat.crgq.com/), plug in what you ate for one day and it will give you the quantities of all macronutrients and micronutrients. You may find that you already take daily much more than what a multivit would give you.

If you eat a good diet you don't need multivitamins. A good diet is:
- vegetables every day
- legumes
- adequate protein (from lean cuts of meat including red meat, dairy, fish etc)
- Good fatty acids (mainly poly- & mono- unsaturated, but some saturated is essential too)

If you train more than 1-2 hours a week, you will probably need extra quantities of certain vitamins and minerals (more notably Vit.C, Vit.E, Ca, Mg).

If there is ONE supplement ALL people should use, this is an EPA/DHA supplement. Cod liver oil will do the job (although fish oil caps may have too low concetrations of EPA/DHA).

Special conditions (pregnancy, anaemia, etc) may require extra supplementation.

[Jon_in_london]

I take cod liver oil to combat the winter miseries and keep up my vitamin D because I wont see a photon of sun until march.

I like those fizzy VitC pills, they are really refreshing!

[El Greco]

To address the studies you mention: Point me to specific studies and I can debunk them one by one. There is no meaning in comparing "men taking multivits" to "men not taking multivits". What were their other nutritional habits ? Who paid for the studies ?

Mutlivitamins will NOT give you a lot of absolutely essential stuff that is found in food. Like soluble and insoluble fiber from vegetables, special antioxidants (some of which we don't know yet), a special agent found in red meat wich increases absorption of B12 etc.

Multivitamins are cheap and leave a lot of profit. They give nothing to someone who follows a balanced diet. If your diet is crap, then yes, take one. But it is just going to replace a small percentage of what you are missing by not having good food.

[Iamme]

Hi El Greco. Is this your line of 'work'...or your line of 'interest'?

If you are an expert in this field, you might be able to help out Jean Carper who is a contributing 'eat smart' editor for USA Weekend. Ever hear of her, or KNOW her?

After reading your post, this thought crossed my mind: Suppose ANOTHER study was conducted that pitted the results of multivitams up against (not placebos or no vitamins...but) a regimine like you espouse? That be interesting.

I also take extra magnesium/calcium/zinc, which metabolize together, and potassium. I also eat sardines to get Omega-3. Jean Carper had a full page article on the merits of Omega-3, and of anything I have ever heard of in my life as far as supplements go, and proven effectiveness...this ranks right up there. Sort of with anti-oxidants.

[El Greco]

It's both work and interest. I am a pharmacist but also have been heavily training (various sports in the past, now just weights) and have tried lots of supplements and every diet on earth. I'm also a regular in relevant fora like HST and CEM. :)

Sorry, never heard of Jean Carper. I don't say I'm an expert, there are no experts when you start to question things on the edge of research. But it really doesn't take an expert to construct a balanced diet for the average person.

Not all omega-3 fatty acids are equal. alpha-linolenic acid is an omega-3 acid (abundant in flax seed) but its rate of conversion in the body to the effective omega-3s (EPA and DHA) is low. This is why I focused on these two.

A study like the one you propose would be very difficult to conduct, because you can't monitor so many people's nutrition for the time needed to get any useful results. Just try the Nutrition Analysis Tool I linked. If you take e.g. 400mg of vit.C from food every day, you would agree that 60mg more from Centrum isn't really necessary, wouldn't you ?

[Iamme]

Per your request El Greco: Bruce Ames, world-reknowned (don't you like that one?:D )researcher on anti-oxidants and nutrients at the University of California-Berkeley, and Children's Hospital of Oakland Research Institute.

David Burton, of Britain's University of Wales Swansea. (about the I.Q.)

University of North Carolina and at Memorial University in Newfoundland (about the infections).

Swedish study (less heart disease)

Harvard study (less cancer)

Fewer cataracts (University of Wisconsin-Madison) (Yea!!!!!)

Eatsmart, by Jean Carper (this column) is an authority on nutrition. Contact her and sign up for her free newsletter at JeanCarper.com

[BTox]

Originally posted by El Greco
If there is ONE supplement ALL people should use, this is an EPA/DHA supplement. Cod liver oil will do the job (although fish oil caps may have too low concetrations of EPA/DHA).


I wouldn't recommend cod liver oil as it is too high in vit A, and there are better sources of epa/dha. I've been taking a fish oil concentrate supplement for years, supplies 500 mgs of EPA/DHA per 1 g softgel, 2.5X more same weight dosage than cod liver oil and other fish oil supplements.

[CurtC]

My wife has been wanting me to take vitamins for some time, and she came across this article the other day. As she was reading it to me, it mentioned "Dr. Ames," and I asked who he is, because if that's *Bruce* Ames, I consider him a credible source. And it was Bruce Ames.

However, Bruce's comments were perfectly reasonable IMHO. He said that he would like everyone in America to take vitamins each day, because there are a large number of people who could benefit, and it's inexpensive. He said especially the young, the old, the pregnant, and the sick. I'm not in any of those categories.

The other results of studies claiming IQ increases etc. were not from Dr. Ames, yet the article didn't make that clear. I told my wife I would read the article, and later when she asked about it, I commented that I didn't see anything there that made me think I would benefit from vitamins. She got mad at me.

[joyrex]

Originally posted by El Greco
I am a pharmacist but also have been heavily training (various sports in the past, now just weights) and have tried lots of supplements and every diet on earth.
What would you say are the critical points to consider when being on a vegan or lacto-ovo vegetarian diet? There's a lot of information about but also much disinformation.

[El Greco]

Originally posted by Iamme
Per your request El Greco: Bruce Ames, world-reknowned (don't you like that one?:D )researcher on anti-oxidants and nutrients at the University of California-Berkeley, and Children's Hospital of Oakland Research Institute.

David Burton, of Britain's University of Wales Swansea. (about the I.Q.)

University of North Carolina and at Memorial University in Newfoundland (about the infections).

Swedish study (less heart disease)

Harvard study (less cancer)

Fewer cataracts (University of Wisconsin-Madison) (Yea!!!!!)

Eatsmart, by Jean Carper (this column) is an authority on nutrition. Contact her and sign up for her free newsletter at JeanCarper.com

Do you mean a "TV-expert", because we have thousands of them. If you want to get past "TV-experts" like Jean Carper (which when I visited her site I realized what a scam she is) look for names like Lyle McDonald, Will Brink, Rosemary Vernon etc. But of course, they don't sell bottles titled "Stop Aging Now" with their face on them.

As for the studies, you know, there is a great little place called PubMed (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi) where all peer reviewed studies are cited. Point me to a study from there instead of ruminating what you have scavenged around the net.

You seem like another case of multivitamin woo-woo, as Dr. Barrett (http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/PhonyAds/centrum.html) would have said.

[El Greco]

Originally posted by BTox


I wouldn't recommend cod liver oil as it is too high in vit A, and there are better sources of epa/dha. I've been taking a fish oil concentrate supplement for years, supplies 500 mgs of EPA/DHA per 1 g softgel, 2.5X more same weight dosage than cod liver oil and other fish oil supplements.

It's impossible to suffer Vit.A overdose from cod liver oil when you take 10-15ml per day. The only group who should avoid it are pregnant women.

[El Greco]

Originally posted by joyrex
What would you say are the critical points to consider when being on a vegan or lacto-ovo vegetarian diet? There's a lot of information about but also much disinformation.

I'd hate to burst a vegan's bubble, but I would suggest reading the articles at BeyondVeg (http://www.beyondveg.com/). Meat is NOT bad for you.

Anyway, B12 supplements are certainly needed when you are vegetarian. Omega-3 supplementation is even more crucial. Protein quality may or may not be an issue, depending on whether one is lacto-ovo or not. But it would be good if you could keep track of daily protein intake. For strict vegans, it would be nice if they could include both grains and legumes in their daily menu so that they get a more complete aminoacid profile.

There could be other problems when you exclude meat from your diet. For example, there has recently been identified a "B12-absorption factor" in red meat, which greatly enhances B12 utilization in the body. Perhaps this is why *some* long time vegans cannot increase their B12 levels even with supplemention.

[El Greco]

Anyway, for anyone who's interested in a sound dietary plan, even if they have no background, I'd recommend reading the 20 (or so) part article by Rosemary Vernon You Are What You Eat (http://www.dolfzine.com/new_page_3.htm). She suggests weight-training as well but you could skip that part if there is no way you could do it.

From the same place, a renowned authority, the late Dr. Mel Siff, sheds light on how "studies" and "facts" are presented in an a questionable way in order to promote certain products, even from allegedly "serious" sites like LEF: LEF exposed (http://www.dolfzine.com/page273.htm)

Unfortunately, those experts do not sell any bottles with their face on them that will increase your IQ. If you need that, you know where to look :D

[BTox]

Originally posted by El Greco


It's impossible to suffer Vit.A overdose from cod liver oil when you take 10-15ml per day. The only group who should avoid it are pregnant women.

10-15 ml per day can put you over the upper tolerable limit for vitamin A (10,000 IU). Way too much, IMO. I don't take any vit A supplements directly, instead take mixed carotenes.

[El Greco]

Originally posted by BTox


10-15 ml per day can put you over the upper tolerable limit for vitamin A (10,000 IU). Way too much, IMO. I don't take any vit A supplements directly, instead take mixed carotenes.

Chronic toxicity occurs from intakes ~33000 iu daily for a month or so. Way above 10000 iu.

Furthermore, regular cod liver oil like
this (http://www.sevenseas.ie/pc/cod_liquid.html) (not enriched or purified etc) will give 6000 iu of Vit.A for 15ml.

[BTox]

Originally posted by El Greco


Chronic toxicity occurs from intakes ~33000 iu daily for a month or so. Way above 10000 iu.

Furthermore, regular cod liver oil like
this (http://www.sevenseas.ie/pc/cod_liquid.html) (not enriched or purified etc) will give 6000 iu of Vit.A for 15ml.

Not talking about chronic toxicity or OD. And the vit A content of cod liver oils available varies widely. Here's one that is almost 15,000 IU per 15 ml:
norwegian clo (http://www.vitaminshoppe.com/browse/sku_detail.jhtml?SkuID=7942&BreadCrumbType=SearchResult)

The point is there are better supplements available to get EPA/DHA that are more concentrated and without the unnecessary vit A.

[El Greco]

I said that vit.A concetration may vary according to production methods. Twinlab's other fish oil contains 4600 iu per tbsp, not tsp. Purification for example, destroys a lot of vit.A.

When we are talking about potential problems that could occur from ingesting something daily, this is called "chronic toxicity". There is either chronic or acute. No other way for Vit.A to harm you.

Indeed, I would prefer capsules of EPA/DHA. Not to avoid vit.A, but because with fish oil you have to get a good amount of calories with your EPA/DHA. The problem is that with capsules we may have other problems. I'm not talking about the cost per mg of EPA/DHA which is a usually a multiple of the CLO cost. But what kind of fish oil do they come from ? Are they molecularly distilled or there could be danger from heavy metals (mercury etc) ? Cod is an open sea fish and gives perhaps the safer fish oil you can get.

[BTox]

Originally posted by El Greco
When we are talking about potential problems that could occur from ingesting something daily, this is called "chronic toxicity". There is either chronic or acute. No other way for Vit.A to harm you.

There are studies showing a relationship between vit A consumption greater than 10,000 IU per day and increased risk of bone fractures. Has not been verified but if real I would not term this chronic toxicity. In any event, I see no benefit to mega-dosing on any vitamins, especially fat soluble ones like vit A. Why take the risk?


Originally posted by El Greco
Indeed, I would prefer capsules of EPA/DHA. Not to avoid vit.A, but because with fish oil you have to get a good amount of calories with your EPA/DHA. The problem is that with capsules we may have other problems. I'm not talking about the cost per mg of EPA/DHA which is a usually a multiple of the CLO cost. But what kind of fish oil do they come from ? Are they molecularly distilled or there could be danger from heavy metals (mercury etc) ? Cod is an open sea fish and gives perhaps the safer fish oil you can get.

The quality of the majority of fish oil supplements is good. A recent test by ConsumerLabs showed all tested (n=20) had no problems with heavy metal contamination nor rancidity.

[El Greco]

Can you please point me to the actual studies ?

[BTox]

Originally posted by El Greco
Can you please point me to the actual studies ?

These are the two recent studies most cited:

nejm serum retinol and fracture (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12540641&dopt=Abstract)

jama vit A intake and fractures (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11754708&dopt=Abstract)

[El Greco]

Originally posted by BTox


These are the two recent studies most cited:

nejm serum retinol and fracture (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12540641&dopt=Abstract)

jama vit A intake and fractures (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11754708&dopt=Abstract)

Ooops! Somehow I missed your answer. Sorry.

The studies you cited are large studies with a follow-up of many years. Very few variables are monitored during these years, mainly vit A intake and serum retinol. Well, let's see what's wrong with the interpretation of these studies:

1) There are other studies whith opposite results. Studies that show that a decrease in serum retinol is associated with osteoporosis. See Marked decrease in plasma antioxidants in aged osteoporotic women (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12679433&dopt=Abstract).
Also see Retinol, supplemental vitamin A and bone status (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=2370577&dopt=Abstract).
2) Short-term studies have failed to find any relationship between vit A intake and bone turnover. See Short-term vitamin A supplementation does not affect bone turnover in men (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12042428&dopt=Abstract).

Such contradictions have led several scientists to question the validity of the interpretation of the studies you mentioned. See for example the Sigurdsson critique (http://www.annals.org/cgi/content/full/131/5/392) on one of the Michaëlsson studies.

So, what's really hapenning ? Can we dismiss such studies because of the apparent contradictions and limitations ?

Several theories and explanations have been proposed in order to explain such discrepancies. I could further elaborate on these, but for the moment let's focus on the most widely accepted theory: What contributes to the lower BMD is not the increased vit A intake or serum retinol, but the disruption of the Vit A to Vit D ratio. This could be a result of increased vit A intake or lower vit D levels.

Without going into many details, it seems that there are many reasons such a disorder may occur. On the biochemical level, there may be a connection between lower levels of retinol-binding protein and type-II osteoporosis (see Biochemical markers of nutrition in type-I and type-II osteoporosis (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=7822374&dopt=Abstract). In any case, one proposed mechanism of why this imbalance can affect BMD is calcium response antagonizing. See Vitamin A antagonizes calcium response to vitamin D in man (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11585356&dopt=Abstract).

Sudies relating vit A intake to fractures have also been criticized because they have been conducted in northern climates, where sunlight exposure is low and therefore the findings could be attributed to lower levels of vit D. As Dr. Volpe points out:

CNN and various newspapers, including The New York Times and the Houston Chronicle, recently reported on a Swedish study (The New England Journal of Medicine, January 2003; 348: 287-294, 347-349) linking Vitamin A with an increased risk of fractures in aging men. These reports have led many people to wonder if supplements containing Vitamin A are safe, and many media outlets are advising readers against the use of any Vitamin A.

Since I often recommend cod liver oil (which does in fact contain Vitamin A) and other Vitamin A supplements, I was very puzzled by these reports and read the study in its entirety. I was surprised to see how little is known about the participants in the study. Basically all that was recorded was their level of Vitamin A in blood and the incidence of fractures over a thirty-year period. To conclude with certainty from this scant information that Vitamin A is dangerous seems quite a stretch to me.

Before we start thinking of Vitamin A as hazardous, let's remember that it plays many important roles, including in vision, cell differentiation, early fetal development, immunity, taste, appetite and growth. Vitamin A is an important antioxidant and may have anticancer and antiviral actions. Signs of deficiency include night blindness, acne and other skin conditions, reduced immunity, chronic viral conditions, complications from measles and, conceivably from the measles vaccine.

The US RDA (recommended daily allowance) for Vitamin A is 5,000 IU (international units) a day for adults and proportionately less for children. The most important recognized risk of Vitamin A is that doses exceeding 10,000 units a day in pregnant women were associated with a higher risk of certain birth defects in one study (Lancet 1988;1:236). However, another study found such doses to be associated with a reduction of the same type of birth defects (Lancet 1996;347:899-900). In total there have been fewer than 20 cases reported worldwide of birth defects possibly caused by Vitamin A overdose.

In numerous studies, doses far greater than the RDA were found to be both safe and effective. Doses of 400,000 units a day for 5 months in adolescents with acne were found to be effective and caused no side effects (Int J Dermatol 1981;114:1776 and Br Med J 1963;2:294). The short-term administration of doses of 200,000 to 400,000 units in small children were also studied, and were found to reduce the occurrence of complications from measles and pneumonia while enhancing immunity, again with no side effects reported. Incidentally, the benefits were documented both in children who were deficient in Vitamin A as well as in children who were not (J Trop Pediatr 2002;48(2):72-7, Clin Infec Dis 1994;19(3):489-99, Am J Epidemiol 1997;146(8):646-54, and many other published studies. You may e-mail me for a full list).

Interestingly, this most recent study linking Vitamin A with fractures in aging individuals was performed in Sweden, a country not known for its abundant sunshine. Since we know without a doubt that Vitamin D is associated with bone health and that much of our intake of Vitamin D comes from the sun, it is possible that Vitamin D deficiency is rampant in Sweden. This may explain why Scandinavians in general have higher rates of fractures in comparison to other Europeans.

One possible explanation of why fracture rates were higher in the study participants who had more Vitamin A in their blood is that vitamins A and D need to be balanced. Everything in nature is a matter of balance, and excessive intake of Vitamin A without enough Vitamin D may cause a relative Vitamin D deficiency, possibly leading to brittle bones.

Cod liver oil is apparently a very popular supplement in Sweden, and some experts suggested that the individuals with high levels of Vitamin A in their blood may have consumed ample doses of cod liver oil, over many decades, and this may have depleted them of Vitamin D.

Cod liver oil actually contains both vitamins A and D, but is tilted towards Vitamin A. It is plausible that consuming it without being exposed to sufficient sunshine or taking additional Vitamin D explains the results of this study. This theory may be the best we have, but is not entirely convincing since cod liver oil, in spite of its high Vitamin A to Vitamin D ratio, was used successfully in the 1800's to treat rickets, a childhood disorder of bone development caused by Vitamin D deficiency.

In my opinion, a normal intake of Vitamin A from cod liver oil or other sources within the RDA should not be of concern, especially if properly balanced with Vitamin D through sunlight exposure or supplements. In special cases much higher doses of Vitamin A can be greatly beneficial, but these doses should be taken only under the supervision of a trained professional, and this study clearly points out some of the risks of not doing so.

Well, this is a point I agree with. Cod liver oil supplementation does not disrupt the Vit A / Vit D balance.

But let's forget all of the above, and think of whether taking an EPA/DHA capsule will ensure that we get lower doses of vit A. Well, it doesn't. In most cases, EPA/DHA capsules are nothing more than fish oil in a different package. Not only that, but many EPA/DHA capsule manufacturers fail to specify the source of the oil and often do not provide any info as to the vit A content of the capsule. See this study (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=2718527&dopt=Abstract) which corroborates the above.

With the above in mind, I still think that cod liver oil is the prefered source of EPA/DHA, especially since it is so easy to find purified preparations of it with lower vitamin A content.

[BTox]

Originally posted by El Greco

Well, this is a point I agree with. Cod liver oil supplementation does not disrupt the Vit A / Vit D balance.

As your studies suggest and as I mentioned, the association between high doses of vit A and fractures is not proven. The point was it is foolhardy to take any vitamin, especially fat soluble ones, at or above the upper tolerable limit, and most sources of cod liver oil at a dose of 15 mls per day do just that. As Dr. Volpe suggests, taking cod liver oil that delivers the RDA or less is fine.

Originally posted by El Greco

But let's forget all of the above, and think of whether taking an EPA/DHA capsule will ensure that we get lower doses of vit A. Well, it doesn't. In most cases, EPA/DHA capsules are nothing more than fish oil in a different package. Not only that, but many EPA/DHA capsule manufacturers fail to specify the source of the oil and often do not provide any info as to the vit A content of the capsule. See this study (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=2718527&dopt=Abstract) which corroborates the above.

With the above in mind, I still think that cod liver oil is the prefered source of EPA/DHA, especially since it is so easy to find purified preparations of it with lower vitamin A content.

I still disagree. That 15 year old study from Germany has no relevance to fish oil supplements sold in the U.S. today. FDA requires vitamin content must be accurately labelled on all supplements. Also, fish body oils, which compose most of the fish oil supplements sold in the U.S. today, as opposed to fish liver oils, have neglible amounts of vit A.

Bottom line is, I'll continue to use and recommend EPA/DHA fish oil concentrates for w-3 supplementation.

[El Greco]

Originally posted by BTox
Bottom line is, I'll continue to use and recommend EPA/DHA fish oil concentrates for w-3 supplementation.

Ok, then we just agree to disagree. My opinion is that current data show that cod liver oil is perfectly safe for chronic use. As I have already said I would prefer myself concetrated EPA/DHA capsules so that I would take less calories, but I do not trust most fish oil capsules because:

1) I can't always know the source of the oil
2) I can't always know whether it is liver or muscle oil
3) I can't always trust EPA/DHA content fish oil supplements. Their levels in capsules are currently NOT regulated by FDA. According to a ConsumerLab review (http://www.consumerlab.com/results/omega3.asp), 6 out of 20 products failed their test because they didn't provide the claimed EPA/DHA. That is for supplements sold in the USA market.

And since:
1) you said yourself that "taking cod liver oil that delivers the RDA or less is fine", and such cod oil can be easily found
2) the cost in the case of capsules is ridiculously higher

...I cannot see why one wouldn't suggest cod liver oil.

Oh well... I think that if anyone is still reading this thread can draw his/her own conclusions by now.

[BTox]

Originally posted by El Greco


Ok, then we just agree to disagree.

I agree!

Originally posted by El Greco
My opinion is that current data show that cod liver oil is perfectly safe for chronic use. As I have already said I would prefer myself concetrated EPA/DHA capsules so that I would take less calories, but I do not trust most fish oil capsules because:

1) I can't always know the source of the oil
2) I can't always know whether it is liver or muscle oil
3) I can't always trust EPA/DHA content fish oil supplements. Their levels in capsules are currently NOT regulated by FDA. According to a ConsumerLab review (http://www.consumerlab.com/results/omega3.asp), 6 out of 20 products failed their test because they didn't provide the claimed EPA/DHA. That is for supplements sold in the USA market.

I've read that study. And as you say that cod liver oil can be easily found with low vit A content, high quality fish oil/concentrates with proper levels of EPA/DHA can also be found. BTW, I would expect similar results with cod liver oils, some would also be lower in epa/dha than claimed.

Originally posted by El Greco
And since:
1) you said yourself that "taking cod liver oil that delivers the RDA or less is fine", and such cod oil can be easily found

Yes, but I prefer to take a supplement with no additional vit A or D. Don't need more, why take it?

Originally posted by El Greco
2) the cost in the case of capsules is ridiculously higher

Not really. I calculate a daily cost of fish oil concentrate caps at 50 cents vs 25 cents for cod liver oil by the tablespoon (both delivering the same amount of epa/dha). I'm not concerned with cost but even if I was I think the extra 25 cents/day is worth the convenience and palatability issues of taking a few caps vs a spoonful of cod liver oil. Not to mention the rancidity issue with bulk highly pufa oils - every time the bottle is opened oxygen is reacting with some of the epa, dha and other pufas - not good. Caps do not have this issue.

.Originally posted by El Greco

Oh well... I think that if anyone is still reading this thread can draw his/her own conclusions by now.

I think anyone once reading this thread has long ago fallen asleep ;)

[joyrex]

Originally posted by El Greco
Meat is NOT bad for you.What would you say about this article (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/09/030930055440.htm), could meat have some kind of a negative impact on health after all? Funny that while being 2 and half years mainly vegetarian, I haven't had even a flu, cold or any kind of sickness. Maybe this is just coincidence, or something to do with (individual) immunology?

[Larspeart]

Centrum is one of the worst MV's on the market.

Reason? They are covered in a nasty shellac that not only inhibits dissolving, but isn't even healthy on the human system. (gf works as a pharm tech. the pharm was educating them on it last week)

Stick with the uncoated (and hence nasty-tasting and harder to swallow) ones. You'll get more out of them.