quote:

ORIGINAL: James

I need to pull the full study to comment fully - but looks like it's a biggy as it's a meta-analysis. I wonder if there's an abbreviated review

Although for the main I'm sure there may be some truth, I'd like to see which studies were used, as there are some antioxidants which have uses in certain conditions, eg vitmain C and stomach cancer, beta carotene in sq cell lung cancer, etc

quote:

Anti-oxidants ARE important for good health

An extensive body of scientific research has shown that taking antioxidant supplements consistently over the long-term, can play a role in reducing the risk of chronic disease, therefore an updated meta-analysis published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews1 should not cause consumers to question the efficacy or safety of antioxidant supplements.

Patrick Holford one of the UK’s leading nutrition experts who provides the latest information on nutrition research on his website www.patrickholford.com, comments on the review, which claims potential harm from taking antioxidant supplements:

“It’s a stitch up. If you look objectively at all the studies reviewed, which were chosen strictly for reducing mortality, and not for the many other benefits reported in other studies, Bjekalovic et al conclude ‘Beta-carotene, vitamin A and vitamin C, used singly or in combination with other antioxidants had no significant effect (on mortality)’, although a number of vitamin C studies did report reduced mortality. . . and that ‘selenium used singly or in combination with other antioxidants significantly decreased mortality’”.

The only way this review could produce the negative results was by finding reasons to exclude most of the positive studies, including all the positive ones on selenium. Their basis for exclusion in a previous meta-analysis published in JAMA (Journal of the American Medical Association) has been heavily criticized in mainstream medical journals.

One of the world’s leading experts in this field, Dr Balz Frei, said “This is a flawed analysis of flawed data, and it does little to help us understand the real health effects of antioxidants, whether beneficial or otherwise2.”

Moreover, although the authors claimed to be assessing antioxidant supplements for the prevention of mortality, they excluded all studies – 405 of them – that reported no deaths.

Patrick Holford says, “Anti-oxidants are not meant to be magic bullets and should not be expected to undo a lifetime of unhealthy habits. But when used properly, in combination with eating a healthy diet full of fruit and vegetables, getting plenty of exercise and not smoking, antioxidant supplements can play an important role in maintaining and promoting overall health.”

In practical terms this means that beta-carotene supplements, as we already knew, are best not taken singly by smokers. Vitamin E in high doses, should not be taken by those on cholesterol lowering medication. (These drugs stop you making CoQ10 turning vitamin E from an antioxidant into a potentially harmful oxidant.) Selenium and vitamin C are the most likely to be beneficial.

Patrick says, “I take, and will continue to take an all-round antioxidant supplementing containing these nutrients as well as CoQ10, lipoic acid and resveratrol (the ‘red wine’ factor) and also eat a diet high in fruit and vegetables.”

quote:

ORIGINAL: kitty

My father in law decided to ring me to tell me this whilst I could hear him puffing on his ciggie

quote:

ORIGINAL: ginasmg
she then went on to say NOONE should be allowed to sell vitamins to the public,because of these new concerns

quote:

ORIGINAL: James

Tony - urgh I'm gonna hate myself, but he has a point here, and very good point in that the data was selected. Also he's right in that the study is limited as it only looks at mortality (though no doubt the authors noted this themselves).

(I'm gonna go an wash my hands now for typing such filth)