I did.
Here’s my thoughts:
I believe the article to be on target, with the following
clarifications or expoundings:
It should be emphasized that there is a difference between
the mass produced ag-biz/pharma related ones and the less well known, better
produced ones. Pills made in a lab or
factory are not only poorly regulated, but often not designed for easy and
ready absorption. If the pills in the
studies were the mass produced crap so prevalent in regular stores, that’s
going to shade the studies’ results. I have personally taken some mass produced
pills that made me feel sick and that sat hard on my stomach (and probably
passed through my system with little nutrient absorption). And that’s not even considering the other
risks of counterfeit or even contaminated pills, so pathetic is our regulation
of the “industry.” In fact, the only
time the FDA seems to get its wonk up about it is to intimidate some small (and
often truly health dedicated) company into not making claims or branding itself
to stand out in the sea of supplements and information and
misinformation/disinformation. But to be
fair, and the article largely is, the FDA also got a hamstringing from the
mass-produced vitamin industry.
As the article says, “natural” is a near-useless term. Something the article does not go into but
should is that even something labeled “organic” may 1) not be entirely organic,
and 2) just because it’s organic doesn’t mean it’s good for you.
A complicating factor about nutrients is that we often have
depleted soils, and the fruits and veggies we get do not have the nutritional content
they had 100 years ago. As the article says, nature did not intend us to eat
vast quantities to get our nutrients, and certainly not take many times the
amount one could, even if we ate mass quantities, via a pill. If we had truly rich soils and sensible food
systems (that didn’t, for example, emphasize spoil-resistance and appearance
over nutrition), there would certainly be next to no need for food supplements.
As it is, there is some need, but just where that need exists on the scale is
not only imprecise because of all the variables (including how much, what kind,
and what quality a person ingests), but imprecise because of what we don’t know
(let alone the imprecision that comes from human behaviors in general).
Another complicating factor is our processed food
industry. It is nutritionally (and
glycemic, fiber, etc.) whacked in many cases, and the nature-provided
nutrients get processed out. Sometimes
they pack it back with artificial nutrients (how crazy the whole process—no pun
intended—is). And that doesn’t even get
into the Frankenfood and Frankendrink type things that change nature’s food—everything
from spliced genes to radiation. The processed
food industry can keep people alive, and with technically enough nutrients (or
at least calories), but it won’t make or keep you healthy. Look at all the
studies about what it’s doing to our bodies and brains, with ramifications for
everything from our educations to health costs to economic productivity.
Things are complicated here in America, with our food “system,”
and we need to be aware of the above.
But one can certainly overdose on vitamins, minerals and other
supplements, and the taking of them may be useless or hazardous anyway. A consumer that wanted to hedge bets might
try getting by with taking something once a week, unless otherwise prescribed
by a doctor or dietitian/specialist who has taken all the factors above and in
the article in consideration. No one can
give ready blanket advice on this one.
We have to be partners in the decisions ourselves. A too common choice in this time and place!
