Articles

Eat To Save Your Life: Another Half-True Diet Book

I am hesitant to review diet books because they are so often a tangled mess of fact and fiction. Teasing out their truth from falsehood is about as exhausting as delousing a long-haired elementary school student. However, after being approached by the authors’ PR agency with the promise of a book that contains science-based nutrition information I decided to agree to the review. This is how the book was described to me in an email:

In their provocative new book, Eat to Save Your Life, best-selling authors Dr. Jerre Paquette and Gloria Askew, RRN, sort through the piles of information and misinformation about nutrition to reveal the true connection between food and health. Fed up with the advertising hype and conflicting nutritional advice, the duo provides common sense explanations for consumers everywhere who are looking to make smart nutritional choices.

Unfortunately, I was sold (quite predictably) a bill of goods. And rather than ignore the book and simply not do a review, I figured that maybe a negative review would reduce the number of incoming PR requests for future tomes of pseudoscience. In the end, I’ll probably just become the focus of personal attacks by dedicated proponents of various snake oils. 

That being said, I thought it might be somewhat instructive to remind SBM readers of certain basic “warning signs of pseudoscience” that I accidentally overlooked in agreeing to review the book. For a more complete review of similar “signs” I highly recommend Dr. David Gorski’s 2007 classic, humorous take on predictable arguments and behaviors of alternative medicine proponents (written in the style of comedian Jeff Foxworthy).  As for me, I tend to think of much of the world of integrative medicine as a militant group of bakers eager to add odd, inert and occasionally toxic substances to cake recipes. 

And so, without further ado, here is a small sample of what authors Askew and Paquette have added to their half-true diet book recipe:

  • The “one true cause” fallacy: The book opens with an interesting review of vitamin C deficiency, noting that it (apparently) took the British Royal Navy 40 years before they accepted that the treatment for scurvy was citrus extract (rather than flogging). Citing this incident as an example of nutritional deficiency leading to life-threatening illness,  it’s a short ride to the “one true cause” fallacy whereby the authors postulate that there are untold numbers of modern diseases caused by unrecognized nutritional deficiency syndromes. Nutritional deficiency may be the one true cause of most diseases, you see.
  • The appeal to research without references. Countless appeals are made to “mounting evidence” of this and that (arthritis being caused primarily by food-related inflammation for example), either without reference footnotes, or with mentions of sources of dubious credibility (such as the Canadian Association of Naturopathic Doctors).
  • The appeal to supplements in lieu of vaccines. No diet advice would be complete without a gratuitous attack on vaccines, right? The authors suggest that flu vaccines (for example) only provide immunity for 2 months “and only for certain individuals.” Meanwhile, they assert that a combination of Echinacea, garlic, and vitamin C support the immune system to successfully fight of viruses. These claims are simply unproven and multiple studies have already found no benefit (over placebo) of these supplements at preventing and treating the common cold.
  • Over-diagnosis. If you think that the world of medicine is predisposed to seeing disease where there is none, try the alternative medicine world. The authors assert that everything from zits, to rashes, to “brain fog” are potential signs of grave underlying immune compromise – caused by, you guessed it, dietary deficiencies.
  • Over-supplementation. The authors argue that “supplementation is a necessity in our nutrient-robbed world.” However, new evidence doesn’t support supplementation for the general population, though it had been traditionally felt that multi-vitamins might be valuable. In addition, new studies are finding that food sources are preferable to supplements for daily nutritional requirements (such as calcium) and that anti-oxidants such as vitamin E may do more harm than good.
  • The “organic is more nutritious” argument. Although a recent systematic review of the scientific literature found no support for the notion that organic foods contain more nutrients than those grown with traditional methods, the authors attribute Americans’ supposed vitamin deficiencies to poor soil quality caused by non-organic farming methods.
  • Nutrigenomics and DNA hype. The authors do not take a sufficiently skeptical view of the emerging field of nutrigenomics (whereby certain foods and supplements are recommended to individuals based on their genetic profiles). They even suggest that nutrigenomic testing is so much fun, it’s “almost like being part of a CSI television show.” Who cares if it’s no more accurate than fortune telling?

So what’s the half true part? Well, obesity is certainly a driver of many modern illnesses, and obesity is caused by (in no small part) nutritional choices. The authors cite statistics on the ravages of heart disease, high blood pressure, and diabetes on the U.S. population which are all quite true. (How this supports the “deficiency” argument is somewhat lost on me – because it would seem more logical that a possible excess of nutrients could be the “one true cause” of a lot of these diseases, but I digress).

There are real nutritional deficiencies that cause medical problems, such as iron-deficiency anemia, neural tube defects related to folic acid deficiency, vitamin D deficiency and rickets, and osteoporosis contributed to by low calcium levels. These conditions underscore the importance of healthy eating habits, but do not support the idea that the entire population is deficient in these nutrients. In fact, a large population study analyzed by the CDC, suggests that most Americans are not deficient in any major nutrient even with their current sub-optimal and obesogenic eating habits.

In general, fair-minded individuals will find Eat To Save Your Life to be yet another example of a half-true, hysteria-peddling, micro-nutrient-obsessed diet advice book. Ironically, the book’s title itself states the opposite of what we really need to be doing to reduce obesity-related diseases: stop eating (so much) to save our lives. 

This book may be purchased (against my medical advice) at Amazon.com.

 
 

Posted in: Book & movie reviews, Nutrition

Leave a Comment (93) ↓

93 thoughts on “Eat To Save Your Life: Another Half-True Diet Book

  1. nybgrus says:

    Dr. Jones,

    Thank you for the succinct review. I actually plan on sending this to a friend of mine who is quite science based, but merely in a non-biology field and thus has trouble finding good diet advice. Something like this, with the references linked, should be a great resource for him to better be able to discern truth from pseudoscience.

    However, beware the trolls nest you’ve stirred up…. how dare you claim that most people in the US actually have enough nutrients and don’t need to supplement and that some supplements may actually be harmful! Don’t worry though, rustic, stanmrak, and Jeff will point you in the right direction for the evidence you clearly overlooked thanks to your indoctrination by “science” and the ideology of “skepticism.” /end sarcasm

    But seriously, thanks. This is great.

  2. windriven says:

    Sooooooo … thinking another MD had gone to the dark side I Googled Dr. Jerre Paquette to find out where s/he went to medical school only to find that the good “Dr.” Paquette holds a PhD in “Written Language Learning Theory.”* I will leave it to the reader to extract as much irony as he or she can from that apparent fact.

    I can’t for the life of me imagine why the publisher used “Dr. Jerre Paquette” on the dust jacket instead of “Some guy in the English Department at a university you never heard of.”

    *http://www.mtroyal.ca/ProgramsCourses/FacultiesSchoolsCentres/Arts/Departments/English/Faculty/jpaquette.htm

  3. Earthman says:

    So the blurb about

    “….sort through the piles of information and misinformation about nutrition to reveal the true connection between food and health. Fed up with the advertising hype and conflicting nutritional advice, the duo provides common sense explanations for consumers everywhere who are looking to make smart nutritional choices.”

    is completely wrong.

    Could this be another sign of woo to add to the others?

  4. rork says:

    Very nice post. The digression sentence was perhaps most on-point of all, at least for the flood of near random advice I see in junk magazines, which seem to need 10 pieces of crunchy nutritional advice per issue. There are after all zillions of things one could eat, and most have something in them that you could name as good for something. It’s that simple. Oz tells me I need dark chocolate, garlic, lima beans. That list need never end.

  5. Dr. Jones,

    Most people don’t need supplementation?! How could you suggest this? I mean, it’s just crazy! I have to say that this makes you obviously part of the Big Pharma conspiracy, making innocent people buy drugs to… wait, what’s that? …Oh….

    I’ve just been told that everything written above is backwards and nonsense. Thanks for looking out for the public and giving out rational advice. It seems that the “alt.med” world is finger-pointing into a mirror.

  6. Janet says:

    @nybgrus

    I cannot for the life of me understand why any rational person cannot seem to figure out “what to eat”.

    Vegetables, fruit, whole grains, lean flesh if you must–all in quantities that don’t exceed your daily caloric needs given your level of activity. Very easy on the white things (sugar, flour and other grains) and the fats (yes, even olive oil, which people seem to think can be consumed by the gallon because it’s a “good” oil).

    What’s so difficult about that? Why does it take twelve books a month pouring off the presses? Why can’t people face the fact that weight issues result from overconsumption–yes, you can eat too much lean chicken or whole wheat bread, but it’s pretty damned hard to eat too much kale/beet salad with a light dressing of vinegar and a little oil.

    There is no mystery and no secret. We eat too much of whatever we choose to eat. It is portion size, not “nutrition” that people should be studying. Pizza is great–the size of a deck of cards, and that’s the rub. Ice cream? One-fourth cup–fine.

    By the way, I’m having some tasty broth for breakfast because I let election night anxiety lead me to a bag of Cheetoes and way too many dark chocolate malted milk balls. No one is perfect.

  7. mousethatroared says:

    Val Jones – Nice article! Although, I don’t think I’ve ever seen a healthy diet book I thought was worth reading. Maybe one of those Eat this, Not That books…Mostly I like recipe books, particularly ones focuses on fast and easy recipes.

    @Janet – One issue for me and I think many other people is finding a reasonably priced, reasonably convenient diet/lifestyle that will support short term/long term health and satiate hunger AND appetite for a good quality of life.

    I don’t find it simple.

    Or rather, it’s like saying “walking a tightrope is simple, you just have to find your center of gravity” or “Getting enough sleep is easy all you need to do is go to bed at 10:00pm and get up at 6:00am”

  8. CarolM says:

    I followed the Vitamin E link…egads. An ophthamologist got me to start taking an AREDS formula supp to stave off macular degeneration, but it has 400 units of E. That and all the fish oil supps are making me pretty bruisy, and they’re both blood thinners, right?

    So an MD made a legitimate recommendation, but with regard to one potential problem only. I don’t know whether to keep taking this stuff or not.

  9. stanmrak says:

    CarolM, you want astaxanthin, lutein, and zeaxanthin.

  10. Harriet Hall says:

    @CarolM,

    Do you have macular degeneration, or are you taking AREDS as a preventive measure? The AREDS trial showed a benefit only for delaying progression of established moderate-to-severe macular degeneration; it has not been corroborated by other studies and it was funded by a company that sold the supplements studied. Also, it contained potentially harmful ingredients that were modified for a second AREDS 2 trial that is now in progress.

    And why are you taking fish oil supplements?

  11. Harriet Hall says:

    @stanmrak,

    Citations, please!

  12. qetzal says:

    @Earthman,

    Yes, “common sense” answers to complex or controversial issues is definitely a sign of woo. (Though perhaps not as telling as “boosts the immune system!”). After all, if the answers were common sense, then the issues wouldn’t be complex or controversial, would they? Plus, if it’s common sense, why do you need to buy their book?

    @rork,

    I don’t need pseudoDr Oz to tell me I how good it is to eat dark chocolate and garlic (not in the same bite, of course!). OTOH, claiming that I need lima beans is just further proof that he’s a dangerous quack! ;-)

  13. lilady says:

    I think this will be the last time you will be asked to write a review for this duo, Val Jones. According to this website the duo has two additional nutrition books *in the works*.

    http://www.wellwise.org/about

    That’s a great link to the JAMA study which disproves the taking of vitamins that are not prescribed by a medical doctor, for proven vitamin deficiencies.

    Liz Ditz: I’ve been posting regularly on Emily Willingham’s blog, mainly on the subject of autism, autism *treatments* and the now totally debunked theory of vaccine-induced-autism.

    I’ll leave you with this adage from my mom, “Overeaters” are digging their graves with their teeth”.

  14. stanmrak says:

    The futility of citations!

    Example: Here’s a book that tackles the subject of calcium and osteoporosis. (this is not a recommendation, just an example).

    “Building Bone Vitality: A Revolutionary Diet Plan to Prevent Bone Loss and Reverse Osteoporosis–Without Dairy Foods, Calcium, Estrogen, or Drugs”

    The authors site 86 studies related to this question:
    Do milk, dairy foods, and calcium supplements reduce the risk of fractures?

    24 studies say yes.
    15 are inconclusive.
    47 say they don’t.

    If you’re trying to prove a point, just pick and choose which group to cite, and leave out the others.

  15. Scott says:

    So providing no evidence whatsoever should be believed, because cherry-picking is possible? Um, no.

  16. Harriet Hall says:

    @stanmrak,

    “If you’re trying to prove a point, just pick and choose which group to cite, and leave out the others.”

    You: If you’re trying to prove a point, just say whatever you want and discount any and all evidence.
    Us: If you’re asking what is true rather than just trying to prove a point, weigh all the published evidence and the methods behind its conclusions.

  17. CarolM says:

    # Harriet Hallon 09 Nov 2012 at 1:34 pm

    @CarolM,

    Do you have macular degeneration, or are you taking AREDS as a preventive measure?
    And why are you taking fish oil supplements?

    Harriet, I was getting a second opinion about my cataract and that opthamologist said I had the beginnings of macular degeneration and recommended these supps which, yeah, his medical group sells! My regular opthamologist hadn’t said anything about any MD. But he did recommend fish oil supps, 3 G aday (or don’t bother), and specifically Carlson Labs, clinical testing proved its quality.

    My optometrist was also high on fish oil, though I don’t give his opinion as much weight of course. The fish oil was supposed to be for overall eye health, and also for dryness o the eye. I don’t notice any different in that regard.

    I am not normally a pill popper so this is not sitting well with me.

  18. RUN says:

    When will the madness stop….ever? Seriously, anyone else sickened by all of this?
    I took a semester of Spanish in college, yet I do not feel qualified to say I am an expert in Spanish! I can also look up Spanish on the internet….yet again I do not feel I am an expert. So why are there so many people out there that feel they are experts in health and nutrition? Why are so many people willing to believe these non experts (English education…really)? Why has no one noticed that these type of books are more about the authors profits than helping people? (My last question I promise) Why are the TRUE experts in these areas looked down on and accused of all sorts of conspiracy theories?

  19. stanmrak says:

    You won’t find experts on nutrition here, either.

  20. Val Jones says:

    Wow, a bunch of sane commenters. Group hug!!! @Janet It is amazing that we continue to create mystery where none exists. Healthy eating is just as you describe. I guess the human instinct for “finding a competitive edge” over our peers (critical for survival of the fittest) is such a part of our psyche that we will promote magic lima beans if it makes us believe we’re in the know and others are not. I am intending to write more book reviews of the nutty stuff I’m sent until either 1) the SBM audience can’t tolerate them anymore 2) the ad hominem altie attacks annoy me too greatly or 3) the PR people stop sending me pseudoscience. ;-)

  21. I am susceptible to colds, (especially in cold weather), and, just a few days ago I staved off another….with Vitamin C1000 (with bioflavanoids and rosehips), apple cider vinegar, honey and cinnamon..the 2nd time already this season. Actually this will be 4 years without a full out cold (except for one last January which lasted an hour)…so, I’m really not sure how ‘studies’ show vitamins as ineffective placebos…but, hey, they work for me very very well. I do also take other vitamins regularly, flax seed oil, Vit. D, B Vitamins, zinc, and I try eating organic because of less pesticides, hormones, antibiotics (even courts now say should not be in them http://www.nrdc.org/media/2012/120323.asp)..so, it seems to me the book is pretty much on the right track. It’s actually my own hypothesis, that most disease is a vitamin deficiency…sorry to disagree.

  22. lilady says:

    RUN:

    A great reference for dietary requirements is here, at the NIH

    http://ods.od.nih.gov/

    Just ignore the trolls’ comments; he only *thinks* he is an expert. :-)

  23. Quill says:

    I appreciate this review very much! I also would have added that any work with such an sensationalist title is likely suspect. True, most authors have little control over titles and packaging, but the idea that there is some terrible disaster to be averted (and apparently part of it is in the form of satanic super-cheeseburgers) is usually a sign to me to move right along, nothing to read here.

    If someone wants to know more about eating I usually send them to the works of Michael Pollan or Marion Nestle. One of Pollan’s virtues is that he removes the fog of mystery surrounding so many outlandish food claims and does it with not a little humor and style. I recall getting caught up in friend’s enthusiasm over various dietary fads but after reading Pollan’s “In Defense of Food” having a much better sense of what was real and what was unscientific marketing hype.

  24. Narad says:

    Although, I don’t think I’ve ever seen a healthy diet book I thought was worth reading.

    Ornish’s Eat More, Weigh Less is somewhat interesting as an example of very low fat technique bound together with dietary advice, although I think there were only a few items that I found appealing. Mainly the Hubert Keller ones, as I recall. Michel Guérard’s Cuisine Minceur is also worth a look in the general category, although this is veering into the realm of straight cookery. Fenwicke L. Holmes’s Psycho-Dietetics is a must-read as far as food-combining hilarity goes.

  25. Harriet Hall says:

    @rustichealthy,

    You say you haven’t had a cold in 4 years, and you attribute it to following your diet and supplement regimen.
    I haven’t had a cold in at least 16 years, and I attribute it to NOT following your regimen, but to eating a variety of non-organic foods and avoiding supplements. I don’t even take a daily multivitamin. This approach works for me! How can you possibly accuse me of being wrong? It’s my own hypothesis that most diseases are not vitamin deficiencies.

    It would seem that my plan is 4 times as good as yours, and I have just as much evidence as you do. Are you ready to try what I recommend? Why do you think I should be ready to try what you recommend?

  26. Dr. Harriet..I did try your plan, and I got colds 3 or 4 times a year, asthma, bronchitis, flu. The difference I believe is, I am susceptible to them, and so I see the benefits of my plan working in that area. Not every one is the same…I understand..but, I was trying to give an example of vitamins working, and more specifically, not just ascorbic acid in low dose…that it seems the ‘studies’ usually go on.

  27. I also was diagnosed with arthritis, started taking calcium supplements with magnesium and Vit. D, and no other real problems with it since..so, studies that say they don’t work are puzzling to me.

  28. kaidog says:

    During cold season, I get a flu shot. Then I’m very careful to make sure I wash my hands regularly, use hand sanitizer, clean surfaces, and avoid touching my face.

    I call this the “viral vector of disease” theory. It’s my own hypothesis. Seems to work.

  29. WilliamLawrenceUtridge says:

    Wow there is no form of quackery Rusty will not fall for, swallow or mis-attribute. I should grind up my fingernail trimmings, dilute them a thousand times and call them a homeopathic connective tissue treatment. Anyone know the dog-Latin for fingernails?

  30. lilady says:

    ” Anyone know the dog-Latin for fingernails?”

    onycho-: Having to do with the nails. Medical terms involving “onycho-” include onychodystrophy (abnormal growth and development of nails), onychomycosis (fungal infection of the nails), and onychoosteodysplasia (malformation of bones and nails).

    How about “homeoonychopathy”, WLU?

  31. Narad says:

    Wow there is no form of quackery Rusty will not fall for, swallow or mis-attribute. I should grind up my fingernail trimmings, dilute them a thousand times and call them a homeopathic connective tissue treatment. Anyone know the dog-Latin for fingernails?

    Well, remember that it works the other way around, so homeopathic fingernails might be suitable for plantar keratitis or something. This seems to be generally covered by “Calc fluor,” but there’s always room for newcomers. Lilady is in the ballpark, but we need a fake alchemical binomial. This would ideally be a truly awful, misdeclined, etymological miscegenation with Greek, so I’m thinking something like “Digitorum nychum,” with optional abbreviated suffix to clarify finger versus toe parings.

  32. Narad says:

    ^ Eh, “keratosis.”

  33. Lytrigian says:

    My preferred nostrum is Aq. vit. scotius unomaltus. I find it cures any number of ills.

  34. lilady says:

    “… so I’m thinking something like “Digitorum nychum,” with optional abbreviated suffix to clarify finger versus toe parings.”

    Well once you guys figure out the finger versus toe parings, we could have sub-specialties incorporating “Pollex” and “Hallux”.

  35. @mouse ((One issue for me and I think many other people is finding a reasonably priced, reasonably convenient diet/lifestyle that will support short term/long term health and satiate hunger AND appetite for a good quality of life.))

    That’s actually what I found when I went organic…I eat all the foods I like, pizza, etc…except I make mine with organic ingredients, and I eat ‘healthy’ naturally now..not worrying about carbs, fats, calories etc. The cost is what many think is prohibitive, but, fact is, since my health has gotten better, I save money on health costs, so it kind of evens out. :)

  36. WilliamLawrenceUtridge says:

    I think nails that have been cut off would fit into the magical opposite criteria for homeopathy – surely nails that have been removed would be the opposite of nails that can’t be removed? You’d have to ask a five year old still in the preoperational stage.

  37. elburto says:

    @rustyheadgear – I thought you only ate chemical-free food?

  38. mousethatroared says:

    RH – The way I approach health advice is this. You either need good quality evidence or good credibility. You don’t have good quality evidence. After all of your political magical thinking in your last appearance here, your credibility is not good. Your advice falls to the bottom of my list of possibilities.

  39. nybgrus says:

    @janet:

    I cannot for the life of me understand why any rational person cannot seem to figure out “what to eat”.
    Vegetables, fruit, whole grains, lean flesh if you must–all in quantities that don’t exceed your daily caloric needs given your level of activity. Very easy on the white things (sugar, flour and other grains) and the fats (yes, even olive oil, which people seem to think can be consumed by the gallon because it’s a “good” oil).
    What’s so difficult about that? Why does it take twelve books a month pouring off the presses? Why can’t people face the fact that weight issues result from overconsumption–yes, you can eat too much lean chicken or whole wheat bread, but it’s pretty damned hard to eat too much kale/beet salad with a light dressing of vinegar and a little oil.
    There is no mystery and no secret. We eat too much of whatever we choose to eat. It is portion size, not “nutrition” that people should be studying. Pizza is great–the size of a deck of cards, and that’s the rub. Ice cream? One-fourth cup–fine.

    Somebody touched on part of it later on, but in essence it is merely a lack of expertise in the subject area coupled with a desire to find a diet to “maximize” outcomes. It is not that said friend doesn’t know what a basically good and healthy diet is. It is that there is literally a deluge of diet advice on how to maximize fat burning and building of lean muscle, etc. Many articles and books are written in a superficially logical and convincing manner, and if you have no expertise or in depth knowledge of biology it is indeed very difficult to decide what is and is not BS. So many sources out there talk about “good” vs “bad” calories and ketogenic diets, paleo diets, “slow carb” diets, and on and on ad nauseum. The keto type diets can be convincing even to someone more versed in the relevant sciences – it took me some additional education and looking over the evidence with a critical eye to determine that it really didn’t have additional intrinsic benefit beyond the “side effect” of decreasing overall caloric intake.

    Furthermore, there are actually legitimate “strategies” that one can employ to help lose weight such as stacking calorie intake towards the beginning of the day, eating more whole fiber and protein rich foods to delay gastric emptying and feel fuller longer, eating more bulky foods with lower calorie densities to feel fuller with less calories, etc. When I was training hard I used to do all of these things and would actually time my eating and my workouts so that I would run out of glycogen stores early in a workout and force my body to switch to fat reserves for fuel. I would also work out in a manner that selectively recruited slow twitch muscle fibers both for stamina and because that preferentially burns lipids for fuel (I also cross trained to recruit fast twitch fibers for explosive power, but mostly stuck to distance/endurance stuff). Notice, of course, that all these strategies take advantage of creating a decreased caloric intake and increased caloric expenditure and that there is nothing magic beyond this.

    So you are right, for the average rational intelligent person who wishes to do nothing more than casually maintain a healthy weight and body fat percentage it is reasonably straighforward. But for those who want to more actively and aggressively do more there is more to do, and a lot of bad advice to try and sift through. And I haven’t even gotten to the truly average person who knows so little about the basics of nutrition that at my institution we find it worthwhile to take groups of patients on “how to shop for food” field trips, teaching them how to read a nutrition label (did you know that the ingredients are listed in descending order of how much they comprise of the food, because most of my patients don’t), what foods have higher or lower calorie and nutritional content (fruit is not “free” food and healthy, because it does contain a lot of empty calories from sugars and in moderation is good for you, but eating 20 bananas and oranges a day, or drinking lots of fruit juice – even the “all natural” organic “no sugar added” stuff – is not), etc. I even had a diabetic patient who was shocked that soda contained sugar and that this sugar was bad for their diabetes!

  40. mousethatroared says:

    Now nybrgus, on the other hand, has the advantage of both evidence and credibility. Always nice to benefit from his hard work, perseverance, curiosity and skepticism. (Oh, now I feel like the slacker I am.)

  41. nybgrus says:

    I’ll take one quick stab at rustic –

    Rustic, the issue we have in general (besides your basic lack of scientific understanding and refusal to learn even one iota of it) is that you are not content with merely believing your “remedies” work for you. If that is all you asserted it wouldn’t really raise much of an issue around here. The problem is that you not only claim what “works for you” you insist that it must work for others as well and further claim that what we here have learned through science is wrong.

    Be content having found something that “works for you” and leave it at that. But leave the understanding of what actually works for the vast majority of people to us.

  42. nybgrus :) while I appreciate that you all are more scientifically advanced in chemicals, my argument in most cases here is when they overstep boundaries, and try to dictate, deny and attack those who do not hold to your belief…that any and all chemicals are harmless to us, according to your studies, when there effects of them are experienced adversely in a number of ways. Case in point, fluoride..on another comment post, some, as I would myself, feel it’s a trampling of freedom to force it in everyone’s water supply. A month or so ago it was blasting one who was going alternative for cancer treatment rather than face the horrendous results of chemo and radiation treatments. And now this criticism of organic diet..which I personally know the benefits of. That’s why I comment.

  43. lilady says:

    @ nybgrus:

    “I’ll take one quick stab at rustic – ”

    With Rusty it goes *beyond* her diet recommendations…way *beyond*. Here’s her webpage on *detoxing* which includes water fasting and activated charcoal for “detoxifying” (and for relief of gas symptoms).

    She even has a post about MMS…the industrial bleach solution that parents of autistic kids use for ridding them of (imaginary) parasites…to *treat/cure/recovery* them.

    http://gethealthybehappy.yolasite.com/how-do-i-detox.php

  44. I should add, the affects of vitamins also, which is once again touted about in here as a bunch of ‘malarkey’, when I know the benefits of them also :) and, actually, know many others who benefit from them. The industry wouldn’t have grown if they weren’t actually beneficial I am sure. It seems an apparent possibility, that the medical industry feels threatened perhaps. I’m hoping actually, that you all will catch on more.

  45. Lilady..I don’t recommend MMS, I state I don’t know personally whether it works or not, but I wouldn’t put it down without knowing personally as yet..I also state, that the criticism coming from conventional meds of anything but your chemical treatments are ‘quackery’ is well..amusing to me. It’s OK to blast someone’s brains out so they can live like a vegetable if they survive it…? I’m sorry, I don’t put too much faith in either :)

  46. mousethatroared says:

    RH – Municipal water is usually metered and you pay for what you use (At least it is in this liberal northern region). If you don’t want fluorinated water, then buy it from somewhere else. No one gave you the right to water piped into your house that is customized to your idiosyncratic requirements.

  47. mouse..well then…’no one gave you the right to have water piped into your house that is customized to Your idiosyncratic (fluoride) requirements then? buy fluoride toothpaste instead? It’s water..a necessity of life..not teeth treatment…how is that not understood and considered?

  48. Quill says:

    “I’m hoping actually, that you all will catch on more.”

    Oh not to worry then. Everyone here has caught on to your message, such as it is.

  49. Dr. Harriet..ok..this is a study..that says…. ‘At present, evidence from randomised-controlled trials is insufficient to recommend a specific role for vitamin C in the treatment of asthma. Further methodologically strong and large-scale randomised controlled trials are warranted in order to address the question of the effectiveness of vitamin C in children with asthma.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15266435

    yet..this is what happened the other day on Craigs List….

    Since I heard here about vitamin C for asthma 09/09 19:57:40

    and have been taking it I have had less asthma attacks. I was really in bad shape with asthma til I started the C. I now take about 2000 mg a day and doing much better.

    My question: How long have you been taking it?

    a few days, its really helping 09/09 20:57:45

    and we have allergies to our cat which it helps. I’m going to take around 5 grams a day and see how I feel. I’ve just been taking 1 a day.
    I am taking 2 grams a day, 1 gram in the morning and 1 gram in the evening, which is 1000 mg each.

    So, it’s interesting how continually I find actual experiences of people (including my own) who actually try it..yet ‘inconclusive evidence’ on studies.

  50. nybgrus says:

    @lilady:

    Oh I know. I have been to her website. And read a bit of it. I also seem to be one of the few here that realize rustic is actually a woman, not a man, and use the correct pronoun. LOL.

    My stab was out of morbid curiosity really. I almost entirely ignore everything she writes since it is always just a rehash of the same arbitrary and often conflicting musings. I just wanted to see the reaction if I focused on one little bit. And I was not surprised by the outcome.

    @mouse:

    Thank you, tough I have been feeling a bit of a lech these days. Burnout from the long year, I reckon. My exit exams for the year are on Thursday coming and after that I will not only officially be in my final year of school (eek! long coat seems much too soon!) but have a well deserved holiday… which will be spent writing an article for submission to the Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. So, not a full holiday, as if those ever exist.

    @rustic:

    if you had stopped right after your first clause, we would be in agreement. You’ve (of course) missed the point entirely. I’ll leave it to others with more time and patience to attempt to educate you. It is my sincere hope you actually try and allow yourself to be educated. Mouse made a most excellent point – it is you that is demanding the unreasonable. I want my water fluoridated for myself, my family, my nephews, and my friends. They also want the same for the very good reasons we have discussed here. If you feel that you personally do not benefit from it, or derive harm from it, that is perfectly within your rights. Nobody is forcing you to drink that water, but it is also unreasonable to force me to be without something I know to be beneficial.

  51. nybgrus..no one is ‘forcing you to be without’ either….you can have something you deem beneficial. Fluoride toothpaste, anytime you so choose. As I said, it’s ‘Water’..it’s not a dental office (educate me? lol is this planet earth?). It’s Water..:) “no one is forcing me to drink water”? I pay Taxes for my Water..not a so called dental treatment..I think I get it though..there must be a surplus of ‘fluoride’ the pharmas/chem companies need to get rid of…if so..that would explain it so as I understand why it’s being forced on us atleast :)

  52. WilliamLawrenceUtridge says:

    You can’t educate rustichealthy. She’s has no relevant education and makes no effort to acquire it, instead relying on bare assertions that are akin to insisting there is no need to follow the speed limit because she has never had a fatal accident. There is no appreciation that science is unlike other forms of knowing, because she couldn’t define the term without a dictionary, and even with a dictionary would not understand it.

    Willful, prideful ignorance.

  53. Amalthea says:

    I, however, am interested in learning, and this website seems to be a good place for it.
    About 5 or 6 years ago I came across a report on the radio that stated that there were some studies that indicated that some people might benefit from taking glucosamine for arthritis. A pharmacist said that it needed to be glucosamine (1500mgs) and chondroitin (1200mgs). (Other than: A: you must have some cartilage remaining in the joint and B: you must take both, glucosamine by itself is just a sugar pill)
    Are there any studies that people can be pointed to that will be something worth sending them to read if they ask me for an opinion? For some reason I get asked a lot of questions by co-workers.

  54. The Dave says:

    her response on the fluoride post about the various chemicals in quite humorous, in a “fearing for the future of the race” sort of way.

    “Sorry, no I’m not a chemist to have feelings for any one of those, except ascorbic acid, which I think is not the best source of Vitamin C imo…as I believe vitamins the closer to their natural form the better they are for processing and use in our bodies.”

    She doesn’t even realize that ascorbic acid IS the closest you can get to its natural form because it IS vitamin C. There really is no hope for her.

  55. Narad says:

    Are there any studies that people can be pointed to that will be something worth sending them to read if they ask me for an opinion?

    This has been discussed here, including to the point of what sounds like the details you’ve mentioned.

  56. Narad says:

    (@Amalthea: I suppose that didn’t quite hit the chondroitin angle, although use of the search box will lead to further entries, including this. I don’t have access to the full text, so I can’t say whether it covers hedge “A” that you identified.)

  57. @Dave: That was my intention when I made the mention of ascorbic acid, that rustichealthy would say something stupid about ascorbic acid while raving about the merits of vitamin C. I guess it was also the intent of whoever made mention of “dihydrogen monoxide.”

  58. lilady says:

    @ Amalthea: Try this…a meta analysis from the BMJ, of studies for chondroitin and glucosamine for treatment of osteoarthritis:

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2941572/

  59. nobs says:

    [QUOTE]“# Harriet Hallon 09 Nov 2012 at 6:26 pm

    @rustichealthy,

    You say you haven’t had a cold in 4 years, and you attribute it to following your diet and supplement regimen.
    I haven’t had a cold in at least 16 years, and I attribute it to NOT following your regimen, but to eating a variety of non-organic foods and avoiding supplements. I don’t even take a daily multivitamin. This approach works for me! How can you possibly accuse me of being wrong? It’s my own hypothesis that most diseases are not vitamin deficiencies.”[/QUOTE]

    Harriet — Seriously, While you may not “supplement” your “non-organic” diet with vitamins, if I remember correctly, you DO “supplement” your diet with a “daily” regimen of Rxs.

    You have admitted to supplementing your diet with a “daily” statin. Perhaps there are others? What others? Do you also take fosomax? or other osteoporosis Rx? Other Rx?

    SOOOO…. Reality is ……. You BOTH “supplement” your respective diets. It just is that, Rustic supplements his diet with vitamins and you supplement yours with Rx drugs.

    Therfore, if we were to follow your preferred logic above …….Do you hypothesize that “most diseases”(or even some diseases) are Rx deficiencies?

    Out of curiosity, Do you supplement your statin supplement with CoQ10?
    Why? or Why not?

    1. Harriet Hall says:

      @nobs,

      “you DO “supplement” your diet with a “daily” regimen of Rxs.”

      No I don’t. I take medications that have been proven effective, I take them for specific medical indications, and I everything I take is via prescriptions from MDs who are science-based. I don’t care to share all the details of my personal medical history; but I will say that I am on one immunosuppressive medication that, if anything, ought to INCREASE my susceptibility to colds.

      Your questions are misguided. If you take antibiotics for pneumonia, you are not “supplementing your diet” but treating an infection.

      As for CoQ10, I don’t take it because (1) I don’t have statin-related muscle pain,(2) the literature does not support using it as a routine preventive measure for patients on statins, and (3) it would interact with another medication I’m on.

  60. BillyJoe says:

    nobs,

    “You have admitted to supplementing your diet with a “daily” statin.”

    A statin is not a dietary supplement.
    Which sort of consigns your whole post to the garbage disposal unit.

  61. nobs says:

    “:A statin is not a dietary supplement.”

    Reallly? Please elaborate. It appears that is is very much being used as such.

  62. ok, I posted this over in Scaremongering to sell Water Filters..so I’ll post it here also…have a great day..try some real nutrients if you dare before putting something down you know nothing about ..just my opinion :)

    My personal experience is ascorbic acid did not work as well (with my asthma attacks) as one with bioflavanoids and rosehips. That’s how I concluded it may not be the best form to take and why the studies don’t show it’s effectiveness. It seems one needs more mgs. when it is in ascorbic acid alone in that case. That’s how I know it’s not as effective, and my belief that the closer to the way it’s presented in nature the more beneficial. The only opinions the studies I’ve found on pubmed come to are “insufficient”, or “inconclusive” evidence actually, (not conclusively saying it Doesn’t work) which, personally, I’m glad I didn’t wait another 30 or 40 years for them to perhaps come to the correct conclusion… finally … sigh… :) See you all another time. :)

  63. lilady says:

    @ Nobs:

    “A statin is not a dietary supplement.”

    “Reallly? Please elaborate. It appears that is is very much being used as such.”

    http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Nutritional+Supplements

  64. mousethatroared says:

    Oh my lord, RH, water is a utility like gas or electricity. It is often provided by cities or counties, but it is not a tax. If you don’t want to pay for it, have it turned off. If local code permits, build a well AND then you can decide how to deal with the flouride that occurs naturally in ground water…

  65. nybgrus says:

    This is absolutely priceless….

    ok..this is a study..that says… with a link to an actual study, followed by yet..this is what happened the other day on Craigs List…

    I can’t even do anything but laugh. Of course WLU and lilady are right, and I knew you were all along, but every once in a while I have a bit of morbid curiosity. Oh well, I’m good now. Nothing like waking up to a belly laugh over my coffee on a wonderful Sunday morning.

  66. nybgrus says:

    @amalthea:

    Here is a link to a post by Scott Gavura on a similar topic as well, in which I posted quite extensively in a debate with commenter JPZ where I ended up dissecting in (probably too much) detail many studies, including bench data on the absorption of collagen and the limitations of those data. My conclusion was the same – that there is no reasonable role for supplementation to be of any particular benefit. I cannot 100% discount any effect, but I think it is reasonable to say that if there is one it is small enough to be clinically useless and certainly not worth the cost of supplementation (even though it is quite cheap to buy in bulk). I think that the same premise would apply equally to glucosamine and chondroitin.

    Hope that helps as well.

  67. weing says:

    “Out of curiosity, Do you supplement your statin supplement with CoQ10?
    Why? or Why not?”

    Supplementing with CoQ10? Why would you?

  68. elburto says:

    If it’s on Craigslist it must be legit!

    RustyHeadgear – if you combine ascorbic acid with Dihydrogen monoxide it works very well.

    Be careful though, Dihydrogen monoxide is dangerous in excess, especially if it interacts with the respiratory system while in its liquid form.

  69. nybgrus says:

    Dihydrogen monoxide is dangerous stuff and should be banned. Thankfully a bunch of folks with crunchy nutty centers signed a petition for us.

  70. Narad says:

    yet..this is what happened the other day on Craigs List….

    Rusty has apparently experienced some frustration with Craigslist in the past:

    “Attention Craigs List ‘Health & Healing’ and ‘Dieter’ Forum “monitors”: You can’t ‘flagg’ me here. You can use your CL “nic” if you so choose, or change it to remain anonymous, you know who you are ;) Please Note: Any government paid-for studies are not accepted verifiable proof/evidence here of anything..sorry. If they don’t concur with my own experience/findings, I’d question who they benefit and consider it ‘Spam’!..:p”

  71. Janet says:

    @Mouse

    I maintain that eating properly is simple–but not EASY. But I still don’t think it’s any mystery that most of us simply eat too much of whatever diet we follow. The EASY (easiEST) way to avoid this is to eat mostly plants and drink only water (okay, beer is mostly water, right?)

    As long as people tell themselves that there is some “secret” food or food group, or special “diet plan”, or that it’s about money for “special” foods, they will avoid the real confrontation of limiting portions. Again, simple idea, not so easy to implement in a food abundant culture that allows us to eat any time, any place, advertises high calorie food non-stop, and provides twice the calories needed to maintain health. Now that I eat about half the calories I used to, I spend less. Salmon isn’t so expensive when you only eat 4 oz at a time! It may sound dull, but measuring cups and a small scale are my best friends. Do I sometimes weep when I see what’s on my (small) plate? Of course, but I smile even more when I get on the scale or read my normal lab reports.

  72. Janet says:

    @Nybgrus

    I think the work you are doing with your patients in terms of education is great news. Much more effort should be made at this basic level. The examples you cite would be laughable if they weren’t to achingly pathetically true. But I would go out on a limb and say that I don’t really think that the dietary needs of athletes are much different than anyone else’s. They may need more calories at times and more fluids, but why does working your muscles require any “special” balance of nutrients? The literature you refer to is a perfect example of how this idea feeds the diet fad industry. Besides, most of us aren’t at those levels anyway, nor are most of the people who buy all those silly books.

    When I was fatter, I ran, lifted weights, bicycled, and more; but I ate too much. Now that I’m older, I exercise much less vigorously, but weigh less because I eat less. My health, in general, is better due to attaining a healthy weight.

    @Val Jones

    You may quickly run out of books to review if you keep posting, (or at least run out of being asked to review them), so keep up the good work.

    I take my cues from Pollan and Nestle and would highly recommend the books of both to anyone seeking down to earth, science-based nutrition advice. Nestle’s newest (co-authored with partner Malden Nesheim), “Why Calories Count”, is a tour-de-force of science and her “Feed Your Pet Right”, does for vet science what her “What To Eat” does for people science. The older but still highly relevant, “Food Politics” sheds a lot of light on how we got where we are with food policy. If you don’t have time for the books, try the blog, foodpolitics.com where most any food and food policy subject is indexed and archived.

  73. nybgrus says:

    @Janet:

    Thank you. I think patient education is the #1 best tool in the science based arsenal. When you empower somebody to know a little bit more about their health and disease, they become much more able and willing to do the right things and improve their health. It also acts to immunize patients against all the BS out there in two ways; one by giving them more knowledge so claims have a higher chance of seeming ridiculous to them and two by giving them more reason to trust and believe you and thus eschew non-science based claims.

    As for the athlete dietary requirements… yes, you are absolutely right. Most people are not even remotely elite enough for it to really matter. There was a time, however, that I was exercising 40+ hours per week, cycling 500+ miles per week, lifting 2-3 times per week, running 2-3 times per week, and surfing 2-3 times per week. Not only did I need to ensure I had enough calories, but I actually did need to eat enough protein and electrolyte rich foods. And I did “supplement” my rides with electrolyte tablets and Power Bar Gels (I like them better than the bars). But I was also doing 100 mile rides which burned between 9-10,000 calories in addition to my basal metabolic rate of around 5,000 calories.

    But you and Dr. Hall are spot on – it is simple but not easy. Until you get to be a more serious athlete, then some thinking and planning is useful, especially since I was trying to continually shave minutes of my century time and seconds off my hill sprints. But at least 90% of people are not at that level. I most certainly am not anymore, what with having to, you know… learn stuff to be a doctor and all. Not as much free time to devote 40+ hours/week to exercise.

  74. Amalthea says:

    Thanks for the links. Interesting reading.

  75. mousethatroared says:

    @Kathy, I think we are focusing on different aspects of eating healthy. You are focusing on the actual content of the food and calorie content that will lead to weight loss or gain and a healthy nutritional balance. In that I agree with you, many people make it more complicated than it needs to be for them. Many of the books that make it complicated are counter-productive or deceptive.

    I am focusing more on the experience of eating a healthy diet. I am a big fan of advice on how to better your experience with eating a healthy diet. NOT rules, I dislike rules. But I like tips and I think many people finds them handy. Some tips I have found handy in the past are based on research, some just personal experience. Things like the information that; the average food craving lasts about a few minutes, eating soup will make you feel more full with less calories, increase fiber helps decrease hunger, eat until you feel partly full then wait 20 minutes for your brain to recieve satiety signal, etc I think well researched articles and book along those lines can be very helpful to folks looking for ways to maintain a more healthy diet.

    I would add that exercise is similar, it’s doesn’t need to be as complicated as some people make it, but advice and tips on how to live a more active lifestyle can be very helpful.

  76. mousethatroared says:

    ^ Kathy? Where did I get Kathy? I meant the above post to addressed to Janet. Sorry about that.

  77. stanmrak says:

    @ Harriet Hall

    Since you are on multiple medications for chronic health problems,
    maybe your nutritional plan hasn’t worked all that well.

  78. Harriet Hall says:

    @stanmrak,

    “Since you are on multiple medications for chronic health problems, maybe your nutritional plan hasn’t worked all that well.”

    Maybe not. But I was in excellent health and on no medications for the first 6 decades of my life. Maybe my health problems would have started sooner or have been even worse on another plan. How could we possibly know? Without good scientific evidence, my guess is as good as yours. I will gladly consider a different nutritional plan if you can show me credible evidence that people following that plan develop fewer health problems as they age.

  79. mousethatroared says:

    ““Since you are on multiple medications for chronic health problems, maybe your nutritional plan hasn’t worked all that well.”

    Yeah! cause people who take supplements are immortal! ….or well you know…healthier in a way that doesn’t seem to show up significantly on any large RCT.

  80. mousethatroared says:

    Really, I just can not get over that last Stanmrack statement. Gosh, I know folks my age who smoke and have serious alchohol and drug problems, yet they do currently have fewer chronic health problem then me. Maybe my lack of smoking, excessive alchohol and narcotic intake hasn’t worked that well for me…

    that is just about the poorest logic imaginable.

  81. nybgrus says:

    Indeed. I couldn’t help but read it in the voice of a petulant child.

  82. kathy says:

    “Kathy? Where did I get Kathy? I meant the above post to addressed to Janet. Sorry about that.”

    I’ll do m’ best to forgive you Mouse! What I know about diet could be written on a postage stamp and still leave room for the postmark.

  83. BillyJoe says:

    “What I know about diet could be written on a postage stamp”

    FOODIS
    NOTME
    DICINE

    ;)

  84. mousethatroared says:

    @Kathy (really) If it’s any comfort, I didn’t mix up your personas, only your names. I have a problem with switching similar names AND many names similar to me, pretty much any name in the same culture and gender with the same number of syllables (give or take one or two) is up for grabs. It just doesn’t show up on the Internet as much due to more unique user names.

    There’s probably a supplement that someone could sell me for that…

    Aren’t you the person who identifies plants for a living? Doesn’t that mean you are most likely to know what’s edible and what’s not? That should exceed a postage stamp…unless you are a monk.

  85. nobs says:

    # Harriet Hallon 11 Nov 2012 at 11:54 am

    @nobs,

    “you DO “supplement” your diet with a “daily” regimen of Rxs.”

    No I don’t. I take medications that have been proven effective, I take them for specific medical indications, and I everything I take is via prescriptions from MDs who are science-based. I don’t care to share all the details of my personal medical history; but I will say that I am on one immunosuppressive medication that, if anything, ought to INCREASE my susceptibility to colds.

    Your questions are misguided. If you take antibiotics for pneumonia, you are not “supplementing your diet” but treating an infection.”
    ““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““

    Your reply attempting a comparison of antibiotic treatment for pneumonia versus ongoing daily statin supplementation, is most certainly “misguided” and can only be considered as obfuscatory.

    Let’s explore:

    Pneumonia,is an acute condition, and antibiotics are used short term to treat it.

    Statins do not treat, nor are intended to treat, any acute condition.

    Admit it- You are taking them “preventively” (ie. “supplementing” your chosen diet) in the belief that it will prevent a future adverse event.

    Seriously Harriet, I know that you know, that no SBM MD would recommend or prescribe an ongoing daily dietary supplementation of antibiotics to prevent pneumonia.

    Therefore:

    Your daily dietary supplementation of statins and blood thinners, and Rustic’s daily dietary supplementation of vitamins, are the same ——- a belief it will prevent or reduce the risk of a future adverse event.

    Harriet additionally claims- “As for CoQ10, I don’t take it because (1) I don’t have statin-related muscle pain,(2) the literature does not support using it as a routine preventive measure for patients on statins, and (3) it would interact with another medication I’m on.”

    1- Do you believe muscle pain to be the only adverse symptom of long term/ongoing statin supplementation?

    2- The literature does indeed support replacing the CoQ10 that statins deplete.

    3- This is indeed your dilemm…..Gambling and juggling between the known risks and claimed benefits of your chosen dietary supplementations(statins and blood thinners).

    1. Harriet Hall says:

      @nobs,

      “Your daily dietary supplementation of statins and blood thinners, and Rustic’s daily dietary supplementation of vitamins, are the same ——- a belief it will prevent or reduce the risk of a future adverse event.”

      Ha, ha, ha! Thanks for brightening my day with a dose of comedy. Nybgrus has already shown you some of what is wrong with your thinking. I’ll simply say that likening my pills to Rustic’s pills is purely delusional. Rustic has claimed that supplements worked for her to treat existing disease (asthma, in particular). And even though we both take pills to prevent future problems, my pills are based on solid science while hers are based only on belief and anecdote.

  86. nybgrus says:

    @nobs:

    You are reaching hard to try and make your point, all while looking like a blithering idiot. You should have quite while you are ahead.

    Pneumonia,is an acute condition, and antibiotics are used short term to treat it. Statins do not treat, nor are intended to treat, any acute condition.

    So if it is acute it is not supplementation? That is the definition you wish to employ?

    So when I have a child with iron deficiency anemia secondary to a diet exclusively of breast milk and I prescribe iron for 3 months to rebuild the stores and then stop the iron, that is not supplementing his iron?

    What if the child has cystic fibrosis and cannot adequately absorb fat soluble vitamins (A,D,E,K) and we give that for life to, um, supplement?

    What if we have a person who has celiac’s disease that has been undiagnosed and due to absorption issues is deficient in multiple vitamins. So now we have identified the issue, rectified it by diet, and supplement temporarily to replenish the deficiencies?

    Or when I have a patient with chronic pansinusitis and I prescribe a 12 month course of clindamycin, is that supplementation because it is a chronic condition that requires 12 months of treatment?

    Or what about the obese person with cholesterol through the roof, that we start on statins and anti-hypertensives and then he loses a bunch of weight and no longer needs the medicines?

    Or someone like myself, who was hypertensive and obese for most of my life and had to take an ARB for my HTN and then I lost the weight, became fit, and had to go off of it because it was bringing my pressure too low. Was I supplementing or treating acutely?

    Which ones are supplementation and which ones are “treating acutely?”

    Seriously Harriet, I know that you know, that no SBM MD would recommend or prescribe an ongoing daily dietary supplementation of antibiotics to prevent pneumonia.

    So to double down on your stupid grab at trying to make a point, you decide to confidently say this.

    Guess what? We do regularly prescribe prophylactic antibiotics for people to take specifically for the prevention of pneumonia. Patients who are immunocompromised certainly do benefit from this. HIV(+) patients take bactrim prophylactically whenever their CD4(+) counts get below 200 for prevention of pneumocystis carinii pneumonia and toxoplasmosis infection. We do the same for patients undergoing chemo and for patients with intrinsic immune deficiencies and for certain patients with sickle cell disease (just to name a few off the top of my head).

    Your daily dietary supplementation of statins and blood thinners, and Rustic’s daily dietary supplementation of vitamins, are the same

    No.

    Statins are not normally present in the body and the intent is to treat an ongoing and chronic pathology in the synthesis and management of lipids. You are not supplementing a statin (definition: Something added to complete a thing, make up for a deficiency, or extend or strengthen the whole.)

    Taking vitamin C, or any vitamin or mineral, is supplementation.

    Do you believe muscle pain to be the only adverse symptom of long term/ongoing statin supplementation?

    No, but it is the only potential indication for CoQ10 supplementation (which would be supplementation since it is endogenous to our bodies and the premise is that it is depleted somehow or a relative deficiency made thus supplementing it is useful). In other words, this point is not a point but a pointless superficial comment.

    The literature does indeed support replacing the CoQ10 that statins deplete.

    [citation needed]

    But I’ll save you the trouble – no, it doesn’t. It tentatively supports the supplementation if there are symptoms of its depletion (aka myalgia).

    This is indeed your dilemm…..Gambling and juggling between the known risks and claimed benefits of your chosen dietary supplementations(statins and blood thinners).

    And just to wrap up on another blitheringly idiotic note you toss this one in. Claimed benefits?? How about robustly demonstrated benefits? In specific populations with a pathological state that requires these treatments?

    This is one of the best examples I have seen in a while of someone with an ideology and just enough knowledge to think you know what you are talking about to confidently make an a$$ of yourself. Dunning-Kruger much?

  87. WilliamLawrenceUtridge says:

    Since you are on multiple medications for chronic health problems, maybe your nutritional plan hasn’t worked all that well.

    I wish I’d seen this sooner.

    Maybe nutrition can’t let you live forever, because maybe human evolution does not ensure a long lifespan of perfect health – only that we live long enough to pass on our genes. The reality is all people age, all people must die of something, and the process of aging is accompanied by loss of mental and physical functionality. There is no perfect diet, exercise or supplementation plan that will ensure you live forever in perfect health no matter how much everyone wishes it were so. Anyone who thinks otherwise is deluded or selling something.

    Also, statins are not supplements (normal dietary ingredients that have been artificially concentrated), they are medicines. Saying you “supplement” with statins may be techincally true according to an idiosyncratic definition, but is simply wrong in the medical sense. Making up your own definition does not mean you are making a meaningful point. High doses of vitamins and minerals used for drug-like effects (niacin for cholesterol, vitamin K to oppose blood thinners), as has long been pointed out here, is not supplementation, it is medication.

  88. Scott says:

    “Statins are supplements” reminds me very much of “vaccines are infections.”

    Is nobs evolving into “Thingy Mark II?” I certainly hope not, but the trend is worrying.

  89. weing says:

    “Statins are supplements”

    If you make up your own definitions for supplements and infections, then you can always be right. Imagine that. A genius in his own mind.

  90. Always Curious says:

    “Supplementing with CoQ10? Why would you?”

    I wouldn’t take it! I would instead eat a diet high in ubiquinone because it’s better for you. (/ snark)

    My diet until I was 18 included drinking 3 glasses of milk/day. I got physically strong and was never sick as a result. By extrapolation, you will be big & strong by doing the same. (/ more snark)

Comments are closed.