Vitamin Use Not Recommended For Older Women

First Posted: 10/11/2011 4:03 pm   Updated: 12/11/2011 4:12 am

Taking some vitamin supplements later in life can't be recommended for older women because they may do more harm than good, according to a new study.

For the study in this week's Archives of Internal Medicine, researchers followed a group of 38,772 women in their 60s in Iowa for about 20 years. Taking multivitamins, folic acid and especially iron supplements were associated with a higher mortality risk, the researchers found. The use of vitamin and mineral supplements as a preventive measure can't be recommended, a journal commentary said.

Use of multivitamins was associated with an absolute risk increase of 2.4 per cent, Jaakko Mursu of the University of Eastern Finland in Kuopio, Finland, and co-authors reported.

In contrast, calcium was associated with a lower mortality rate.

Participants in the study filled in questionnaires about their use of supplements three times during the study period. By 2004, 85.1 per cent of women said they took at least one supplement daily.

The most commonly used supplements were:

Calcium.
Multivitamins.
Vitamin C.
Vitamin E.
Supplement users were more likely to have a poorer quality diet overall, with a lower intake of energy, total fat, and saturated fatty acids, the researchers found.

Looking for a natural way to get your vitamins? Here are 10 foods to prevent osteoporosis:

Green Peas
1 of 11
Green peas are very high in vitamin K, a nutrient which indirectly activates osteocalcin, a major protein in bone which ancors calcium molecules. They're also high in vitamin B6 and folate, two nutrients that inhibit homocysteine, a dangerous molecule that can prevent collagen from forming a proper bone matrix. Fresh green peas are always preferable to frozen or canned.
Total comments: 8 | Post a Comment
1 of 11
Favourite Foods
Pass
Love It

  • 1

  • 2

  • 3

  • 4

  • 5

  • 6

  • 7

  • 8

  • 9

  • 10
Foods
loading...
Users who voted on this slide
loading...

"Although we cannot rule out benefits of supplements, such as improved quality of life, our study raises a concern regarding their long-term safety," the study's authors concluded.

"Based on existing evidence, we see little justification for the general and widespread use of dietary supplements. We recommend that they be used with strong medically based cause, such as symptomatic nutrient deficiency disease."

The study included a large sample that was followed for a long period of time.

More not better
But the researchers noted that use of supplements is related to a healthier lifestyle. The study also included only white women, so generalizing the findings to other populations, ethnic groups, or men could be questioned.

The study was well designed and well conducted, Dr. Goran Bjelakovic of the University of Nis in Serbia and Christian Gluud of Copenhagen University Hospital said in a related journal commentary.

Since the study was observational, the researchers cannot draw cause-and-effect conclusions and other factors could be playing a role, the commentary noted.

"We think the paradigm 'the more is better is wrong,'" Bjelakovic and Gluud said.

"We cannot recommend the use of vitamin and mineral supplements as a preventive measure, at least not in a well-nourished population. Those supplements do not replace or add to the benefits of eating fruits and vegetables and may cause unwanted health consequences. Consumption of a varied, healthful diet seems to be a prudent preventive strategy."

The findings add to the growing evidence showing that certain supplements, such as vitamin E, vitamin A, and beta carotene, can be harmful, the pair said.

Both the researchers and commentators noted that dietary supplements, unlike drugs, do not require rigorous testing using the gold-standard approach of randomized control trials to be approved.

The commentators called on politicians and regulators to allow only safe products on the market.

The Council for Responsible Nutrition oversees the supplement industry, and maintains supplements can be a part of healthy lifestyle.

"The study may make for interesting scientific water cooler discussion, but certainly does not warrant sweeping, overstated concerns for elderly women," Duffy MacKay, the group's vice president of scientific and regulatory affairs, said in a asatement.

The study was funded by the U.S. National Cancer Institute and the Academy of Finland, and the Fulbright program.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST CANADA LIVING

Filed by Arti Patel  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 8
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
02:57 PM on 10/12/2011
Without getting into the argument that powerful forces (i.e. Big Pharma) could be influencing the design of these studies to ensure their failure, I must express my concern over how this kind of research—and, more significantly, its generally one-sided coverage in the mainstream media—will affect regular consumers who are trying to improve their nutrition and are looking to better eating in conjunction with supplementation to do just that. Will these people see a headline like, “Vitamins linked to earlier death,” and think: Wow! Even vitamins can kill me. So what’s the use of trying to get healthy at all?

http://newhope360.com/blog/are-your-customers-now-afraid-multivitamins-and-other-supplements
10:37 AM on 10/12/2011
I have found a lot out about vitamins and herbs over time.

The difference in prescription medicine and herbs is the prescriptions are made out of part of the plant where herbs are made out of the whole plant.

One thing most people should not take is Iron tablets. It can cause all kinds of problems if you don't need iron.

I have noticed when the Doctors ask what medicine you take, they don't write down what herbs and vites you take.

I would never take a vitamin or herb if I felt energetic and healthy. Most people who take herbs and vites don't think they are in good health.

Calcium supplements will cause kidney stones in those who are prone to kidney stones.

Big pharma want to be able to control prescriptions for vitamins and herbs, too, along with their expensive medicines. Imagine if you wanted to take a herb, but the doctor wanted to 'sell' a prescription.

It probably helps a lot to take a one a day when you have been exposed to the flu or have gotten chilled. It will keep your body from using up what you have in your system.

Cabbage seems to work to keep us looking younger and healthier. . I know a woman who is 90, but she looks 60. She eats cabbage every day. She cooks it into a soup, cole slaw or raw with salt. We need to find a herb for memory. She is forgetful.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ddanimal
02:37 AM on 10/12/2011
A ridiculous hit-piece on vitamins. No mention is made of vitamin quality or even type.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
don52
12:36 AM on 10/12/2011
Unfortunately vitamins are not the cure all. There are many factors that determine ones health.
In a day and age where so many people are over weight and don't exercise there are definitely other factors at work here. When is nutritional medicine going to give us answers. Why do you think that so many people turn to natural products, because our medical establishment focuses on drugs, medicine and operations.
To insinuate that vitamins are not safe does a disservice to people. "Supplement users were more likely to have a poorer quality diet overall, with a lower intake of energy, total fat, and saturated fatty acids, the researchers found." What does this comment mean? People think that vitamins are a substitute for a healthy life style. It definitely means that they have been listening to advise that fat is bad for you, We have low fat and no fat everything now. I have never believed in no fat and low fat products. These studies are like taking a few pieces to a large puzzle and claiming that it has merit.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jennifer Hoffman
Author and intuitive
08:32 PM on 10/11/2011
This is an appalling story and study, a thinly veiled attempt, I surmise, to give credence to the current legislation in Congress to limit the sales of all supplements. While the funders sound like reputable organizations -- the National Cancer Institute, Academy of Finland and the Fulbright program, I think it's important to go down a level or two to see who really benefits from this study, a big pharma company or two?
Unfortunately the study doesn't look at things that Iowa women would be subject to, especially those in their 60s, such as carcinogenic chemicals (both my grandparents, Iowa farmers, died of cancer caused by chemical exposure), diet, life stress and other factors that would have to be included in the study parameters to give it credence. I find this appalling and plan to stock up on supplements, just in case Congress decides to do me a "favor" and take them all off the market.
OverseasVet
stuck in a 3rd world country called texas
01:53 AM on 10/12/2011
While I agree with much that is said, it is still sad to see ad hominim attack of "big Pharma". "big suppliments" pays congress as much to allow it to promote and sell magic cures. Orin Hatch is a big promoter of such nonsense because of the money he and his state receives. He was the author of the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 which allows unregulated compounds to be sold with dubious claims of health promotion.

But this paper is complete garbage. a questionaire (very unreliable) administered only 3 times in a 20 year period is not going to give any useable data. Supplement users were also more likely to have a poorer quality diet overall which would more likely be the cause of increased mortality than the suppliments.
07:19 PM on 10/11/2011
"Since the study was observational, the researchers cannot draw cause-and-effect conclusions and other factors could be playing a role, the commentary noted."

That people already in ill-health would be considerably more likely to use vitamin or mineral supplements would be one such "other factor".
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jennifer Hoffman
Author and intuitive
08:35 PM on 10/11/2011
Well said and Iowa women in their 60s would have been exposed to a host of factors that are not mentioned in this study. Were they even considered? This propoganda is so thinly disguised that it would be laughable if not for the sinister motives behind it.