FAULTY STUDY TARGETS VITAMINS C AND E

[Guest guest]

FAULTY STUDY TARGETS VITAMINS C AND E

Finding of No Cardiovascular Protection Was Predictable

http://aahf.nonprofitsoapbox.com/index.php?option=com_content & task=view & id=604 & I\

temid=

Today, the American Association for Health Freedom (AAHF) and the Alliance

for Natural Health (ANH) have sharply the criticized defective and

misleading research published earlier this month in the Journal of the

American Medical Association (JAMA). The research, which triggered headlines

around the world, suggested that neither vitamin E nor vitamin C supplements

protect against cardiovascular disease in older men.

The study by Sesso and colleagues from Harvard, the " Physicians'

Health Study II, " included over 14,600 male physicians over a ten-year

period, and used the least potent form of vitamin E and incorrect dosages of

both vitamins C and E, according to an analysis conducted by ANH experts Dr.

Steve Hickey, Dr. Damien Downing, and Dr. Verkerk.

The ANH analysis, " Designed to Fail: A Trial without Meaning, " criticized

the study by Sesso et al. for using synthetic dl-alpha-tocopherol, which is

less effective than the natural and more complete forms of vitamin E and is

thus more likely to not reveal any benefit. Additionally, the vitamin E dose

in the study (400 IU every other day) is far below the dose taken by many

who supplement, making the findings irrelevant to older supplement consumers

who are aware of the extensive research and clinical evidence on higher-dose

vitamin therapy.

The JAMA paper included a 500 mg. daily dosage of vitamin C, which is only

half of a typical one-gram tablet of the type popular with supplement users.

Evidence suggests that dynamic flow levels of vitamin C, which may prevent

heart disease, begin at daily intakes above about 3 g. per day, best

delivered in divided doses.

Additional complaints about the JAMA study include the use of an

unidentified placebo, which may have included beneficial nutrients such as

magnesium; the study's failure to control diet for synergistic nutrient

interactions that may have skewed test results; and the relevance of

findings among physicians (the study group) to men in the general

population.

" Considering that the methodologies were significantly biased against

finding a positive result from vitamins C and E, as determined from both

available research and clinical evidence, " said Gretchen DuBeau, AAHF

Executive Director, " one has to ask who stands to benefit from these

findings? How, for example, would the pharmaceutical industry be impacted

from diminished sales of their vitamins if the public, under the belief that

vitamins provided no benefit in the treatment and prevention of

cardiovascular disease, instead chose pricey prescription drugs? "

Dr. Damien Downing, ANH's Medical Director, President of the British Society

of Ecological Medicine, and Editor-in-Chief of the peer-reviewed Journal of

Nutritional and Environmental Medicine, stated that the Sesso study was " an

intervention designed to fail. "

The Scientific and Executive Director of ANH, Dr. Verkerk, added,

" With three of the world's largest drug companies-BASF, Wyeth, and DSM

(formerly Roche)-supplying the synthetic low dose vitamins for the study, it's

perhaps not surprising that the outcome is made to look bad for vitamins. A

trial like this costs a huge amount of money and is a waste of much-needed

research funds. Why don't they ask the people who work with nutrients on a

daily basis-integrative medicine doctors-which nutrient forms, dosages, and

combinations are most likely to work? "

Take a moment to read the brilliant analysis of the Physicians Health Study

II by Dr. Rob Verkerk of the Alliance for Natural Health.