Do you take a multivitamin?

+1 I take Vitamin D some days, but that is all now. I felt guilty about not taking Calcium, but I just heard something that said it really did not help. I thought that I remembered hearing something negative(possibly about heart disease) about taking multi-vitamins also. That is my problem, I hear or read something, and then can't remember it. Maybe I should start taking that memory enhancing pill. LOL. I hate taking pills.

(It's hard to tell who is female or male here so here goes) - I suspect women need additional calcium more than men due to their propensity to suffer from osteoporosis more than men. Men, not as much calcium is needed. As part of my physical, I had a bone density test (I am male) at this age (69.5) and the test indicated very little, if any, loss of density.

Actually, I reviewed the scans and was impressed as to how good the spine bones looked and the lack of compression of the disc areas. As I said before, I don't take any multi-vitamin supplements.

This topic reminded me of Bobby Riggs who took massive doses of vitamins and played a tennis match with B. King and lost. I believe the vitamins didn't do much for him, even after the match.

"Despite endorsing candy, he (Riggs) was a health-food fanatic (as long as it did not conflict with his cigars and cognac) and ate plates of vitamins. Before the second match he took 450 pills a day to make him big and strong. He should have practiced, too, because even with the extra vitamins, 29-year-old Billie Jean King whooped him."
 
One comment about those who said their Dr didn't indicate any deficiencies. Well, I suspect that most Drs are not ordering tests to check for most key vitamins and minerals. Further, the PCP is not necessarily a nutrition expert either.
 
One comment about those who said their Dr didn't indicate any deficiencies. Well, I suspect that most Drs are not ordering tests to check for most key vitamins and minerals. Further, the PCP is not necessarily a nutrition expert either.

+1, I always have to ask.
 
How do you demonstrate this? I would think that x amount of effort uses x amount of energy, period.

On 20% fewer calories burned during exercise when using multivitamin:

I record the number of calories my stationary bicycle says I burn in 40 minutes of exercise. Same cycle for years. I had reached a consistent plateau for over a year. Then I happened to skip over a week of multivitamins. Suddenly I feel much stronger, less tired during exercise. I can do 20% to 25% more work, in terms of calories on the bike, while actually feeling good when I'm done. Take the pills again and the calories drop back to the old normal and exercise is work again. Off the pills and a week later I'm at new peaks again. Try pills with no iron, still bad. Try pills with no minerals, still bad. Off pills, everything is great again. That's as far as I've taken it. I've had a few recent instances of lower output that I may eventually be able to relate to diet. I keep a daily diary. But generally I'm fairly consistent at my new higher exercise level.
 
One comment about those who said their Dr didn't indicate any deficiencies. Well, I suspect that most Drs are not ordering tests to check for most key vitamins and minerals. Further, the PCP is not necessarily a nutrition expert either.

My doc wanted me to take a new lab analysis that is supposed to measure intracellular vitamin/mineral levels. I go in for the blood draw in a week, but won't have the results until mid-May since I had to delay the office visit. Should be interesting, though the insurance probably doesn't cover it.
 
On 20% fewer calories burned during exercise when using multivitamin:

I record the number of calories my stationary bicycle says I burn in 40 minutes of exercise. Same cycle for years. I had reached a consistent plateau for over a year. Then I happened to skip over a week of multivitamins. Suddenly I feel much stronger, less tired during exercise. I can do 20% to 25% more work, in terms of calories on the bike, while actually feeling good when I'm done. Take the pills again and the calories drop back to the old normal and exercise is work again. Off the pills and a week later I'm at new peaks again. Try pills with no iron, still bad. Try pills with no minerals, still bad. Off pills, everything is great again. That's as far as I've taken it. I've had a few recent instances of lower output that I may eventually be able to relate to diet. I keep a daily diary. But generally I'm fairly consistent at my new higher exercise level.
So, it isn't that vitamins somehow change the rate at which you burn calories but rather that vitamins have the perverse effect of reducing your energy so you do less work on the bike. That is an interesting effect. I have never heard of anyone suggesting that but you appear to have some pretty good empirical evidence that it happens to you.
 
I have been taking Centrum for about 15 years. My most recent bottle is 50+, which seemed strange.
 
...(snip)...
However, I just rejoined Weight Watchers and they require a multivitamin every day. So, I probably should go get some. They seem overly expensive to me. A doctor told me years ago that Centrum is a good multivitamin, so I will probably get Centrum Silver, I suppose. Seems like a waste of money to me so I am dragging my feet on this.
I got vitamins at Whole Foods. I tend to be trusting of this store. Their Multivitamin for "mature" folks is only about $16 (as I recall) for a year's supply.
 
I have been taking Centrum for about 15 years. My most recent bottle is 50+, which seemed strange.


centrum silver has no iron. that is the difference between centrum and centrum silver
 

Real food is made entirely of chemicals. And the "real food" has thousands of unlisted chemicals. "Real food' contains known carcinogens. Real "organic" food contains pesticides.

+1. I just compared labels between Grasshoppers $29.99 for 72 capsules and my $10 for 300 capsules multis. They're virtually identical with a few minor exceptions, and Grasshopper's contain no iron, phosphorus, or potassium, and almost no calcium (2%) or magnesium (1%). So Grasshopper is paying ~$.41 per vitamin vs. my $.03 per vitamin.

That's ~1367% markup for.... basically, hype. Saying they're "organic" is meaningless -- ALL vitamins are, by definition, organic compounds.

The point is, diet should be the main source of all vitamins & nutrients, and supplements used only for/when, for some reason, those vitamins are not being obtained in sufficient quantity from the diet. Multivitamins are a good inexpensive "catch-all" for deficiencies in a diet, but you can't live off of them, regardless of the source.

The second factor, is that everyone is different as far as dietary habits, needs, absorption, and other health factors that may effect nutrient availability and utilization.

Some people may not need any vitamin supplements, some may need a multi, and some may have good reason for taking a lot more.

YMMV is implied.

Tyro
 
+1. I just compared labels between Grasshoppers $29.99 for 72 capsules and my $10 for 300 capsules multis. They're virtually identical with a few minor exceptions, and Grasshopper's contain no iron, phosphorus, or potassium, and almost no calcium (2%) or magnesium (1%). So Grasshopper is paying ~$.41 per vitamin vs. my $.03 per vitamin.

That's ~1367% markup for.... basically, hype. Saying they're "organic" is meaningless -- ALL vitamins are, by definition, organic compounds.

The point is, diet should be the main source of all vitamins & nutrients, and supplements used only for/when, for some reason, those vitamins are not being obtained in sufficient quantity from the diet. Multivitamins are a good inexpensive "catch-all" for deficiencies in a diet, but you can't live off of them, regardless of the source.

The second factor, is that everyone is different as far as dietary habits, needs, absorption, and other health factors that may effect nutrient availability and utilization.

Some people may not need any vitamin supplements, some may need a multi, and some may have good reason for taking a lot more.

YMMV is implied.

Tyro

Nice comparison, because I have sub clinical Prostate cancer, there are things that aren't good for me, like calcium. And folate in plant form not Folic acid is the best way to get to get a B-vitamin. And because I am a veggie/vegan some of the plant forms of supplements, are better for me.

Besides, it just shows I have more money than brains.
 
Last edited:
This isn't the LBYM forum, if I want to eat organic carrots, so be it.:mad:
Please, have an organic carrot if that is what you want. If you say you enjoy them, that's quite enough reason to go on eating them. Just don't expect to claim that they, or "natural" vitamins," are superior without getting a rebuttal.
 
Please, have an organic carrot if that is what you want. If you say you enjoy them, that's quite enough reason to go on eating them. Just don't expect to claim that they, or "natural" vitamins," are superior without getting a rebuttal.

What was said was that my vitamins tablets were made from food, isn't that how we should all get our vitamins from food or sunlight.

Of course George Jetson, would just take a pill for dinner.
 
steelyman said:
I wonder why. Is iron bad for "people of age"?

I am saying this off the top of my head and memory, so remember that! Iron can be very harmful to body tissues as I believe the body stores more of it as you age. It can really be bad on your liver, heart, and joint problems. It is very stealth like and isn't noticeable until some damage has been done. My iron levels were a little elevated and I had to get tested for hemochromatosis, which I did not have. I try to give blood every now and then to thin it out. In fact people with diagnosed with too much iron are supposed to have blood removed as a means to lower iron levels.
 
But, where is the science that says the RMDs are right?
RMDs: Brought to you by the people who gave us the food pyramid with 12 daily servings of bread, rice, and other highly refined things (very large blue area in the diagram). Given that expertise, I'm not sure how much I trust RMDs. Also, they are based on a level that will prevent disease, not an optimal level.

File:WHOFoodGuidelinesSummaryPyramid.png
crPPFKa.png


If you eat real foods, and have almost no blue, you probably COULD get by without vitamins, but how many people eat like that?

--Dale--
 
I'm a pharmacist. there has never been any evidence that excess vitamins help.

Only shortage of minimumdaily requirements have proven to possibly cause issues.

if you have a varied(and good diet) you probably don't need a multiple vitamin.

Agree, but many surveys suggest most Americans don't usu eat a balanced diet. And few cents/d for basic multivit seems like cheap insurance for most.
 
i stopped a year ago or so, based on a study that showed correlation of 4 months less lifespan of those who took one.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom