Warning about natural supplements

Those who take natural supplements may not be getting what they think they're getting.

Many of us take statins, for one reason or another. Some of you may know that statins were discovered in a fungus on rice called red yeast rice. The active ingredient in it is called monacolin K. That ingredient is purified and sold as a prescription drug, lovastatin. Some prefer the natural source.

So a recent study looked at 28 popular brands of red yeast rice and analyzed them for monacolin K, Here's what they found:
• Monacolin K was not detected in two brands.
• In the 26 brands that contained monacolin K, the quantity ranged more than 60-fold from 0.09 to 5.48 mg per 1200 mg of red yeast rice.
• Following the manufacturers’ recommendations for daily servings, the quantity of monacolin K consumed per day would range more than 120-fold from 0.09 to 10.94 mg.

journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2047487317715714

An accompanying editorial points out the safety hazard...

The editorial said...
The adverse effects that were reported relate to muscle symptoms, liver enzyme abnormalities, allergic, skin and gastro-intestinal reactions...Uncertainties related to safety issues also exist when it comes to the composition of these products; some may also contain monacolins other than monacolin K, which may also influence the lipid profile. These supplements may also contain saturated and unsaturated fatty acids, pigments, minerals, plant sterols and citrinin. The precise content of the supplements is generally not labelled; methods to measure the composition are insufficiently standardized; the absence of mycotoxins such as citrinin should be measured with great precision.

Even when the labels are correct, we have to be cautious about taking supplements. There is nothing "natural" about supplements. Our bodies evolved to process foods, not isolated and concentrated ingredients. We, and our microbiomes, can extract what we need and handle the limited amounts of toxins that occur naturally. The internet is full of sites like "Life Extension" and daytime TV is full of shows like "Dr Oz" that promote supplements while playing fast and loose with medical evidence. They spin research to make it sound scientific, but it is usually fake medical news.

I believe that for most people there is no need at all to eat supplements. Some specific groups may need it for a limited time, for example, young children need vitamin-D. There could be people that for various reasons do not eat certain kind of food and therefore need supplements (vegans). But the vast majority of those who eat supplements do it unnecessary. Compensating a bad diet with dietary supplements is a bad idea, it doesn't work.
The exceptions I know of are:

- Vitamin D to children up to two years of age.
- Folic acid for women planning to be pregnant.
- Vitamin D to the elderly who do not regularly stay outside.
- and for a vegan: Vitamin B12 and vitamin D

Post deleted by moderator.

Post Edited By Moderator (Tudpock18) : 6/25/2017 6:04:33 AM (GMT-6)

Tommy I used to work at AT&T.

Wow Allen, that’s some variation. It’s sad to see people increasing their profits by cutting corners on other people’s health. I hope the OZ’s of the world would do a few shows pointing out the down side to supplements to balance out the message. I have zero problems putting my life at risk, but without hard facts, I restrain from doing that to others unless they ask.

Tommy, at this point, I'll second Bohemond's comments.

Everyone here is a member because either they, or someone close to them, has a serious illness. You're not only being childish, your being disrespectful if others. If you don't like the way this forum is run, then just go away. We've never, to my memory, had someone quite like you visit us.
At this forum we discuss serious business. It's not a baseball forum.

tommyc said...
I’ve been in IT for the last 27 years, at the largest telecommunications company on planet earth.

Ummm...you've completely lost me here. I did secure communications for the largest navy on this earth. So what? Nothing to do
do with the medical topics we address here.

OK, Tommy, here's the deal. This forum is for support and education of folks or their loved one who have prostate issues. People here are dealing with serious stuff. It is NOT a platform for your lectures, rule violations or trolling for fights. That's another forum.

Stay, go -- I don't care. If you want to stay, please post in a respectful and supportive manner. If you want to go, good luck in whatever your future may bring. If you prefer, we can permanently ban your user name and IP address.

Jim

Last thing then i'm about done here... I can hear cheers I can tell you not being liked isn't much fun, especially when you are trying to do something good. To be honest I don't have much experience with it, so excuse me if I don't handle it properly.
As I said in the deleted post above(I have no idea again why it was deleted). I picked this thread because it has nothing to do with anything about the prostate. No one will gain prostate knowledge from this thread. I even AGREE red yeast rice is bad, as are many approved drugs. Never take it!!! As I also (tried, but wasn't permitted) to say there are better options. I achieved Lipitor numbers without Lipitor. My MD was very happy and even encouraged me to tell others, I PROMISE you he did, on a stack of bibles, on my fathers grave. Just don't attempt to do it here because free speech does not exist here.

^^^ what is so wrong with saying this?

Post Edited (tommyc) : 6/25/2017 10:40:35 AM (GMT-6)

I was going to comment on this thread earlier but all the talk about supplements reminded me that I hadn't yet choked down my morning fist-full-o-pills so I went to do that first. While I was at it I got to wondering which, if any, of the dietary supplements I take have the word "natural" on the bottle so I checked.

My CoQ10 claims to be "naturally fermented" but it does show the amount of ubiquinone per capsule (100 mg) in the ingredient list. And my Krill Oil claims to have "natural astaxanthin". But most of supplements I take show the chemical compound(s) the provide on the front of the label and the quantities on the back. I am more put off than attracted when a product claims to be "natural" since it is often an attempt to put a positive spin on being vague about what, exactly, is in the pills.

My supplements can be divided into a number of categories. One category is comprised of things my various physicians suggested I take. My MO likes to make sure his patients have vitamin D levels in the normal range. He measures my vitamin D every three months and I take an astonishing 15,000 units a day just to stay in the normal range (generally in the lower half). My dermatologist has me on nicotinamide because of a recent Australian study that found a 24 percent reduction in skin cancer recurrences. My primary care doctor suggested that a bit of extra magnesium might help with the morning charlie horse that sometimes makes it difficult to put on my socks. It does seem to help. My podiatrist suggested some fancy-schmancy B vitamins for the neuropathy in my feet. (L-Methylfolate, a form of B9, and Methylcobalamin, a form of B12).

That last part -- the fancy B vitamins -- leads me to another category: Supplements that show some promise in areas where mainstream medical science has nothing. If you search the research for management of peripheral neuropathy you will find a lot about treating the symptoms but, aside from controlling blood sugar, especially for diabetics, there is very little about treating the disease itself or even slowing its progression. What advice the studies do offer about managing the disease mostly seems to feature a number of supplements that seem to help. There are the aforementioned B vitamins, and Alpha Lipoic Acid and Accetyl L Carnatine. The B vitamins were originally prescribed for me as a prescription-only "medical food" but I found that I could order the ingredients separately from an online store and reduce the price dramatically.

As I see it there are three ways that supplements can do harm. They can be harmful in themselves, either directly or when combined with prescription drugs, they can cost too much for small benefits, and they can distract the user from other treatment options that have been better vetted. To avoid these you should do your own research, paying particular attention to emerging negative information about things you are taking, you should make sure all of your doctors know everything you are taking, and you should bear in mind that some of the studies about supplements may be less reliable than those for prescription drugs.

Having done my due diligence as described above, I allow myself the luxury of hope with a number of dietary supplements. I am a sucker for things that make mice live a long and active life. Ah, sweet, sweet placebo. Where would I be without you?

PDA-

You mentioned 3 ways they may be harmful. I suppose the red yeast rice falls into all 3 of your categories? If it provides far too much statin, it is harmful. But if it provides no statins, I guess it would fall into your waste of money category, and (3) it substitutes a placebo for a drug that might provide a real benefit. Because there is little FDA control (they might spot check a few from time to time) the labels misrepresent what is actually in the bottle. At minimum, there ought to be a requirement for qualified independent testing labs.

The big problem with those low level of evidence studies is that they often give contradictory results. Since you mentioned B vitamins, let me take "folates" as an example:

This one suggests dietary folates are associated with reduced risk of PC:
/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23702887
/academic.oup.com/annonc/article-lookup/doi/10.1093/annonc/mds212

This one suggests a benefit to folate supplements but not to dietary intake:
/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23519640

This one suggests that reducing folates may be better for prostate health:
cancerpreventionresearch.aacrjournals.org/content/4/11/1825

These suggest no association with dietary intake, but a negative association with serum levels
/www.nature.com/pcan/journal/v17/n3/full/pcan201416a.html
/bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2458-14-1326

This one suggests a benefit to higher serum folate levels after prostatectomy:
/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23849564

These suggest no association:
www.jurology.com/article/S0022-5347(13)05564-X/fulltext
/link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10552-012-0079-7

This analysis recommends against supplementing folates:
/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3852144/

This one suggests that low folate intake and high alcohol consumption may be a bad combination:
journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fonc.2012.00100/full

None is level 1 evidence. So is a man with PC better off supplementing folic acid, or reducing his intake? One can look at research all day long, but there is no reliable answer. Confirmation bias will dictate which a person attends to and which he ignores, possibly at his peril. I'd argue that because there may be a risk to supplementing, maintaining a normal varied diet is the best solution.

Post Edited (Tall Allen) : 4/2/2018 12:42:43 AM (GMT-6)

cashlessclay said...
tommyc says . . . "I achieved Lipitor numbers without Lipitor.
My MD was very happy and even encouraged me to tell others . . . "


Tommy, I'm quite interested in this subject. Please post how you
achieved this.

Thanks, Cashless

===
I guess you aren't following along cash, not gonna happen. But I read your thread, you keep up the fight, its not for me.

<< tommyc says . . . "I achieved Lipitor numbers without Lipitor.
My MD was very happy and even encouraged me to tell others . . .

"Cashless says . . . "Tommy, I'm quite interested in this subject.
Please post how you achieved this."

tommyc says . . . "I guess you aren't following along cash, not gonna happen." >>



Tommy, please decode. Your not achieving Lipitor numbers? or
you are, but you're not going to tell us how? . . . Cashless