Posted 3/9/2015 12:57 PM (GMT 0)
It's difficult concluding anything from clinical trials on mice.
Researchers will apply for funding from, say, NIH from universities, labs, hospitals, etc. and you can see all these titles which make you believe you should take that supplement. When you dig into the studies you'll they're just trials of published 'benefits' where they used something on mice. It's great they found, say, melatonin helped mice which were UC-induced and purposely fed increased amounts of melatonin so they showed the melatonin reduced the inflammation in those UC-induced mice but those researchers just stay with mice ('clinical trials' which show 'benefit'). A lot is shown small scale but take it to the actual real-world (full scale) and you have an, often, different end result.
I've seen those studies on mice go to humans (much are much more expensive studies) and results are conflicting.
How's one to go through all those abstracts and believe they now should take those many suppliments and how much and which one will help their UC.
I can site research papers on mice all day. Show me people studies with conclusions I can easily interpret. No, you just then see websites of supplement suppliers which refer to those mice trials results.
I was fine for years and read in here about the benefits of fish oil. I bought supplements and those gave me the runs.
Get moderate amounts of fish oil from eating fish I say. One shouldn't need all those supplements if they're getting proper nutrition from food.
A multi-vitamin causes me problems. Also lets all don't forget about the fact the many supplements don't even have in them what they say nor do we know what else might be in them.
Most are a waste of money I believe. Not all but be leery when you just read a title of a small study on mice or even a clinical trial on 10-30 people. It takes at least several hundred (preferably thousands of) people in studies to show something meaningful.