Home > Uncategorized > The American Dietetic Association’s new position on nutrient supplementation

The American Dietetic Association’s new position on nutrient supplementation

December 15th, 2009

I’ve written a bunch about supplements recently, but bear with me for one more quick post. The American Dietetic Association just released its new position stand on “nutrient supplementation.” (The full text is available here.) A few interesting nuggets in there — for one, they note that supplement sales in the U.S. totalled an astounding $23.7 billion in 2007. About half of Americans take dietary supplements, and in particular about a third take a multivitamin/mineral (MVM). However you slice it, that’s a lot of money.

The basic gist of the position stand is as follows:

It is the position of the American Dietetic Association that the best nutrition-based strategy for promoting optimal health and reducing the risk of
chronic disease is to wisely choose a wide variety of nutrient-rich foods. Additional nutrients from supplements can help some people meet their nutrition needs as specified by science-based nutrition standards such as the Dietary Reference Intakes.

Pretty basic stuff. As you read further, it gets a little more forceful:

Although MVM supplementation can be effective in helping meet recommended levels of some nutrients, evidence has not proven them to be effective
in preventing chronic disease
. A study published in 2009 from the Women’s Health Initiative found no association between MVM supplementation and cancer or cardiovascular disease risk or total mortality in postmenopausal women…

They then do a pretty good job of summing up the evidence for and against various health claims, like vitamin B-12 and cognitive function, vitamin D and bone health and so on. If you’re taking vitamins, it’s worth a look to see what they have to say about the benefits you’re looking for (though it’s a far from comprehensive list).

The bottom line for me (as I ranted in a recent comment) is that supplements offer many people a false sense of security with, in many cases, very little evidence to back them up. Eating enough fruits and vegetables is a real challenge — one that I certainly struggle with, especially at this time of year — but I’m not sure it’s helpful to convince ourselves that coming up short doesn’t matter because we’re taking some pills that will compensate.

,

  1. RKS
    December 22nd, 2009 at 15:38 | #1

    What an important topic!

    A few points to ‘supplement.’

    1) Sadly, tests on commercially (and even some organically-farmed) produce have revealed an absence (or lower levels) of the vitamins and minerals that are expected to be present. One theory is that soil (traditionally made mineral-rich via crop rotation and organic fertilizers) is lacking in minerals and, thus, they cannot be transferred to the crops.

    2) This article stops short of printing the whole excerpt that reads “A study published in 2009 from the Women’s Health Initiative found no association between MVM supplementation and cancer or cardiovascular disease risk or total mortality in postmenopausal women…” For instance, did this study look at pre-menopausal women, whose needs for iron are much higher than for most other groups?

    3) I think the author’s point that people should not rely on supplements to do the work of a balanced diet is an important one. Supplements are not ‘replacements.’ They are aptly named, as they are meant to ‘supplement’ (or perhaps ‘augment’) a diet that could benefit from additional support.

  1. No trackbacks yet.