Are Multivitamins Placebos?

Clinical research suggests that vitamin supplements offer little to no health benefits—until you research the research.

Why Some Doctors Discourage Vitamins

A clinical study on a limited target group is being applied to the general population. Rather than spend money on vitamins, the conclusion is we should keep taking prescribed medications, eating balanced meals, getting plenty of rest, exercising, and having regular medical checkups.

Basically, live life as we normally would, sans vitamins. To prevent exaggeration, let me provide the exact quote from the multivitamin researchers, Eliseo Guallar, MD, et al:

Most supplements do not prevent chronic disease or death, their use is not justified, and they should be avoided. This message is especially true for the general population with no clear evidence of micronutrient deficiencies, who represent most supplement users in the United States and in other countries.

While the report conclusions use such language as, “their use is not justified” and “multivitamin and mineral supplements are ineffective,” it is in context to preventing mortality or chronic disease—not to feeling or performing better on a daily basis.

These multivitamin clinical trials have evaluated outcomes of thousands of patients over many years. So should we conclude that all vitamins are worthless and should be avoided?

Several times in my life, doctors have indicated I was deficient in specific vitamins. As a vegetarian, I struggle to maintain adequate levels of vitamins B12 and B6, omega-3, vitamin D, and protein. When dangerously low, I experience extreme fatigue, memory problems, and pain in extremities. Prescription-strength and over-the-counter supplements are prescribed.

Imagine your team of researchers have conducted a clinical study on unicyclists. Relative health benefits are cataloged with injuries. Perhaps the data suggests an increased number of knee and shoulder injuries from falls; a high non-compliance rate due to such accidents; balance deficiencies, etc.

Would researchers be justified in applying their conclusions to all cyclists, despite the fact that a higher population is more adept in riding traditional bicycles?

Anatomy of a Clinical Report

Generally, there are distinct parts to a clinical report: The abstract may provide background and explain how initial theories were challenged. The materials and methods section offers details about the number and condition of participants, makeup of the control vehicle as compared to the test product along with any measuring instruments or guidelines.

Results outline the actual findings, supported by raw data and photographs. Finally, the authors summarize the conclusions; this is where things can sometimes get tricky. Conclusions should not stray from actual results or materials and methods.

The largest group of clinical trials examined the efficacy of multivitamins and various individual vitamins to prevent heart attacks and cancer. Another study measured effectiveness of vitamins on senior memory. The final study looked at patients who previously had heart attacks to see if vitamins would prevent further cardiac events.

In each case, vitamins had little to no effect on preventing specified outcomes. Nevertheless, can these results become license to negate efficacy of all vitamins on the general population?

At first glance, the study’s title, “Enough Is Enough: Stop Wasting Money on Vitamin and Mineral Supplements” might seem to apply to every user of vitamin supplements. However, readers must remember to insert this qualifier after the title: “…to prevent chronic disease or death.”

Dr. Rhonda Patrick critically analyzes the headline-grabbing editorial entitled “Enough is Enough: Stop Wasting Money on Vitamin and Mineral Supplements.” She highlights problems with methodologies of the supporting references. These include lack of biochemical analysis, focus on critically ill subjects, and exclusion of data favoring supplementation. You may watch her video rebuttal in reference section below.