>>The point is that most doctors aren’t up to date on medical research. Further, they get no kick backs on vitamins. They do on drugs. You doc is probably FOS.<<
OK, point me to a rigorous scientific study that proves supplement efficacy.
I’ll wait (this will be a long wait).
I doubt these will be “rigourous” enough.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2048599/
“Although calcium and vitamin D3 supplements alone have been proven to be beneficial in frail, institutionalised patients,6 it has recently been shown to be less use in the general population.7 The NICE guidelines,5 therefore, recommend starting all patients who sustain a fragility fracture on a bisphosphonate as well as calcium and vitamin D3 supplements (raloxifene and teriparatide are second-line treatments if patients cannot tolerate bisphosphonates). Etc”
and.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18443709
“CONCLUSION:
The high prevalence of vitamin D insufficiency (78%) observed in this study affirms the importance of incorporating vitamin D supplementation in hospital-based fracture care pathways. The discharge pathway was more effective than the newer admission pathway, a finding attributable to effects of familiarity, retraining, and introduction of computer-prompts. These evolving pathways represent a much-needed paradigm shift in the care of fragility fracture patients.”
There are apparently doctors who think vitamin D and calcium supplements work, certainly for those with bone loss or fractures.
http://www.mayoclinic.org/drugs-supplements/vitamin-d/background/hrb-20060400
General layman info on supplements here:
http://www.mayoclinic.org/drugs-supplements
(Not all the reviews of supplements are positive.)
What about iodized salt? Iodine (a mineral) is added to salt to prevent thyroid issues and goiters because many parts of the world don’t have iodine freely available in foods/soil.
What about vitamin d fortified milk? It’s added, along with calcium, to milk to prevent rickets. And it does prevent rickets.
While neither of these examples are taken in the traditional sense of a vitamin or mineral (tablet, capsule, liquid form), they’re still “supplements” in the sense that they’re nutrients added to foods which don’t contain the vitamin or mineral in high amounts naturally. But both salt and milk are consumed by many, so it’s a broad-based way to distribute these nutrients to those who may not get them otherwise.
Not being snarky here at all, by the way....But, just to clarify, is your argument that the standard vitamin or mineral supplement we buy in a bottle is worthless and have no impact on health? Or is it that all supplements, regardless of how we get them, outside of the natural sources found in foods and soil (like B12 and iodine), are worthless and have no impact on health?