Posted on 07/27/2025 9:19:06 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Rather than extending lifespan, daily multivitamin use is linked to a 4 percent higher risk of death, according to a large study of healthy U.S. adults conducted by the National Cancer Institute.
Drawing data from three extensive cohort studies, the research followed 390,124 adults across the United States for up to 27 years, making it one of the most comprehensive analyses of its kind.
Participants, all without a history of cancer or chronic diseases, were part of the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study, the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial, and the Agricultural Health Study. They reported their multivitamin use at the study’s start and during follow-up intervals.
The data did not support a mortality benefit for multivitamin users. Instead, the results indicated a slight increase in mortality risk. The study states, “Daily MV use was associated with a 4% higher mortality risk” compared to non-users. This increased risk, though small, suggests multivitamins may not provide the expected health benefits.
The researchers accounted for other health habits such as diet, exercise, and smoking. They found that multivitamin users were generally more health conscious, often eating healthier and exercising more. However, this “healthy user effect” did not translate into a longer lifespan.
The study’s extended follow-up period allowed for a robust analysis of long-term multivitamin use. Over the study period, 164,762 participants died, providing a substantial dataset to evaluate mortality trends. The consistency of the findings across different cohorts and follow-up periods strengthened the conclusion that MV use does not significantly impact mortality rates.
He emphasized that individual nutritional needs can vary greatly and change over time, which the study did not account for. This variability means that the weakest nutritional link in one person might not be the same in another, and it can shift based on various factors.
“We have no idea what the baseline nutritional status was of any of the folks in the study or if they even needed a multivitamin to begin with,” Dr. Bauerschmidt said. This omission is significant because without knowing the initial nutritional deficiencies, it is challenging to determine the true impact of multivitamin use, he said.
Another concern is the imbalance of minerals in many multivitamins. Robert Love, a neuroscientist, noted in a video , “Multivitamins are deficient in some minerals that most of us are lacking—specifically magnesium and zinc.” He noted that 40 to 70 percent of Americans are deficient in magnesium and many multivitamins also lack adequate zinc, crucial for brain health and immunity. Conversely, multivitamins often contain excessive amounts of minerals such as copper and iron. Mr. Love said that too much copper can cause oxidative stress and brain damage, especially if it is not balanced with zinc.
Similarly, high iron levels , which most Americans do not need, can contribute to oxidative damage and accelerate aging . This imbalance may negate potential benefits and be harmful long term. Renowned scientist David Sinclair, a tenured professor at Harvard Medical School, avoids multivitamins due to concerns about excessive iron intake.
“They did their best to control for things like the possible ‘sick user effect,’ but there could be other factors not fully accounted for, such as differences in how often people see their doctors or other health habits that aren’t reflected in the available data sets, which might influence the results,” he said. While the study states that multivitamins do not benefit longevity, it is harder to say with certainty that they cause harm, he added.
The study mainly focused on mortality, leaving open the possibility that vitamins may have other health benefits or risks not measured in this research. “Although the study did not find evidence of any benefit with respect to mortality, that does not rule out the theoretical possibility for some other type of benefit that they weren’t measuring,” Mr. McSweeney added.
Mr. McSweeney’s personal view is clear—if a health care provider recommends a supplement, follow their advice. “However, in cases where people may be choosing to take new supplements based on things they see on social media, I still don’t see strong evidence that justifies spending a lot of money on products that don’t seem to offer significant health benefits,” he said.
He suggests that people might be better off spending their money on healthy foods rich in dietary fiber and phytonutrients. “Such foods are pricey these days with inflation, but have very clear benefits for health,” he concluded.
people who have bad health often take vitamins. Cause or effect?
“My benchmark test is to check the label to see if the Vitamin E is solely in natural form with mixed tocotrienols and tocopherols, and with the magnesium being amino acid chelated (magnesium taurate, glycinate, or L-threonate). As a practical matter, look to buy the most expensive brands, not the cheapest”
I was going to say, what percentage of people who take vitamins believe (a) that they'll make them healthier, and (b) provides a shortcut to a poor diet?
First- the issue could be that a lot of people taking multivitamins may be taking too many on the theory that “if one is good for you, more is better”. (guilty here) and could be overdosing on things like iron.
Second, 4% is kind of noise level and people with health problems tend to be more heath conscious than people who are very healthy so there may be some selection bias here.
Third, there are so many vitamins added to foods as a supplement exclusive of multivitamins that the multivitamins are redundant. Fourth, the study only speaks to longevity - not overall health or vitality.
It would really be nice to see how multivitamin use effects health broken down into other criteria.
My experience has been that cheaper nutritional multi supplement brands are rarely as good as the expensive ones. Your experience may differ. If so, please give me some guidance. I am not in favor of paying more than is necessary to get good quality.
I heard that porta potty people say the multivitamin doesn’t even dissolve as they find them whole in the waste. It definitely matters what is taken and I think taking vitamins is a must.
I knew it!
I will now start taking all the pharma pills and vaccines....
It’s like Woody Allen found out in “Sleeper” when he woke up in the future: everything they thought was bad for you turns out to be good and vice versa.
He’s not far off. Last week coffee was poisoning; this week it has health benefits. Sugar/artificial sweeteners. Butter/margarine. The carbon dioxide content of our very atmosphere.
You know what certainly DOES hurt you? Worrying about all the crap they’re trying to scare you with.
Nobody can personnaly know if a supplement, which is by definition has small and long term health effects, is better than another or not. If you can feel the difference, it’s just the placebo effect (especially due to the price), a psychological, unscientific and irreproducible thing.
I’ve seen eye watering priced magnesium supplement (from Juvamine, not to name names) that ends up being junk because it’s made of “marine magnesium”, a marketing term for magnesium oxyde, the cheapest and LEAST bio available magnesium form. That’s why I called out the price=quality claim, especially as a blanket statement in a field with so poor science as nutritional ‘science’.
Unfortunately, there is no simple solution against the wild claims and the marketing push, except extreme skepticism and a lot of personal research. Eating carnivore has dramatically improved my fitness so I don’t really need supplements anyway.
I had sound reason based on the medical literature to think that those supplements would be helpful. They enabled me to claw my way back from Chronic Fatigue Syndrome; from persistent, atypical shingles; and from the beginnings of what I believe was osteoporosis, arthritis, and Alzheimer's Disease. A lifelong tendency toward cold hands and frequent colds was also remedied.
My current doctor now shakes his head that my blood and cardiac numbers are better than his. My contemporaries say that I look ten or fifteen years younger than I am.
?!
You socialize with a lot of "porta-potty people," do you?! Is that typical "cocktail party" chatter where you hang out?!
And those "porta-potty people" routinely examine the raw sewage, looking for undigested kernels of corn, bits of bacon rind, and the occasional undissolved tablet?!
And they check to see if those tablets are actually vitamin tablets - and not, say, other forms of medicine?!
Color me skeptical!
Regards,
You're speaking from personal experience? Did you conduct trials on yourself? Were you really able to discern a difference in your state of health while taking one brand of MV, as opposed to another? What parameters were you measuring and recording, on a daily basis?
Regards,
“My experience was that when doctors failed, five supplements made for a dramatic improvement in persistent health issues: vitamin B-12; vitamin D; Magnesium L-Threonate; collagen peptides; and liposomal vitamin C.”
They held that variable
I’ve been a licensed physician since 1992, board-certified in family medicine since 1999 (worked as a GP/GMO for most of that time, and residency training in Anesthesiology I left early) and I always thought I had a fair background in nutrition (both undergrad AND med school classes)… I’ve taken a daily multivitamin probably all my life.
One-a-day, Shaklee, Centrum (the last for nearly 25 years).
Why?
I believe it’s possible to eat one’s self into disease. None of us are getting the MRDA (MINIMUM Recommended Daily Allowance) of ALL vitamins, minerals and “micronutrients”) every single day and for such a low cost, what can it hurt?
There IS, however, a “more is better” philosophy to which I do NOT subscribe , following the sage advice of one of my pharmacology “professors,” one Sergeant First Class Rivers at the Academy of Health Sciences in 1977 who said, and I quote “you gots to do the mostest with the leastest.”
Sure, there’s the old medical joke that all a daily MVI does is produce very expensive urine but I was listening to the radio in my car going to work one day about 25 years ago when I heard a report from the NIH/FDA that there was NO utility in taking a daily MVI and ANOTHER report out of HAH-vud medical school saying there was a purportedly lower risk of death from cancers to people who took a daily MVI.
Who you gonna trust?
I find a single, daily MVI to be cheap insurance and I don’t trust ANYONE connected to NIH/FDA/CDC or even HAH-vud ivory tower white coat pinheads to dictate my healthcare and diet choices, only to suggest.
Oh, and HIGH dose pyridoxine can cause peripheral neuropathy, sure, but NOT at the 2-4mg per day dose found in most MVIs. The warning always seem to base their fear-mongering on extremes.
https://www.webmd.com/vitamins/ai/ingredientmono-934/pyridoxine-vitamin-b6
I imagine the kind snd and brand of b12 matters? Which do you use?
This from the JAMA?
Hmmmmm...
Nope, still taking my multivitamin.
And still not getting a CoupFlu vaxx.
To your point...
https://jamanetwork.com/collections/5950/vaccination
Folks might want to read what’s on there and then ask themselves why they continue to automatically believe anything coming out of Big Med.
Some folks who are or become health conscious and take vitamins do so because they know they have personal or family histories that show increased risk of early mortality. Thus these folks may bump the numbers upward.
As an added comment to your interesting point they don’t mention what these extra 4 percent riskers are actually dying of.
And would these 4 percent higher riskers be dying in higher numbers if they weren’t taking the vitamins?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.