But as we evolved over millions of years, life expectancy was not what we hope for today. People suffered from all sorts of diseases mediated by vitaHin deficiencies, from the obvious rickets (which often caused death in childbed in an age before Caesarean sections), visual problems, osteoporosis, cancers potentially linked to Vitamin D deficiencies, and so forth. People lived short lives full of suffering. We’d like to do a bit better now. We have a not-unrealistic expectation that we’ll be able to live long, healthy lives and remain active into our eighties.
Unfortunately, it’s hard to do that with today’s “balanced diet.” By the time that tomato arrives at your house after its trip from Holland, or the green pepper gets here from California, or the grape is eaten after being shipped from Chile, it’s questionable whether much nutrition remains in it. A valid case can be made that people who don’t raise their own food ought to take supplements just to restore the nutrition that is supposed to be in a balanced diet.
It’s also been clearly demonstrated that the office worker who lives north of Charleston, South Carolina is not getting enough Vitamin D because he isn’t exposed to enough sunlight in the winter, especially if he’s black. This phenomenon has been linked to the increasing incidence of asthma in black children. One may reasonably assert that it’s appropriate for those who live in northern latitudes to take Vitamin D supplements.
And are you really going to be able to consume enough dairy foods to take in 1500 mg per day of calcium needed to sustain strong bones into old age? You can eat a “balanced diet,” whatever that may consist of, and still have osteopenia or osteoporosis after menopause. So calcium and Vitamin D supplements may be appropriate.
There’s just too much sound science demonstrating that some supplements really do improve health and the quality of life.
Your assumption is false. Ever since the first National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey results were published nearly forty years ago, it has been established that a majority of U.S. childred do not ingest the recommended dietary allowance (RDA) of vitamins C and D every day, and that 90% do not ingest enough iron. And many nutrition scientists regard the RDA levels as way too low, since they are based on those levels required to prevent the symptoms of deficiency disease, NOT the levels required for optimum health.
The major contribution to our current life-expectancy is control of infectious disease. That results from sanitation measures and vaccinations, and has nothing to do with adequate nutrition. And the observation that a lack of a particular nutrient leads to pathological conditions does not mean that excesses of that same nutrient will lead to super-health. Quite the opposite, in many cases. Either you have enough of a given nutrient, or you don't. In addition to control of infectious disease, genetics plays a huge role in life span.
Unfortunately, it’s hard to do that with today’s “balanced diet.” By the time that tomato arrives at your house after its trip from Holland, or the green pepper gets here from California, or the grape is eaten after being shipped from Chile, it’s questionable whether much nutrition remains in it. A valid case can be made that people who don’t raise their own food ought to take supplements just to restore the nutrition that is supposed to be in a balanced diet.
I highly question that all the nutrients are somehow disappearing during shipment. According to this article, the half life of some of those compounds is 6-8 days, and the loss is mediated through tissue death. Which suggests to me that the nutrient loss occurs in proportion to the degradation of the veggies. I don't know about you, but I avoid buying or eating any produce that doesn't look nearly perfect. BTW, I would ignore the pink editorial note at the end of the article I linked. The article was written on the basis of scientific research; the editorial note was not.
It’s also been clearly demonstrated that the office worker who lives north of Charleston, South Carolina is not getting enough Vitamin D because he isn’t exposed to enough sunlight in the winter, especially if he’s black. This phenomenon has been linked to the increasing incidence of asthma in black children. One may reasonably assert that it’s appropriate for those who live in northern latitudes to take Vitamin D supplements.
I'm highly skeptical of many of those vitamin D claims; for instance, the blanket assertion that we cannot get enough vitamin D through normal sun exposure. It sounds like a ploy to sell more vitamins to me (as do a lot of these claims--vitamins are a HUGE business). In the one special case you mentioned, that of black people living in the north, the point is probably valid that they don't get enough sunlight. That's because the high levels of pigment in black people's skin is an adaptation to living in an area with strong sunlight, very unlike what one finds in the US. That pigment does such a great job of blocking UV light that little of it penetrates down into the living cells where it is needed for vitamin D synthesis. Those of us who have European or Asian ancestry, especially if our ancestors came from the northern parts of those continents, are far better adapted to the amount of sunlight that we are exposed to here. We have far less of that pigment, so more UV light can penetrate.
BTW, I've noticed that American blacks, in general, are lighter than African blacks. Maybe because they're adapting to the lower levels of sunlight in the US as compared to Africa?
And are you really going to be able to consume enough dairy foods to take in 1500 mg per day of calcium needed to sustain strong bones into old age? You can eat a “balanced diet,” whatever that may consist of, and still have osteopenia or osteoporosis after menopause. So calcium and Vitamin D supplements may be appropriate.
Once again, you're bringing pathological conditions into the discussion of normal nutrition. Bone diseases associated with menopause are related to genetics. A woman whose genetics predispose her to osteoporosis may not be able to consume enough extra calcium or vitamin D to counteract the bone loss, because she DOES have a genetic disease. Luckily, there are drugs developed to treat those diseases now.
There’s just too much sound science demonstrating that some supplements really do improve health and the quality of life.
No, there is no science that says that consuming excesses of trace nutrients is superior to consuming adequate amounts of them. While fostering the belief that more=better is excellent for the supplement industry, it is not based in rigorous science. In 2009, Americans spent $26.9 billion on dietary supplements, including vitamins, according to Carlotta Mast, editorial director at Nutrition Business Journal. Vitamins are Big Business.