View Single Post
Old 04-26-2008, 07:39 PM   #5 (permalink)
openeyes
Senior Member
 
openeyes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Chapel Hill, NC
Posts: 1,207
openeyes is on a distinguished road
Default

This rebuttal could be said to be biased since it's from a supplement company (Life Extension Foundation), but still the info seems valid:

"This negative report attacking supplements is fatally flawed because it:

1. Omitted 91% of the studies that measured the effects of these vitamins on human subjects including all studies for which there was no mortality!
2. Included studies that used doses far below or far above what health conscious people actually supplement with.
3. Chose to bias the reporting of the results by emphasizing one type of statistical model that showed a significant effect rather than another statistical model that did not show a significant effect.
4. Failed to account for the 14 mechanisms involved in aging and premature death. For example, it is absurd to think that taking 1,333 IU to 200,000 IU of vitamin A is going to have meaningful impact when there are more than one hundred individual components to a science-based death reduction program."

(link to be posted separately in case spam filter delays its posting. it did.)

Last edited by openeyes; 04-26-2008 at 07:54 PM.
openeyes is online now   Reply With Quote