Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com>: Mar 24 04:55AM +0100
https://drhoffman.com/article/are-fruit-and-veggie-pills-really-as-
effective-as-they-claim/
drhoffman.com Are fruit and veggie pills really as effective as
theyclaim?
November 23, 2016 | By Dr. Ronald Hoffman
It's been a bad season for veracity (witness our recent political
campaigns!): Unfounded claims abound. Product pitches assault us with
no tether to reality. Science is misappropriated for commercial gain.
Are fruit and veggie pills really as effective as they claim?One
example of such things: fruit and veggie pills that claim they can
take the place of the whole foods you're not including enough of in
your diet.
Don't get me wrong: I think there's value in certain plant-derived
nutrient supplements. Before it sounds like I'm dismissing an entire
group of products, you should know that there are a few categories
where these substitutes for fresh produce can have benefits.
For instance, there are some phytonutrient concentrates with
validated, standardized extracts of key plant constituents like
resveratrol, EGCG, pomegranate proanthcyanidins, Broccophane,
curcumin, quercetin and lycopene as found in my own formulation
PhytoGuard. They are not merely ground up fruits and vegetables, but
rather carefully distilled concentrates of specific, well-studied
plant constituents.
Then there are green and red powder products that deliver some of the
benefits of the plants from which they are extracted. I'm particularly
impressed by beet concentrates like Superbeets and green powder drinks
like HeartGreens, which at least possess the advantage of delivering
measurable amounts of dietary nitrates demonstrated to support the
circulatory system. And, because you consume several scoops of the
powder with each serving, they are more likely to provide significant
plant nutrient benefits than a couple of pills. Additionally,for those
who disdain the sometimes aversive taste of nitrate-rich veggies,
these formulations are pleasantly flavored with natural ingredients.
As usual with dubious marketing spiels, the "miracle" fruit and veggie
pill promoters proceed from a kernel of truth. There really is a
factual basis for concerns about fruit and vegetable consumption in
the U.S. 87 percent of Americans don't meet recommendations for fruit
consumption, and 91 percent don't meet recommendations for vegetable
consumption, according to a new report.
Moreover, a 2014 study published in the Journal of Epidemiology and
Public Health found that people who ate seven or more portions of
fruit and vegetables per day had a 42% lower risk of death at any
point in time than those who ate less than one portion. The more fruit
and vegetables you eat, the more protection you're afforded from
disease and death—what's referred to in medicine as a "dose-response
effect."
Compared to eating less than one portion of fruit and vegetables, the
risk of death by any cause is reduced by 14% by eating one to three
portions, 29% for three to five portions, 36% for five to seven
portions, and 42% for seven or more.
The illogical leap occurs when we falsely equate taking fruit and
vegetable pills with eating actual fresh produce. They're not the
same.
Are you old enough to remember the mid-twentieth century infatuation
with the idea of "food pills"? It was a popular science fiction theme.
Why bother with all the fuss of eating meals when science could
provide you with all the nutrients you need in a concentrated pill?
The issue is tackled in a recent Discovery Magazine article entitled
"The Enduring Appeal of a Meal in a Pill."
The article states: "Food pills were heralded repeatedly and with
certainty. So why don't we have them? Because a meal in a pill is an
impossibility."
A recent review in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
addresses this succinctly, insofar as the benefits of fruits and
vegetables are concerned:
"The key question is whether a purified phytochemical has the same
health benefit as does the whole food or mixture of foods in which the
phytochemical is present . . . We propose that the additive and
synergistic effects of phytochemicals in fruit and vegetables are
responsible for their potent antioxidant and anticancer activities,
and that the benefit of a diet rich in fruit and vegetables is
attributed to the complex mixture of phytochemicals present in whole
foods [emphasis added]."
Research indicates that the benefits of whole fruits and vegetables
cannot be distilled down into a pill. Many of the health effects may
be mediated by the impact of substantial portions of healthy fibers
and associated phytochemicals on fostering a favorable intestinal
microbiome, thus affecting metabolism, immunity, and even mood.
Marketers of fruit and vegetable pills invoke reassuring words like
"purity," "real food," "nature," "superfoods," and "balance." They
decry the use of "artificial" vitamins, although the ingredients of
these supplements are chemically identical to the nutrients found in
fruits and vegetables.
They claim that their proprietary extraction methods—"flash-freezing"
or "cold extraction"—maintain 95% of the nutritional potency of fresh
fruits and vegetables, but without adducing any proof of that
assertion.
Unlike most supplements and foods, their labels usually do not
indicate the specific amounts of vitamins and minerals in relation to
the RDA.
The marketers claim that a few pills yield the equivalent of "the real
nutrition of over 10 servings of fruits and vegetables a day." But how
can that be, when hundreds of grams of fiber, polyphenols, live
enzymes (which may not survive the dehydration process) and other
crucial health-supporting substances are not present? Remember, each
capsule is about 1 gram (1000 milligrams); a small 2 ounce serving of
a fruit or vegetable is equivalent to 57 grams! Don't tell me that 56
grams or so of that weight is simply worthless water!
With the exception of just one company, the "evidence" they present
for the effectiveness of their products is purely anecdotal, based on
testimonials that are difficult to authenticate—and sometimes strain
credulity. Fruits and vegetables are healthy, but by what means does
their consumption result in rapid, dramatic reversal of weight gain,
cancer, high cholesterol, infectious diseases, venous stasis ulcers,
or even brain lesions?
In science, double-blind placebo controlled trials are considered the
"gold-standard" for proving efficacy. Testimonials are considered the
most unreliable form of proof, and no good researcher would base a
conclusion on them.
To its credit, one company did undertake some small studies which
demonstrated treatment effects of their supplements: Juice Plus. But
their studies are of poor quality, at best are only single-blind, and
were underwritten by the company that makes Juice Plus, which can be a
potential source of bias. It may be that for some people who are sick
or don't eat many fruits and vegetables, taking a few dehydrated plant
concentrates provides them with just enough basic nutrients to upgrade
their health—lower their cholesterol a few points, or slightly shorten
the duration of their colds, for example.
But nowhere is there evidence that such an effect could not be
achieved with a basic multivitamin/mineral supplement. Nostudies have
been performed that offer a head-to-head comparison of fruit and
veggie supplements vs. conventional multis. Had they been done, it's
quite likely the multivitamins would have conferred similar or
superior benefits—as they have already demonstrated in many properly
conducted studies of multis vs. placebo.
Of additional concern is the exorbitant price of these fruit/veggie
pills. When formulating vitamin supplements, there are real costs
associated with the ingredients. For example, a kilo of vitamin C goes
for about 3-5 dollars on the open wholesale market. Admittedly, the
markup is enormous when that raw material is formulated into a tablet
or capsule or incorporated into a multi. But with fruits and
vegetables, especially in a proprietary blend whose constituents might
vary accord to market prices, there's no certainty as to the cost of
the raw materials, which might be sourced from cheap produce deemed
unacceptable for supermarket shelves. Imagine paying 70 dollars
("preferred customer" price) every month for your daily dose of a few
capsules of powdered fruits and vegetables?
Worse yet is the false sense of security these pills impart to those
who don't eat their fruits and vegetables!
So, what's the answer? If you want to boost your health, take the time
to eat the recommended 7-10 servings of fresh fruits and vegetables.
Saving high double digits of money per month should get you most of
the way there if you shop seasonally.
Or, if you want a short-cut, blend (not juice) whole fruits and
vegetables into a delicious smoothie. Add whey, rice, or hemp powder
if you want added protein, and some coconut oil, avocado, or flax oil
for healthy fat.
Alternatively, take supplements with standardized amounts of
recognized phytonutrients, or with documented attributes like raising
nitric oxide. And steer clear of expensive pills that claim they're
all you need to take—to the exclusion of vitamins, minerals and other
supplements—or that make outlandish claims of reversing serious
diseases using dubious testimonials.
=============
https://www.truthinadvertising.org/?s=supplements
Balance of Nature | Truth In Advertising balance-of-nature-image
UPDATE 11/7/17: The National Advertising Division has referred Balance
of Nature's internet advertising to the FTC after the company failed
to respond to the group's inquiry despite repeated attempts to engage
the company in the self-regulatory process. Claims at issue mirror
those that comprise the following ad alert, published nearly a year
ago, including the implied claims that the health benefits in a
serving of Balance of Nature are equivalent to 10 servings of real
fruits and vegetables and that Balance of Nature prevents cancer.
Why stop at an apple a day? To truly keep the doctor away, take
Balance of Nature, which boasts that its supplements contain a
prodigious 10 servings of fruits and vegetables per pill.
After two readers alerted us to Balance of Nature's health claims, we
visited the company's website and found a stream of testimonials
touting the supplements as a treatment for everything from balding to
diabetes to advanced stage cancer.
balance-of-nature-cancer-testimonial
But as testimonials, these personal accounts do not fall under the
category of "proven results" — despite the company's exact
categorization of them as such on the site.
In addition, while Balance of Nature claims on its site that the USDA
recommends "9 to 11 servings of fruits and vegetables every day to
strengthen our immune system and prevent disease," actual USDA
recommendations vary depending on age, sex, and how much daily
exercise a person gets.
TINA.org readers have also pointed out that Balance of Nature has an
"F" rating with the BBB.
Remember, readers, marketing supplements as having the ability to
treat, cure, alleviate the symptoms of, or prevent developing diseases
and disorders is simply not permitted by law. If a supplement really
could do all that, then it would be a drug subject to rigorous study
and testing to gain FDA approval.
|
