Weigh supplements’ benefits, harms

Dear Dr. Roach:

I read your recent response to a question about the efficacy of brain supplements. You note there is “no consistent evidence” that supplements help, except perhaps vitamin E.

The lack of data may indicate simply that there is too little information, rather than the conclusion that supplements do not help. I do not believe the medical community has yet tested adequately the impacts of combined strategies to address dementia over time. It appears likely that Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias develop over periods of time, and that multiple therapies, over time, may be needed.

At 69, and over a number of years, I use the following supplements: multivitamin, fish oil, turmeric, CoQ10 and vitamins C, D and E.

My research indicates this has potential to help. My physician agrees none of this will hurt me.

Why shouldn’t people trust their own research to try to head off this horrible disease?

J.B.

Answer:

I agree even though scientists can’t prove supplements helpful, they may still be helpful.

I also agree that multiple interventions may have a more beneficial effect than just one, and that testing multiple different types of regimens is difficult, expensive and time-consuming. However, it is very difficult to be objective when looking at the confusing mass of conflicting research in these supplements.

Ultimately, it comes down to a balance of potential benefits against potential harms. Of all the supplements you named, none is likely to cause much harm — with an exception being vitamin E in smokers having a possible and small increase in risk for lung cancer. There may also be an increased risk for prostate cancer.

However, the original column was not about these low-cost supplements, but about highly advertised supplements costing $30-$50 per month with no good research to back their claims. It makes me angry that vulnerable people can be misled into thinking these products have been proven useful, when they have not.