Mooshie peas <[email protected]> writes: [...] >You must post an example of a vitamin supplement >being needed by a normal healthy adult eating a >varied wholefood eucaloric diet with regular >moderate exercise. [...] Some say the evidence for taking vitamins is lacking. They say "if cavemen evolved to survive on whole foods, moderate exercise and calories, that's good enough for us too". They say "only the fittest survived and we should live how they lived, eat what they ate and exercise how they exercised". However, as I write this in August of 2003, I'm aware of MORE EVIDENCE THAT EVOLUTION CONSERVED THE BENEFITS OF B VITAMINS than a Neanderthal's knuckle dragging lifestyle. B vitamins have been found, in scientifically controlled studies, to extend the life spans of both fruit flies AND rodents, whose last common ancestor is thought to have lived HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF YEARS AGO, when the ancient sea beds were ruled by the mighty trilobite and WAY before any man walked the earth. It's remarkable that the same vitamins work in two species so different. Bugs and mammals, small and large, airborne and terrestrial. Can we deny the possibility that the beneficial chemical pathways acted up by B vitamins have been conserved during hundreds of millions of years of evolution? Perhaps you're wondering which B vitamins I'm writing about. B5 and B6 increased life spans in both fruit flies and rodents, from 10% to 28%, each. Studies have also found that B5 and B6 improve health in humans. All this is in Michael Price's excellent Longevity Report. On the other hand, I know of no studies that found that whole foods, moderate exercise or calories extend life span. Where are they? Even if one or two can be found, how compelling are they? Were they done on very different species, by different researchers and at different times? And, if B5 and B6 have more evidence, shouldn't we prefer them? I think so. Thanks, Kingsley -- -- Kingsley G. Morse Jr.