John H said:The Council for Responsible Nutrition (CRN), founded in 1973, is a
Washington, D.C.-based trade association representing dietary
supplement industry ingredient suppliers and manufacturers.
Laymen like myself have to choose between sources of information.
In Feb05 Berkely University posted this information:
http://www.berkeleywellness.com/html/ds/dsVitaminE.php
Claims, Benefits: Helps prevent cancer, heart disease, cataracts.
Bottom Line: There's little or no clinical research showing that
vitamin E
Quoted message said:supplements are beneficial. Nearly all the clinical trials on E from
the
Quoted message said:past few years have yielded negative, inconclusive, or neutral
results.
Quoted message said:Thus, we no longer recommend supplements.
John
Laymen like yourself should be better educated, evaluating the QUALITY
of information rather than attempting to choose between SOURCES of
information before making an informed decision. If you are waiting for
scientific studies to fall into lockstep on any matter relating to
public health, you are going to be very disappointed. You refer to The
Council for Responsible Nutrition, yet only provide a quotation and
link to Berkley's waffling after admitting they did exactly as you have
done -- giving more weight to recent studies simply because of that
fact. It so happens that many of the earlier studies were also of
higher quality, and often MUCH larger. The HOPE-TOO trial evaluated
only +70 year olds in poor health who were also on a variety of
prescription medications. A number of conventional drugs are known to
interfere with nutrient function and vitamin uptake.
See the link at CRN providing a list of vitamin E benefits supported in
the earlier studies: http://www.crnusa.org/vitaminEissafe.html and a
link discussing the poor quality of the recent negative vitamin E
trial, at
http://nutrition.about.com/od/researchstudies/a/vitaminecrn.htm.
Peter
