Years ago I argued with a doctor here about multivitamin supplements.
He claimed they were of no real value.
I claimed they made up for gaps in poor diet (meat & tater eaters).
Eventually he kindly & graciously allowed me my beliefs.

Now this:
*************************************************************
If you're like many Prevention readers, multivitamins have been a key part of your daily routine since... well, forever. As recently as 2002, no less an authority than the Journal of the American Medical Association recommended that "all adults take one multivitamin daily." We at Prevention have suggested them to you dozens of times over the years as well. And many doctors and nutritionists still urge a multivitamin to any "less-than-perfect eater" to compensate for dietary shortfalls.

But today, a tsunami of scientific data has resulted in a reversal in thinking among many experts in the health and nutrition community, including Miriam Nelson, PhD, director of the John Hancock Research Center on Physical Activity, Nutrition, and Obesity at Tufts University. "The multivitamin as insurance policy is an old wives' tale, and we need to debunk it," she says.

The sea change is supported by two massive studies. The first, a review of 63 randomized, controlled trials (the gold standard research method) on multivitamins, published by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, found that multis did nothing to prevent cancer or heart disease in most populations (the exception being developing countries where nutritional deficiencies are widespread). In the second paper, published last year, scientists at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center followed 160,000 postmenopausal women for about 10 years. The researchers' conclusion: "Multivitamins failed to prevent cancer, heart disease, and all causes of death for all women. Whether the women were healthy eaters or ate very few fruits and vegetables, the results were the same," says the lead author, Marian Neuhouser, PhD.

Maybe you never expected your multi to prevent breast cancer or head off a heart attack. Maybe you just felt that taking one would make you healthier by boosting your immunity or energy level. But research on those benefits is equally discouraging, especially in specialized groups on which you'd expect them to have an impact. For instance, a British review of eight studies found no evidence that multis reduced infections in older adults. Another study found that the vitamins didn't improve fatigue among breast cancer patients undergoing radiation therapy. And inner-city schoolchildren who took a multi did not perform any better on tests or have fewer sick days than students who didn't take one.

"There is even a small body of evidence that may suggest harm from a multi," says David Katz, MD, MPH, director of the Prevention Research Center at Yale University School of Medicine. A 2010 study of Swedish women found that those who took multivitamins were 19% more likely to be diagnosed with breast cancer over a 10-year period than those who didn't. A 2007 paper in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute found that men who took multivitamins along with other supplements were at increased risk of prostate cancer. And other research has linked excessive folic acid intake to higher colon cancer risk in people who are predisposed. "In terms of a risk-benefit ratio," says Dr. Katz, "why would you accept even a tiny risk if you're not getting any benefit?"

It still shocks people that the FDA doesn't regulate supplements, including vitamins, minerals, and herbs, the same way it does for drugs. Supplements don't have to go through any safety testing before they hit stores. Despite 2007 legislation that marginally increased the FDA's authority, health and safety critics say the FDA doesn't have enough resources to oversee the industry.

Some new bills proposed in Congress would give the FDA more oversight and enforcement muscle, but in the meantime, these aisles are truly buyer beware zones.

Protect yourself: Choose products with seals from quality-testing companies like United States Pharmacopeia (USP) or NSF. Supplement companies pay to have their products evaluated according to these more rigorous protocols, which check for contaminants and ensure products contain exactly what their labels say.

You can also subscribe to ConsumerLab.com, an independent testing organization, for reports on specific supplement groups, like omega-3s. Finally, don't take any supplements without talking with your doctor. Many interact with medications or can worsen health conditions.

So why were earlier researchers so wrong? One reason is that they were studying the wrong people. It's now well known that people who take vitamins tend to be some of the planet's healthiest to begin with. Researchers have shown that vitamin takers tend to be leaner, more affluent, and more educated. They drink and smoke less; they exercise and go to the doctor more. In other words, they're healthy despite their use of multis.

In addition, the very concept of a multivitamin as nutrient delivery system is limited. We now have a much better understanding of how well whole foods deliver their nutritional benefits. A typical multi contains 10 to 25 isolated nutrients, but fruits and vegetables have hundreds of active compounds with a long list of health properties. "The vitamin C in a multivitamin is likely just not as effective as the vitamin C in a citrus fruit, where it's also surrounded by fiber and flavonoids and carotenoids. All these nutrients working together is what really keeps you healthy," explains Dr. Neuhouser.

So even when you're not eating the healthiest diet, there's no proof that a multivitamin is the right tool to fill in the gaps. "And it doesn't make up for the main disease-fighting nutrients the average American woman is missing, like fiber, omega-3s, and vitamin D," says Dr. Katz.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id...-diet_and_nutrition/
*******************************************************
I don't remember which doctor here it was, but I apologize.
Apparently, I was wrong.

Lesson: Highschool dropouts should never argue with the highly-educated, in thier own field of study.

[This message has been edited by Boondawg (edited 11-04-2010).]

Keeping your body 'balanced'(adequatly hydrated,decently fed, stress handled,and a decent amount of activity) is better 'medicine' then any pill(s), imo...

quote Originally posted by FieroRumor: Keeping your body 'balanced'(adequatly hydrated,decently fed, stress handled,and a decent amount of activity) is better 'medicine' then any pill(s), imo...

So, you are basically just saying
"Don't get married".

I dunno? It's not scientific, but my currently 96 year old grandma was a vitamin pusher my entire childhood and through my early adulthood too. When she was in her late eighties, she had a younger guy (in his fifties) living with her.

Vitamins prevent deficiency diseases like scuvy and rickets. I take one for that reason because my diet is lacking in a lot of things.

I don't expect vitamins to prevent cancer or any of the other diseases that article cites. I agree that a lot of vitamin pedallers are selling snake oil.

I stopped taking all supplements a long time ago except iron immediately after my bypass surgery. I stopped that when the doc took me off. Most doctors say that dietary supplements are a scam and after being off them for nearly 14 years, I don't feel any different.

My cardiologist became a little alarmed because my total cholesterol was 112 (too low) so he decreased my Zocor dosage to 40mg and prescribed 200mg Niacin to raise the good cholesterol. I questioned him on that and he very patiently told me that Niacin is known to increase the good cholesterol and that is one of the rare supplements he recommends. He went on a tirade about infomercial "doctors" and some guy named Kevin Trudeau (I think) who he said is a charlatan.

The point to all this is that some supplements (niacin, iron) are good but not on a permanent basis.

My guess is that you have to take the study a step beyond what they did. You probably can't take vitamins and maintain a crappy diet and expect results. But if you have a decent diet to begin with, and take supplements, you will probably gain some benefit. The problem is primarily that you don't absorb but a small percentage of what's in the vitamin before it is digested.

If anyone claims that vitamins do nothing in vivo, take a magnesium supplement and report back to me in the morning.

If you don't have some crazy vivid dreams, I'll give you your money back.

quote Originally posted by ryan.hess: If anyone claims that vitamins do nothing in vivo, take a magnesium supplement and report back to me in the morning. If you don't have some crazy vivid dreams, I'll give you your money back.

Video In / Video Out?

quote Originally posted by maryjane: So, you are basically just saying "Don't get married".

And don't eat junk... I'm not gonna toss stones on either count tho. But been working on the 2nd part.

warning: rant

I think if they can put it in a pill form, you shouldn't need to take a pill to get it...

To me, all pharmaceuticals are worthless - about 3 or four years ago, I stopped taking meds for my allergies and "asthma." I haven't had any problems with allergies (at all, and I used to be crazy allergic to cats - like 5 minutes around one, and I needed a week to recover). Nothing.

Asthma was a crock as far as I'm concerned, as well. I was out of shape - strike that, I was freaking fat in my younger days.

5'4" tall and 215+ pounds isn't a healthy combo. A few years later, I'm 6' and weigh in at 190. No breathing problems at all anymore (and I have a bit of a smoking habit, to boot).

-------------------

I don't much like doctors - they always find something wrong. I stay away for a couple years -the healthiest I've ever been - have to take a physical, and they say (despite being a bastion of good health) because I snore and there's still something on my records from half a decade ago, that I should get a full pulmonary workup done ?

Screw that. If I was to have any problems breathing, they would've shown themselves when I was working in the 100+ degree heat and the 85% humidity levels - every day. Doing heavy lifting.

I'm good

[This message has been edited by skuzzbomer (edited 11-03-2010).]

quote Originally posted by starlightcoupe: The point to all this is that some supplements (niacin, iron) are good ...

Yes. Ask your doctor(s) about vitamins B12 and D3, too. Many people over the age of 60 have some degree of vitamin B12 deficiency, even with proper diet, due to diminished digestive efficiency. You need adequate B12 to maintain healthy neurological function and to slow age-related mental decline. (It's obviously not a problem for you now, but we're both getting older and I need all the help I can get.) Multiple studies over the past half century, some involving more than 20,000 participants over a 30 year span, have consistently shown that vitamin D3 supplements (1000 to 2000 IU per day) are very beneficial to most people, especially those living at moderate to high latitudes:

The New England Journal of Medicine: Holick (2007)
The Journal of Nutrition: Holick (2005)

[This message has been edited by Marvin McInnis (edited 11-04-2010).]

I think the obvious conclusion is: if you get enough from your diet, you don't need more. If you're deficient, you need it. There are herbal supplements that aren't vitamins at all (though they may contain natural minerals and vitamins - like food) that have different effects on people - so don't confuse the two. If you are chronically tired, you'd be surprised what a B-Complex will do for you with breakfast... besides the highlighter-colored urine.

SO it says:
"The researchers' conclusion: "Multivitamins failed to prevent cancer, heart disease, and all causes of death for all women. Whether the women were healthy eaters or ate very few fruits and vegetables, the results were the same," says the lead author, Marian Neuhouser, PhD. "

I gotta say though, I didn't expect multivitamins to prevent cancer, heart disease, or death.

quote Originally posted by 2.5: SO it says: "The researchers' conclusion: "Multivitamins failed to prevent cancer, heart disease, and all causes of death for all women. Whether the women were healthy eaters or ate very few fruits and vegetables, the results were the same," says the lead author, Marian Neuhouser, PhD. " I gotta say though, I didn't expect multivitamins to prevent cancer, heart disease, or death.

exactly - wtf. who thinks vitamins are gonna prevent cancer?!

and - yes - if your diet is lacking - supplements maybe needed. pretty simple stuff, I would think.

quote Originally posted by Marvin McInnis: Ask your doctor(s) about vitamins B12 and D3. Most people over the age of 60 have some degree of vitamin B12 deficiency due to diminished digestive efficiency. You need adequate B12 to maintain healthy neurological function and tp slow age-related mental decline. Multiple studies over the past half century, some involving more than 20,000 participants over a 30 year span, have consistently shown that vitamin D3 supplements (1000 to 2000 IU per day) are very beneficial to most people, especially those living at moderate to high latitudes: http://www.mcinnisusa.com/p...n_D3_Holick_NEJM.pdf http://www.mcinnisusa.com/p...min_D3_Holick_JN.pdf

Interesting information. Maybe my cardiodoc doesn't read the New England Journal of Medicine. I'll see him again Dec 5 so I'll be ready for another tirade or two. He is a very good doctor and I totally trust in him but some things set him off and he won't shut up long enough for me to interject a question or comment.

quote evidence suppoting viewpoint

Thanks for the article Boonie! Its your stories/threads here that help to make PFF what it is

(Let alone the fact it takes real guts to apologize publically on a forum like this-- my hat is off to you)

Ryan Hess: Magnesium supplement/wacky dreams


Oh wow, is THAT the reason? Just started taking them. Dreams have been pretty wacky (also, I rarely recall them, but I have been, latey)

One thing to realize- sometimes,the results are based on how the test is performed and not the substance being tested...
I did a Vitamin study years ago.
It was a project I wanted to do(to see if my vitamins actually DID anything)
I did two tests:
1.
I grew some sheets of human skin, and subjected them to various amounts of UV light(=a bad sunburn)(with two unexposed sets as a control. I then fed 'em, and some I also fed some of them a diluted vitamin mixture. Then, I waited a few days, then used this special stuff which dissolves intercellular bonds (liquid Cliffw) and put each group on a new plate. Then waited a few days (for the still viable cells to cling to the plate). Then rinsed them with this other stuff, and then used that liquid cliffw again.I ran each set through a cell counting machine, and also 'counted using a grid'each of the groups , and the results were:
Control groups had the hightest number
Then the vitamin groups, then the others(which fared MUCH worse).

2. I did the same process, but this time, I put the vitamin mixtures in BEFORE the UV exposure. I also expanded my control group to include a group with a few uv blocking screens over them (varying degree of blocking) and used some other things, such as honey and other things which might physically blosk the UV.

The results showed that the cells that had a little exporure to uv actually did 'better' then the unexposed group, because the slight damage triggered the cells to divide more(I didn't test for any DNA or other damage the uv may have caused)
The vitamin groups did almost the exact same as the honey, and other things which blocked the UV.


The first test shoed that if there are vitamins floating around near cells, they will benefit from it. I have heard that if a cell can't get something it needs (from the goop around it) it will try to grab it from its neighboors. Not sure if that's true, but if it is, it means that this would weaken the whole group...

Trouble is, you pop a pill, and usually, only a smidgen of the stuff gets into youre bloodstream, and only a raction of that will reach some of your cells...
Best combo (imo) is reduce the 'constant stress' level, eat healthy,(balanced) and try to get yer iron,vitamin, and minerals into yer body (and try to get as much of it as you can from healthy sources)
Hard to do, though....

quote Originally posted by FieroRumor: Ryan Hess: Magnesium supplement/wacky dreams Oh wow, is THAT the reason? Just started taking them. Dreams have been pretty wacky (also, I rarely recall them, but I have been, latey)

I rarely dream, and when I do, I don't remember them. I've been taking magnesium supplements on and off for the past few years. One thing I will tell you - when you dream, and you KNOW you dream, you wake up feeling refreshed! Actually, today I had to wake up early and I was pretty groggy. Fell asleep for just 15 minutes and it felt like an hour. It was amazing.

quote Originally posted by FieroRumor: The first test shoed that if there are vitamins floating around near cells, they will benefit from it. I have heard that if a cell can't get something it needs (from the goop around it) it will try to grab it from its neighboors. Not sure if that's true, but if it is, it means that this would weaken the whole group...

This makes sense to me. If your skin (or liver or lungs or ____) is being bombarded by invaders, they will go for the weakest link in the chain. But if the chain "averages" itself, there is no weak link. Organism survives another day.

One thing about supplements I sure noticed. Some of them make ya pee alot more, and bright neon yellow too.

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: who thinks vitamins are gonna prevent cancer?!

From the NEJM article cited earlier: A greater than 50% reduction in the incidence of breast cancer in post-menopausal women with high vitamin D intake!!! There were similar but less dramatic reductions in cancers of many other types in both men and women. The mechanism seems to be (my words) that vitamin D is necessary to support the mechanism for repairing cellular DNA damage. The DNA in our cells is being damaged all the time ... by ionizing radiation (including UV), by viruses, and by chemical agents, to name just a few ... and our body is constantly repairing this damage. It's part of the brilliance of the structure of DNA; one strand of the double helix can be used as a template to repair damage to the other strand. Damaged cells in which the DNA has been successfully repaired continue to function normally; cells in which the DNA is not completely repaired are potentially cancerous.

The big questions with many vitamins is, "How much is enough?", "How much is too much?", and "Where does it come from?" In the case of vitamin C, most other mammals synthesize their own but primates (including humans) do not, so 100% of our vitamin C has to come from diet or supplements. In the case of vtamin D, we synthesize it in our skin as a response to exposure to intense light (e.g. the Sun). It has been observed for more than a century that the incidence of many human diseases is strongly related to latitude ... the farther north you live, the higher the incidence of those diseases. The apparent reason is the relative sun exposure and the resulting serum levels of vitamin D. The question then becomes, "How much is enough?" For years the recommendation has been ~400 IU of vitamin D per day from sources other than sun exposure, i.e. from diet and supplements. Just in the past year, based on data from Holick and many others, that recommendation has been increased to 1000-2000 IU per day. How much is too much? The threshold of toxicity from vitamin D3 appears to be somewhere above 50,000 IU per day for an extended period, so a supplement of 2000 IU per day should be a non-issue for most people.

One other startling (to me) bit of data cited in the NEJM article: A public health study in Finland (a very northern latitude!) that followed about 20,000 participants for more than 30 years found that the incidence of Type 1 Diabetes was reduced by 80% in those subjects who had received a 2000 IU per day supplement of vitamin D3 for their first 18 months of life. Simply astounding!

Please don't take my word for it; I'm not trying to sell anything. Discuss it with your doctor.

[This message has been edited by Marvin McInnis (edited 11-04-2010).]

Studies and doctors at least TRY to be very specific, but people tend to not be specific and make conclusions that were never stated.


The study was people taking a MULTIvitamin. Not specific vitamins. Not minerals. A MULTIVITAMIN.


So ryan.hess--you jumped over from vitamins to MINERALS. That is an entirely different issue. Glad you are having fun with magnesium. Surprised you are getting vivid dreams, but didn't also report diarrhea as magnesium usually has a significant laxative effect. But that has nothing to do with vitamins.


Marvin--it IS common to have a normal diet and be deficient in vitamin b12. And in many parts of the U.S., vitamin d deficiency is common because vitamin d is produced in response to sun exposure on the skin. At least 6 months out of the year where I live, it is too cold to expose your skin to the sun even if it would shine every once in a while.


I routinely recommend people take 2,000 units vitamin d per day. I often, depending on the person, advice them to take a vitamin b complex with folic acid (which also contains b12).

But THIS study was about taking a MULTIVITAMIN daily. Not selective, targeted vitamins for particular needs.

*grabs vitamin D bottle*

quote Originally posted by 2.5: One thing about supplements I sure noticed. Some of them make ya pee alot more, and bright neon yellow too.

Heh, that's usually the 99% of what you paid for but DIDN'T absorb into yer body... ;D

quote Originally posted by frontal lobe: THIS study was about taking a MULTIVITAMIN daily. Not selective, targeted vitamins for particular needs.

Thanks for your authoritative comments. I agree with you. I was responding primarily to those who jumped into this thread and proclaimed that vitamin supplements have no value at all under any circumstances.

Are you familiar with the Holick article and other recent studies on vitamin D? If so, I would appreciate your comments. I was first referred to the NEJM article by my primary care doc, with whom I have an interesting intellectual as well as medical relationship. I am used to dealing with data in which a 15% to 20% difference is considered "significant," so when I see studies with huge statistical populations returning differences in the 50% to 80% range it really gets my attention.

[This message has been edited by Marvin McInnis (edited 11-04-2010).]

quote Originally posted by frontal lobe:

Would you suggest using a sun lamp? I know a few people who seem to get that SAD (Seasonal Artichoke Depression)...

Most vitamins contain elements of things I am allergic to. I have not taken a vitamin since 2000. I got extroardinalrily sick, was vomitting for three days. Extreme back pain and stomch pain, like a sharp knife was carving a jackolantern in my torso. On the third day, among the bile I was heaving, out came the vitamin! Whole and barely dissolved, I could still somewhat see the engraved writing on the pill. My body apparently wanted NOTHING to do with it... I also IMMEDIATELY felt better, finally. Seaweed (kelp) was the suspect.. I have severe problems with most seafood and shellfish since ingesting this vitamin. Previously, it was just stomach aches when I ate fish.. now I need epinepherine if I ingest any of it. I have to stay away from most things with Calcium Carbonate as well, many times it comes from ground shellfish. Many chickens are fed with seafood feed, as a result, I can now no longer eat chicken or eggs, either, unless I know what they have been fed. We are thinking of raising chickens so I can eat it again.

Last vitamin I ever took. If it does not come from my usual food or drink, I don get it. Period. I also don't eat out anymore for the same reasons.. you just never know what was prepared alongside your food, if tongs were also used to turn seafood, etc.

quote Originally posted by frontal lobe: The study was people taking a MULTIvitamin. Not specific vitamins. Not minerals. A MULTIVITAMIN. But THIS study was about taking a MULTIVITAMIN daily. Not selective, targeted vitamins for particular needs.

When I posted, I thought the mutiviamin part was clear.
Maybe not.

[This message has been edited by Boondawg (edited 11-04-2010).]

I'm starting to feel better about my diet. I drink one Rockstar energy drink a day which has a lot of B vitamins. I also drink a glass of vitamin D fortified milk every day. Add in 2-3 servings of peanuts and I am getting a lot more vitamins than I thought.

I guess I just need to pay more attention to food labels.

quote Originally posted by Marvin McInnis: Thanks for your authoritative comments. I agree with you. I was responding primarily to those who jumped into this thread and proclaimed that vitamin supplements have no value at all under any circumstances. Are you familiar with the Holick article and other recent studies on vitamin D?

Yes, that is why I was responding, too. Targeted vitamin usage for specific purposes has been studied and has value.

I'm somewhat familiar with Holick and other studies. Due to that, I think the 2,000 unit daily recommendation is wise. But ryan.hess, you know I am jealous of you for where you live. If I were you, I wouldn't be grabbing the vitamin d bottle. I'd be heading outside for the 15 minutes per day sun exposure that would do approximately the same thing as the vitamin d supplementation or better.

FieroRumor, I don't honestly know if a sun lamp has the same light spectrum to stimulate vitamin d production in the skin. But there have been studies that show lots of people benefit from sun lamp usage for Seasonal Affective Disorder, so I would recommend people in certain parts of the country to give it a try.

Yeah regarding those, what about "fortified" pruducts?

Isn't it just basically powdered vitamin pills mixed into the fortified product? Are they effective at all?

quote Originally posted by frontal lobe: FieroRumor, I don't honestly know if a sun lamp has the same light spectrum to stimulate vitamin d production in the skin. But there have been studies that show lots of people benefit from sun lamp usage for Seasonal Affective Disorder, so I would recommend people in certain parts of the country to give it a try.

Is that like a tanning bed? Because I thought those WERE cancerous?

quote Originally posted by 86fierofun: Is that like a tanning bed? Because I thought those WERE cancerous?

The Holick study actually said "most tanning beds ... are a recommended source of Vitamin D, when used in moderation"

quote Originally posted by ryan.hess: The Holick study actually said "most tanning beds ... are a recommended source of Vitamin D, when used in moderation"

N.B. Also from the NEJM article: "Supported in part by grants from the National Institutes of Health (M01RR00533 and AR36963) and the UV Foundation."

[This message has been edited by Marvin McInnis (edited 11-04-2010).]

quote Originally posted by Marvin McInnis: ..."Supported in part by grants from ... and the UV Foundation."

Nice! Theres a fun job title. "I work for the Ultra Violet Foundation."

quote Originally posted by 2.5: One thing about supplements I sure noticed. Some of them make ya pee alot more, and bright neon yellow too.

quote Originally posted by FieroRumor: Heh, that's usually the 99% of what you paid for but DIDN'T absorb into yer body... ;D

You might want to rethink or restate that. How did the "99%" get from the GI tract to the urinary tract without passing through "yer body?" It might be better to say "... the 99% that passes directly into the kidneys without therapeutic effect."

quote Originally posted by 2.5: Yeah regarding those, what about "fortified" pruducts? Isn't it just basically powdered vitamin pills mixed into the fortified product? Are they effective at all?

Some vitamins, like vitamin D, are unstable on their own but bind tightly to lipids (fats), so milk in the U.S. is often "fortified" with vitamin D3, which binds to the butterfat and remains stable there. The level of supplementation in milk, however, is too low (~100 IU per 8 ounce glass) to be adequate by itself.

[This message has been edited by Marvin McInnis (edited 11-04-2010).]

quote Originally posted by 86fierofun: Is that like a tanning bed? Because I thought those WERE cancerous?

If you are giving yourself constant exposure, you increase the risk. I 'think' the newer ones use only parts of the uv spectrum and are less likely to promote skin cancer.

But, no, sun lamps aren't like a tanning bed in that you don't expose as much of your skin to them (unless you sit around the house in your underwear I guess and if you DO, I don't really care to know.)

Regarding "fortified" products, if they are what I think you are referring to, then it would just be the same vitamins but just in a more easy to dissolve formula.

Regarding multivitamins, they are trying to get a LOT of different things in there, and they all take up space. In order to compress the tablet to a size that is easily swallowable, it can also make it hard to dissolve.

On the other hand, the situation with t-bone, I don't know if he had a multivitamin that is intentionally a WAX MATRIX tablet. On those, the vitamins dissolve off, leaving a tablet shell. Products like that you can see the wax matrix tablet coming out in your poo if you care to look for it.

quote Originally posted by Marvin McInnis: You might want to rethink or restate that. How did the "99%" get from the GI tract to the urinary tract without passing through "yer body?" It might be better to say "... the 99% that passes directly into the kidneys."

(I think rumor was being a little sarcastic)
So we use it, and convert it to pee?

quote Originally posted by 2.5: (I think rumor was being a little sarcastic)

Concerning "unused" vitamins, a doctor friend of my parents used to quip, "We in the U.S. have the healthiest sewers in the world."