25 replies to this topic

[Fredrik]

Have you ever calculated how much of each nutrient you get from food? It´s enlightening. I get 85% of the RDA for vitamins and 94% of the RDA for minerals just from food. You will probably rearrange your supplement stack if you calculate how much you get. I´m eating 5 capsules per day of Ortho-core but I realised I need only certain nutrients in it (cholecalciferol, selenium and the 8 vitamers of E).

Supplement companies often say that people are deficient in magnesium & zinc for example. I saw that my vegan diet gives 602 mg magnesium (143% of RDA), 18.9 mg iron (236% of RDA) and 18 mg zink (167%). That is more than enough for health and more will not extend my lifespan or reduce morbidity.

I´m not against supplements at all. I´m against the kitchen sink approach because some nutrients can be harmful if oversupplemented with. From now on I will top off my diet with selected nutrients like calciferol 2000 IU (which I already take), the complete vitamin E family, a homocystein formula with metafolin, B6 and B12, AOR vitamin K2, ALCAR + ALA and maybe resveratrol.

Below is a summary of nutrients in my food only.

I ran my staples for a day, what I eat everyday at home, through the Cron-o-meter software and I covered 85% of the RDA for vitamins and 94% of the RDA for minerals. I eat a low calorie vegan diet so lacto-ovo vegetarians and meat eaters who love fruit and vegetables would probably get a lot more vitamins and minerals than this diet sample (this is from 1337 kcal, I usually eat some junkfood or icecream on top of this).

As expected I´m low on selenium (soils are depleted where I live) and vitamin D (which you should get from supplements anway, cause cancer and sagging uneven wrinkly skin is not sexy). I´m not sure why chromium and biotin is showing 0 % though. That is a bug in the software. My ratio of omega-3 to omega-6 is about 1:2 which is very good. Trans-fats and cholesterol 0 mg (but I get some from occasional snacks).

Please post how much you eat of the RDA and why you choose to supplement with 100% to 8000% more? If you have any studies that show a reduction in human morbidity (no mice studies please) of those nutrients you supplement with, please post them along with your calculation.

Food only, no supplements:

Vitamins (85%of RDA) RDA

Vitamin A 37125,6 IU 1238%

Retinol 4,5 µg
Alpha-carotene 87,4 µg

Beta-carotene 12510,0 µg

Beta-cryptoxanthin 687,5 µg

Lycopene 11936,8 µg

Lutein+Zeaxanthin 506,3 µg

Folate 381,2 µg 95%

B1 (Thiamine) 2,0 mg 166%

B2 (Riboflavin) 1,6 mg 124%

B3 (Niacin) 10,7 mg 67%

B5 (Pantothenic Acid) 5,9 mg 119%

B6 (Pyridoxine) 2,4 mg 144%

B12 (Cyanocobalamin) 4,0 µg 165%

Vitamin C 307, mg 342%

Vitamin D 48 IU 12%

Vitamin E 11,7 mg 78%
Beta Tocopherol 0,1 mg
Delta Tocopherol 0,7 mg
Gamma Tocopherol 14,2 mg

Vitamin K 83,1 µg 69%

Biotin 0,0 µg 0%

Choline 80,5 mg 15%


Minerals (94% of RDA)

Calcium 1099,6 mg 92%

Chromium 0,0 µg 0%

Copper 2,8 mg 306%

Fluoride 2,4 µg

Iron 18,9 mg 236%

Magnesium 602,3 mg 143%

Manganese 9,3 mg 406%

Phosphorus 1533,4 mg 219%

Potassium 4344,2 mg 92%

Selenium 31,4 µg 57%

Sodium 1365,6 mg 105%

Zinc 18,3 mg 167%

Lipids

Saturated 5,8 g 29%
Monounsaturated 11,6 g
Polyunsaturated 28,8 g
Omega-3 9,3 g 582%
Omega-6 19,4 g 1 39%
Trans-Fats 0,0 g
Cholesterol 0,0 mg 0%
Phytosterol 59,3 mg

Edited by fredrik, 10 August 2007 - 07:48 PM.

[efosse]

Fredrik-

2 points/questions:
1. What software do you use?
2. I agree with what you're saying -- or at least what you're implying. I think too many people over-supplement -- check out the antioxidant-prooxidant thread.

I still supplement, but only EOD with dr weil's multi. I may just do it every third day.

best,
efosse

[Fredrik]

Hi Efosse!
I´m a dietitian so I´ve used specialised swedish software but I find the free programs online satisfying. I use nutritiondata.com, svenska livsmedelsverkets databas (slv.se) and the Cron-o-meter that you can download for free:

http://sourceforge.n...ects/cronometer

I´m also concerned about taking antioxidants. I take R-lipoic but that one works not by being an antioxidant but quite the opposite. According to professor Bruce Ames, by being a weak oxidant lipoic acid upregulates the cells own enzymatic antioxidant defense and the net effect of that is beneficial. So it is a second hand effect.

But they sell lipoic acid as an "antioxidant" because the public have been led to believe that antioxidants are in some way good for you, although that has never been proven in humans. Without free radicals in our system we would certainly die and we are probably dying from ROS-damage at the same time. It´s the supplement companies and our wishful thinking that set it up as a simple "good antioxidants" vs "evil free radicals". Nature is more complex than that.

Edited by fredrik, 10 August 2007 - 07:33 PM.

[efosse]

Awesome, Fredrik! Thanks for the software link. I'll check this out.

A question: are you a vegan because of what you've learned as a dietician or for animal rights/welfare/environmental reasons?

best,
efosse

[Fredrik]

We can start another thread about the health aspects of different diets. I don´t eat animals or animal byproducts because of all the reasons you listed. But I think omnivores can be as helthy as vegans if they just eat LOTS of vegetables, fruits, legymes and nuts and cuts down on dairy products. There is really nothing wrong with meat per se, it´s the sauces, fries and the dairy products loaded with saturated fat that often come with a traditional omnivorous diet that is bad.

[Mind]

Just came across this today Too many vitamins?. It seems most large studies have found little or no benefits to mega-dosing on anti-oxidants. But that is not the same thing as saying vitamins and minerals are not important.

I strive for a balanced omnivorous diet. I usually take 4 ortho-core per day instead of the reccomended 9.

As you have pointed out, I have often thought that over-dosing on antioxidants is probably not a good thing because oxygen radicals are essential for proper functioning of the human body. My feeling is that the free radical part of aging is most prominent in people with crappy diets eating way too many calories. Once a person achieves the optimal balance of free-radicals vs. anti-oxidants there probably isn't much more that can be done (through vitamin supplementation anyway).

[efosse]

Fredrik -- thanks a million for that software. I just used it and I found out 3 things:

1. I have GOT to eat low-sodium meats
2. That small pizza -- carefully picked by me to have no trans fat -- wrecked my diet for the day, lol
3. And my vitamins are great -- all I need is Vitamin D and K. I don't need to take a multivitamin -- who knew tea and muesli had so many vitamins!

Thanks again Fredrik, I truly mean it!

Mind, I totally agree with you. But try out the software rec'd by Fredrik. It totally blew me away -- I have like 200+ percentages for ALL vitamins except D and K. I'd be seriously over-dosing it with a supplement.

best,
efosse

[efosse]

Fredrik -- one other question: do you think organic low-fat dairy is "bad" for your health? Obviously a blanket statement but I'd love to hear your point of view as a dietician. (BTW, I'm aiming for a low-glycemic diet with very few carbs)

[Fredrik]

haha no prob efosse! I´m happy that you found out that you´re over supplementating and by just improving your diet and taking carefully selected supplements you can both save your money and health. I told you it would be enlightening =)

No one can meet the real requirement of vitamin D through food alone, we´re meant to get it from the sun. 1000 IU to 2000 IU cholecalciferol a day from a supplement is cheap from iherb.com or swansonvitamins for example.

[Fredrik]

Well, men who drank more than two glasses of milk had a greater incidence of prostate cancer in a study. It could be the calcium or something else in milk. There are too many questions surrounding dairy.

The reason I don´t think adults should consume dairy is that nature didn´t make it for us, it´s a growth stimulating substance made by cows for calves. Our mothers supplied us with milk made for our species and thats that. We don´t need the "bodybuilding" qualitys of dairy as adults. I have a sneaky suspicion that dairy, in some cases, can aid cancerous growth.

[Mind]

I did the cornometer and my vitamins and minerals were pretty much off the charts. 2 to 4 times rda. However, some of the inputs were approximations because the food list is not 100% exhaustive, but still very good. What I can't believe is how much I would have to cut back in order to reach 100% rda. Right now I am only at 2600 calories (during the winter when I lift weights I am more around 3500 to 4000). It seems I would have to be down around 1500 or less in order to get 100% rda on most of the items. Does that seem right?

And a second thought, is that one of the keys to CR success? balanced nutrients, not under, not over.

[health_nutty]

I've noticed this too. Vitamin K2 could be listed as well since the diet only has K1 (thanks krillin for pointing that out in another thread)

What about b vitamins? Why is it that most vitamins (including ortho-core) have several times the RDA for most of the b vitamins?

[Fredrik]

What about b vitamins?  Why is it that most vitamins (including ortho-core) have several times the RDA for most of the b vitamins?

I think it started as a marketing advantage, "Look at our vitamins...2633% of vitamin B1...MORE than competing brands!". And because the B-vitamins are water soluble they are not readily toxic and you can stuff your multivitamins with them.

I was just going to say that isn´t this the american way, bigger is better? But AOR is a canadian company (well, they don´t have the 50 mg range that many american multis have

On the other hand, there are polymorphisms where B-vitamins can work as coenzymes...so megadosing (100s of milligrams) of B-vitamins can be a therapy in these diseases. Ames wrote a great paper on this not long ago.

[maxwatt]

The classic Greeks philosophers' maxim "oderation in all things" applies here. I noticed some time ago that mega-doses of B vitamins caused irritability bordering on the psychotic. An RDA supplement does not.

The RDA is just a suggestion for average janes and joes. A 220 pound weightlifter will need more of everything than a 110 pound ballet dancer. Someone posted a link to a video of a lecture by Ames in a thread on Vitamin D, in which Ames mentioned that B vitamin requirements vary widely and wildly in people of northern European extraction; the lack of folate during long, dark northern winters resulted in some unusual metabolic pathways as compensation. He referred to people who had several times the RDA for different B vitamins; the mega B supplements could help them.

Maybe someday you can get a genetic test and end up with a tailor-made multi. Until then, we all have to find what works for ourselves.

More about Ames view HERE; the video link is not to the lecture I referred to above.

Edited by maxwatt, 11 August 2007 - 02:25 AM.

[Fredrik]

Thanks maxwatt for posting the Ames article. That´s what I was referring to regarding his view on megadosing in certain cases. I believe some people should absolutely megadose, but not everyone. The old "first do no harm.." philosophy.

[ajnast4r]

first, how the hell are you getting 1000mg of dietary calcium on a vegan diet?


second, the RDA is basically the minimum amount needed to avoid a deficiency... not the amount needed for optimum health.

third, i dont really think mega-dosing is good with anything unless its for a specific purpose.

i know i hit 100% with all my vitamins & minerals, and i take a multi that has 100-150% of most everything (sans iron, calcium etc). i strive to hit 200% every day

*edit*
that cron software is showing the incorrect macros for oats... its exactly double what it should be.
fitday.com is pretty accurate

[Fredrik]

first, how the hell are you getting 1000mg of dietary calcium on a vegan diet?


second,  the RDA is basically the minimum amount needed to avoid a deficiency... not the amount needed for optimum health.

Getting enough calcium on a vegan diet is easy (as hell! ). People tend to forget that fruits and vegetables also contain calcium, although not as bioavailable as from milk. That´s why I eat more vegetables and grains than I listed below but you asked me how the hell I get 1000 mg of kalcium from a vegan diet;

and this is how:


3 dl of soymilk = 360 mg

30 grams of walnuts = 29.4 mg

250 g of kale = 340 mg

100 g sweet potato = 30 mg

150 g soymeat = 105 mg

19 g dried plums = 8.2 mg

5 tbs hummus = 132.8 mg (probably a lot more as I have more sesame seeds than the common recipes)
_________________________________________

Total calcium
from vegans sources = 1005 mg kalcium

The rest is from assorted vegetables, celery which I eat everyday for example has 40 mg of calcium per 100 gram.


It´s a common misconception that the RDA is set to avoid absolute deficiency. It´s actually a bit more clever than that. RDAs have a built in safety in that they´ve increased the minimal amount to avoid deficiency by two standard deviations so to cover the need of 98% of the population. So it´s not true that RDA is the minimal amount to avoid deficiency.

I´m not saying the RDAs are perfect. But they receive a lot of unfair criticism from supplement companies and people that never took the time to read how they actually establish them and what they are meant for.

Anyone interested can read more about how they establish the RDA here: http://books.nap.edu..._id=9194&page=7


It is true that the RDA are not devised to promote optimal health. But it´s also true that they are not supposed to be used on an individual level, it´s for use on populations. And the RDAs cover most HEALTHY peoples needs (with the exception of vitamin D, but I´m certain they will revise that).


The RDAs

# Increase value to meet needs of practically all healthy people
# Increase value to account for increase use
# Account for variability due to age, sex, physiological state

Six types of evidence are used in establishing RDAs:

* nutrient intakes observed in apparently normal, healthy people,

* epidemiological observations of populations in which the clinical consequences of nutrient deficiencies are corrected by dietary improvement,

* balance studies that measure nutrient status in relation to intake,

* nutrient depletion/repletion studies in which subjects are maintained on diets containing marginally low or deficient levels of a nutrient, followed by

* correction of the deficit with measured amounts of that nutrient (such studies are undertaken in humans only when the risk is minimal),

* extrapolation from animal experiments, and

* biochemical measurements that assess the degree of tissue saturation or adequacy of molecular function in relation to nutrient intake.

The 1989 edition notes that if the distribution of nutrient requirements followed a normal or Gaussian distribution, the most straightforward way for establishing an allowance would be to calculate the population mean requirement and increase it by two standard deviations. This would cover the needs of 98 percent of the population.

Edited by fredrik, 11 August 2007 - 12:02 PM.

[efosse]

Christ, Fredrik, thanks for another great post!!! Very informative...!

[ajnast4r]

interesting!!! im a vegetarian, and i find it difficult to hit 1000mg every day... i often wonder if the RDA amounts were set to bulk or elemental levels of minerals. i know supplements are usually measured in elemental, but the amount of calcium lets say, on a glass of milk, is listing bulk weight.

great post on the RDA, thanks for the info.


did you see what i said about the CRON software giving inaccurate information for oats? that significantly changed my micro intake for the day....

i believe the macros its giving for oats are really for thick irish style porridge oats, not the rolled oats most of us use.

[Fredrik]

Thanks for the kind words, both of you

I`m not sure I understand what you mean, please explain further. I just checked "oats" on the Cron-o-meter and it states 389 kcal per 100 g, 16.8 g of protein, 66 g of carbohydrates and 6.9 g of fat. It´s based on the dry weight of oats, not oat porridge. That correlates quite good with the swedish government database.

[ajnast4r]

ah, i was looking by cup.. not grams

1 cup of steel cut oats is 156G
http://www.nutrition...01-01c21U4.html
1 cup of rolled oats is 81G
http://www.nutrition...01-01c20Pl.html

[efosse]

Hey fredrik -- how much protein do you try to get? I'm curious, b/c I've read you "need" 1.5-2.0 grams of protein for every pound of your own weight if you want to build muscle
(e.g., this is what nutritionist John Berardi claims). Anyway -- it'd be great to hear what you have to say!

a more practical question: what is your ratio setting for carbs/fats/protein on the cronometer?

cheers,
efosse

[Fredrik]

I try to do some form of moderate CR (but I sabotage it with red wine, icecream and chocolate hehe). I try to get 1 - 1.5 gram of protein per kilo bodyweight. I get 85 grams of protein with my quorn, soy, sesame seeds, milled flaxseeds, pumpkin seeds, red kidney beans, hummus and walnuts.

That is 1.3 gram of protein per kilo (I weigh 62-63 kilo, 136 - 138 punds).

I don´t use the macronutrient settings, actually I don´t use the cron-o-meter at all unless I drastically change my food staples. I just weigh or measure my most energy dense foods and eat unrestricted amount of vegetables.

PS yes, sorry, I recently started to eat quorn so I am no longer a vegan. I haven´t really reflected over that, I call my diet vegan but it´s just vegetarian and dairyfree. Quorn contains eggwhite. DS



Hmm, this thread isn´t about supplements anymore. A suggestion, maybe we should move this discussion about macronutrients to the food, diet and exercise forum instead (which I´ve never posted on) and try to keep this thread on RDAs, what the diet contributes and how much to supplement?

Edited by fredrik, 11 August 2007 - 03:35 PM.

[efosse]

Agreed, let's keep it on topic

[krillin]

Well, men who drank more than two glasses of milk had a greater incidence of prostate cancer in a study. It could be the calcium or something else in milk. There are too many questions surrounding dairy.

It looks to me like it's high calcium decreasing 1,25 hydroxy D3 formation. Check out the discussions in other threads.

The calcium RDA for men was fudged: "Too few data for men are available to justify a separate AI for them."

http://www.hsph.harv...ce/calcium.html

Balance studies - which examine the point at which the amount of calcium consumed equals the amount of calcium excreted - suggest that an adequate intake is 550 mg/day.

a British committee that is comparable to the U.S. group that established calcium requirements here concluded that 700 mg/day was enough for individuals aged 19 and older.

Currently, there's no good evidence that consuming more than one serving of milk per day [about 300 mg calcium] in addition to a reasonable diet (which typically provides about 300 milligrams of calcium per day from nondairy sources) will reduce fracture risk. [=600 mg total]

Page 40 gives a 10 mg/kg recommendation.

[Fredrik]

Well, men who drank more than two glasses of milk had a greater incidence of prostate cancer in a study. It could be the calcium or something else in milk. There are too many questions surrounding dairy.

It looks to me like it's high calcium decreasing 1,25 hydroxy D3 formation. Check out the discussions in other threads.

Yes, I followed those reports (actually I remember I read the exact letter from Harvard that you posted) when they came out and it´s an interesting theory. It may be so. Thank you for the links!