digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

WARNING: Vitamins may increase Risk of Death

guardian.co.uk — Supplements taken by millions may raise risk of premature death, claims new scientific review.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • leerayIG88, on 04/16/2008, -34/+2good...i suck at life.
    fffff-*****!
    • ThndrShk2k, on 04/16/2008, -1/+15WARNING: LIVING MAY CAUSE DEATH.

      Sidenote: If you suck at life, then maybe you'll avoid death?
  • mytibt, on 04/16/2008, -6/+51"vitamin A was linked to a 16% increased risk of dying, beta-carotene to a 7% increased risk"

    Great...now I can see my death coming
    • plncrzy, on 04/16/2008, -7/+3I got the joke... I dug you up.

      Just so you know it wasn't lost on /everyone/... :)
      • jmpeagle, on 04/16/2008, -0/+6i think it was lost on me...the only thing I can think of is the old urban legend from WW2 about carrots increasing the eyesight of British fighter pilots
        • ElectricKetchup, on 04/16/2008, -2/+5The joke is: Everyone has a 100% chance of dying. In this world, nothing is certain but death and taxes.
        • chemaj, on 04/16/2008, -1/+3Yes, but that's not the joke he was really making. Yay biology!
      • greenm1981, on 04/16/2008, -0/+3You get a gold star!
    • falkonv7l, on 04/16/2008, -5/+5In other news, 84% of Statistics are false.
      • falkonv7l, on 04/16/2008, -5/+2sorry I forgot to put "jk" or /sarcasm/ at the end........
      • Cerebron, on 04/16/2008, -0/+2Only 50% of the time.
      • JimXugle, on 04/17/2008, -0/+242% of the false statistics were made up on the spot, and 73% of people know this.
    • paolo27, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1It's not that statistics are false, it's that they're very easily manipulated. Anyway overuse of vitamins or minerals brings you to potential deadly diseases, it's known from decades ,this is it.
  • Jovensdesciple, on 04/16/2008, -6/+185Only if those supplements are taken in mass amounts. Everything may increase your risk of death if you are a dumbass.
    • jmpeagle, on 04/16/2008, -0/+26true, some athletes die from over-hydration
      • appletalk, on 04/16/2008, -23/+2Ignorance called, they want their widely overused and cliched example back.
        • scallon, on 04/16/2008, -4/+25The personification of "being a dick" called and commended you on your brilliant use of him.
          • airquotes, on 04/16/2008, -8/+9the jerk store called theyre running out of you
          • snowpatrol, on 04/16/2008, -0/+8What's the difference? You're their all-time best seller
        • anarchyinthekr, on 04/16/2008, -1/+12oh yeah Reilly, well I had sex with your wife!
          • airquotes, on 04/16/2008, -5/+4Funny I am dug down for starting the quote, and you are dug up for completing it, then again people are idiots.
      • cheerio, on 04/16/2008, -2/+7Your mom.
    • unravelled, on 04/16/2008, -1/+10They need to scare us before they criminalize vitamins. Don't believe me? http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-526688491 ...
    • ngmcs8203, on 04/16/2008, -9/+2--OT; Comment Oddity--
      Weird, your comment was grayed out as if it was dugg down below my negative digg threshold. Even stranger, I dugg you up, refreshed and it still looks like you are below the threshold.
      • ngmcs8203, on 04/16/2008, -3/+3I see now why I'm being dugg down. I blocked you at some point. Makes sense. [you have blocked Jovensdesciple, hide comment] Well I liked your comment here!
    • snypa, on 04/16/2008, -2/+2So there's even a risk of dying?
    • RobotKing, on 04/16/2008, -1/+4According to another article, that was posted here, masturbating cures everything. Digg looks these death vitamins in the face and laughs.
    • aclockwork3, on 04/16/2008, -0/+8WARNING: LIVING MAY INCREASE YOUR RISK OF DEATH
      • bullcutter, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1... and the longer you live, the bigger the risk becomes!
  • Tiberiansun292, on 04/16/2008, -10/+46i smell bs.
    • DavidtheDuke, on 04/16/2008, -0/+15I ***** GIVE UP, I'M GONNA GO SNORT A TRUNK OF CHOLESTEROL NOW
      • seans33, on 04/16/2008, -0/+3If it happens to be long chain HDL cholesterol, and in the right amount, it could significantly increase your lifespan!
    • unravelled, on 04/16/2008, -0/+4this is BS and if you agree digg here> http://digg.com/world_news/WARNING_Vitatmins_are_b ...
      • jmf866, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2I was going to say the same thing, that this is just the beginning of the propaganda to scare everyone into believeing vitamins and supplements need to be regulated in time for Codex Alimentarius to be forced on us at the end of 2009.
    • RobotBuddha, on 04/16/2008, -0/+6It's meta analysis, which is a lot more akin to an art than a science. Generally they only have a 50/50 chance of being correct when the actual experiments are done. Now someone 'skilled' at it can get much, much, higher probabilities. In general they're more akin to something just a bit better than anecdote though. That said, it's not surprising that vit. A or E would show a chance of lowering the average.
    • Abatrour, on 04/17/2008, -0/+175% of the time statistics can be made to say anything.
  • outofstep, on 04/16/2008, -10/+68This confirms my believe in the cigarettes, coffee, and Guinness diet.
    • Picaroon, on 04/16/2008, -1/+92 of those things actually aren't bad for you, and are even good for you in the right amounts

      Then again, Guinness probably wouldn't be fun in the right amounts :)
      • iticu, on 04/16/2008, -1/+2Coffee is good for you? Since when?
        • lennybird, on 04/16/2008, -0/+3America's #1 source of antioxidants, when taken - increases concentration and comprehension, does NOT absorb bodily fluids and dehydrate you like most people think. Just makes you want to go pea.
      • Tomchei, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1cigarettes weren't that bad for you until they put those addicting chemicals in it.
        But smoking has always been gross.
    • dumpyhumpy, on 04/16/2008, -1/+3I thought it was Bluemoon this whole time. *****... Im gonna die...
    • ronin691, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1I am on the exact same diet! Woo ray!
  • Rippleeffect, on 04/16/2008, -5/+74Everything is bad for us on some amount. And how does one say death is premature since its on it own timetable?
  • SemiSarcastic, on 04/16/2008, -6/+56Looking at stars at night are now also a leading cause in cancer.
    • falkonv7l, on 04/16/2008, -0/+8That is why I use "MoonScreen" it protects me from harmful UV rays amped by the Moons dangerously reflective atmosphere.
  • theRedLasso, on 04/16/2008, -5/+22"may" - this word always pisses me off.

    it "may" help you live longer, or it "may" kill you. distributors always use this word to cover there ass.
    • airquotes, on 04/16/2008, -1/+9their
    • falkonv7l, on 04/16/2008, -1/+2"Possible", "statistics show","surveyed","Presumed","Research Began on....",
    • bruce86, on 04/16/2008, -0/+2Well its funny because if they didn't say that, people would be jumping down their throats for sweeping generalizations.
  • number44, on 04/16/2008, -1/+26more incentive for Tom Cruise to keep eatin' those vitamins.
  • mytibt, on 04/16/2008, -1/+9Just when I thought GNC couldn't be any more overpriced
  • spamcrusher, on 04/16/2008, -18/+9Vote for Obama, he will destroy deadly supplements.
  • TheKarmaPolice, on 04/16/2008, -3/+75wait, you're telling me there's a risk of me dying?
    • Tyorant, on 04/16/2008, -1/+17Sure, what if you open the pot full of them, you spill them, they spread all over the floor, you step back to analyse the mess, you slip on them and you fall right through a window.
      Vitamins will increase your risk of death.
  • dantidote, on 04/16/2008, -2/+147Everyones chance of death is 100% dammit.
    • petrodollar, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1999.99999999% if you factor in Keith Richards, Joan Rivers, and John McCain.
    • scallon, on 04/16/2008, -0/+9Well if you happen to be of the Clan MacLeod and come from the highlands of Scotland, there is a slim chance you might live forever. But you have to be very good with a katana.
      • greenm1981, on 04/16/2008, -0/+9There can be only one!
      • zephc, on 04/16/2008, -0/+7yeah, but who wants to live forever? Who WANTSSSS to LIVVVVVVVVVE FOREVERRRRRRRRR?
    • SpectralSounds, on 04/16/2008, -1/+3Except for Dick Clark, he is immortal.
    • Apokalyps2547, on 04/16/2008, -0/+2Frankly I'm shocked it took this long for someone to say that. Thank you, dantidote.
    • veloscaper, on 04/16/2008, -0/+3HA! Not me, you losers. I've got a 0.0001% chance of drinking a magical elixir of ever lasting life with every beer I drink.
  • CarStan, on 04/16/2008, -3/+3Dr. Cochrane and his Collaboration better go back to inventing the warp drive.
    • yojiffyskippy, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1I thought he was OJ's lawyer?!?!?
  • dondara, on 04/16/2008, -1/+30FTA: "The evidence suggests it would be safer to obtain the chemicals not as supplements but by eating plenty of fruit and vegetables."

    Well duh. Anything processed and concentrated is not as healthy as naturally occurring. Everything in moderation.
    • mooseontheloose, on 04/16/2008, -5/+3Which is why I take arsenic and hemlock to cure my ills. Nice, natural, and healthy! No way am I putting dangerous drug capsules like modified penicillin in MY body.
    • radiopayola, on 04/16/2008, -0/+3You make a good point... Many vitamins require complete mineral complexes in order to be processed successfully within the body. As an example, the body uses X amount of some vitamin or mineral in order to metabolize ascorbic acid (commonly considered vitamin C). Without consuming a complete mineral complex of Vitamin C to provide all of the components required for proper digestion, the body uses up existing stores of these other substances within the body...actually causing DEFICIENCIES. So, in a sense, it's true. If you take ***** isolated minerals instead of true vitamin mineral complexes...you're harming your health.
      • spongya77, on 04/16/2008, -2/+0On the other hand you can't possibly eat as much fruits and vegetables as you'd need to get all the vitamins e required amount.
        • DeadElephant, on 04/16/2008, -0/+2Thats a lie.
        • radiopayola, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1Like the previous responder said, that's a lie. Not only is it a lie, but it's completely irrelevant because there are plenty of vitamin products out there that only contain complete mineral complexes derived in their entirety from fruits, vegetables, and other various plants.
  • Rufunki, on 04/16/2008, -1/+47Interesting digg day, vitamins bad, but is masturbation good.
    • Railz, on 04/16/2008, -0/+15Sounds like any other day at digg to me.
    • oilcan, on 04/16/2008, -3/+0western doctors will tell you yes, eastern doctors will tell you no. well, at least in excess, no.
    • dumpyhumpy, on 04/16/2008, -0/+8Im gonna live forever!!
    • bowe, on 04/16/2008, -0/+3I've been drinking vitamin water like crazy lately. It says on the label, "Vitamins+water = All you need". I've given up all other foods!
  • kazimir22, on 04/16/2008, -1/+24So what i'm hearing here is "If you don't take vitamins you will become immortal"

    i guess i better start now
  • amcnair, on 04/16/2008, -1/+13Risk of death = 100% among humans. Kinda hard to increase that.
  • veoeluz2268, on 04/16/2008, -2/+7fta: "Bjelakovic's team evaluated 67 randomised clinical trials with 232,550 subjects; 21 of the trials were on healthy subjects, while the rest tested patients with a range of diseases."

    um... why?
    • elliotys, on 04/16/2008, -2/+3Really? A control group.
    • RobotBuddha, on 04/16/2008, -1/+2I don't think they were controls. It's just really hard to find studies of vitamin use in healthy people that can be validly joined into a meta analysis.
  • screwfanboys1, on 04/16/2008, -8/+4i call *****, this is just like when scientists were trying to what ***** causes cancer
  • floridiot2, on 04/16/2008, -1/+24Ok... what exactly does 16% increased risk even ***** mean? What was my risk beforehand?
    • jcastillo81, on 04/16/2008, -0/+12100%
    • mckinnej, on 04/16/2008, -0/+12You had a 100% chance of dying at some point in the future. Based on these numbers you now have a 116% chance. Somehow I don't see where you or anyone lost much in that increase. Now if they could say something like we're going to have a 16% shorter lifespan, that would be a different story. I think we're still more likely to die from cancer or some other natural cause than an over abundance of vitamins.
    • floridiot2, on 04/16/2008, -0/+2How is 100% a risk?
    • crossmr, on 04/16/2008, -0/+2at any given time you have a chance to die based on a number of risk factors (current illness, family history, what you had for breakfast, etc) this is saying if you do these things it adds another % to that. These risk factors come from statistics, e.g. x% of people who do Y end up dead.
    • erinspice, on 04/16/2008, -0/+4The 16% increased risk is of dying PREMATURELY. It doesn't mean that if you take vitamins you have a 116% chance of dying. The article just doesn't say how the authors of the study defined "premature death." The first paragraph states that correctly, even if they left out the word "prematurely" in other places in the article.
  • lohphat, on 04/16/2008, -0/+11> 60% of all supplements are excreted unprocessed in the urine. Americans have the most expensive pee on the planet.
    • Railz, on 04/16/2008, -0/+10Damn right we do. We should start selling it back to China.
    • hayzeus, on 04/16/2008, -0/+13That's why I drink my own -- saves me big bucks on vitamins AND soda.
      • lohphat, on 04/16/2008, -1/+1And if you like RedBull you don't have to worry about the color!
    • khail250, on 04/16/2008, -0/+3what about columbia that pees out coke?
    • Jennadickes, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1It's true, especially with the B vitamins. Take those and your urine will be a lovely shade of mustard yellow an hour later
    • pimpdad82, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1That's why I use slow release GMC vitamins
  • lolology, on 04/16/2008, -1/+7I get my vitamin/MINerals from high quality food, not synthetic/cooked tablets processed through dozens of factories.
    • crossmr, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1I doubt the food is anywhere near as high quality as you think it is. Food is no longer allowed to mature and doesn't contain the nutrients that they used to. Unless you grow your own food and kill your own meat that is.
      • lolology, on 04/16/2008, -0/+0I do grow my own food, but not as much as I should be. The rest of it is certified organic from the local grocery store. I used to eat a lot of meat for protein and other vitamins, however, once the meat is cooked, you are destroying most of the protein/enzymes/tryptophan. I get most of my protein from hemp. 2 small tea spoons of hemp seed nuts is 11g of protein + tryptophan/amino acids. Hemp is the best source of protein, along with Spirulina.
    • chuckDontSurf, on 04/16/2008, -0/+6Great. You want a ***** medal?
  • Zlorp, on 04/16/2008, -0/+9this just in: everything is bad for you in large quantities.

  • Biznaka, on 04/16/2008, -0/+4Hah, so basically they are saying that if I don't take vitamins I won't have a higher risk of death? But I thought I was going to die anyway.
  • VoodooPunk, on 04/16/2008, -2/+6Does a day go by where science doesn't tell us that something they once said was bad for us is now good for us and something they told us was good for us is now bad for us? How are we supposed to take any of these scientific studies seriously?
    • frishack, on 04/16/2008, -2/+1I totally agree. Scientists don't know jack. Read this very awesome article: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/28/magazine/28nutri ...
      short link: http://tinyurl.com/2e446z
    • RobotBuddha, on 04/16/2008, -0/+3There's a huge difference between science, scientists, and popular science reporters. The latter usually take out of context quotes, mix it in with science they don't understand, and then try to spin it into a blockbuster story. It's not unusual at all for science reporters to have never taken even an introductory level class in research methodology. Meaning they can't even understand what they're reporting on. Quite frankly you should take anything about science that's not directly written by a researcher in that exact field with quite a few grains of salt.
      • VoodooPunk, on 04/16/2008, -1/+3I'd apply that standard even to science written by a researcher in the field. The truth is there are monetary incentives for all scientists to produce sensational results. The money for research doesn't keep rolling in for scientists that simply confirm conventional wisdom.
        • bruce86, on 04/16/2008, -0/+4actually they have to get published first. Which involves the study being validated by other experts in the field. If the researcher's claims are to far reaching or sensationalized, their study will be rejected. Additional if it doesn't apply to scientific conventional wisdom, it might have a hard time getting published because scientific communities are notoriously slow and stubborn.
  • loaff, on 04/16/2008, -2/+3Cochrane reviews are usually a good source for evidence-based information. This meta-analysis confirms earlier studies and could have a clinical impact.
  • fatTJ, on 04/16/2008, -1/+35WARNING: Living may increase increase Risk of Death
  • macweirdo42, on 04/16/2008, -1/+6Wait, are you saying that if I stop taking vitamins, I increase my chances of becoming immortal? That's pretty freakin' sweet.
  • standinero, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1the people that make vitamins are not going to be happy
  • n8o8, on 04/16/2008, -1/+15This is ridiculous sensationalism.
  • ZippidyDoo, on 04/16/2008, -0/+6So, my 1 meal a day (damn college) w/o taking a multivitamin is better than taking it?
  • footodors, on 04/16/2008, -5/+1too much tom cruise is bad for your health
  • jsknoll, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1above 100%?
  • T101, on 04/16/2008, -0/+10Buried for not saying how they will kill me.
    "linked to a 16% increased risk of dying, beta-carotene to a 7% increased risk and vitamin E to a 4% increased risk."
    dying from what?
    • NoQuarter, on 04/16/2008, -0/+3Everything, it's a generalised risk of dying from anything in a time period. So a study might have looked at (randomly chosen) people taking supplements or placebo for 4 years, counted the deaths on each side and calculated the risk ratios from that. Typically the studies have associated vitamin use with increased risk of cancer (because ironically enough they expected to find an improvement in cancer survival due to the anti-oxidant theory) although it's possible the vitamins can have an effect on other diseases.
  • eddy23170, on 04/16/2008, -2/+4ray kurzweil is so screwed
    • shasty55, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1first thing i thought of. wouldnt this technically make him dead already?
  • OneLess, on 04/16/2008, -0/+2Every time I end up ingesting more than twice the RDA of vitamin C, I feel like I'm already dead. So does everyone else in the room.
    • bowe, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1so two cups of orange juice will just about put you under?
      • OneLess, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1Yes, unfortunately. The worst is those energy drinks that have like 300% RDA each of all the B vitamins and C.
  • apocelo42, on 04/16/2008, -2/+13correlation isn't causation.
    • bobburn, on 04/16/2008, -1/+1thank you, and another note: if you shove enough of any substance into something, it'll cause death. Jebus. Another attempt by big pharma to get vitamins regulated. ***** you Big Pharma! ***** YOU!
    • m00n1, on 04/16/2008, -1/+1Well, it can be pretty much established that it is causation with a large enough sample group and enough controls/placebos in place.
      • apocelo42, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1of course it can, all it takes is finding a connection between the two that explains both the correlation and the effect, but that's not the case for this study. One of two things is happening in this case, either the study is flawed (least likely) or the results are being twisted (most likely). This article was very vague about why getting vitamins from supplements is bad when it's not from fruits etc. and it was also quite vague about what the causes of death were. You can't just say that chance of death is up 16%, there has to be a reason, such as chance of death by cancer or what have you. Those two holes suggest that they say a correlation and assumed causation. Until they can explain any connection i suggest not giving into their scare tactics.
  • Tweak1313, on 04/16/2008, -4/+2Living increases your chance of dying.
  • elliotys, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1I think the rationale for this is as follows. Free radicals, while generally seen as a bad thing, are important markers for your cells because they play a regulatory role in Apoptosis (healthy programmed cell death). By taking so many antioxidants, you irreversibly suppress the levels of Free radicals, and thus no apoptosis. So I assume the increased risk of death was from a general increase in various Cancer rates, but then again I am basing this off a couple paragraphs without reading the actual study.
    • schultzi22, on 04/16/2008, -0/+0Free radicals form during metabolism, among many other common biological processes, so it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to "irreversibly suppress" their levels. As you mentioned, free radicals are generally viewed as detrimental, since they have been implicated in both cancer and negative effects of aging. I can't find any information about free radicals being markers for apoptosis, only being created during the process, buy I may just be missing it. Either way, I'm surprised that excess antioxidants are unhealthy, I would really like to see what the causes of death were, it would make the article much more persuasive.
      • elliotys, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1Last year a huge study came out saying men that take "high amounts" of vitamins each day had an increased risk of Prostate cancer. The hypothesis put forward in that paper, to explain the increase in cancer, was pretty much what I said up above about free-radicals triggering apoptosis ( I guess I got overzealous with the "irreversible" part, but the overall message remains the same.
  • Dnuts, on 04/16/2008, -3/+1Oh WoW, You mean I'll have a 16% chance of just up and ***** dying if I take Vitamin A?! These morons neglected to realize the truth that people who take vitamin A have a 84% risk of living. My god!! It's like playing russian roulette at the GNC!
  • jcastillo81, on 04/16/2008, -2/+7***** now I have 116% chance of dying! I wonder what that number would be if I added on drinking alcohol, using a cell-phone, standing too close to the microwave, eating eggs and bacon, getting hit by lightning, getting shot, spontaneous combustion, etc etc etc?

    I'm boned...
  • UtopiaTree, on 04/16/2008, -0/+4What's going to kill you next changes from week to week.
  • sdphost, on 04/16/2008, -1/+2What doesn't cause death nowadays?
    • crossmr, on 04/16/2008, -0/+2interestingly death. Those who were already dead did not have an increased chance of dying when vitamins were shoved down their throat.
    • darkcooger, on 04/16/2008, -1/+3Only death itself, it seems.
    • vagabond45, on 04/22/2008, -0/+0Since everything causes death, it is a miracle how there is any life on this planet!
  • dugghole, on 04/16/2008, -2/+1In other news, bacon is now good for you.
  • manito9, on 04/16/2008, -1/+4In a study, anyone taking vitamins that happens to die, will be rendered prematurely dead because of the vitamins, no matter what the real cause was. Preposterous.
    • RobotBuddha, on 04/16/2008, -0/+2To be fair, they might have factored it in correctly. But, as usual, the article didn't feel like including the needed information to judge whether the study should be considered valid or not.
  • jes4772, on 04/16/2008, -4/+4Scientific evidence has proven that living increases the risk of death.
    • tellahoohooo, on 04/16/2008, -2/+3read comments before you comment...
  • theratdotus, on 04/16/2008, -1/+3Bjelakovic's team evaluated 67 randomised clinical trials with 232,550 subjects; 21 of the trials were on healthy subjects, while the rest tested patients with a range of diseases.

    Wow, what a flawed study. did any of the 21 already healthy people die?
    • erinspice, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1There were 21 trials on healthy subjects. I doubt those trials studied just one subject each. The sentence you posted is not nearly enough information to determine whether the study was flawed. I'm sure some of the healthy people died -- it had to be a very long study. The point of this article is that taking vitamins increases your risk of PREMATURE death by 16%. It would have been nice if they'd told us how the authors of the study defined "premature death," though.
      • RobotBuddha, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1Exactly. Or mentioned 'why' the healthy people were taking vitamins, which is often a sign of trying to treat illness. Or even just whether the vitamins taken in all the studies had each been tested to verify the amount and quality of the ingredients.
  • liuite, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1too much potassium can cause heart flutter which can be very serious
  • BrickTamaland, on 04/16/2008, -0/+2The vitamin A data is heavily driven by studies done on smokers. Tobacco carcinogens are known to interact with beta carotene making it carcinogenic
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 111 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.