Response to Brian Radcliffe Article
admin on 09 30, 2009
Nutrigolds response to Brian Radcliffe negative article.. in The Daily Mail September 10th 2009
Click here to read the original article.
The comments of Brian Radcliffe, quoted in “Multivitamin pills can do you more harm than good”, by Fione Macrae are a lot of negative nonsense, directed unfairly and unreasonably against the nutritional industry. One wonders what can be the motivation for such a poorly informed tirade in the face of ample evidence of huge benefits from nutritional supplements. This is bias in the extreme.
The statement that supplements “do little to boost health” is at the heart of the dispute, for the benefits of supplements are so widely attested from numerous clinical trials. With thousands of such trials in the research literature, one can only conclude that Brian Radcliffe has not done his homework before writing his rant. Since it is hard to believe that such a person is entirely ignorant of the existence of these positive trials, can it be that he deliberately ignores them? Science is supposed to be based upon objective assessments. Surely it seems as if this man only wants to destroy our supplements industry. Why is that? We do know that nutritional supplements can reduce the overall requirements for drugs, so maybe that gives us a hint.
No one has drawn up a listing of all the favourable trials recently, but Werbach first produced his book “Nutritional Influences on Illness, a Sourcebook of Clinical Research” in 1987 and updated it in 1993. This is a true compendium of the research up to that time. The number of references is huge and most of them positively report good results coming out of using supplements. A few of the reports were not so favourable, but very few, and mostly related to very minor side effects, experienced only a few people at unnecessarily high doses, doses not usually used and entirely avoidable.
It was followed in similar vein by “Nutritional Influences on Mental Illness” in 1991. Since then we have had “The Physician’s Desk reference for Nutritional Supplements” (2001) which provides “unbiased profiles to help you separate fact from fiction, crucial warnings for safe, effective use, authoritative, in-depth comprehensive”. Does Brian Radcliffe not know that nutrition is a deeply effective, sophisticated approach to medicine? Does he not know that there is a whole profession out there, staffed by experts who know about the very few, mostly minor, dangers that exist with their use, but who are, above all, well schooled and well experienced in obtaining great benefits through their use?
He quotes the example of Vitamin A. Of course, all nutritionists know that there is such a thing as hypervitaminosis A, first discovered among Arctic explorers who ate polar bear liver. But the dose required is very high. In all my 30 years as a practitioner I never saw anyone suffering even slightly from an acute excess of Vitamin A. Yet Brian Radcliffe seems to want everyone to think that the risk of hypervitaminosis is something they should fear. It is not reasonable, It is silly. It is written in such a manner that people are going to conclude that all supplements are dangerous in the same manner as is misleadingly alleged for Vitamin A. Problems arising from the use of supplements are rare, temporary and avoidable through proper use. Most supplements on the market are utterly safe. Again, one questions his intentions and the appearance is that he has no intention of heeding the massive available evidence and no intention of addressing the matter in a balanced way.
Newspapers and other media that publish such material need to be challenged on the issue of unfair reporting. They should give professional nutritionists an equal right to state the case for their profession within their columns. It does not happen, the newspapers are biased as well.
Click here to read the original article.
Click here to read the statement prepared by the Health Food Manufacturers’ Association (HFMA).
Comments (6)
Leave a Reply
Popular Posts
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
- muscle max xl gnc: great site, i found
- Caroline Boyle: The world has truly
- floriauck: When I first was let
- andywren77: , I absolutely love
- Florence Neville: I found this article
I’m tired of the ignorant ’so called experts’ voicing their opinions without applying thorough clinical governance to their own methods of analysis. It’s time the pharma got a grip and accepted that Healthy eating, healthy living and indeed quality food supplements help the body to function more efficiently as many of those nutrients are lacking in the typical western diet and indeed stressful lifestyles also cause us to lose/use up valuable nutrients to counter balance the stress mechanism!
its time the people, yes we are a majority started to kickback over how the multi nationals have the level of power that they have to strongly influence the media and also the media are to blame because they love to sensationalise a story and exagerate and are selective about what they want to public to read/hear.
I’m in great health, I don’t get any types of flu or illnesses because I eat a healthy diet and take supplements and I know many people who experience the same benefits, but then that is the point isn’t it because it means if more people live this healthier lifestyle they probably require less drugs!!!
Dear Barbara,
Thank you for your input and response. It’s so hard to see why the media continue to offer such a one sided debate, with obvious misrepresentation of the facts, how can this possibly be in the public’s best interests. It’s almost as if everything the pharmaceutical industry, or there representatives, ever say is excepted as correct, often without any scientific justification and they never seem to question any of their motives for saying such things.. Interestingly no one has mentioned it to me. It’s as if the public have already made up their mine on the matter. However it does highlight the issue that not all food supplements do the job there meant too…
Best wishes
Andrew Wren.
Managing Director.
Nutrigold Ltd
I’m totallly in agreement with the sentiments expressed by Nutrigold following the Mail’s article – a fairly common ‘bash’ at alternative remedies and aimed at people who like to be informed, think for themselves and take charge of their health as far as possible; people who do not help the pharmaceuticals to get even richer. (How relatively poor is the £600m vitamin industry compared to the multi-billion pound pharmaceutical giants!)
The fact that more people appear to be turning to alternative medicine and practices speaks for itself. I, for one, will not be rushing for my Tamiflu jab, or any other jab for that matter, and doctors can keep the Statins they are paid to hand out so liberally. I hate to say ‘I’m 65, etc.’ – but taking charge of my own health, using vitamin and mineral supplements etc. means my doctor doesn’t even know who I am. Long may that last! I don’t believe a few extra minerals and vitamins will ever compromise my body in the way drugs can and do.
Those who ’stand outside the box’ and refuse to follow like sheep are rarely popular. The ‘powers that be’ are more comfortable with those who simply conform, don’t challenge or have opinions.
Well – I only came on to the site to order some Aloe Vera but Brian Radcliffe’s article made me see red….!
Keep up the good work, Nutrigold. Your Education section is great too.
I don’t believe that supplements keep you healthy and I also think that they can be dangerous.
I think that a healthy balanced diet and exercise, alongside a relaxed approach to life is all you need. Humans have survived this long without supplements!
In Response to Sam knights recent comments. Interesting point of view, obviously your not alone with this one. Is there any chance you would like to share some scientific research that supports this revelation? Come on lets talks about the facts not fiction!!!
Dear Mr Knight,
Thank you for your response, even though yet again you lack any real tangible evidence, I can see that this is a pointless exercise for both me and our readers. Anyway, here is a response to your latest comments.
1. “Well I hope that we can be reasonable. First of all you are assuming that the idea that
supplements can be dangerous is fiction?”
ALMOST ANYTHING CAN BE MADE DANGEROUS BY ABUSING IT. WITH MOST NUTRIENTS YOU HAVE TO USE PRETTY ABSURD LEVELS OF THEM TO MAKE THEM DANGEROUS OR EVEN TO PRODUCE ANY UNCOMFORTABLE EFFECTS. “RESPONSIBLE USE” MEANS KEEPING INTAKES WITHIN LABEL RECOMMENDATIONS OR TAKING THE ADVICE OF A NUTRITIONAL PRACTITIONER SKILLED IN USING BOTH DIET AND SUPPLEMENTS FOR HEALTH BENEFITS. VITAMIN A LEVELS IN POLAR BEAR LIVER CAN BE HARMFUL BUT THE INTAKE LEVELS FROM EATING POLAR BEAR LIVER ARE NOT ENCOUNTERED IN ANY NORMAL DIET OR IN ANY SUPPLEMENTS. THIS IS A HIGHLY REGULATED INDUSTRY.
VITAMIN A IS SIMPLY A VITAMIN ESSENTIAL TO HEALTH WHOSE ADEQUATE PRESENCE IN DIET IS NOT GUARANTEED AND WHOSE ABSENCE LEADS TO BLINDNESS.
2. “Once upon a time I was very naive and was absolutely convinced that we all needed
supplements, I also took a diploma in nutrition. But when it came to researching evidence associated with the benefits of lets say, antioxidants or fish oils and health benefits, I had a really hard time finding anything substantial and I really did look hard in many journals, including: best evidence, Ovid and alternative medicine journals.”
ONE SIMPLY WONDERS WHOEVER AWARDED YOU A DIPLOMA IN NUTRITION WITHOUT GIVING YOU THE ABILITY TO SEARCH THE LITERATURE PROPERLY? THE SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE REPORTING BENEFITS FROM ADEQUATE INTAKES OF NUTRIENTS AND FROM USING SUPPLEMENTS IS TRULY VAST AND YOU HAVE SOMEHOW MANAGED TO MISS ALL OF IT. IT IS SO HARD TO MISS THAT ONE WONDERS WHETHER YOU INTENDED TO DO SO FROM THE START?
WERBACH FIRST PRODUCED HIS BOOK “NUTRITIONAL INFLUENCES ON ILLNESS, A SOURCEBOOK OF CLINICAL RESEARCH” IN 1987 AND UPDATED IT IN 1993. THIS IS A TRUE COMPENDIUM OF THE RESEARCH UP TO THAT TIME. THE NUMBER OF REFERENCES IS HUGE AND MOST OF THEM POSITIVELY REPORT GOOD RESULTS COMING OUT OF USING SUPPLEMENTS. A FEW OF THE REPORTS WERE NOT SO FAVOURABLE, BUT VERY FEW. THEY MOSTLY RELATED TO VERY MINOR SIDE EFFECTS TEMPORARILY EXPERIENCED BY A FEW PEOPLE USING UNNECESSARILY HIGH DOSES. SUCH DOSES ARE NOT USUALLY USED AND ARE ENTIRELY AVOIDABLE.
THERE ARE ABOUT 7-9 SUCH REFERENCES PER PAGE IN WERBACH AND WELL OVER 600 PAGES, SO PROBABLY ABOUT 5,000 REFERENCES IN THAT ONE PUBLICATION. THESE ARE WIDELY DISTRIBUTED THROUGH THE WORLD SCIEN-TIFIC AND MEDICAL LITERATURE, AND YET YOU DID NOT SEE ANY OF THEM!
ONE IS TEMPTED TO SAY “THERE ARE NONE SO BLIND AS THOSE WHO WILL NOT SEE!”
IT WAS FOLLOWED IN SIMILAR VEIN BY “NUTRITIONAL INFLUENCES ON MENTAL ILLNESS” IN 1991. SINCE THEN WE HAVE HAD “THE PHYSICIAN’S DESK REFERENCE FOR NUTRITIONAL SUPPLEMENTS” (2001) WHICH PROVIDES “UNBIASED PROFILES TO HELP YOU SEPARATE FACT FROM FICTION, CRUCIAL WARNINGS FOR SAFE AND EFFECTIVE USE.
SIMONE’S BOOK ON “CANCER AND NUTRITION”, COVERING BOTH DIETS AND INDIVIDUAL NUTRIENTS, HAD ALREADY OFFERED OVER 1,000 REFERENCES ON THIS SPECIFIC AND NARROW TOPIC IN 1992.
3. “I do think that some supplements can be dangerous and as long as we eat a balanced diet and exercise and have a relaxed approach to life”
THE WORDS “A BALANCED DIET” RUN OFF THE TONGUE SO EASILY, DON’T
THEY? PERHAPS YOU COULD ENLIGHTEN US ALL AS TO WHAT THIS ACTUALLY REFERS TO AND THE CAREFULLY CALCULATED NUTRITIONAL VALUES OF THIS BALANCED DIET? MAYBE YOU ARE REFERRING TO THE AVERAGE BRITISH DIET AS STATED IN OUR SCIENTIFICALLY REFERENCED NEWSLETTER ENTITLED “SURVIVING THE BRITISH DIET?” INTERESTINGLY THIS RESEARCH HAS BEEN COMPILED BASED ON THE BRITISH GOVERNMENTS OWN RESEARCH INTO THE SUBJECT. MAYBE YOU KNOW SOMEONE WHO IS FAR BETTER QUALIFIED TO DO SUCH A JOB?. WHY DON’T YOU TAKE THE TIME TO READ THE ABOVE LITERATURE, WHICH IS ONLY A SAMPLE OF WHAT’S AVAILABLE TO THE OPEN MINDED, YOU NEVER KNOW YOU MIGHT FIND IT MOST INFORMATIVE.
4. “I do not think that we need supplements.”
WHY NOT TAKE THE TIME TO READ THE NEWSLETTER ENTITLED “SURVIVING THE BRITISH DIET AND EXPLAIN TO ME WHERE YOU FEEL WE ARE WRONG AND WHY?
5. “Of course you will not agree with this, because it would not be good for the family business and I am sure that having your parents involved with the business and also running colleges that promote supplementation, there will be a lot of conditioning involved with your interest in this field.”
ONCE AGAIN YOU ARE BEING VERY IGNORANT AND OFFENSIVE WITH YOUR COMMENTS, YOU HAVE OBVIOUSLY PUT LITTLE OR NO EFFORT INTO RESEARCHING YOUR POINTS. YOUR COMMENTS ARE ONCE AGAIN BASED ON TOTAL MISS-INFORMATION. NUTRIGOLD IS NOT, AND HAS NEVER BEEN, A FAMILY OWNED BUSINESS, THESE MUST BE YET MORE RIDICULOUS ASSUMPTIONS ON YOUR PART. OTHER THAN MYSELF AND A BUSINESS PARTNER DEE LAVER, NO ONE HAS EVER HELD SHARES IN NUTRIGOLD LTD UNTIL IT WAS SOLD IN 2006 TO NEUTRA HEALTH PLC WHO ARE THE CURRENT OWNERS. NEUTRA HEALTH’S SHARES ARE QUOTED UPON THE STOCK EXCHANGE.
WHILST ALL COMMERCIAL BUSINESS LEADS TO SOME FORM OF VESTED INTEREST, I LIKE TO THINK THAT MOST PEOPLE WHO WORK WITHIN THE COMPLEMENTARY HEALTH FIELD DO SO BECAUSE OF SELF DISCOVERY AND AN INNER BELIEF. LET’S FACE IT WITH AN AVERAGE WAGE OF £14,000 PER YEAR FOR TRAINED NUTRITIONALISTS, COMPARED TO THE PHARMACEUTICAL MULTI BILLION POUND INDUSTRY, WE ARE MERE AMATEURS WHO EARN VERY SMALL RETURNS FOR OUR EFFORT AND THE CAPITAL INVESTED. WE ALSO CAN’T AFFORD THE REPORTED SIX MILLION POUNDS A DAY THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY INVEST IN GOVERNMENT LOBBYISTS. SOMEONE’S GETTING VERY RICH OUT THERE AND ONE HAS TO ASK ONE’S SELF WHY THEY NEED TO INVEST SO MUCH IN PUSHING THEIR PRODUCT ON THE PUBLIC? MAYBE I SHOULD BECOME A LOBBYIST?
WHILST DISCUSSING THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY IT’S PROBABLY
WORTH MENTIONING THEIR VESTED INTERESTS IN US ALL LINING UP FOR
OUR VACCINATIONS AND REGULAR MEDICATION. THE LAST THING THEY
NEED IS PEOPLE HAVING ALTERNATIVE VIEWS TO THEIRS AND WITH THEIR POWER THROUGH CONTROLLING THE FEW MEDIA COMPANIES IN THE WORLD YOU END UP WITH A VERY ONESIDED DEBATE. THEIR VESTED INTERESTS ARE VASTLY GREATER THAN ANYONE ELSE’S, WITH A REPORTED AVERAGE SHARE CAPITAL GREATER THAN BRITISH TELECOM, WHO THE HELLS TAKING ALL THESE DRUGS? THEIR PRODUCTS OFTEN PRODUCE SHOCKING SIDE EFFECTS THAT ARE LARGELY BY PASSED AND DEEMED OK FOR THE PATIENTS TO SUFFER. BY COMPARISON SIDE EFFECTS FROM FOOD SUPPLEMENTS ARE RARE AND ONLY COME FROM MISS-USE OR COMPRISE ONLY MINOR AND TEMPORARY INCONVENIENCE, WHICH IS EASILY REVERSIBLE UPON CHANGING THE DOSE. COMPARE THIS WITH THE SERIOUS AND OFTEN IRREVERSIBLE EFFECTS OF MANY DRUGS.
AS FOR THE WEBSITE YOU MENTION I WOULD NOT LOWER MYSELF TO READ ARTICLES THAT START WITH A HEADING LIKE NUTRIBOLLOCKS, THIS SETS THE SCENE FOR A MOST DEBASED DEBATE, WHICH IS BASED ON EXAGGERATED NONSENSE. I WOULD LOVE TO SEE WHERE THEIR FUNDING COMES FROM!!.
AS FOR THE SAFETY OF FOOD SUPPLEMENTS, AS YOU MAY OR MAY NOT
KNOW, THE INDUSTRY HAS BEEN THROUGH SOME VERY INTENSE REGULATION. STARTING WITH THE EUROPEAN POSITIVE LIST FOR FOOD SUPPLEMENT INGREDIENTS (THIS IS WHERE A DOSSIER ON EACH INGREDIENT HAS TO BEEN SUBMITTED TO A COMMITTEE AND ITS SAFETY HAS TO BE PROVEN WITHOUT DOUBT) I REPEAT MY QUESTION ARE YOU SAYING THE EUROPEAN COMMITTEE OF EXPERTS HAVE GOT IT WRONG? WE HAVE ALSO HAD LEGISLATION COVERING GMP, ALLERGEN AND MORE RECENTLY UPPER SAFETY LEVELS FOR LONG TERM USE OF FOOD SUPPLEMENTS, WHICH ARE SET AT VERY LOW LEVELS AND EVEN FAIL TO STATE WHAT LONG TERM USE IS! THESE LEVELS ARE OFTEN SET AT MANY TIMES LOWER THAN ANY REASONABLE SUGGESTED TOXIC LEVELS.
6. “I like to think of myself as a person of science, who tests and questions everything.”
YOU COULD CERTAINLY COULD DO A LOT BETTER AT IT!!
7. “I also like to have evidence, not poorly constructed biased evidence or opinion.”
TRY LOOKING IN THE MIRROR, THAT’S EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE PROMULGATING.
8. “Good bye Andy and I wish you well with your ethos and future debates.”
AS FOR MY CONDITIONING, I AM HAPPY WITH WHO I AM, HOW ABOUT YOU?