Comments on: The vitamin E study http://www.journalclub.org/2004/11/22/n24 Comments on the medical literature Wed, 13 Jul 2005 13:30:08 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Jen http://www.journalclub.org/2004/11/22/n24/comment-page-1#comment-1079 Jen Wed, 16 Mar 2005 05:27:00 +0000 http://www.journalclub.org/2004/11/22/n24#comment-1079 Thanks goodness someone is seeing this study for what it is. Just like the media to freak everyone out! Thanks goodness someone is seeing this study for what it is. Just like the media to freak everyone out!

]]> By: dpatrie http://www.journalclub.org/2004/11/22/n24/comment-page-1#comment-294 dpatrie Fri, 17 Dec 2004 14:08:55 +0000 http://www.journalclub.org/2004/11/22/n24#comment-294 Reading over the published results on the vitamin E study, personal avoidence of the supplement should not be based on a study that is unsure of the effects on healthy adults. This study was based on subjects alreasy facing health issues, and with 75% of polled cardiologists still recomending the supplement to their patients on a somewhat regular basis (http://www.crnusa.org/Shellnr013101Steinberg0305.html), I do believe that we have a lot more to learn about this beneficial supplement before any more decisions are made against its potential health benfactors. As all supplements, before taking a consult with a physician and nutritionist are always reccomended. [Comment by Michael Jacobson: The statistics of 75% of cardiologists recommending the supplement is taken from a 2001 survey, found on the website listed above. That website is CRN --"The Council for Responsible Nutrition (CRN), founded in 1973, is a Washington-based trade association representing ingredient suppliers and manufacturers in the dietary supplement industry." They also sponsored the survey, to be taken with a grain of salt, I believe. -- mjmd ] Reading over the published results on the vitamin E study, personal avoidence of the supplement should not be based on a study that is unsure of the effects on healthy adults. This study was based on subjects alreasy facing health issues, and with 75% of polled cardiologists still recomending the supplement to their patients on a somewhat regular basis (http://www.crnusa.org/Shellnr013101Steinberg0305.html), I do believe that we have a lot more to learn about this beneficial supplement before any more decisions are made against its potential health benfactors. As all supplements, before taking a consult with a physician and nutritionist are always reccomended.

[Comment by Michael Jacobson: The statistics of 75% of cardiologists recommending the supplement is taken from a 2001 survey, found on the website listed above. That website is CRN --"The Council for Responsible Nutrition (CRN), founded in 1973, is a Washington-based trade association representing ingredient suppliers and manufacturers in the dietary supplement industry." They also sponsored the survey, to be taken with a grain of salt, I believe. -- mjmd ]

]]>