Are multi vitamins that important? i heard they were and heard they arent but if so whats a good one to take?
They’re a good idea when losing fat because stored fat starts releasing a bunch of nasty stuff when it’s broken down for fuel. There’s a little more info in the newest Poliquin article. It recommended what type of multi-v you should get. He sells a multi-v on his site that meets the criteria.
[quote]livinthedream wrote:
Are multi vitamins that important? i heard they were and heard they arent but if so whats a good one to take?
[/quote]
I will just tell you what I have settled on concerning the great vitamin debate. I use a healthy serving of Greens Plus in my morning Metabolic Drive shake and then try to eat a fruit or vegetable in every meal for the rest of the day. My morning shake also contains blueberries and a banana usually.
Take care,
D
[quote]livinthedream wrote:
Are multi vitamins that important? i heard they were and heard they arent but if so whats a good one to take?
[/quote]
if the multi is giving you nutrients that you are not otherwise consuming, then it will work wonders as long as it is a quality product.
most people who need it to fill in gaps find that they feel the effects right away. food however is still a better option as it provides many nutrients that a multi does not.
i have my clients take multi+ by genuine health (greens+ people) if they choose to take a multi. in general most of my clients do not take a multi and still manage to get well over the DRI for most nutrients.
Multi Vitamins are important and you most likely do need them since 99% of us dont meet our daily requirements (if you do major props)…but i know there isnt enough time in everyones day to make vitamin and amino acid packed meals and such…Its my opinion but i know its strongly backed…Multi Vitamins are a very smart choice
[quote]livinthedream wrote:
Are multi vitamins that important? i heard they were and heard they arent but if so whats a good one to take?
[/quote]
I’ve found that Beverly International makes a dynamite multi, called the “Super Pack” its simply put the best multi pack I’ve ever had/used, its still a tad on the pricey side (about $30) for a 30 day supply, but the only other thing you would prolly want to add to it is another HQ fish oil cap.
Normally I try to stay out of the technical discussions since they usually turn into a food-fight, but this subject is too important not to discuss.
The arguments for synthetic vitamin supplementation usually go something like this:
A)Most people don’t receive enough of their R.D.A.'s, so vitamins fill that gap.
B)If you’re losing weight, you need extra for they’re antioxidant roles in the body and since more toxins are released during this time…you’re need increases.
C)You can’t receive your R.D.A.'s with a 2,000 calorie or lower diet, therefore you need to supplement.
D)If you work around, or directly with chemicals, toxins, wastes, etc. your demands are much higher than the ‘average’ person’s.
Let’s examine each of these points to see if they are really leading us in the right path.
A)While it has been repeatedly reported that the majority of us don’t receive adequate amounts of the R.D.A’s, if you do the math…this simply couldn’t be all that true. Let me illustrate:
For all of us egg eaters, have you looked at the nutrient load of a single egg? It basically has everything except vitamin C in adequate levels (in some cases, in large amounts). You read in some of these threads about individuals eating dozens per week, so if this is the case…these people can be eliminated from this category. If the eggs are from organic range-fed sources and the yolks are eaten raw, this will also improve the chances of these nutrients being bioavailable.
B)If you’re in a fat loss stage, then nutrient need does seem to be increased. However, as seen earlier, multivitamins are not the only way to receive a large quantity of your R.D.A’s.
C)This is a ridiculous statement that only exists in the minds of people who still buy into the food pyramid and that fuckin step thing that they have now. Of course you can’t receive adequate amounts of vitamins through grains, fruits and veggies…they have the least amount per serving. The highest? Yup, you guessed it…organs, other meats, unprocessed dairy, eggs and certain oils.
D)This reason can be answered the same way as reason c. If there is an increased demand, attempt to fill it with REAL food.
Weston Price was an absolute pioneer in the field of nutrition; vitamins in particular. One of the many interesting observations that he made was that in every primitive culture that he studied (thoroughly), their nutrient content was considerably higher than their industrial counterparts…i.e…us.
In particular, the fat soluble vitamins were found to be at least 10 times higher than that of the American population of that time. Let’s keep in mind that this was still a period of time when fat consumption was still relatively untouched by politics and science. Shortly after, margarine, and technology-created oils replaced butter, tallow and lard.
Knowing this, does it seem like the concept of NEEDING a multi dramatically decreases?
To test this, sign up for fitday.com’s free service to track your calorie, macro and micronutrient amounts per day…or you can use any other service that you may currently subscribe to.
Input these foods first and see each of their nutrient contents:
-pasta, whole wheat bread
-broccoli, cabbage, tomato
-apple, orange, banana
Now input these foods and see the differences in nutrient content:
-liver, kidney, brain
-flank steak, tenderloin, bacon
-eggs
-raw milk, butter, cheese
-cod liver oil, high vitamin butter oil
After this experiment, the topic of whether you NEED multi’s or not should be brought into a new light.
For more reading, this is a great starter piece written by Dr. Tim O’Shea…sure he’s a Chiro, but that doesn’t make the information any less important.
http://thedoctorwithin.com/index_fr.php?page=articles/whole_food_vitamins.php
[quote]spurlock wrote:
Normally I try to stay out of the technical discussions since they usually turn into a food-fight, but this subject is too important not to discuss.
The arguments for synthetic vitamin supplementation usually go something like this:
A)Most people don’t receive enough of their R.D.A.'s, so vitamins fill that gap.
B)If you’re losing weight, you need extra for they’re antioxidant roles in the body and since more toxins are released during this time…you’re need increases.
C)You can’t receive your R.D.A.'s with a 2,000 calorie or lower diet, therefore you need to supplement.
D)If you work around, or directly with chemicals, toxins, wastes, etc. your demands are much higher than the ‘average’ person’s.
Let’s examine each of these points to see if they are really leading us in the right path.
A)While it has been repeatedly reported that the majority of us don’t receive adequate amounts of the R.D.A’s, if you do the math…this simply couldn’t be all that true. Let me illustrate:
For all of us egg eaters, have you looked at the nutrient load of a single egg? It basically has everything except vitamin C in adequate levels (in some cases, in large amounts). You read in some of these threads about individuals eating dozens per week, so if this is the case…these people can be eliminated from this category. If the eggs are from organic range-fed sources and the yolks are eaten raw, this will also improve the chances of these nutrients being bioavailable.
B)If you’re in a fat loss stage, then nutrient need does seem to be increased. However, as seen earlier, multivitamins are not the only way to receive a large quantity of your R.D.A’s.
C)This is a ridiculous statement that only exists in the minds of people who still buy into the food pyramid and that fuckin step thing that they have now. Of course you can’t receive adequate amounts of vitamins through grains, fruits and veggies…they have the least amount per serving. The highest? Yup, you guessed it…organs, other meats, unprocessed dairy, eggs and certain oils.
D)This reason can be answered the same way as reason c. If there is an increased demand, attempt to fill it with REAL food.
Weston Price was an absolute pioneer in the field of nutrition; vitamins in particular. One of the many interesting observations that he made was that in every primitive culture that he studied (thoroughly), their nutrient content was considerably higher than their industrial counterparts…i.e…us.
In particular, the fat soluble vitamins were found to be at least 10 times higher than that of the American population of that time. Let’s keep in mind that this was still a period of time when fat consumption was still relatively untouched by politics and science. Shortly after, margarine, and technology-created oils replaced butter, tallow and lard.
Knowing this, does it seem like the concept of NEEDING a multi dramatically decreases?
To test this, sign up for fitday.com’s free service to track your calorie, macro and micronutrient amounts per day…or you can use any other service that you may currently subscribe to.
Input these foods first and see each of their nutrient contents:
-pasta, whole wheat bread
-broccoli, cabbage, tomato
-apple, orange, banana
Now input these foods and see the differences in nutrient content:
-liver, kidney, brain
-flank steak, tenderloin, bacon
-eggs
-raw milk, butter, cheese
-cod liver oil, high vitamin butter oil
After this experiment, the topic of whether you NEED multi’s or not should be brought into a new light.
For more reading, this is a great starter piece written by Dr. Tim O’Shea…sure he’s a Chiro, but that doesn’t make the information any less important.
http://thedoctorwithin.com/index_fr.php?page=articles/whole_food_vitamins.php
[/quote]
Nice info !!