Any links?

peaton@pt.lu (Paul Eaton) wrote in news:13eed8fa.0409140228.1cc547a6
@posting.google.com:

Umm...sure..if you post more information. (links to articles and/or studies
- that sort of thing.)

L.

The Earth is flat.

Nope.
--
Jim Chinnis   Warrenton, Virginia, USA

Apologies, a search on this new group has sice brought up plenty of
info. My interest was sparked by a BBC article:-

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3673365.stm

Hold the antioxidants and improve plasma lipids
http://www.jci.org/cgi/content/full/113/9/1253

"Thus, although there is considerable evidence for the involvement of
oxidative stress in many disease processes, including atherosclerosis,
the potential for unintended outcomes of antioxidant therapy should
serve as a warning against proceeding with such treatment in the
absence of clinical-trial evidence for benefit and safety."

I apply the same criteria to my vitamin choices as I do to my
medications choices. Because I haven't seen clinical evidence of
efficacy for any supplement pertinent to my needs, I use none. I view
vitamin 'science' with skepticism and think most if not all is blatant
quackery. But there many suffering from HIV, HEPC, Multiple Sclerosis
and cancers, not to mention those injured by statins, who think
differently.

There are also those whose health ethic involves taking something.
Always taking something. "A pill for every ill". And often a pill to
prevent ill. Statins, for example, are largely marketed as preventive
although there is little evidence for this. How ironic that those
injured by an unproven pill would seek cure in another unproven 'pill'.

The marketing departments of medications pharma and supplement pharma
(increasingly the same entity) know their targets well.

Zee