FAMILY MEDICINE® COLUMN
By John C. Wolf, D.O.
Associate Professor of Family Medicine®
Ohio University College of Osteopathic Medicine

VITAMINS WON'T HELP FARMER'S EYES, JUST HIS COWS!

Question: Last spring, at age 42, I started having some eye troubles for the first time. The eye doctor said I shouldn't worry because everyone in their 40s needs glasses. I've worked for years as a dairy farmer and know that nutritional imbalance, particularly in vitamins and minerals, has a great effect on the health and performance of animals. I assume that we humans are the same. I eat lots of carrots. Are there vitamin and mineral supplements that I should be taking to help my eyes?

Answer: I receive many questions asking about the benefits of nutritional supplements, "health foods" and organically grown produce. Since we all must eat, and we all want to be healthy, it's easy to understand why nutrition is such a popular topic of conversation. But, I suspect the current level of confusion arises not so much from our inherent interest in this topic as from the distorted claims made by those who wish to sell us their "more healthful" foods and nutritional supplements.

Nutritional research is difficult to conduct in a scientifically sound way. You see, to be sure that a health benefit or problem originated from a food, vitamin, or other nutrient, it would require studying two groups of individuals with the same mix of age, sex, race, occupations, hobbies, environmental exposures, family histories and diets. One group would consume the product in question and the other group would not. Comparing the frequency of health problems between the two groups would show the effect of the product being studied.

Obviously, it is impossible to match two groups this closely. Failure to match the groups creates the possibility that any difference between them was due to something other than the consumption of the food or nutrient being studied. Much of the data used to support the claims of the health food and organic food industries are based on studies that are scientifically unsound. In addition, much of their advertising uses personal endorsements or "testimonials" that are generally worth no more than the paper on which they're printed!

Beta carotene presents a good example of the difficulty in conducting research on nutrition. Some early studies suggested that consuming beta carotene may reduce the risk of lung cancer and heart disease. Every health food store and vitamin manufacturer promptly promoted their beta carotene products. Now, the National Cancer Institute has published a study, entitled Beta Carotene and Retinol Efficacy Trial, that carefully followed more than 22,000 individuals. It has shown that beta carotene does not prevent heart disease or cancer, and it may actually increase the risk of lung cancer in smokers.

My advice is for all of us be skeptics when it comes to nutritional advertising. Remember, that all advertisement is designed to sell products, not to share objective information. Take all of it with that figurative "grain of salt."

For proper nutrition, I suggest you eat a balanced diet that is heavy on fresh fruits and vegetables and light on fats and sugar. Vitamin pills are OK, but unless your doctor tells you otherwise, do not take daily amounts larger than that recommended by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). He or she can tell you if you have a specific disease, dietary problem or special need that requires additional supplementation. You see, your milk cows are healthier and more productive with supplements because they fall into a "special need" category, just as lactating humans do. Your need for glasses at age 42 is not due to nutrition. In my next column, I'll explain why even those of us who have had good eyesight in our younger days almost always need glasses in the fourth decade of our lives.

Family Medicine® is a weekly column. To submit questions, write to John C. Wolf, D.O., Ohio University College of Osteopathic Medicine, Grosvenor Hall, Athens, Ohio 45701.