Natural or synthetic? Use science and common sense to decide
By Michael Dobbins, DC

In nutrition, we frequently hear the argument, “Natural is better!” For decades, many healthcare providers have asserted loudly and vigorously that only natural vitamins have any lasting benefit for the living body.

The fundamental concept is that vitamin complexes as found in foods are the optimum resource for attaining and maintaining health. To many of us, such a concept is almost axiomatic; years of clinical experience have proven it.

Yet, for skeptics, this anecdotal evidence is unacceptable. They demand rigorous scientific testing, evaluation and confirmation. However, before skeptics — or anyone else — accepts scientific evidence as “proof positive,” they should understand that the scientific method of inquiry is not infallible. It has its weaknesses.

TYPES OF REASONING

The scientific method involves the appropriate use of inductive and deductive reasoning. It starts with the formulation of a hypothesis on the basis of examining discrete pieces of information. Scientists making the hypothesis gather as much information as possible; however, they must always be aware that more information lurks outside of the laboratory — information that may crush the hypothesis

The testing of the conclusion applies deductive reasoning, the logical derivation of a specific conclusion based on the prior hypothesis. Deductive reasoning is the crucible in which any hypothesis begins to prove itself. Any failure on this end of the process simply drives us back to refine or reject our hypothesis. (To better understand the fallibility of scientific reasoning, see the sidebar, “How scientific reasoning can err.”)

The weakness of the scientific inquiry is that sometimes we assume that we have seen all of the data and reach a conclusion supported by the experiments we have performed.

We can see how this weakness applies to the “natural versus synthetic” vitamin argument: When chemists extract a particular molecule or group of molecules from a natural food source, they leave everything else behind. When they extract the target molecule, the scientists make an assumption that this molecule is all of the biologically functional material.

Even more confusing is the fact that sometimes the scientist has many experiments that seem to validate the conclusion. However, the most important point is that there are almost always other experiments that demonstrate that the hypothesis is at least incorrect as given and in need of refinement.

What often happens is that scientists apply deductive reasoning in place of inductive reasoning with the result that facts are interpreted in the light of an already assumed hypothesis. This is circular reasoning at best and usually gives little new information.

In nutritional research this is demonstrated almost monthly in the major journals. New studies frequently show that previous studies were incomplete or wrong.

COMMON SENSE RULES

The scientific method should be used. However, it should not cause us to need studies when common sense dictates.

With regard to nutrition, food has been and is the only real medicine for mankind. Early nutritional teachers and researchers insisted that only naturally occurring food sources contain what the human system requires for proper function. It was believed that the only acceptable therapeutic approach was to concentrate whole foods in such a way as to preserve all of the known and unknown factors.

But this premise is challenged today. It is assumed that science can determine essentially all aspects of human nutrition and extract the specific molecules needed. This assumption has a fallacy: An extract is always incomplete and though it may well have great short-term use it can never provide more — not in a natural sense. Whole foods (or their concentrates), on the other hand, always contain more than can be detected or perhaps understood at this point in time.

HOW THIS APPLIES TO YOU

Understanding the scientific method and its shortcomings as they apply to nutrition is important, because patients come to you for information. They ask you for recommendations about nutritional supplementation.

What should you do to guide your patients to the best products?

• Carefully choose products. Select products based on what science knows about nutrition.
• Explain the difference between natural and synthetic supplements. Focus on the “part vs. the whole” concerning nutritional needs.
• Suggest whole-food concentrates. These offer the best potential for patients, because patients may need some yet-to-be-identified micronutrient that cannot or may not be found in an extracted (synthetic) supplement, yet will be found in the whole foods (even though concentrated).

Adding nutritional support to your practice will bring you a whole new segment of the population as patients. When you add this to your already good spinal care, the word-of-mouth referrals will astound you.

Michael D. Dobbins, DC, a 1987 graduate of Life Chiropractic College West, is in private practice and also teaches weekend nutritional seminars through Standard Process, www.standardprocess.com. He can be contacted by e-mail at mdobbins@ix.netcom.com.