March 2005

Experts say vitamin E study is faulty

The recently published study in the March 16 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) has caused a stir in the supplement industry. Most experts agree, however, that vitamin E is safe and that more research on the supplement is needed.

The study, known as HOPE-TOO (the second phase of the “Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation” study), included almost 4,000 people, aged 55 or older, who had vascular disease or diabetes. The study participants took vitamin E or a placebo. Researchers were looking to determine if long-term vitamin E (400 IU daily for seven years) would reduce the risk of cancer, cancer death and major heart disease outcomes. Researchers concluded that there were no differences in the pre-specified major heart disease outcomes, although there was a 13 percent increase in heart failure events.

According to experts in the industry, the study is makes erroneous conclusions about this vitamin. The JAMA study, formally entitled, “Effects of long-term vitamin E supplementation on cardiovascular events and cancer,” concluded: “In patients with vascular disease or diabetes mellitus, long-term vitamin E supplementation does not prevent cancer or major cardiovascular events and may increase the risk for heart failure.”

“There was not a definitive conclusion to this study, except to state that more studies were needed,” said David Seckman, executive director and CEO of the National Nutritional Foods Association (NNFA).

“The conclusions drawn about vitamin E from these recent studies need to be looked at in context,” said Andrew Halpner, PhD, director of product development for Douglas Laboratories, a 50-year-old supplement manufacturer. “The results need to be looked at in the context of all the other existing data on vitamin E, none of which demonstrate such a connection to heart failure.”

Matthew Armstrong, general manager for A.C. Grace Company, a company that only manufactures vitamin E, commented: “Most people aren’t educated about the different forms of vitamin E and their functions. The different forms of E not only differ in chemical structure, but they also differ in the way they function in the body. … Rarely do researchers or reports disclose what form of vitamin E was used, even though such information is obviously critical. Unless the different forms of vitamin E are understood and taken into account, research will continue to be conflicting and more confusion will result.”

Armstrong also emphasized, “Since 1949 the synthetic form of vitamin E has been the ‘research standard’ even though it’s been proven to be the least effective form and does not represent vitamin E in nature.” He pointed out that pharmaceutical companies donate synthetic vitamin E for research.

Although vitamin E has received considerable publicity in the last several months, it is considered safe within a wide range, “up to 1,000 mg (1,000 IU of synthetic vitamin E or 1,500 IU natural vitamin E) per day,” according the Institute of Medicine. “Vitamin E is essential for life and health and most Americans don’t get enough from diet alone. Supplements can fill that gap,” said Annette Dickinson, PhD, president of Council for Responsible Nutrition (CRN).

Taryn Forrelli, ND, director of medical education for NewMark/New Chapter, Ind., a producer of probiotic nutrients and herbal supplements, said, “When it comes to nutritional supplementation, ‘the devil is in the dose.’ Flooding the body with too much of any single compound irrespective of being natural can disrupt the balanced interactions with the network. … The form of the nutrient is an equally important consideration.”

Sources: Journal of the American Medical Association; National Nutritional Foods Association; Dr. Andrew Halpner, Douglas Laboratories; Matthew Armstrong, A.C. Grace Company; Dr. Taryn Forrelli, NewMark/New Chapter, Inc.; Council for Responsible Nutrition.

Industry News from:
Chiropractic News from: