evilcyber.com
  • Home
  • Workouts
    • Home Workout Plans
    • How To Build Muscle
    • How To Get Toned
    • Home Workout Equipment
    • Advanced Workout Topics
    • Other Workout Programs
    • Important Workout Lingo
    • Recommendable Books
  • Cardio
    • What Is Cardio?
    • How To Start Cardio
    • Home Cardio Exercises
    • Cardio Or Weights First?
    • Best Time For Cardio
    • Does Cardio Burn Muscle?
    • Cardio On Empty Stomach?
    • HIIT – Doing It Right
    • Cross-Training
  • Weight Loss
    • The Secret To Weight Loss
    • Gain Muscle And Lose Fat?
    • Exercise And Weight Loss
    • Diet Reviews
    • Weight Loss Myths
    • Weight Loss Supplements
  • Nutrition
    • Healthy Nutrition Explained
    • Bodybuilding Nutrition
    • What Are Carbohydrates?
    • What Is Fat?
    • What Is Protein?
    • Nutrition For Cardio
    • Marathon Nutrition
    • Exercise On Low Carb
  • Supplements
    • 3 Supplements That Work
    • BCAA Supplements
    • Beta-Alanine
    • Creatine
    • Dextrose Supplements
    • Energy Shots
    • Make Your Own Weight Gainer
    • Multivitamins
    • NAC
    • Testosterone-Boosters
  • The Rest

Supplements

Multivitamins Prevent Cancer?

A new study claims that daily multivitamin usage reduces the risk of cancer in men. Let’s have a look at what’s up with it.

Tough Times In The Vitamin Business

Already months ago I summarized that the usage of multivitamins could at best be doing nothing for and at worst potentially harm you.

The scientific evidence is so solid, that even the usually rather business-friendly Forbes magazine felt compelled to remark about a “bad week for the nutritional supplement industry”. Other publications followed suit.

That isn’t good news for any company selling vitamin supplements. They needed a counterpoint and it came in a study now published in the Journal of the American Medical Association. It found usage of multivitamins “modestly but significantly reduced the risk of total cancer.”

No Effect On Most Common Cancers?

I won’t bore you with my numbing analysis of the statistical methods used, but that careful wording above does stand out.

When you go through the study’s details, you’ll discover that  there was no significant effect of a daily multivitamin on prostate cancer, colorectal cancer, other site-specific cancers and the risk of cancer mortality.

Yet prostate and colorectal cancer are the most common types of cancer found in men – if the multivitamins had no effect on these, on what exactly did they have an effect on?

Who Sponsored The Study?

What really got me to wonder was a look at the financial disclosures that have to be stated at the end of any study. These were a long read.

The study and its authors were supported by the BASF Corporation, Pfizer Inc., DSM Nutritional Products Inc., the Tomato Products Wellness Council, Cambridge Theranostics Ltd., Cognis Corporation, Pronova BioPharma, Pharmavit, the Aurora Foundation,  Bristol-Meyers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Novartis, the Natural Source Vitamin E Association and Bayer Healthcare. One author also has a consulting agreement with Merck, Inc.

It might be entirely innocent, but it’s half the who is who in vitamin supplements manufacturers.

Picture courtesy of Erich Ferdinand.

Help me spread knowledge and share this:

  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)

Search

Subscribe to EC

Enter your email address to subscribe and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Latest Comments

  • No comments

4 Comments

  1. Band3 says:
    October 18, 2012 at 10:19 pm

    As the old Assiro-Babylonian wisdom says: FOLLOW THE MONEY

    Reply
  2. Fraser says:
    October 18, 2012 at 10:50 pm

    Wow, pwned.

    Reply
  3. Band3 says:
    October 19, 2012 at 11:46 pm

    On a serious note, though. Those graphs look utterly ridiculous. Significantly reduced the risk… Really? REALLY??? I wear glasses, but I am not blind. The reviewers obviously have serious eyesight problems or maybe just a major hole in the wallet.

    Well, Fig. 3a could be. Could.

    Reply
    • evilcyber says:
      October 20, 2012 at 1:17 am

      Let me put it like this: I found the p-value in connection with the sample size a bit questionable.

      Reply

    What do you think?

    Click here to cancel reply.


    • About
    • Contact
    • Copyright
    • Disclaimer
    • Privacy Policy
    © Copyright 2025 — evilcyber.com. All Rights Reserved.

    Evilcyber.com uses cookies

    More info about these little buggers in the Privacy Policy.

    Close
    loading Cancel
    Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
    Email check failed, please try again
    Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.