Do Multivitamins Really Work?

Sure, taking your multi is healthy—for a lucrative industry’s bottom line.

<a href="http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ginkgo_biloba_Tabletten.jpg">Wikimedia Commons</a>

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


I didn’t start taking vitamins until a few years ago, after Target began selling adult multivitamins in the form of gummy bears. I’ve been dutifully popping two bears a day ever since, getting my daily candy fix while ostensibly improving my health. After all, to hear the $28 billion supplement industry tell it, the gummies could be all that stands between me and scurvy. “Some people, like if you’re eating kale for breakfast or something, get all their nutrients from food,” says Duffy MacKay, vice president of scientific and regulatory affairs for the Council for Responsible Nutrition (CRN), the industry’s leading trade group. “But in this complex world, that’s getting increasingly rare.”

According to a survey by the National Institutes of Health, nearly a third of Americans take multivitamins regularly. The Vitamin Shoppe, a chain with more than $700 million in annual sales, has been growing by double digits year after year. Yet mounting data suggests that multivitamins aren’t the nutritional wonders the industry would have us believe. “There is virtually no evidence that they make healthy people healthier,” says author Marion Nestle, one of several nutritionists who told me that vitamin deficiency is quite rare in the United States. (Her latest book, Why Calories Count, is due out in April.)

Despite manufacturers’ coded claims that multivitamins ward off chronic illness—D “promotes breast health,” B is “heart healthy“—a large 2009 study of postmenopausal women published in Archives of Internal Medicine found that multis didn’t protect against any of the diseases studied, including heart disease and lung, breast, and colon cancer. A 2011 study involving nearly 39,000 women reached similar conclusions.

What’s more, if you’re the kind of person who takes a multi you may literally be pissing away your hard-earned dollars. According to another oft-cited study, typical vitamin users are more likely than nonusers to get their quota from food alone. And with so many fortified products crowding supermarket shelves, it’s not hard to exceed recommended daily limits for certain vitamins and minerals. In some cases, that can be dangerous. Several studies link excessive folic acid intake—the amount you might get from popping a multi and eating two bowls of Total—with lesions that can lead to colorectal cancers. For seniors, who usually get all the iron they need from fortified rice, cereals, and sliced breads, a multi with iron can increase the risk of heart disease. And pregnant women who pop standard multis containing the retinol form of vitamin A may boost the likelihood of birth defects. (Prenatal vitamins are formulated to be very low in retinol.)

Thanks to the unceasing pressure of politicians like Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), the Food and Drug Administration doesn’t regulate the labeling of supplements. Last June, Sen. Dick Durbin, an Illinois Democrat, introduced a bill that would force manufacturers to slap a warning on supplements that could cause health risks. Naturally, the industry opposes it. “We believe in the safety of our products across the board,” Mike Greene, CRN’s vice president of government relations, assured me.

But not all companies police their own labels well. In a recent analysis of 60 common multivitamins, ConsumerLab.com found fault with about a third of the label claims: For instance, one gummy for kids exceeded the upper daily limits of vitamin A and zinc, and one adult multi had double the recommended dose of vitamin A.

While federal health officials recommend multis for picky-eater kids and anorexics, and specific supplements for certain categories of people (see chart), most of the nutritionists I talked to encourage their healthy patients to stop fretting about vitamins. Our diets may be chock full of sugar, sodium, and fat—but when’s the last time you met someone with rickets? Most people, Nestle says, “will have adequate nutrient intake from whatever they are eating,” even if they don’t chomp kale for breakfast.

Given all of this, I’ve decided to give up my daily vitamin regimen—and spend the money I save on good old unfortified gummy bears.

Who Needs ‘Em

Only some otherwise healthy folks require supplements. A few examples.
By Azeen Ghorayshi

SUPPLEMENT RECOMMENDED FOR WHY

Calcium

Older women, vegans

Strengthens weak bones

Vitamin D

Older adults, people with dark skin or with limited exposure to sun, breast-fed infants

Needed to absorb calcium; can make from sunlight, but dark-skinned people produce less; not enough in breast milk

Folic acid

Women pre-pregnancy and in early pregnancy, alcoholics

Cuts risk of a neurological birth defect; alcohol interferes with absorption

Vitamin B12

Vegetarians, vegans, people over 50

Animal products are main source; older people absorb less from their food

Iron

Pregnant women, toddlers, teen girls

Helps build new hemoglobin/blood

Source: National Institutes of Health

 

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate