From: chuq@Apple.COM (Chuq Von Rospach)
Newsgroups: misc.fitness
Subject: Re: SUPPLEMENTS! (was Re: Really Strong Stuff)
Date: 17 Dec 92 08:47:13 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Pooh Corner Country Club -- A Planned Community

doug@HQ.Ileaf.COM (Doug) writes:

>Well, the problem I have with all of your research data slinging is that
>this data was collected in a lab setting, using pharmaceutical quality
>supplements. But what does this research data provide for the average
>*lifter/*builder? Almost nothing! You mention dosages for Chromium,
>well in your research, is the stuff sold at the local GNC the same
>as what was used in these lab experiments?

Well, it depends. Chromium Picolinate is a specific compound that was
developed by the USDA and patented. That patent was then licensed to a
single manufacturer, who owns a monopoly on it for however many years the
patent runs. So there is only a single source of Chromium Picolinate, which
implies that the stuff you buy at the store is coming from the same place as
the stuff they're testing in the lab. If you trust your supplement vendor
not to muck with it, then you'll probably get decent results.

If you switch to another form of Chromium, like GTF, all bets are off, since
it's not as biologically active and doesn't get taken up as well, and since
GTF comes from a yeast host, the concentrations might vary on top of it. If
you go to some of the other forms of Chromium, it's possible that they're
biologically inactive and all you're doing is supplementing your toilet
bowl.

I think the key is this: if you're interested in taking supplements or have
decided that you want to (or need to), then it's important to do your
homework. Period. You can't believe any source, including (especially) me.
There are zillions of variables, starting with each individual's baseline
nutrition and diet and metabolism and ending with the various types/quality
of supplements and their costs and benefits. 

I think it's important that each individual make informed decisions. That
doesn't mean reading advertisements or fluff off the net, but knowing what
you're putting in your mouth. I encourage posting references not to be the
final say, but to give people pointers on where to look for the info, and
because there's an amazing amount of factless exhortation that goes on that
we need to discourage. Fluff can be dangerous, and if you can point at
research, it both gives you something to base your opinion on and gives the
other person something to look up to decide whether to believe you.

>supplements are BULLSHIT! They will not provide "claimed" results at
>the dosages recommended. 

Which is why it's important to get all of the data out and available. I
agree with you, by the way. Most supplementation is overdone, probably
unnecessary and some of it is potentially dangerous. People put a lot of
crap in their mouth that either lines the toilet bowl or simple wastes
money. But that doesn't mean ALL supplementation is bad, but the only way we
can tell the difference is through information.

>I would much rather
>gather a consensus of personal testimonies about a particular supplement
>than listen to the "lab data",

Anecdotal data is useful, but it has the limitation of exceptionally poor
control for variables. So while it shouldn't be ignored, it shouldn't be
given too much importance. Like studies that hide the IV vs. oral dosage
stuff, it needs to be evaluated on its own terms for relevance. (FWIW, most
of the chromium stuff I've seen has been oral-dose, so we don't have that
problem. But I digress).

Mostly, I think the fascination with supplements is the endless search for
the easy hack or the quick fix. It's not going to happen, but lots of folks
hate to hear that. But as long as the snake oil artists can generate sales,
there will be snake oil.

FWIW, here's my supplement regimen, so people can see what I do in the
privacy of my own pill cabinet. It probably says more about my attitude to
supplements than a dozen postings: I take a good, general purpose
multi-vitamin/mineral mix (not a One-A-Day type, but a multi-pill packet
that more or less covers accepted doses rather than minimum RDA). I add to
that some E (which I'm thinking about cutting out as unnecessary), some C
(which I may step up, since it's toxicity is really low and there's lots of
anecdotal to encourage it), and an extra 200mcg of Chromium Picolinate. 

I also supplement with an Amino mix, plus aspirin. Not a lot of Amino,
although I'm considering upping that as well. I'm still researching that.

Why do I take what I take? While my diet is much improved over a year ago,
it isn't perfect. Still weaker than it should be in vegggies and fruits, so
I know I'm not getting a balanced intake. A lot less fat and a lot more
carbo than I used to, but it still needs work. So I cover myself. I add the
C because it looks like a good anti-oxidant, plus all the anecdotal info. I
added the E for the anti-oxidant scavenging as well, but I'm not convinced
and I don't like the long-term toxicity issues, so I probably won't continue
it.

I add the Chromium (a total of 400mcg, but then I weight 280-285, so I don't
see this as an unreasonable value and one study showed 200mcg didn't help
folks above about 165) partially because I'm encouraged by the research on
fat catabolism that it'll help me burn fat under my new regime faster than
I'd burn it without, but also because it's pretty well established to be a
factor in blood sugar regulation, and at 300 pounds on a high-fat,
too-much-sugar diet I was at risk for diabetes, plus I come from a family
with a genetic history of hypoglycemia, so I feel like hedging whatever bets
I can on this one, if I can do it safely. (Anecdotally, since starting on
the Chromium my weight has started edging down again after an eight week
plateau, even though my workout schedule is shot to hell. Is it the
Chromium? Is it a natural cycle? A combination? Dietary changes? Hell if I
know. I also know that my mood swings and other blood-sugar-is-bouncing
indications like sugar cravings have moderated significantly, and I've
effectively lost my sweet tooth. Not that I'm complaining. But there are
lots of other factors that could be part of the changes, which is the
problem iwth anecdotals...)

The Aminos are supplemented because there are indications of various
interesting effects I might or might not believe (Carnatine and fat
catabolism) and because they might or might not help muscle tissue
development as part of my weightlifting. I'm not convinced they help a lot,
but I'm also not convinced they're worthless, and the risks are low. I'm not
expecting miracles, though.

And the aspirin are for the blood-thinning, heart-attack risk reduction and
etc that are pretty well documented, since I'm in a moderate risk
genetically plus I'm carrying an extra hundred pounds of flab. (well,
probably 80 now). Again, low risk.

Pretty conservative, actually, except the chromium and aminos. 

There's lots of smoke around supplements, very little fire. The key to
staying warm without being burnt is information.

-- 
            Chuq "IMHO" Von Rospach, ESD Support & Training (DAL/AUX)
                      Member, SFWA =+= Editor, OtherRealms
                chuq@apple.com | GEnie: MAC.BIGOT | ALink:CHUQ 

                       Sterling Holloway: We'll miss you.
Newsgroups: misc.fitness