vi shape pregnancy and supplementing

8/3/2019 Vi Shape Pregnancy and Supplementing

1/3


2/3

Our fish oil is distilled at the molecular level to remove toxins, and we add evening primrose, pumpkinseed, flaxseed to

make a very robust 12:1 ratio of Omega 3:6. Meaningyou get high quality nutrients. This is one reason Dr. Seidman

was awarded a patent, and has clinicals showing that the Vi-Pak help reverse age-related hearing loss by 7-12 decibels. I

like to say if it can do that for my hearing..wow..think of what else it can help with. We have many of Dr. Seidmans studies

theVisaluswebsite. For the Vi-Pak, the omegas and multi are great for pregnant or lactating women. Some doctors do

not want women taking the antioxidant if pregnant so it varies by doctor. The anti-aging tablet we also recommend they

talk to their doctor about first as every pregnancy is different.

Dr. Seidman on Supplementing: The pros and cons of supplementing with vitamins, minerals and similar substances

are no less confusing. In spite of thousands of studies examining the effects of various supplements, experts still

disagree. As a practicing physician and scientist, I believe I have a responsibility to present what I feel is a strong case for

supplementation. It is clear that proper nutrition is essential for optimum health. We need to eat from the basic food

groups, and consume significant amounts of fruits and vegetables as part of a sensible diet. Unfortunately, the Standard

American Diet, with its emphasis on processed and prepared foods and large amounts of fat, salt and refined ingredients,

does not come close to meeting these standards. The majority of Americans are clearly not going to obtain adequate

nutrition from this diet. To complicate matters, more than 60 percent of Americans are now considered overweight or

obese, and roughly the same proportion of the population is sedentary. Stress, another major health factor, takes a toll on

nutritional status, as does aging. Additionally, while working for the CDC (reviewing grants), there was compelling data to

support that 1/3 of the WORLD population has a micronutrient deficiency. While genetics certainly play a role in health, we

do not have the option of changing our genes, at present. Meanwhile, many of the health issues we face are social and

lifestyle choices. The end result can be seen in these statistics: Cancer the second most common cause of death in the

United States claims more than 550,000 lives each year. Yet two-thirds of these cancer deaths are considered

preventable through lifestyle changes quitting smoking and all tobacco use, consuming 5 to 10 servings of fruits and

vegetables daily, reducing intake of meat, fatty foods and dairy products, exercising moderately and supplementing

appropriately. Here again, we have controversy over how to define supplementing appropriately. I think its important to

remember that the Recommended Dietary Allowances (RDA) now known as the Dietary Reference Intakes (DRI) were

established in 1941 to meet the needs of most healthy people. While these recommendations are updated every ten

years, they are neither minimal requirements nor optimal levels. In fact, they are simply educated guesses. Meanwhile,

there is compelling science to suggest that many of the nutrients found in routine supplements could be taken at much

higher doses with an excellent safety profile and significant health benefits. Is it possible to get sufficient quantities of

nutrients from a healthy diet? To answer that question, lets use vitamin E as an example. Oregon State Universitys Moret

Traber dispels this notion when she states: To obtain enough vitamin E from food to attain a reduction in the risk of

cardiovascular disease, youd need to consume 9 tablespoons of olive oil, 75 slices of whole wheat bread, 40 almonds or

200 peanuts each and every day. Since it appears to be difficult at best to get a beneficial amount of vitamin E from

food, what should the supplement dosage be?

There have been numerous studies to show that an increased intake of antioxidants, such as vitamin E, reduces heart

disease and the risk of stroke, Alzheimers and cancer. Vitamin E has also been shown to increase immune function and

reduce exercise-related free radical damage. When it comes to precise dosage, however, there is no one-size-fits-all

answer. The DRI recommends 30 IU, a figure considered too low by many health experts. Indeed, some clinical trials

suggest 800 to 1,200 IU may be required to affect cardiovascular health, particularly in patients who already have the

disease. Then how do we explain conflicting findings? For example, a meta-analysis by researchers at Johns Hopkins,

which reviewed 19 previously published articles involving 135,967 patients, suggests that consuming more than 400 IU of
http://visalus.com/about/scientific_advisory_board/http://visalus.com/about/scientific_advisory_board/http://visalus.com/about/scientific_advisory_board/http://visalus.com/about/scientific_advisory_board/


3/3

vitamin E per day may increase the risk of dying by 6 percent (Miller et al Jan 4, 2005 Ann of IM vol 142 No1). While the

media pounced on the bad news aspect of the story, the truth is the research had shortcomings. First, it co nsisted largely

of older individuals who were already suffering chronic illness of one sort or another, including heart disease,

hypertension, Alzheimers, Parkinsons, kidney disease requiring dialysis, as well as a group of smokers. Its difficult to

imagine that vitamin E alone could improve the health of these individuals. Second, the supplements used were synthetic,

and there are studies to show that the natural forms are possibly more effective. Third, from a statisticians viewpoint,

mixing such a wide assortment of studies together can produce meaningless results. Finally, they eliminated 12 trials that

had fewer than 10 deaths! This introduces a very serious selection bias against the benefit of vitamin E. Essentially they

randomly eliminated 12 studies where the death rate was very low, you may call this science, but this is how science gets

a bad name. Basically, manipulating the data to support their bias. As an aside, for our rotection and safety, Visalus

Sciences uses only mixed tocopherols, so it is an all-natural group of tocopherols, not just the d-alpha tocopherol, but the

gammas, deltas, tocotrienols etc. There has been some science to suggest that it is much better to use mixed tocopherols

and tocotrienols, which is precisely what we do at Visalus Sciences. Note, too, that the Johns Hopkins researchers

themselves pointed out that most of the patients in these trials had chronic illness and were over the age of 60. As a

result, the authors observed that the studys findings may not necessarily apply to younger, healthy individuals. In fact, in

some ways, this studys conclusion is similar to earlier research that encouraged people to abandon butter in favor of

margarine. Needless to say, that opinion was reversed when it was determined that the trans fats in margarine were far

more toxic to us than butter. Of course, not all studies are inconclusive. For example, the excellent work by Rimm et al, in

1998, looked at more than 80,000 women who supplemented with folate and vitamin B6. Researchers found a significant

reduction in the risk of heart disease. They also found that combining these supplements with one drink per day reduced

the risk even more. Further, they determined that low intake of folate and B6 led to high levels of homocysteine, which

increased heart disease. This specific study was responsible for changing the RDAs of folic acid from 50 micrograms per

day to the current 400 micrograms per day. We are now finding that despite appropriate diets 1/3 of the planet has a

micronutrient deficiency, the most common now are Vitamin D, the B vitamins and others.

Studies like (the Rimm Study) these, cost millions of dollars and take many years to complete, are to be encouraged. But

in the meantime, there is compelling evidence in smaller clinical trials that is relevant, reasonable and should cause us to

change the way we think about diet and nutritional supplementation. For example, my colleagues and I have conducted

studies with a number of antioxidants, including phosphatidylcholine (PPC), resveratrol, acetyl-L-carnitine (ALCAR), and

alpha-lipoic acid (ALA), among others. Our findings: these supplements provided protection against free-radical damage

throughout the body. In other words, supplements minimized and sometimes even reversed cellular assaults linked to

deterioration of health and the aging process. A final thought: Over the last 12 years, the average annualized mortality

rates secondary to vitamins have been attributed to be one death per year, and herbs at three deaths per year. On the

other hand, 400,000 deaths per year are attributed to smoking, and another 300,000 to poor diet. It should also be noted

that pharmaceutical errors cause approximately 100,000 deaths per year.

The bottom line is that there is an extremely remote likelihood that one would be hurt by taking nutritional

supplements, and there is certainly compelling scientific data to support their use. Please always consult your

own physician before using Visalus nutritional products for your own safety.

vi shape pregnancy and supplementing

Documents