Weight Loss Forum / Low Carb / May 2006
Selenium Protection of Hearts another Health Myth ?
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Jbuch - 26 Apr 2006 16:17 GMT This 13 year long placebo-controlled clinical study does not show any positive cardiac protection from Selenium nutrients, in spite of the known "antioxidative character" of Selenium.
Selenium appears to join the ranks of the nutrients Vitamins C, and E which do not live up to common cardiac nutritional clams in controlled studies.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Antioxidant Selenium Offers No Heart-Disease Protection
04/25/06
Contact
Lois Baker
ljbaker@buffalo.edu
BUFFALO, N.Y. -- Selenium does not protect against cardiovascular disease, despite its documented antioxidant and chemopreventive properties, analysis of a randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial covering 13 years has shown.
The selenium-CVD association was a secondary endpoint in the Nutritional Prevention of Cancer Trial, which was designed primarily to determine if selenium supplementation could prevent the recurrence of non-melanoma skin cancer.
Results of the trial, the only large randomized clinical trial to date to examine selenium supplementation alone in the prevention of CVD, appear in the April 15 issue of the American Journal of Epidemiology. Saverio Stranges, M.D., Ph.D., assistant professor of social and preventive medicine in the School of Public Health and Health Professions, University at Buffalo, is first author.
"Our results extend previous research based on smaller intervention trials focusing on cardiovascular risk factors," said Stranges. "Our findings are consistent with those from previous studies that have shown no beneficial effect of selenium supplementation in combination with other antioxidants on the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease."
Several antioxidants, vitamins C and E in particular, that were thought to play a role in preventing heart disease based on observational studies have turned out not to be protective in randomized clinical trials, and selenium now has joined this group.
The main findings of this report focus on the 1,004 participants in the study, conducted from 1983-96, who were free of cardiovascular disease when they were recruited. Participants came from seven dermatology clinics in low selenium areas of the eastern United States: Augusta and Macon, Ga.; Columbia, S.C.; Miami, Fla.; Wilson and Greenville, N. C.; and Newington, Conn.
Enrollees were assigned randomly to take a tablet containing 200 micrograms of selenium daily or a placebo. Information on sociodemographics, health habits, education and body mass index also was collected.
Participants provided blood samples at their respective clinics twice a year and reported any new illnesses or medications. Individuals were followed for an average of 7.6 years.
Results showed no association between selenium supplementation on any of the endpoints studied: coronary heart disease, stroke or deaths from cardiovascular disease, Stranges said. There also was no difference in the endpoints based on the level of selenium at baseline. In addition, the lack of significant association with CVD endpoints was confirmed even in the 246 participants who had CVD at baseline. (This data does not appear in the published manuscript.)
"These results must be interpreted cautiously," said Stranges, "because they result from exploratory analyses, although from the largest randomized clinical trial available that has selenium only as the intervention. However, this report adds important information to our knowledge on the role of selenium in cardiovascular-disease prevention, indicating no overall benefit of supplementation by selenium alone in prevention of cardiovascular disease."
 Signature 1) Eat Till SATISFIED, Not STUFFED... Atkins repeated 9 times in the book 2) Exercise: It's Non-Negotiable..... Chapter 22 title, Atkins book 3) Don't Diet Without Supplemental Nutrients... Chapter 23 title, Atkins book 4) A sensible eating plan, and follow it. (Atkins, Self Made or Other)
tunderbar@hotmail.com - 26 Apr 2006 16:48 GMT The main problem with this study is that they only looked at one dosage - 200 mcg per day. They did the same kind of thing to vitamins C and E. When you test an inadequate dosage and ignore other larger and possibly useful dosages, you pretty much will get the results you want.
TC
> This 13 year long placebo-controlled clinical study does not show any > positive cardiac protection from Selenium nutrients, in spite of the [quoted text clipped - 82 lines] > book > 4) A sensible eating plan, and follow it. (Atkins, Self Made or Other) Jbuch - 26 Apr 2006 17:12 GMT MDR of selenium about 50 mcg/day vs 200 mcg/day in study.
http://lpi.oregonstate.edu/infocenter/minerals/selenium/index.html
-----------------------------------------------------------
Immune function
Selenium deficiency has been associated with impaired function of the immune system. Moreover, selenium supplementation in individuals who are not overtly selenium deficient appears to stimulate the immune response. In two small studies, healthy (12, 13) and immunosuppressed individuals (14) supplemented with 200 mcg/day of selenium as sodium selenite for 8 weeks showed an enhanced immune cell response to foreign antigens compared with those taking a placebo. A considerable amount of basic research also indicates that selenium plays a role in regulating the expression of cell signaling molecules called cytokines, which orchestrate the immune response (15).
Cardiovascular diseases
Theoretically, optimizing selenoenzyme activity could decrease the risk of cardiovascular diseases by decreasing lipid peroxidation and influencing the metabolism of cell signaling molecules known as prostaglandins. However, prospective studies in humans have not demonstrated strong support for the cardioprotective effects of selenium. While one study found a significant increase in illness and death from cardiovascular disease in individuals with serum selenium levels below 45 mcg/liter compared to matched pairs above 45 mcg/liter (30), another study, using the same cutoff points for serum selenium, found a significant difference only in deaths from stroke (31). A study of middle aged and elderly Danish men found an increased risk of cardiovascular disease in men with serum selenium levels below 79 mcg/liter (32), but several other studies found no clear inverse association between selenium nutritional status and cardiovascular disease risk (33). In a multi-center study in Europe, toenail selenium levels and risk of myocardial infarction (heart attack) were only associated in the center where selenium levels were the lowest (34).
While some epidemiological evidence suggests that low levels of selenium (lower than those commonly found in the U.S.) may increase the risk of cardiovascular diseases, definitive evidence regarding the role of selenium in preventing cardiovascular diseases will require controlled clinical trials.
---------------------
Maybe very low serum selenium levels are associated with cardiovascular diseases.
At last, there is a controlled clinical study.
Let's hear a chear for Selenium.
> The main problem with this study is that they only looked at one dosage > - 200 mcg per day. They did the same kind of thing to vitamins C and E. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >> >>------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Signature 1) Eat Till SATISFIED, Not STUFFED... Atkins repeated 9 times in the book 2) Exercise: It's Non-Negotiable..... Chapter 22 title, Atkins book 3) Don't Diet Without Supplemental Nutrients... Chapter 23 title, Atkins book 4) A sensible eating plan, and follow it. (Atkins, Self Made or Other)
tunderbar@hotmail.com - 26 Apr 2006 17:14 GMT > The main problem with this study is that they only looked at one dosage > - 200 mcg per day. They did the same kind of thing to vitamins C and E. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > positive cardiac protection from Selenium nutrients, in spite of the > > known "antioxidative character" of Selenium. And just because 200 mcg per day does not show "positive cardiac protection" does not mean that higher amounts will not show "positive cardiac protection" as well and does not mean that selenium is not needed for other major health benefits.
TC
Noway2 - 26 Apr 2006 17:24 GMT > The main problem with this study is that they only looked at one dosage > - 200 mcg per day. They did the same kind of thing to vitamins C and E. > When you test an inadequate dosage and ignore other larger and possibly > useful dosages, you pretty much will get the results you want. As a teacher I used to have always said, "Figures don't lie, but liars do figure"
Jbuch - 26 Apr 2006 18:00 GMT >>The main problem with this study is that they only looked at one dosage >>- 200 mcg per day. They did the same kind of thing to vitamins C and E. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > As a teacher I used to have always said, "Figures don't lie, but liars > do figure" As a researcher I have always said "Liars dispute figures."
A good alternative quote which means as little as the quote given above.
Unfounded hope dies hard.
It seems clear that the 200 mcg dose is not beneficial.
It is said that the maximum tolerable daily dose is 400 mcg/day.
So what data is around to tell one what would be a "Safe but Effective" dose?
It is embarrassing (and legally expensive) if your study uses too high a dose and harms the study participants.
 Signature 1) Eat Till SATISFIED, Not STUFFED... Atkins repeated 9 times in the book 2) Exercise: It's Non-Negotiable..... Chapter 22 title, Atkins book 3) Don't Diet Without Supplemental Nutrients... Chapter 23 title, Atkins book 4) A sensible eating plan, and follow it. (Atkins, Self Made or Other)
Roger Zoul - 26 Apr 2006 18:18 GMT :: The main problem with this study is that they only looked at one :: dosage - 200 mcg per day. They did the same kind of thing to :: vitamins C and E. When you test an inadequate dosage and ignore :: other larger and possibly useful dosages, you pretty much will get :: the results you want. So, if we follow this thru, we'd be taking really large doses of C, E and selenuim.
Where does it stop, TC?
:: TC :: [quoted text clipped - 88 lines] ::: 4) A sensible eating plan, and follow it. (Atkins, Self Made or ::: Other) Marengo - 27 Apr 2006 01:15 GMT |:: The main problem with this study is that they only looked at one |:: dosage - 200 mcg per day. They did the same kind of thing to [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] |So, if we follow this thru, we'd be taking really large doses of C, E and |selenuim. *ahem*
I take 2000 mg of vitamin C each say, 800mcg of Vitamin E and 400mcg of Selenium, along with my other fistfuls of supplements.
 Signature Peter
Roger Zoul - 27 Apr 2006 04:54 GMT :: On Wed, 26 Apr 2006 13:18:34 -0400, "Roger Zoul" :: <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] :: I take 2000 mg of vitamin C each say, 800mcg of Vitamin E and 400mcg :: of Selenium, along with my other fistfuls of supplements. See!
tunderbar@hotmail.com - 27 Apr 2006 17:55 GMT > :: The main problem with this study is that they only looked at one > :: dosage - 200 mcg per day. They did the same kind of thing to [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > So, if we follow this thru, we'd be taking really large doses of C, E and > selenuim.
> Where does it stop, TC? It stops at the optimum amount. No more, no less.
But our "researchers" and the research industry need to make a true effort at determining these optimal amounts. Not some food industry and pharma marketting biased research effort to discredit vitamins or to minimize their importance or even to demonize them as dangerous.
The fact is that by their very definition, vitamins are absolutely necessary for optimal health. The next question is what is the optimum dosage that will provide enough amounts without overdoing it. Right now the RDIs are arbitraily set by govt agencies with too many ties to the food and pharma industries. They are not based on real science, they are based on govt and industry agendas.
TC
> :: TC > :: [quoted text clipped - 88 lines] > ::: 4) A sensible eating plan, and follow it. (Atkins, Self Made or > ::: Other) Jbuch - 28 Apr 2006 01:54 GMT >>:: The main problem with this study is that they only looked at one >>:: dosage - 200 mcg per day. They did the same kind of thing to [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > TC Just who is going to PAY for these careful (repeated for verification) studies?
Do you work for free, too?
Until someone comes up with how to PAY for the research, you might as well be passing gas instead of making recommendations like the ones you made above.
I am laughing inside at your "OPTIMUM AMOUNT", as if there is such a thing for the diverse population of human beings.
Your mileage may vary.....
 Signature 1) Eat Till SATISFIED, Not STUFFED... Atkins repeated 9 times in the book 2) Exercise: It's Non-Negotiable..... Chapter 22 title, Atkins book 3) Don't Diet Without Supplemental Nutrients... Chapter 23 title, Atkins book 4) A sensible eating plan, and follow it. (Atkins, Self Made or Other)
tunderbar@hotmail.com - 28 Apr 2006 18:52 GMT > >>:: The main problem with this study is that they only looked at one > >>:: dosage - 200 mcg per day. They did the same kind of thing to [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > Just who is going to PAY for these careful (repeated for verification) > studies? The FOOD and Drug Administration? the National Institutes of HEALTH?
You would think that by now we would have a complete and thourough understanding of these fundamental essential nutrients and our optimal dosages. Christ, it's not like sending someone to the moon. It is basic and simple science, and not nearly as costly as lunar flight. And way more important in a direct way.
Is this not OBVIOUS?
TC
Jbuch - 28 Apr 2006 23:02 GMT >>>>:: The main problem with this study is that they only looked at one >>>>:: dosage - 200 mcg per day. They did the same kind of thing to [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > > TC To those who have actually studied biochemistry and physiology, it is not obvious and simple.
However, there are people who are obviously simpleminded.
You.
Get some real academic education.
 Signature 1) Eat Till SATISFIED, Not STUFFED... Atkins repeated 9 times in the book 2) Exercise: It's Non-Negotiable..... Chapter 22 title, Atkins book 3) Don't Diet Without Supplemental Nutrients... Chapter 23 title, Atkins book 4) A sensible eating plan, and follow it. (Atkins, Self Made or Other)
tunderbar@hotmail.com - 01 May 2006 16:24 GMT > >>>>:: The main problem with this study is that they only looked at one > >>>>:: dosage - 200 mcg per day. They did the same kind of thing to [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > To those who have actually studied biochemistry and physiology, it is > not obvious and simple. So, you are saying that for those who have "studied biochemistry and physiology", it is not an obvious or simple concept that we actually determine the optimal amounts of essential nutrients? You are saying that our advanced degreed scientific leadership cannot be bothered to understand our basic nutritional requirements because it is too complex and not obvious enough for them?
> However, there are people who are obviously simpleminded. > > You. I guess it is too simpleminded to expect those charged with educating us on nutrition and treating us for health problems to actually know something about the fundamentals of real nutrition. In spite of the simpleminded, but still altogether true, fact that good health is IMPOSSIBLE without good NUTRITION.
No one gets a chronic disease because they did not have a specific medicine in their diet.
> Get some real academic education. If getting some real academic education means that I don't need to actually know something useful about nutrition and/or remain completely ignorant of basic and fundamental nutritional and health concepts, then I'll forgo the advanced degree.
If, at this point, you know, the 21st century, hundreds of year after we first learned about nutritional deficiency diseases like scurvy and rickets, we cannot say with some certainty, what the optimum dosages are for the essential nutrients, based on age, sex, size, etc., then we can clearly understand how it is that millions upon millions upon millions suffer from chronic disease without any chance for cure. Sufferers are treated to the tune of billion$, with very few actually being cured of anything. In fact, they tend to get sicker and suffer more from the initial condition as well as new symptoms from the treatments themselves such as pharmaceuticals, surgeries, etc.
The fact that the healing classes can go on with this farce without effecting any significant actual improvements in health, while milking the masses for all of their wealth, is mind boggling on so many levels.
TC
|
|
|