Derek Wilson
Active member
In daily life, what are the vitamin supplements everyone must take to stay healthy?
what are the vitamin supplements everyone must take to stay healthy?
- Thread starter Derek Wilson
- Start date
BloodManor
Well-known member
Personally
Vitamin D and fish oil
I’m always low in d in my blood work and rarely eat fish. All the added from a multi vitamin supp is just a bonus.
Vitamin D and fish oil
I’m always low in d in my blood work and rarely eat fish. All the added from a multi vitamin supp is just a bonus.
bosskardo
Well-known member
+ vit K
great to pair with vit D and has a lot of benefits (bone strenght, hearth health, a little beneficial effect on blood sugar).
muscleupcrohn
Legend
“Must” take? Arguably none, unless you claim that everyone who doesn’t take some vitamin supplement isn’t healthy.
musclemaker
Board Sponsor
Seems like the study has a specific focus for results though.
"The research team concluded that the most commonly consumed supplements — multivitamins, vitamin D, calcium, and vitamin C — had no effect on a person’s risk of suffering a heart attack stroke, heart disease, or early death."
One way or another I always take a multivitamins as I know there gaps in my diet.
I am also big on taking fish oils. Your omega 6:3 ratio is supposed to be around 3:1 yet the average american has a ratio of about 20:1. The right Omega-3 balance makes every cell in the body work better, communicate better, protect itself better, and the benefits list goes on an on.
"The research team concluded that the most commonly consumed supplements — multivitamins, vitamin D, calcium, and vitamin C — had no effect on a person’s risk of suffering a heart attack stroke, heart disease, or early death."
One way or another I always take a multivitamins as I know there gaps in my diet.
I am also big on taking fish oils. Your omega 6:3 ratio is supposed to be around 3:1 yet the average american has a ratio of about 20:1. The right Omega-3 balance makes every cell in the body work better, communicate better, protect itself better, and the benefits list goes on an on.
musclemaker
Board Sponsor
After I finished typing that I immediately grabbed my bottle of omegas and popped a few haha.
HIT4ME
Well-known member
Yeah - I love that study. Since it doesn't help heart health, it must have no benefit at all.
Well, in that case being lean increases your mortality rate, so being fat must have enormous health benefits.
Oh, wait....so....you're saying that morbidity and mortality are different animals?
Derek Wilson
Active member
Small fish are basically rich in omega 2 fatty acids. Include more of anchovies, makrels and go light on tuna, seer fish and basa. You will naturally get a glowing and firm skin and good hair. Japanese cuisine is mostly based on fish and you might have seen how young looking people they are. A fifty year old lady looks like only 22!!
BloodManor
Well-known member
I hate the taste of most fish unless it’s raw or battered and deep fried lol. I do eat shashimi tuna and salmon once a week. I already am young looking for my age. Everyone guesses I’m in my late 20’s and gonna be 40 this year.
Derek Wilson
Active member
The best souces of phylloqinone are leafy green vegetables, some vegetable oils like rapeseed and soybean oil, and some legumes like peas, lentils, kidney and pinto beans. In addition to the health benefits mentioned in some of the other responses, vitamin K has also been shown to help with skin issues (bruising, spider veins, etc.). In fact, a lot of massage therapists use vitamin K cream because of this.
Derek Wilson
Active member
Derek Wilson
Active member
Good one!
USPlabsRep
Board Sponsor
None is needed.
Get your daily servings of Veggies and Fruits and daily means everyday of your life, don't abuse calories, and exercise...
BloodManor
Well-known member
Even with eating a pretty balanced diet I feel like you still may be deficient in some nutrients. That’s why I take a multi , plus I’m hotrible at varying my greens. I usually don’t eat much fruits unless I get something that has fruit in it. And I usually eat the same greens over and over again (asparagus, broccoli, bok Choy)
USPlabsRep
Board Sponsor
I have a shake every day usually that provides 3 servings veggies, 2 fruits and 40 grams protein in a single shake and the volume is not overkill..
Wild blueberries could be considered one of the greatest supplements ever created....Veggies and Fruits are probably (they are but i say probably because most people can't imagine it could be) better than any supplement ever created but for some reason, we think its creatine or some other "super food."
Almost everyday I have a servings of spinach, Kale, broccoli, wild blueberries, strawberries/blackberries/cranberries or raspberries blended with 40 grams of Vanilla protein (casein/whey blend or just casein is best) in a SINGLE shake! It's a life changing shake. There are hundreds if not thousands of nutrients in that shake some we don't even know about yet....
Its shouldn't be
HIT4ME
Well-known member
Yeah - I can say this. Even when I am eating 2-3 steam bags of broccoli and some spinach every day for more than 12 servings a day, I notice that taking a ZMA type supplement STILL had a positive impact on sleep and stress levels. This is just one example where you can be eating things that should have you covered and they still aren't making things run optimally.
BloodManor
Well-known member
Sounds really good actually and I need to start doing that too. I must say on cycle I feel like I need more nutrients than when I’m not “on”. I’m still a newb in that dept though. Only done a test only cycle and some 1/4 Andros
USPlabsRep
Board Sponsor
if you like, I can send some Vanilla Modern Protein it really brings it together nicely (you don't taste the veggies at all) and the shake recipe....the cool part is you can buy it all frozen so it never goes bad...
its a game changer nutrition wise....
BloodManor
Well-known member
Mass produced meats and veggies for contain the same nutrients as they used too. Souls are not as rich plus pesticides = less nutrient dense food.
USPlabsRep
Board Sponsor
the reason i pick 3 veggies and 2 fruits is the data is pretty consistent that 5 servings keeps us healthy.....that is not in routinely exercising men.
think about it this way, one delicious shake you get your daily allowance and anything above that is gravy!!!! You get hundreds if not thousands of nutrients in one shake...some known and some not known....very significant.
I usually end up at 5-7 serving veggies and 2-4 fruits depending on my total caloric needs at the time....
USPlabsRep
Board Sponsor
probably because the variety is lacking...12 servings of Broccoli is overkill...mix it up.
I'm not saying supplements are useless (obviously) but what i am saying if we all had a general idea what a healthy diet it was and executed consistency. we would rely on supplements much less.
HIT4ME
Well-known member
Yeah - I usually eat a bag of broccoli at a time and that's 4 servings. I may have spinach or kale or asparagus or whatever...but MOSTLY I use broccoli and spinach is my next most common. The point being spinach and broccoli are both good sources of magnesium and that should be more than enough, yet even more seems to still help.
Still doesn't mean supplements are necessary, and you are right that variety is important. Your shake idea isn't too bad.
Problem is, I actually hate veggies to begin with. Hahaha.
USPlabsRep
Board Sponsor
Consistency is key.
Great thing about the shake with the fruit and Vanilla protein.....the veggies are tasteless...
HIT4ME
Well-known member
Haha - yeah. Consistency is the key to life. Actually, I take it back. From dieting - I have a part of me that does love veggies because they can fill you up without much caloric content - which is part of how I got into the eating 2 bags of spinach/broccoli per day. When I was doing the PSMF it was pretty much a necessity. It really took the edge off and I learned to lean on that a lot for avoiding hunger.
John Smeton
Legend
Just your regular vitamins and minerals in most multi formulas . The multi's that test all their ingredients via third party testing or cGMP certified where everything is tested prior to assembly and after are the ones you want.
I use Millennium Sports MVP-365 and ZMK.
Derek Wilson
Active member
Veggies and Fruits already in my list! Thanks anyway!
Derek Wilson
Active member
It will help a lot.
Derek Wilson
Active member
It is a must follow!
Derek Wilson
Active member
I will try very soon.
kelvarnsen
Member
That article talks about vitamins not preventing stroke or heart disease.
Vitamin D3 has an important role in hormone production. While it may not prevent death it does serve a purpose.
fightnews
Well-known member
I prefer to get my vitamins from food, There is some doubt on weather synthetic vitamin supplements can even be absorbed and used. That said I do take a folic acid supplement because I was once anemic from a lack of it and the doctor told I should. Also I believe in magnesium suplements
fightnews
Well-known member
Fish oil is not a vitamin
BloodManor
Well-known member
I was just stating it as a health option
And even though it is not classified as a vitamin people count it in that catergory.
HIT4ME
Well-known member
Neither is Vitamin D....so I just want to disclose that.
Ricky10
Well-known member
I have taken fish oil liquid for longer than I can remember and vitamin-D for the last 8 years or so.
Considering switching to Krill oil though...thoughts?
I believe Ecklonia Cava is one of, or possibliy is the strongest antioxidant known to man. It also has exceptional bioavailability and an impressive half-life. Definitely a supplement to consider for optimal health and anti-aging.
A trusted/legit probiotic is arguably one of the most beneficial supplements one could take as well.
Considering switching to Krill oil though...thoughts?
I believe Ecklonia Cava is one of, or possibliy is the strongest antioxidant known to man. It also has exceptional bioavailability and an impressive half-life. Definitely a supplement to consider for optimal health and anti-aging.
A trusted/legit probiotic is arguably one of the most beneficial supplements one could take as well.
fightnews
Well-known member
Ok that's true. Whats up with the prescription fish oil it supposedly has only EPA? Why is that? What brand of fish oil do you take? I used to like biotest but its a complete rip off and I hate Tnation. They used to pitch the opposite, That the dha was the better one.
Really? Why not? I have a calcium disorder. I'm always Vitamin D deficient but I can't take it because it makes my calcium go to high.
Aleksandar37
Well-known member
Because it's technically not essential.for "normal" nutrition.
HIT4ME
Well-known member
As to the first part - EPA and DHA can be interchanged within our body. I've read a bunch of research, opinions and articles. I am not sure I've ever reached a clear consensus on what I believe is better. I have found some products that have more DHA (Like NOW DHA 500) and products that have more EPA (Like NOW Super Omega or something like that) and would switch between the two to get a balance over time. Now may have questionable quality so I check out other brands and Bronson makes a triple strength omega or something that I use a lot now. I tend to use 6-10 grams of either of those a day so I am price sensitive.
But I think they both have benefits and they also interconnect so I try not to over think it. Maybe someone here can teach me something I am missing.
As far as Vitamin D, I was being a bit of a wise azz. There is a lot of speculation that vitamin D acts more like a hormone than a vitamin...but there is also some valid thought that it is a vitamin and not a hormone. I think this type of thinking highlights the fact that our "groupings" of things like vitamins, minerals and hormones can be incomplete.
Clearly vitamin D is an alien creation from out space that is both a vitamin and a hormone and a tesseract.
Aleksandar37
Well-known member
Vitamin D is absolutely a hormone and it works through a hormone receptor. There isn't any speculation there. The name simply has to do with what was known when it was first discovered. It was the 4th vitamin to be discovered, so it was named vitamin D. The pair who discovered it didn't realize that the human body could synthesize it, thus the incorrect name of vitamin.
HIT4ME
Well-known member
I tend to agree, but also realize it is a little more complicated especially since Vitamin D comes in a few forms, and particularly since a deficiency in diet or sunlight exposure will elicit symptoms...which fits the criteria for a vitamin.
Here is a good post I snagged from reddit that is pretty thoughtful. Again..not saying right or wrong. I lean toward hormone but I think it has to do with our groupings of things...
What is Vitamin D?: Untangling the Confusions
Although some carelessly worded studies and official nutrition committee reports in both the US and Europe casually claim that Vitamin D is more of a hormone than a nutrient, this is in error and regrettably an all too common misconception, and stems from failure to differentiate the nature and function of various Vitamin D-related compounds like ergocalciferol, cholecalciferol, 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D, 25-hydroxy-VitaminD, and the shorthand terms calcitriol and calcidiol (distinguished below).
The preeminent Vitamin D researcher and expert Ronald Vieth, one of the "fathers" of modern Vitamin D theory, at the University of Toronto, critically shed light on these issues in his now landmark paper "Why "Vitamin D" is Not a Hormone"1, and I have extended and adopted his distinctions below for the sake of accessibility and clarity. However definite his analysis is, I will nonetheless before closing this discussion introduce one non-trivial point of disagreement that I think deserves mention as a compromise perspective that more fully and clinically realistically captures the current sense of Vitamin D..
The Facts
First we have Vitamin D which is referent to either Vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol) or Vitamin D2 (ergocalciferol). Vitamin D is the structural raw material that one or more hormones or prehormones (not prohormones) are made from, and meets the strict definition of a vitamin, namely an organic substance present in minute amounts in the natural diet (foodstuffs, not supplements) that is essential to normal metabolism, and insufficient amounts of which in the diet may cause deficiency diseases. Vitamin D itself (whether D3 or D2) is not a hormone which is strictly defined as a substance formed in one organ but transported in the blood to another organ and capable of altering the functional activity of that target organ1. In addition, the set of compounds derived from the cholecalciferol (Vitamin D3) molecule are known as secosteroids.
The Vitamin D process involves roughly that:
(1) the liver readily hydroxylates vitamin D – using cytochrome P450 enzymes –in to 25(OH)D, the primary circulating form of vitamin D,
(2) then the kidney further hydroxylates 25(OH)D into the active form 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D which is also referred to as 1,25(OH)2D, which then acts to maintain serum calcium through sequential direct effects on calcium absorption and excretion, and through a complex series of inter-relationships with serum phosphate and parathyroid hormone.
But there are two hormonally-active substances, known as (fat-soluble) secosteroids, derived - and distinct - from Vitamin D (either D2 or D3), these being:
(1) 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (calcitriol) which is a calcium-regulating hormone, an adaptive hormone produced in response to calcium deficiency, it functions the same way as other steroid hormones, namely by interacting with its cognate vitamin D receptor (VDR);
(2) 25-hydroxy-VitaminD which is a prehormone (not a prohormone), a glandular secretory product, having minimal or no inherent biologic potency, that is converted peripherally to an active hormone.
However, 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (calcitriol) which is the metabolic product of vitamin D, is itself a potent, pleiotropic repair and maintenance secosteroid hormone acting as a a molecular switch targeting over two hundred known human genes across a wide variety of tissues2, and functions as an adaptive hormone (being produced in response to calcium deficiency).
The actions of 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (calcitriol) are mediated by the Vitamin D receptor (VDR), a ligand-activated transcription factor that functions to control gene expression, 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (calcitriol) thus serving as a transcriptional regulator of various genes2. Indeed, recent data shows that 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (aka, 1,25(OH)2D)-activated VDR modulates the expression of genes at both single gene loci and also at the level of gene networks3,4,5.
Given, as I have demonstrated above, that:
(1) Vitamin D is a vitamin, with
(2) 25-hydroxy-VitaminD being a prehormone (a glandular secretory product converted peripherally to an active hormone, namely 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (calcitriol); while
(3) 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (calcitriol) is a secosteroid hormone functioning as a a molecular switch which is known to target over two hundred known human genes, and thus serves as a transcriptional gene regulator,
then I would argue that we need to construe Vitamin D itself as something more than a vitamin but less than a strict hormone (that function being reserved for 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (calcitriol)), in order to reflect and accommodate its gene transcriptional regulator functions, and so it would be more clarifying to speak of Vitamin D as not a simple vitamin, but rather as a biomodulator vitamin, a vitamin which exerts transcriptional regulation of genes at the molecular pathway level.
Summary
- Vitamin D itself - neither cholecalciferol (Vitamin D3) nor ergocalciferol (Vitamin D2) - is not a hormone, but rather a biomodulator vitamin (capable of gene regulation);
- the primary active form 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (calcitriol) is a calcium-regulating hormone;
- the primary circulating non-active form 25-hydroxy-VitaminD is a prehormone, converted peripherally to the active hormone 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (calcitriol).
References
Vieth R. Why "Vitamin D" is not a hormone, and not a synonym for 1,25-dihydroxy-vitamin D, its analogs or deltanoids. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol 2004; 89-90(1-5):571-3.
Cannell JJ, Hollis BW, Zasloff M, Heaney RP. Diagnosis and treatment of vitamin D deficiency. Expert Opin Pharmacother 2008; 9(1):107-18.
Pike JW, Meyer MB. The vitamin D receptor: new paradigms for the regulation of gene expression by 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D(3). Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am 2010; 39(2):255-69.
Pike JW, Meyer MB, Martowicz ML, et al. Emerging regulatory paradigms for control of gene expression by 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol 2010; 121(1-2):130-5.
Sutton AL, MacDonald PN. Vitamin D: more than a "bone-a-fide" hormone. Mol Endocrinol 2003; 17(5):777-91.
Aleksandar37
Well-known member
Reddit? Really?
HIT4ME
Well-known member
Yup. Hard to believe. But the source of an idea should never matter. Only the validity - and there are references to papers.
I thought it was a decent read.
Aleksandar37
Well-known member
Are you kidding me? Of course the source should matter when discussing a scientific or medical issue. Reddit threads are at best a starting point for laypeople to start finding citations, but is not a valid source. That's one random stranger on the internet's opinion that you are blindly accepting. At least read what is cited and work from there. From the titles alone, they sound like reviews (more opinions, not facts) and not even peer-reviewed research papers.
Aleksandar37
Well-known member
Also, that isn't the entire criteria. Again, by definition a vitamin can't be able to be synthesized by the human body. Alcoholics show symptoms when they are deficient in alcohol. Alcohol, also not a vitamin.
jrock645
Well-known member
In all fairness, Reddit was NOT the source of the information. It was merely cited there.
Aleksandar37
Well-known member
The source he posted was somebody's opinion on reddit which that person tried to support with citations that may or may not even agree with the reddit post. Also, I find misleading citations in peer-reviewed journals all the time when researching subjects, so it's not a good idea to just assume the person posting on an unreviewed reddit thread is being honest in their citations.
jrock645
Well-known member
On that basis, you can’t trust an article written by a human posted anywhere. So then, how can you arbitrarily discount this one? Exactly what defines an article credible or not? Do you make the rules up as you go along?
Aleksandar37
Well-known member
Anybody can go on reddit and claim anything they want to. What do you not understand about that? It's automatically credible because he listed articles? How do you know those articles support what he is even saying without reading them? If you want to have a scientific discussion, that is why peer-reviewed journal articles exist. As I said earlier, the reddit person seems to have posted only review articles, not actual research articles. That means those will then cite yet more sources. You need to follow it back to the original work, otherwise you get opinions and not facts.
There is nothing arbitrary about me discounting a reddit thread. If you want to believe random unchecked **** from the internet, go on then. If people are going to be lazy in their sources, then that's their own fault. Reading isn't that difficult.