Are Dietary Supplements Effective? You could call it the Big Chill of the winter of '06. Or it would be a chill if consumers were buying it. In recent weeks we've seen the release of studies that have found the use of dietary supplements to be ineffective. Saw palmetto, glucosamine and chondroitin have all been found lacking, coming on the heels of research from last year that questioned the value of echinacea and St. John's wort. But according to an Associated Press (AP) report, these studies are having little effect on supplement sales because so many people have had success with these and other alternative products. But how can this be so if the studies say the supplements are ineffective? Is it because the studies were flawed by using dosages that were inappropriate for the severity of symptoms? Or is it because the studies didn't last long enough, or because other variables interfered with the results, or because researchers glossed over key details? The AP article allows somewhat for these factors, but devotes a large portion of the article to the placebo effect. Ah, that's it! A plant extract couldn't work miracles! The benefits must be mostly in our heads! I'm not saying the placebo effect isn't real. But the implication in the AP piece is that it goes hand in hand with alternative therapies, as if such an effect applies to only non-pharmaceuticals. I wonder if it will ever dawn on the mainstream media that traditional remedies worked for many centuries before the first synthetic drug ever appeared on the scene. Sources:
"Consumers Shrug off Studies on Supplements" Associated Press, 2/27/06, ap.org
| 
