« Order Your Megamuffins (and such) here! | Main | A Memo Regarding Swedish Fish »
January 16, 2007
RDA Angst
There's been a lot of angst in the CR girl community in the last day or so because we all realized that Aaron set the RDAs to men's. This is good news for most of us, cause it means we're doing better than we thought! But it brings up the topic of just what is the right amount of each nutrient for us, how do we best supplement, and what nutritients do we really need to get from food, vs. what nutrients can we supplement adequately?
Dr. Walford has an excellent treatment of this topic in Beyond 120, so I suggest y'all read it if you haven't yet. But a few quick points:
-- In lab animals, the ones fed their nutrients from real food live longer than the ones fed rat junk food plus supplements.
-- We don't know, for sure, what exactly it is in each food that is good for us, so by getting our RDAs from food we maximize our chances that we're getting whatever we need that might not be specifically isolated in a vitamin. There is no perfect vitamin pill.
-- Most multis have toxic levels of this or that, and varieties of the nutrients that are actually different from what's found in food. Synthetic beta-carotene, for example. Even if you have a great multi, it will still only fill in the holes in your particular diet by chance. You really must analyze your diet before you choose your supplements. MR doesn't take a multi cause his diet is too good. He'd be overdoing it on some nutrients if he took a multi. He supplements with specific nutrients, but doesn't take one single multi.
-- There are some nutrients that have to be kept in balance with each other, else neither will be properly absorbed or utilized. Zinc and copper are an example. If you have too much copper (which is found in fruits and vegetables) relative to your zinc, your zinc won't be properly absorbed and utilized, even if you're getting more than the RDA of both nutrients from your food and/or your supplements. And vice versa. So taking a random pill without analyzing your diet is likely to throw off the balance of your nutrients, or at the very least leave an imbalance uncorrected. You might think you're getting the RDA (the pill says so!) but you're not absorbing and utilizing it. The more you rely on pills without knowing what's in your food, the more likely you are to fail to correct imbalances, or make them worse. You're reasonably safe if you have the RDAs, or even proportional multiples of all the RDAs at once, since good balance is shown in the RDAs. But if you start taking a bunch of pills on top of your food, without knowing exactly what's in them and understanding how they interact with the nutrients in your diet, you're likely to perpetuate any imbalances.
There are still plenty of reasons why you might want to supplement. Insurance against occasional or chronic deficiencies (such as taking Vegetarian Booster if you eat a mostly vegetarian diet,) specific medical conditions for which certain supplements might be indicated (like my I-3-C for cervical dysplasia, which, btw, is GONE as of my last check up!!!) and more experimental supplements that may have a beneficial effect but definitely aren't necessary for a healthy diet. I've written a lot about what supplements I take, and I need to update some of the info because we've recently revamped my supplement program. Informed supplementation can improve your CR program, and uninformed supplementation can cause problems, so analyze your diet before you start taking pills.
I'll ask MR more about the RDAs tomorrow morning... I just got home from a late meeting and he's already in bed. I need to head that way too!
Meanwhile, I continue to be so impressed with the newbies! Great blogs guys and girls!
Posted by april at January 16, 2007 11:12 PM
Comments
April,
I been thinking along the same lines lately.. I go in binges..some years supplementing 'till I'm broke..others nothing. Food has so many more nutrients than we are aware of and each is a perfect little package (Let me clarify: wholesome, natural food, NOT packaged, processed food.)
Please link to me if you have a chance. I'm enjoying being part of the CR Girl Club!
Deborah http://djhinva.blogspot.com/
Posted by: Deborah at January 17, 2007 6:50 AM
April:
I do enjoy reading your blog. I wanted to add a bit of information for your readers on RDA’s.
The good old RDA (Recommended Dietary Allowances, 1989) has been replaced. The Food and Nutrition Board of the Institute of Medicine has now replaced the RDA with the new Dietary Reference Intakes (DRI, established 1997-2001), which are a combination of the Estimated Average Requirement (EAR), the Adequate Intake (AI) and the Upper Level of Tolerable Intake (UL). Confused yet? To really get tangled up, go to the Food and Nutrition Board of the Institute of Medicine web site and try and make heads or tails of it. I’ll save you some time—it’s a mess.
To condense a lot of information, the level set for the old RDA was established at two standard deviations (that doesn’t refer to the delinquent kids down the block) above what the usual intake (EAR) is determined to be. Again, the EAR is actually adequate for the bulk of the population, but to capture the upper end of the population bell curve, the DRI was established. As a comparison, the old RDA for selenium was 70 micrograms and based upon more recent data, decreased in the DRI to 55 micrograms. Magnesium under the old RDA was set at 400 mg and under the new DRI is set at 420 mg. Checking my own multivitamin bottle, which I just purchased, it uses the old RDA for magnesium at 400 mg. So I would suggest that readers check their nutrient database to find if daily requirements are being analyzed by RDA’s or the updated DRI’s. DRI information can be found at the USDA website.
WG
Posted by: WG at January 17, 2007 7:32 AM
I think from a "newbie" perspective the best advice anyone could ever guve to us is to SLOW DOWN! I think it takes a significant amount of nutritional knowledge to perform CR correctly. If we start buy safely cutting our calories back and try to maximize the amount of vitamins and minerals from food, I think that is a good start. It's so easy to want to be the best CR groupie. It's so easy to push ourselves to know everything overnight and I truly believe that is just impossible. We must take our time and try to throughly learn the material. Bachelor degrees are not given over night. The people that we see who are "sucessfull" CR practioners have not only been doing this for quite a while, but some even have science and medical research back grounds.
Obviously, I am not preaching because I am probably the most impatient newbie. Just that after reading the post I realized, there is more to this stuff then I ever imagined!
Posted by: carolyn at January 17, 2007 8:06 AM
Couple of brewer's yeast questions;
Why are you using this product? Is it more the vitamins and minerals? Or is it safe to say that it is a great way to up your protein levels without the added fat?
Just wondering from your personal perspective.
Also buds or flakes? LL offers it both ways. If you have tried and use both, which texture for what purposes?
You must get sick of the questions sometimes. I am sorry, but you can help, I would greatly appreciate it.
Posted by: carolyn at January 17, 2007 9:46 AM
WG,
Riddle me this: How do Daily Values (DVs) fit into all this? Is DV the same as RDA? And if so, should I assume a product expressing nutrition as %DV is using the old RDA info.?
Posted by: Robin at January 17, 2007 11:12 AM
Yes! About WG's post - there really seems to be a big difference. I had thought I may have to suppliment D to get enough. The suppliment label that says 100%, based on an the old average, is actually 200% for me. The calcium chewie label says 25%, but it's actually 50%. Confusing, huh?
Posted by: Christina at January 17, 2007 3:54 PM
The question is a good one and involves the sometimes contradictory roles the FDA and USDA play in determining the following:
1. What we are consuming (FDA)
2. How much of it we should consume to stay healthy (USDA)
The system has become unnecessarily cumbersome as described in my comment above. With the Dietary Reference Intake as the new gold standard, we have tables for the Adequate Intake (AI), and the Tolerable Upper Level of Intake (UL) to account for those potentially toxic vitamins like A and D. So back to your question, in all this mess what is the %DV?
The FDA requires that labeling give a reference value for the contents of the food. In the case of vitamins, the industry has set the %DV, either tied to the 1989 RDA or the 2002 Dietary Reference Intakes. You have to realize that the tiny label can’t tell the whole story. The DRI for a 51 yo male is 8mg and for a 14 year old male it’s 11mg. The %DV can’t render all the nuances of gender, age and condition or the label would outweigh the bottle. In short, the %DV is a one size fits all value, not necessarily specific for individuals. To get the up to date DRI’s check out the USDA at:
http://fnic.nal.usda.gov/nal_display/index.php?info_center=4&tax_level=1&tax_subject=242
Click on Dietary Guidance in the left hand column.
WG
Posted by: WG at January 17, 2007 4:21 PM