Simple Questions Don’t Always Have Simple Answers

Posted By elissa on Apr 8, 2009 | 2 comments

A case in point popped up on the “Bodybuilding Revealed” forum recently…

“What is the best multivitamin?”

That’s a pretty, simple question… but I’ll be damned if I know the answer.  I’m not sure what “best” even means, when it comes to multivitamins. To be perfectly honest, there are very few objective standards for evaluating a multi.  The few that come to my mind are:

• Label specifications (i.e. ,what’s on the label should be what’s in the bottle)
• Completeness (i.e., the known essential nutrients should be covered)
• Amounts (i.e., nutritionally significant amounts should be provided)
• Bioavailability of individual nutrient sources
• Price
• Company (i.e., from an established company w/a reputation for quality and good customer service)

Unfortunately, while this list can help us weed out poor products, it’s not a lot of help when it comes to identifying the very best ones.

Many people assume “more is better” when it comes to a multi, but this assumption is often unwarranted.  For one thing, many of the ancillary nutrients (like amino acids or food extracts) are likely to be “label decoration” – that is, supplied in amounts too small to be useful.  Needless to state, these additional ingredients often come at an additional cost, too.

Likewise, the utility of providing very high doses of certain nutrients (250% – 10,000% of the RDA) has yet to be established.  While this may come as a shock to many people, there isn’t a whole lot of science linking multivitamin use to the prevention of disease (with the exception of deficiency diseases).  While megadoses of certain vitamins may have specific therapeutic uses (such as niacin for cholesterol reduction and CVD), it’s unclear what – if any – benefits there might be from chronic intake by healthy people.  At the moment, Vitamin D is one of the few essential nutrients for which there’s a strong justification for consuming more than the RDA.

Of course, in the case of water-soluble nutrients, such as the B-Vitamins and Vitamin C, there’s no real harm to it either…it’s just that there’s no reason to assume a product providing – say – 800% of the RDA for Vitamin C is better than one providing “only” 500%.

Ironically, I’d be inclined to look at the products formulated for bariatric surgery patients as a potential “best” standard, since this population is at high risk for nutrient deficiencies; and has a limited ability to absorb certain nutrients.  In other words, they’re a sort of “worst case scenario” – so products that work for them will have good bioavailability, at the least.

That being said, however, it doesn’t mean the very “best” formulas are the only ones that will do, if you’re a healthy person whose goal is simply to have your nutritional bases covered.  Often “good enough” is…well, good enough.  In the end, your health is going to be far more dependent on your food choices and physical activity. 

Thus, I see no virtue in spending endless hours agonizing over finding the “best” multi…or paying through the nose for the “best” products.  Overall, you’re better off with a decent product that covers the basics AND fits your budget.  It’s a “win-win” proposition, as this will leave you with more $$$ to spend on the “best” food(s), as well.