Addressing nutritional deficiencies for general health and optimisation seems to be all the hype right now on the internet, especially on bodybuilding and biohacking/self-improvement forums (Examine is another source that stresses its importance). I find it hard to believe that everyone needs high doses of Vitamin D3, magnesium, vitamin K2, omega 3’s and zinc. What are your thoughts on this matter? I personally did supplement with all five of those for a couple years in moderate doses because I thought that you “had to” since they were the “basics”.
I don’t think I noticed much of a difference to be honest, if anything there were deleterious effects. My bloodwork shows that I do need supplemental D3 to get in the 40-60 ng/mL so I use that but do you really need Vitamin K2 and magnesium in conjunction with D3 as almost all online sources say you do? They say you need K2 to synergize with D3 and prevent symptoms of hypercalcemia. Thanks for your time.
I don’t think that supplementing nutrient deficiencies without objective evidence (read: reliable lab tests) that something needs to be addressed is useful, nor do I think it’s without risk (see antioxidants).
Depending on your vitamin D level you may need a different preparation to achieve optimal levels, but supplemental K2 isn’t necessary in most cases.
Along this line, I’ve been wondering about multivitamins. I know you don’t recommend them for the same reason, but is there any value in taking them if a person is unable to get tested and therefor is unaware if they have a deficiency?
Perhaps the USDA guidelines for fruit and vegetables, etc is enough, perhaps not, I’m hopelessly undereducated in that regard. I’m intuiting a lot of nuance with that in particular as well, perhaps more than you wish to type, so I completely understand if you don’t.
If you have reason to believe you are deficient or will become deficient based on medical history, e.g. malabsorption diseases or surgeries causing malabsorption, conditions that produce an inability to take in a correct amount of food mechanically, psychologically, or other- then a doctor will probably prescribe a multi in addition to necessary other vitamins based on the situation.
I don’t think that supplementing off the cuff is a good idea, as it is highly unlikely you (or someone without a medical condition) is deficient in something requiring supplementation but no doctor’s evaluation…
For someone who never eats fish (maybe sushi one a month), is fish oil worthwhile?
By the way, how would you rank the ergogenic supplements in peri-rx in order of importance (discounting caffeine) if one takes the ingredients separately and wants to save cost? I’d wager it goes creatine > beta alanine > citrulline malate > TMG > HMB/BCAA’s.
TMG still has a pretty marginal benefit though compared to creatine right? I wish Examine would update their page on TMG because it’s lacking a lot of the more recent data.
I see. I guess now I’m wondering if a person is on the lower end of the range for a level of vitamin, which is technically not deficient, couldn’t that person realize a kind of benefit to physical health by supplementing with a vitamin, thereby increasing the level from the lower end of the range to higher?
I have to say, the more I type this out, the more it sounds like that thing that everyone believes about testosterone: that more is exponentially better than less no matter what… that 1,000 is way better than 300, when that’s not true/doesn’t matter.
No. Not typically (in most cases- there’s some nuance here).
I have to say, the more I type this out, the more it sounds like that thing that everyone believes about testosterone: that more is exponentially better than less no matter what… that 1,000 is way better than 300, when that’s not true/doesn’t matter.