Some of the smart people I've heard talk about this and harp on about how MVMs basically just produce "expensive piss" do also mention that unless you have a medically diagnosed deficiency, it's not necessary. But I understand your argument here to be that one doesn't have to wait until they have been diagnosed. Taking them as insurance policies can be good practice.?
Yeah. And practically, most people have no idea if and what they are deficient in. Blood tests rarely test for all micronutrients, and, even if they did, you're only testing your levels at one timepoint, which might not reflect chronic insufficiency.
I'll admit, prior to seeing this (your posts) discussed on Twitter I too was of the belief that they didn't seem to do much, but this was from a life-extending perspective. Reframing this into a life-improvement perspective of course makes complete sense - and seems to be supported.
I think it raises again the topic of trust or communication at the population-level. There's RD's who advocate for high red meat consumption on one street, and other RD's advocating the opposite right next door. There's well respected nutritionists/health-science communicators informing clients that MVM are useless in this clinic, but in another clinic they're advocating for use.
Whilst opposing opinions of course are present in all fields (although I feel some within the nutrition field feel it's exclusive here), nutrition is unique in that it's inescapable (everyone's involved everyday) *and* there's a lack of fundamental knowledge. Susan doesn't need to worry about what 'x' AI debate between Y and Z professor: she lacks knowledge, but doesn't require it and thus can 'leave'. She leaves to go eat lunch and sits down next to 2 'health-minded' friends eating and advocating for the examples given above. She has to eat, so she can't 'leave', but she doesn't possess any fundamental knowledge, so cannot partake in the conversation. What should she do? I don't know the answer.
Most nutritionists and dietitians agree on most important health topics, including red meat. This topic (MVM) is one of the exceptions. The trouble is that professionals who consistently hold anti-consensus stances tend to have loud voices and large followings, which muddies the level of certainty for anyone looking from the outside in. It's something that I'll continue to write about. Thanks for reading.
There’s more to life than death…love that subtitle. And agree with you 🤙🏼
Cheers, Michael. Didn't know you were on here, too. Subscribed!
Some of the smart people I've heard talk about this and harp on about how MVMs basically just produce "expensive piss" do also mention that unless you have a medically diagnosed deficiency, it's not necessary. But I understand your argument here to be that one doesn't have to wait until they have been diagnosed. Taking them as insurance policies can be good practice.?
Yeah. And practically, most people have no idea if and what they are deficient in. Blood tests rarely test for all micronutrients, and, even if they did, you're only testing your levels at one timepoint, which might not reflect chronic insufficiency.
MNS to Sustack - nice.
I'll admit, prior to seeing this (your posts) discussed on Twitter I too was of the belief that they didn't seem to do much, but this was from a life-extending perspective. Reframing this into a life-improvement perspective of course makes complete sense - and seems to be supported.
I think it raises again the topic of trust or communication at the population-level. There's RD's who advocate for high red meat consumption on one street, and other RD's advocating the opposite right next door. There's well respected nutritionists/health-science communicators informing clients that MVM are useless in this clinic, but in another clinic they're advocating for use.
Whilst opposing opinions of course are present in all fields (although I feel some within the nutrition field feel it's exclusive here), nutrition is unique in that it's inescapable (everyone's involved everyday) *and* there's a lack of fundamental knowledge. Susan doesn't need to worry about what 'x' AI debate between Y and Z professor: she lacks knowledge, but doesn't require it and thus can 'leave'. She leaves to go eat lunch and sits down next to 2 'health-minded' friends eating and advocating for the examples given above. She has to eat, so she can't 'leave', but she doesn't possess any fundamental knowledge, so cannot partake in the conversation. What should she do? I don't know the answer.
Most nutritionists and dietitians agree on most important health topics, including red meat. This topic (MVM) is one of the exceptions. The trouble is that professionals who consistently hold anti-consensus stances tend to have loud voices and large followings, which muddies the level of certainty for anyone looking from the outside in. It's something that I'll continue to write about. Thanks for reading.