Vitamin E Meta-Analysis

___________

Council for Responsible Nutrition

EDITOR'S NOTE: The Council for Responsible Nutrition published a FACT SHEET -- Vitamin E meta-analysis in Annals of Internal Medicine: What’s wrong with this picture? -- in late 2004 to help consumers better understand the "negative" press about Vitamin E. This negative press continues to today -- and the information in the FACT SHEET is still tremendously valid for all to read! The FACT SHEET even discusses the "upcoming SELECT" test (which has just been published -- with negative press, of course) and prefaces that upcoming test as part of the meta-analysis process.

Please take the time to read this important FACT SHEET and, if you have any questions, feel free to call us at 800.833.4368, and we will be happy to discuss the positive truths about Vitamin E going back to the 1930s.

Below are excerpts from the topics discussed in the FACT SHEET:

FACT SHEET

Vitamin E meta-analysis in Annals of Internal Medicine: What’s wrong with this picture?

What is a meta-analysis?
A meta-analysis is not a clinical trial. It is a statistical technique for combining the results of many existing studies in order to clarify possible effects.

What is all-cause mortality?
A certain number of people in long term studies are going to die, and all-cause mortality is the number of people who died from any cause — whether or not the cause has anything to do with the purpose of the study.

What did this study find, overall?
Overall, Vitamin E supplementation did not affect all-cause mortality.

What did the study find, relating to high and low doses of Vitamin E?
However, they go on to generalize, saying that people should avoid high-dose Vitamin E and indeed high doses of any Vitamin — a conclusion much more sweeping than is justified by their analysis.

Were there other findings?
The researchers also did a dose-response analysis of the clinical trials, which found a statistically significant (but very small) increase in mortality only when the Vitamin E dose was greater than 900 IU. This is contrary to the finding in their main meta-analysis that doses over 400 IU might confer increased risk.

What were the 19 studies used in this meta-analysis?
Some of the studies involved over 20,000 people, and some involved only a few hundred people. Doses used in the studies ranged from 16.5 IU to 2000 IU and were given for periods from one to 8 years . . . some of the studies found a benefit of Vitamin E for these purposes.

Do any of the studies show a benefit from Vitamin E?
Yes. Many of the 19 clinical studies used in this meta-analysis actually showed a health benefit from Vitamin E.

Do epidemiologic studies show a benefit from Vitamin E?
Yes. Numerous epidemiologic studies have shown a benefit from Vitamin E.

Are more studies being done using high-dose Vitamin E?
Yes. A number of new clinical trials are now under way, and researchers are attempting to reassure the people enrolled in these trials that Vitamin E is safe and that the research should continue.

Was it reasonable to select 400 IU as the cutoff between low-dose and high-dose Vitamin E?
No. Four hundred IU was an arbitrary number.

How much Vitamin E is safe?
The Institute of Medicine, a scientific advisory body, has concluded that Vitamin E is safe for chronicuse in the general population at levels up to 1000 mg (1000 IU synthetic Vitamin E, 1500 IU natural Vitamin E).

What should people think about this meta-analysis?
Consumers who are already using Vitamin E should continue to use it with confidence, and people who are not currently using at least a multiVitamin containing Vitamin E should consider doing so, since the overwhelming majority of the population fails to get the recommended amount of Vitamin E from diet alone.