For not taking vitamins?
This article could lead you to think so. But don't believe it!
I don't take vitamin pills, basically because every time I've started, I've found myself incapable of maintaining the habit. So, as in other areas of my life, a bad character trait--in this case, my tendency to procrastinate in the adoption of something I've been told is good for me--has spared me.
I'm willing to let the early adopters have their day in the sun. If you wait around long enough, you always look like a genius.
[Thanks to Ann Althouse for putting me on to the NYT article.]
1 comment:
The article was interesting, but I think it tries to prove too much.
I've never thought of vitamins as anti-cancer pills or a defense against heart disease. I take vitamins to ensure that I have a balanced intake of essential nutrients. They are part of maintaining my health, not some magic cure-all.
The subtext of the article is perhaps more interesting than the reporting -- apparently what we really want is a magic cure-all.
Medical reporting seems to swing from one extreme to the other, as some trial shows that oat bran or folic acid or fish oil is the new miracle additive, then a later study shows that the promise was oversold. As you've pointed out, if you wait long enough, every study gets debunked.
Personally, I'm banking on the ones that say caffeine and chocolate are good for you. :)
Post a Comment