Here’s a summary of the recommendation lists, pulled (sloppily) from each of the report abstracts for those who don’t wish to read.
SODIUM: < 1.5 g through dietary control. Most people should reduce consumption. (Yvain & Michael)
POTASSIUM: > 4.7g through diet supplemented by potassium salt if necessary. Most people need to increase consumption (Yvain & Michael)
IODINE: + 6 mg supplement for women as Lugol’s solution or other molecular iodine (Yvain)
LITHIUM: + 1 mg supplement as lithium orotate (Yvain)
PHOSPHOROUS: Most people should reduce consumption (Michael)
MAGNESIUM: Many people are deficient. These people should increase intake (Michael)
SELENIUM: +0.1-0.2 mg per day. (Steven Kaas)
CALCIUM: Contradictory—Michael suggests consume lots, but men who do so should take vitamin D. Says most people are deficient, even with current RDI. Yvain suggests calcium supplements are bad. Neither give their recommendation particularly high confidence.
BEEF LIVER (not a vitamin. I mean an actual liver you cut out of a grass fed cow that goes moo): 4oz 1-2 times per week. (Kevin)
Generally, supplementation is better than deficiency. Getting it through diet is better than supplements. And blood tests are cheap and let you know exactly what you need. Most of those things you heard were healthy/unhealthy are generally right like being sure to eat your fruits and veggies, brown rice > white rice, spinach is good for you, etc.
Please note that this is a summary of their summaries, which in themselves are summaries of other research. We’re playing god knows how many levels of telephone with the data, and I just added two more. I only wrote this post because I didn’t want to read all those reports and I was secretly hoping someone else would do it and post a summary. Then my decision theory kicked in and said “but if this site is full of clones of me, I’d never get to read a summary”, so I rolled a dice and started reading.
I’m sure I missed lots of stuff and I omitted things I thought were common knowledge like spinach being an exceptional source for some vitamins instead. In retrospect I should have probably made a note of every recommendation instead of a personal set of cliff notes. Anyhow I digress. My point is that you should read the reports themselves if you’re considering changing your diet routine. Oh, and since I’m sure I got things wrong, don’t hesitate to tell me.
Then my decision theory kicked in and said “but if this site is full of clones of me, I’d never get to read a summary”, so I rolled a dice and started reading.
Out of curiosity, what die did you roll and what result was required to start reading?
Here’s a summary of the recommendation lists, pulled (sloppily) from each of the report abstracts for those who don’t wish to read.
SODIUM: < 1.5 g through dietary control. Most people should reduce consumption. (Yvain & Michael)
POTASSIUM: > 4.7g through diet supplemented by potassium salt if necessary. Most people need to increase consumption (Yvain & Michael)
IODINE: + 6 mg supplement for women as Lugol’s solution or other molecular iodine (Yvain)
LITHIUM: + 1 mg supplement as lithium orotate (Yvain)
PHOSPHOROUS: Most people should reduce consumption (Michael)
MAGNESIUM: Many people are deficient. These people should increase intake (Michael)
SELENIUM: +0.1-0.2 mg per day. (Steven Kaas)
CALCIUM: Contradictory—Michael suggests consume lots, but men who do so should take vitamin D. Says most people are deficient, even with current RDI. Yvain suggests calcium supplements are bad. Neither give their recommendation particularly high confidence.
BEEF LIVER (not a vitamin. I mean an actual liver you cut out of a grass fed cow that goes moo): 4oz 1-2 times per week. (Kevin)
Generally, supplementation is better than deficiency. Getting it through diet is better than supplements. And blood tests are cheap and let you know exactly what you need. Most of those things you heard were healthy/unhealthy are generally right like being sure to eat your fruits and veggies, brown rice > white rice, spinach is good for you, etc.
Please note that this is a summary of their summaries, which in themselves are summaries of other research. We’re playing god knows how many levels of telephone with the data, and I just added two more. I only wrote this post because I didn’t want to read all those reports and I was secretly hoping someone else would do it and post a summary. Then my decision theory kicked in and said “but if this site is full of clones of me, I’d never get to read a summary”, so I rolled a dice and started reading.
I’m sure I missed lots of stuff and I omitted things I thought were common knowledge like spinach being an exceptional source for some vitamins instead. In retrospect I should have probably made a note of every recommendation instead of a personal set of cliff notes. Anyhow I digress. My point is that you should read the reports themselves if you’re considering changing your diet routine. Oh, and since I’m sure I got things wrong, don’t hesitate to tell me.
Out of curiosity, what die did you roll and what result was required to start reading?
A d20 of course. We are all clones of one another after all.
I’m just glad I didn’t roll a natural 20 or I’d have had to write an original report myself.
What range was “summarize” and what range was “wait for someone else to do it”?
I needed a 13 or better to do it. 12 or lower would be wait for someone else.
Heh, I was thinking you rolled a d20 even before I read this comment.