folate Archives - Health Tips From The Professor

Can Folate Prevent Obesity In Adolescents?

April 14, 2026 by Dr. Steve Chaney

When Pigs Fly

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

The obesity epidemic has reached our children!

The prevalence of obesity in children and adolescents has increased 3-fold in the past 30 years.

According to the CDC:

In 2023 almost 20% of US children and adolescents (ages 6-17) were obese.

- And if you expand the category to overweight AND obese the percentage is over 30%.

The medical costs for treating obese children and adolescents in 2023 was $1.3 billion. That’s:

- $116 higher per person for obese children than children of normal weight.

- $310 higher per person for severely obese children than children of normal weight.

In the short-term, obesity in children and adolescents affects:

Growth
Hormone balance.
Self-image and psychological wellness.

Longer term, obesity in children and adolescents increases the risk of:

Heart Disease.
Diabetes and other metabolic disorders.
Certain cancers.
Premature death.

That’s why recent headlines suggesting that folate decreases the risk of obesity in children and adolescents were so intriguing.

We know that around 13% of boys and 40% of girls aged 12-15 have inadequate folate intake.

Could something as simple as a folate supplement decrease the risk of your child or teenager becoming obese?

Maybe. But before you rush out and buy folate supplements for your children, perhaps we should examine the study (F Yan et al. BMC Pediatrics, 26: 141, 2026) behind the headlines and see if there is a simpler explanation of the data.

How Was This Study Done?

This study utilized data from the US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) that is conducted by the CDC on a continuous basis. This particular study utilized data collected from 49,693 Americans of all ages and ethnicities between 2009 and 2018.

For this study, children were classified as ages 6-11 years (4458 individuals) and adolescents as ages 12-19 years (4946 individuals).

Dietary folate intake was calculated from two 24-hour dietary recalls spaced 3-10 days apart.

The data only included folates from food sources and did not include any dietary supplements.

The first dietary recall interview was conducted in person and the second by phone.

Daily folate intake was calculated as folate intake in mcg per 1,000 calories of food (mcg/1,000 calories).

Finally, the participants were divided into quartiles: Q1 <143, Q2 143-182, Q3 182-235, Q4 ≥235, all in units of mcg/1,000 calories.

The study correlated folate intake with both overall overweight/obesity and central obesity.

Overweight/obesity was defined as a BMI ≥ than the sex- and age-specific 85^Th percentile for BMI.

Central obesity was defined as a waist circumference ≥ than the sex- and age-specific 90^th percentile corrected for height.

Can Folate Prevent Obesity In Adolescents?

The data appeared to be convincing. For example:

In the total population of children plus adolescents (9,405 individuals):

Folate intake was negatively corelated with obesity.

When folate intake was analyzed as a continuous variable, for every unit increase of dietary folate intake:

- The percentage of overweight/obese children and adolescents decreased by 11%.

- The percentage of children and adolescents with central obesity decreased by 13%.

When folate intake was analyzed by quartiles.

- When quartile 2 (folate intake of 143-182) was compared to quartile 1 (folate intake <143), overweight/obesity decreased by 26% and central obesity by 23%.

- When quartile 3 (folate intake of 182-235) was compared to quartile 1, overweight/obesity decreased by 29% and central obesity by 26%.

- When quartile 4 (folate intake ≥235) was compared to quartile 1, overweight/obesity decreased by 35% and central obesity decreased by 36%.

As you might have guessed from the previous data, the effect of folate on the risk of obesity/overweight and central obesity was non-linear. There was an inflection point around 192 mcg/1,000 calories.

- When folate intake was below 192 mcg/1,000 calories, an increase of 100 mcg/1,000 calories decreased the risk of overweight/obesity and central obesity by 35%.

- When folate intake was above 192 mcg/1,000 calories, the effect of additional folate intake was not statistically significant.

When they broke down the data by age and gender:

The effect of folate intake on overweight/obesity and central obesity was not significant in children.

However, the effect of folate intake on overweight/obesity and central obesity was highly significant in adolescents and the effect was gender specific.

- When comparing folate intake in the Q4 range (≥235 mcg/1,000 calories) to the Q1 range (<143 mcg/1,000 calories) overweight/obesity:

- - Was reduced by 47% in men and 50% in women.

- When comparing folate intake in the Q4 range to the Q1 range central obesity:

- - Was reduced by 58% in women, but no statistically significant decrease was seen in men.

The authors concluded, “This cross-sectional study indicates that higher dietary folate is associated with lower odds of overweight/obesity and central obesity in children and adolescents in the United States. The association exhibits non-linear characteristics with potential thresholds of 190 mcg/1,000 calories and 195 mcg/1,000 calories, respectively. It is worth noting that this association is mainly significant in the adolescent population. This study reveals a possible dose-response relationship between dietary folate and obesity in children and adolescents.”

When Pigs Fly

It would be easy to accept the conclusions of these authors at face value. After all, the statistical correlation between higher folate intake and the risk of obesity in adolescents was very strong.

And the authors invoked a lot of impressive sounding metabolic mumbo-jumbo to explain how folate could affect appetite and body weight. [I’m qualified to call it mumbo-jumbo because I taught human metabolism to medical students for 40 years.]

You might be tempted to rush out and buy a folate supplement for your teenager, especially if they are starting to get a bit plump. But then, you might think, “Wait. It couldn’t be that simple. It just doesn’t sound plausible that folate intake has anything to do with obesity”.

The 16^th century English and Scotts had a phrase for impossible events. They were things that only happened “When pigs fly”. The original version of the saying was, “When pigs fly with their tails forward.” In other words, the pigs were not only flying. They were flying backwards.

What Could Go Wrong?

As I said above, the inverse association between folate intake and obesity in adolescents was very strong. What could go wrong? As Mark Twain said years ago, “There are lies. There are damn lies. And then there are statistics.” Let me explain.

This was an association study. Association studies measure the association between a single variable (folate intake) and an outcome (obesity). But, for the results to be reliable they need to be corrected for other variables that affect the same outcome. There are two kinds of variables – known variables and confounding variables.

The known variables for this study were age, sex, race, poverty level, physical activity, and total energy intake. They were all corrected for in this study.

“Confounding variables” are unknown variables that also affect the outcome of the study. But since they are unknown, they are not corrected for.

Let me give you a simplistic example of a confounding variable. Let’s say you were doing a study of dietary habits, and you found an association between ice cream consumption and mortality. You might conclude that ice cream consumption is bad for you. It increases your risk of dying.

But then you might remember that ice cream consumption increases during the summer. And then you might reason that people swim more during the summer, and there is a correlation between swimming and drowning deaths.

Swimming could be a confounding variable. To make sure that your initial conclusion that ice cream increases the risk of dying was correct, you would need to correct your data for swimming deaths during the summer and see if you still found a correlation between ice cream consumption and mortality.

In this study there was an inverse correlation between folate consumption and energy intake (calories consumed per day). The authors focused on the decreased energy intake associated with high folate intake. They postulated several mechanisms to explain this correlation, but their arguments were weak.

They should have been focusing on the other end of the spectrum. Adolescents in the lowest quartile of folate intake were consuming 10% more calories than those in the top quartile, yet their folate intake was 65% less.

The authors should have been asking, “How do you consume 10% more calories and end up with 65% less folate?” The answer is obvious.

The adolescents in the lowest quartile must be consuming a lot more highly processed foods – otherwise know as junk and convenience foods.

So, let’s ask what else we know about the situation:

Adolescents like to eat junk food.

There is strong correlation between consumption of highly processed foods and obesity.

The mechanisms underlying the correlation between highly processed foods and obesity have been well defined, and they have nothing to do with folate intake.

Highly processed food consumption was an obvious confounding variable, but the authors never asked what foods the adolescents in each folate quartile were eating.

This is sounding a lot like the correlation between ice cream consumption and death. The pigs are flying.

So, if you want your teens to be slim and healing, don’t reach for a folate supplement. Instead, try to convince your teens to cut back on their junk food consumption.

The Bottom Line

A recent study found a strong inverse association between folate intake and obesity in adolescents. For example:

When the highest folate intake was compared to the lowest, the risk of overweight and obesity was decreased by 35%.

However, you can’t believe every published study. In this case, the authors made a critical mistake in interpreting their data. The actual interpretation of their data should have been much different.

For more details about this study, what the study should have concluded, and what the study means for you, read the article above.

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.

_____________________________________________________________________________

My posts and “Health Tips From the Professor” articles carefully avoid claims about any brand of supplement or manufacturer of supplements. However, I am often asked by representatives of supplement companies if they can share them with their customers.

My answer is, “Yes, as long as you share only the article without any additions or alterations. In particular, you should avoid adding any mention of your company or your company’s products. If you were to do that, you could be making what the FTC and FDA consider a “misleading health claim” that could result in legal action against you and the company you represent.

For more detail about FTC regulations for health claims, see this link.

https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/health-products-compliance-guidance

______________________________________________________________________

About The Author

Dr. Chaney won numerous teaching awards at UNC, including the Academy of Educators “Excellence in Teaching Lifetime Achievement Award”.

Dr Chaney also ran an active cancer research program at UNC and published over 100 scientific articles and reviews in peer-reviewed scientific journals. In addition, he authored two chapters on nutrition in one of the leading biochemistry text books for medical students.

Since retiring from the University of North Carolina, he has been writing a weekly health blog called “Health Tips From the Professor”. He has also written two best-selling books, “Slaying the Food Myths” and “Slaying the Supplement Myths”. And most recently he has created an online lifestyle change course, “Create Your Personal Health Zone”. For more information visit https://chaneyhealth.com.

For the past 54 years Dr. Chaney and his wife Suzanne have been helping people improve their health holistically through a combination of good diet, exercise, weight control and appropriate supplementation.

Is Folate Needed For Strong Bones?

October 8, 2024 by Dr. Steve Chaney

Why Is Folate Needed For Strong Bones?

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

When most people think of the nutrients required to build strong bones, they just think of calcium and vitamin D. This is understandable because these two nutrients are essential for building healthy bone.

But in reality “it takes a village” to build strong bones.

The bone matrix also contains magnesium, zinc, copper, and manganese. They are also needed.

- Fun fact: As an undergraduate at the University of Southern California my wife, Suzanne, worked for Dr. Paul Saltman, the biochemist who discovered the importance of these nutrients for building healthy bone.

Vitamin C is required to build collagen, the foundation on which bone is built, and the cartilage that helps bones resist fractures.

Vitamin K delivers calcium to osteoblasts, the cells responsible for building bone.

But a new study (L Zhou et al, BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 25: 487, pages 1-9, 2024) suggests that folate is also important for building strong bones and preventing osteoporosis as we age. I didn’t see that one coming. So, let me start by explaining why folate may be important for bone health before I review the study.

Why Is Folate Needed For Strong Bones?

There are four facts we need to know about human metabolism to understand the effect of folate on bone health.

Fact 1: We tend to think of bone as a permanent, unchanging part of our body. But that’s not true. As we move about our bones experience wear and tear. As they age they become more brittle and susceptible to fracturing.

So, our bodies have a process for continuously removing old bone and replacing it with new bone. Although you don’t notice the change, your bones today are not the same bones you had 10 or 15 years ago. They are continually being renewed.

The cells responsible for removing the old bone are called osteoclasts, and the cells responsible for building new bone are called osteoblasts. It is the perfect balance between osteoclast and osteoblast activity that keeps our bones strong.

Fact 2: When cellular folate levels are low, an amino acid metabolite called homocysteine accumulates in our cells and in our blood.

Fact 3: (This is the one I didn’t know until I looked it up): Homocysteine increases osteoclast activity and decreases osteoblast activity.

This tips the balance towards breaking down our bones. For young people that makes it more difficult to build strong, healthy bones. For older people that increases the risk of osteoporosis.

Fact 4: To clear up any confusion before we get started, I should tell you that the term “dietary folates” often includes folates from foods and folic acid from supplements. That is because folic acid is efficiently taken up by our cells and converted to folates in the cell.

And when methyl folate and folic acid are compared head to head in clinical studies, methyl folate offers no advantage over folic acid, even in individuals with mutations in the MTHFR gene. For more detail on this statement, go to https://www.chaneyhealth.com/healthtips/ and type “methy folate” in the search box.

How Was The Study Done?

The investigators used data from the CDC’s 2017-2020 NHANES (National Health And Nutrition Examination Survey) database. The NHANES program has been obtaining health and nutrition data from approximately 5,000 US citizens a year since 1969. Every 4 years the data are compiled into a database that can be used for studies like this one.

The investigators excluded participants who were missing important information such as calcium, vitamin D, or folate intake and bone density measurements. This left 2297 participants for the current study.

The participants were 49.9% female, 73% white, and the average age was 64 years. The prevalence of osteoporosis in this group was 6.92%, which is similar to other estimates of osteoporosis prevalence in this age group.

Dietary intake was based on two 24-hour dietary recalls. Bone density in the femur region was assessed by DXA radiological imaging. Osteoporosis was defined as a bone mineral density of <0.64 g/cm² for women and <0.68 g/cm² for men.

The study measured the correlation between dietary folate intake and prevalence of osteoporosis.

Is Folate Needed For Strong Bones?

The investigators separated the participants into 3 groups based on dietary folate intake: lowest (<264 mcg/day), middle (264-390 mcg/day), and highest (>390 mcg/day). For reference the daily value (DV) for folate is 400 mcg/day for adults in this age group.

When adjusted for other factors that affect bone density such as calcium, vitamin D, smoking, and alcohol consumption, those with the highest dietary intake of folates compared to those with the lowest dietary intake of folates:

Decreased their risk of osteoporosis by 70%.

And when the data were broken down by gender and age, the highest intake of dietary folates:

Decreased the risk of osteoporosis by 82% for women.

- Also, decreased the risk of osteoporosis for men. But the decrease was not statistically significant (Because men are less likely to develop osteoporosis than women, a much larger study would likely be required to show a statistically significant decreased risk for men.)

Decreased the risk of osteoporosis by 70% for people over 60.

- Did not significantly decrease the risk of osteoporosis for people under 60 (Osteoporosis is rare in people under 60.)

In short, adequate intake of folates (including folic acid) significantly decreases the risk of osteoporosis for those who are at highest risk, namely postmenopausal women over 60.

When the investigators did a dose response plot they found an L-shaped relationship between dietary folate and the risk of osteoporosis. They concluded that:

Dietary folate intake between 264 and 569 mcg/day was effective in preventing osteoporosis in post-menopausal women. Intakes above 569 mcg/day provided little or no additional benefit.

The authors concluded, “This finding suggests the potential importance of dietary folate for preventing and managing osteoporosis.”

“However, further longitudinal research and randomized controlled trials are necessary to elucidate the causal association between dietary folate intake and the risk of osteoporosis.”

What Does This Study Mean For You?

I am not suggesting that you should throw out your calcium and vitamin D supplement and rely on a folic acid supplement to build strong bones and prevent osteoporosis.

Calcium and vitamin D are absolutely essential for building strong bones. But they are not sufficient by themselves. It takes a holistic approach to build strong bones.

I have previously alerted you to the importance of vitamin C, vitamin K, magnesium, zinc, copper, and manganese for building strong bones. This study suggests I may need to add folic acid to the list. And who knows how many additional nutrients may play a role we don’t yet know about.

And it’s not just nutrients. There are many other lifestyle factors that influence the health of our bones. I have described what it takes to have a “bone healthy lifestyle” in a previous issue of “Health Tips From the Professor”.

This is why so many studies looking at the effect of calcium/vitamin D supplements on the risk of developing osteoporosis have come up empty. These studies were asking if calcium and vitamin D were “magic bullets” that could prevent osteoporosis on their own.

The answer to that question appears to be, “No”. But it isn’t the right question. As I have said before, “When clinical studies ask the wrong question, they get the wrong answer.”

Calcium and vitamin D are essential for bone formation, but they aren’t sufficient by themselves. It takes a village. Any study that ignores that is doomed to failure.

What does that mean for you? My recommendation is simple. If you want to build strong bones and reduce your risk of osteoporosis:

Start with a comprehensive multivitamin/multimineral supplement to make sure your bases are covered.

If your intake of calcium and vitamin D are below DV values (1,300 mg of calcium and 600-800 IU of vitamin D for adults in this age range), consider a calcium/vitamin D supplement.

Follow a “bone healthy lifestyle”.

The Bottom Line

A recent study suggests that dietary folate is important for building strong bones and preventing osteoporosis in post-menopausal women.

In this article I review the study, put it into perspective, and discuss what it means for you.

For more details about this study and what it means for you, read the article above.

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.

______________________________________________________________________________

For more detail about FTC regulations for health claims, see this link.

https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/health-products-compliance-guidance

____________________________________________________________________________

About The Author

Dr. Chaney has a BS in Chemistry from Duke University and a PhD in Biochemistry from UCLA. He is Professor Emeritus from the University of North Carolina where he taught biochemistry and nutrition to medical and dental students for 40 years. Dr. Chaney won numerous teaching awards at UNC, including the Academy of Educators “Excellence in Teaching Lifetime Achievement Award”. Dr Chaney also ran an active cancer research program at UNC and published over 100 scientific articles and reviews in peer-reviewed scientific journals. In addition, he authored two chapters on nutrition in one of the leading biochemistry text books for medical students.

For the past 45 years Dr. Chaney and his wife Suzanne have been helping people improve their health holistically through a combination of good diet, exercise, weight control and appropriate supplementation.

Is Vegan Breast Milk Sufficient?

June 27, 2023 by Dr. Steve Chaney

What Can Vegan Moms Do?

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

A whole food vegan diet is incredibly healthy:

Vegans are less likely to be overweight than the general population.

Vegans have a lower risk of diabetes, heart disease, cancer, hypertension, and several other diseases than the general population.

Whole food vegan diets are anti-inflammatory, so they lower the risk of autoimmune diseases and the “itis” diseases.

But vegan diets leave out meat, dairy, and eggs. Vegetarians without proper dietary advice are at high risk of inadequate intake of vitamin B12, vitamin D, iron, iodine, calcium, and DHA. And, of course, the risk of inadequate intake is even greater for vegans than it is for vegetarians, who may include some dairy and eggs in their diet.

So, it is legitimate to ask whether a vegetarian or vegan diet is sufficient for pregnancy and lactation. The short answer is that they can be if they are properly designed and properly supplemented.

But that is not an easy task, as evidenced by a recent study (N Ureta-Velasco et al., Nutrients 15:1855, 2023) comparing the breast milk of omnivore moms with the breast milk of vegetarian and vegan moms.

How Was This Study Done?

This study was done with 92 omnivore moms, 9 vegetarian moms (5-ovo-vegetarian and 4 lacto-ovo-vegetarians) and 11 vegan moms between August 2017 and February 2020 at the Regional Human Milk Bank at the “12 de Octubre” University Hospital in Madrid, Spain. The vegetarian and vegan moms were grouped together for data analysis.

On Day 0 of the study, participants went to the regional milk bank for blood and urine samples to determine nutritional status, a screening to determine health and socioeconomic status, and for food frequency questionnaire to characterize their habitual diet.

On days 1-5, they returned to the regional milk bank with a 24-hour diet recall of the previous day and to express 25 ml of breast milk to determine its nutrient content. On day 6, they returned to express a larger sample of breast milk to determine its lipid content (including EPA and DHA).

Note: Both the food frequency questionnaire and the 24-hour dietary recalls included nutrients derived from supplements.

What Did The Study Show About Dietary Intake of Key Nutrients?

This was a comprehensive study, so I will just cover the highlights here:

Birth Weight: Compared to the children of omnivore moms, the children of vegetarian/vegan moms were more likely to:

Have less weight gain during pregnancy (2 pounds less on average).

Be underweight at birth (60% of babies born to vegetarian/vegan moms were in the underweight category of birth weights versus 25% for babies born to omnivore moms).

This is probably because vegetarian/vegan moms:

Consumed slightly fewer calories per day (2146 versus 2319).

Consumed significantly less protein (67 g/d versus 96 g/d).

Were 10 times more likely to be underweight prior to pregnancy (10% versus 1%).

This is a concern because low birth weight increases the risk of physical and mental health issues later in life.

Supplement Use: The nutrients of greatest concern in a vegetarian/vegan diet are vitamin B12, vitamin D, iron, iodine, calcium, and DHA. For all these nutrients except DHA, this message appears to have gotten out to most vegetarian/vegan mothers because they were compensating for these potential deficiencies through supplementation.

For example, when they looked at average daily intake of these key nutrients from supplements, they found:

Nutrient	Vegetarian/Vegan Moms	Omnivore Moms
Vitamin D	1,080 IU (27mcg)	240 IU (6 mcg)
Folic acid	400 mcg	280 mcg
Vitamin B12	312 mcg	2 mcg
Calcium	566 mg	164 mg
Iron	40 mg	29 mg
DHA	100 mg	180 mg

However, that doesn’t tell the whole story, because not all vegetarian/vegan moms took supplements. When the investigators looked at the percent taking supplements, this is what they found.

Nutrient	Vegetarian/Vegan Moms	Omnivore Moms
Vitamin D	50%	50%
Folic acid	35%	61%
Vitamin B12	85%	60%
Calcium	15%	37%
Iron	25%	43%
DHA	10%	16%

Dietary Intake (Food + Supplements): The extra supplementation clearly played an important role because when the investigators looked at the overall intake from food and supplements, they found:

Nutrient	Vegetarian/Vegan Moms	Omnivore Moms
Vitamin D	224 IU (5.6 mcg)	432 IU (10.8 mcg)
Folate + Folic acid	668 mcg	473 mcg
Vitamin B12	258 mcg	6.9 mcg
Calcium	910 mg	1148 mg
Iron	31 mg	25 mg
DHA	110 mg	380 mg

Again, this doesn’t tell the whole story. Some women didn’t supplement. When the investigators looked at the percentage of women getting an inadequate intake of key nutrients from food plus supplements they found:

Nutrient	Vegetarian/Vegan Moms	Omnivore Moms
Vitamin D	75%	88%
Folate + Folic acid	0%	39%
Vitamin B12	25%	0%
Calcium	45%	40%
Iron	Not reported	Not reported
DHA	Not reported	Not reported

These results clearly show the need for supplementation. While the average intake from food plus supplements looked good, there were a significant percentage of women who weren’t getting adequate intake of key nutrients because they didn’t supplement.

The exceptions were folate + folic acid for vegetarian/vegans because their diet is rich in folate-containing foods and vitamin B12 for omnivores because their diet is rich in foods containing B12.

Is Vegan Breast Milk Sufficient?

Of course, the proof is in the pudding. When the investigators looked at the nutrient content of breast milk, this is what they found:

Nutrient	Vegetarian/Vegan Moms	Omnivore Moms	Reference Value*
Vitamin D3	1.1 mcg/L	3.4 mcg/L	0.25-2 mcg/L
Folate + Folic acid	19 mcg/L	20 mcg/l	80 mcg/L
Vitamin B12	0.74 mcg/L	0.65 mcg/L	0.5 mcg/L
Calcium	83 mg/L	99 mg/L	200-300 mg/L
Iron	Not reported	Not reported
DHA	0.15 g/100 g fat	0.33 g/100 g fat	0.35 g/100 g fat

*Reference values established by WHO

The chief difference between breast milk from vegetarian/vegan moms was in DHA levels.

That’s because the diet of vegetarians and vegans contains very little DHA, and very few vegetarian/vegan women in this study supplemented with DHA.

This study also found that breast milk from both vegetarian/vegan moms and omnivore moms was low in folate + folic acid, calcium, nicotinamide, and selenium. They said that requires follow-up in future studies.

The authors concluded, “The most important contribution of this study is the detailed and comprehensive description of micronutrients and lipids in human milk from omnivore milk donors and vegetarian/vegan women…Of particular concern is the lower DHA content in the milk of our vegetarian/vegan group. However, raising awareness and administering proper supplementation could bridge the gap, as has been the case with vitamin B12.”

What Can Vegan Moms Do?

This study emphasizes the importance of careful planning and supplementation during pregnancy and lactation if you are a vegetarian or vegan mom.

For example, the vegetarian/vegan women in this study were more likely to have low birthweight babies, and low birthweight infants are at risk for health issues later in life. That means:

Careful planning is required to select calorie- and protein-rich plant foods.

A high-quality plant protein supplement can be a great help.

Supplementation is particularly important during lactation to assure your breast milk adequately nourishes your newborn baby. For example, in this study:

The vitamin B12 level in the breast milk from vegetarian/vegan moms was adequate because 85% of them supplemented with vitamin B12.

The DHA level in the breast milk from vegetarian/vegan moms was inadequate because only 10% of them supplemented with DHA.

The authors of this study recommended that vegetarian and vegan moms consume at least 200 mg of DHA from algal sources while they are breastfeeding.

However, finding a prenatal supplement that provides all the nutrients you need prior to pregnancy, during pregnancy, and while breastfeeding is challenging. I gave you 7 tips for choosing the best prenatal supplements in a previous “Health Tips From the Professor” article.

The Bottom Line

A recent study asked whether the breast milk of vegetarian and vegan moms was sufficient for the needs of their newborn babies. The study found that:

Folate levels in their breast milk were sufficient because the diets of vegetarians and vegans contain many folate-rich foods.

Vitamin B12 levels in their breast milk were sufficient because 85% of the vegetarian and vegan women in this study supplemented with vitamin B12.

DHA levels in their breast milk were insufficient because the diets of vegetarian and vegan women are very low in DHA, and only 10% of the women in this study supplemented with DHA.

The authors of this study recommended that vegetarian and vegan moms consume at least 200 mg of DHA from algal sources while they are breastfeeding.

This study reinforces the need for supplementation during lactation to assure your breast milk adequately nourishes your newborn baby.

However, finding a prenatal supplement that provides all the nutrients you need prior to pregnancy, during pregnancy, and while breastfeeding is challenging. I gave you 7 tips for choosing the best prenatal supplement in a previous “Health Tips From the Professor” article.

For more information on this study read the article above.

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.

___________________________________________________________________________

For more detail about FTC regulations for health claims, see this link.

https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/health-products-compliance-guidance

What Supplements Help Mental Health?

January 14, 2020 by Dr. Steve Chaney

Do Omega-3s Reduce Depression?

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

We are in the midst of a mental health crisis. According to the latest statistics:

· 19% of adults in the United States have some form of mental illness.

· 16.5% of youth ages 6-17 have some form of mental illness.

· The 5 most commonly diagnosed forms of mental illness are anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, bipolar disease, and ADHD.

Even worse, mental illness appears to be increasing at an alarming rate among young people. For example:

· Between 2005 and 2017 depression increased 52% among adolescents.

· Between 2002 and 2017 depression increased 63% in young adults.

· Between 1999 and 2014 suicides have increased 24% in young adults. In the past few years suicides have been increasing by 2% a year in this group.

Much has been written about the cause of this alarming increase in mental illness. The short answer is that we don’t really know. But the most pressing question is what do we do about it?

The medical profession relies on powerful drugs to treat the symptoms of mental illness. These drugs don’t cure the illness. They simply keep the symptoms under control. Plus, if you have ever listened closely to the advertisements for these drugs on TV, you realize that they all have serious side effects that adversely affect your quality of life.

My “favorite” example is drugs for anxiety and depression. You are told that one of the side effects is “suicidal thoughts”. That means that the very drug someone could be prescribed to prevent suicides might actually increase their risk of suicide. Why would anyone take such a drug?

If drugs are so dangerous, what about supplements? Do they provide a safe, natural alternative for reducing the symptoms of mental illness? Some supplement companies claim their products cure mental illness. Are their claims true or are they just trying to empty your wallet?

How is a consumer to know which of these supplement claims are true and which are bogus? Fortunately, an international team of scientists has scoured the literature to find out which supplements have been proven to reduce mental health symptoms.

How Was The Study Done?

This was a massive study (J. Firth et al, World Psychiatry, 18: 308-324, 2019. It was a meta-review of 33 meta-analyses of randomized, placebo-controlled trials with a total of 10,951 subjects. The clinical trials included in this analysis analyzed the effect of 12 nutrients, either alone or in combination with standard drug treatment, on symptoms associated with 10 common mental disorders.

To help you understand the power of this meta-review, let me start by defining the term “meta-analysis”. A meta-analysis combines the data from multiple clinical studies to increase the statistical power of the data. Meta-analyses are considered to be the gold standard of evidence-based evidence.

However, not all meta-analyses are equally strong. They suffer from the “Garbage-In, Garbage-Out” phenomenon. Simply put, they are only as strong as the weakest clinical studies included in their analysis.

That is the strength of this meta-review. It did not simply combine the data from all 33 meta-analyses. It used stringent criteria to evaluate the quality of each meta-analysis and weighted the data appropriately.

What Supplements Help Mental Health?

The strongest evidence was for omega-3 supplements. In the worlds of the authors:

· “Across 13 independent randomized control clinical trials in 1,233 people with major depression, omega-3 supplements reduced depressive symptoms significantly.”

o The average dose of omega-3s in these studies was 1,422 mg/day of EPA.

o The effect was strongest for omega-3 supplements containing more EPA than DHA and for studies lasting longer than 12 weeks.

o There was no evidence of publication bias in these studies. This is a very important consideration. Publication bias means that only studies with a positive effect were published while studies showing no effect were withheld from publication. That makes the effect look much more positive than it really is. The fact there was no evidence of publication bias strengthens this conclusion.

o Omega-3 supplements were more effective when used in combination with antidepressant drugs, but there was some evidence of publication bias in those studies.

· “Across 16 randomized control clinical trials reporting on ADHD symptom domains, significant benefits were observed for both hyperactivity/impulsivity and inattention.”

· Omega-3s had no significant effect on schizophrenia or bipolar disorder other than a mild reduction in depressive symptoms.

There was strong, but not definitive, evidence for folic acid and methylfolate supplements for depression.

· When used in conjunction with antidepressants both folic acid and methylfolate supplements “…were associated with significantly greater reductions in depressive symptoms compared to placebo, although there was large heterogeneity between trials.”

· The largest effects were observed with high dose methylfolate. In the words of the authors: “Two randomized control clinical trials examining a high dose (15 mg/day) of methylfolate administered in combination with antidepressants found moderate-to-large benefits for depressive symptoms.” However, to put this into perspective:

o 15 mg/day is 3,750% of the RDA. This is a pharmacological dose and should only be administered under the care of a physician.

o A smaller dose of 7.5 mg/day is ineffective.

o No comparison was made with folic acid at this dose, so we do not know whether folic acid would be equally effective.

· The authors concluded that there is emerging evidence for positive effects of vitamin D (>1,500 IU/day) for major depressive disorders and N-acetylcysteine (2-3 gm/day) in combination with drugs for mood disorders and schizophrenia. The term “emerging evidence” means there have been several recent studies reporting positive results, but more research is needed.

· The authors did not find evidence supporting the use of other vitamin and mineral supplements (E, C, zinc, magnesium, and inositol) for treating mental health disorders.

· The authors did not find enough high-quality studies to support claims about the effects of prebiotics or probiotics on mental health disorders.

Do Omega-3s Reduce Depression?

The evidence supporting the effectiveness of omega-3s in reducing symptoms of depression is strong. In the words of the authors: “The nutritional intervention with the strongest evidentiary support is omega-3, in particular EPA. Multiple meta-analyses have demonstrated that it has significant effects in people with depression, including high-quality meta-analyses with good confidence in findings…”

However, before you throw away your antidepressants and replace them with an omega-3 supplement, let me put this study into perspective for you.

· Depression can be a serious disease. If you just feel a little blue from time to time, try increasing your omega-3 intake. However, if you have major depression, don’t make changes to your treatment plan without consulting your physician.

· The best results were obtained when omega-3s were used in combination with antidepressants. This should be your starting point.

· Ideally, adding omega-3s to your treatment plan will allow your doctor to reduce or eliminate the drugs you are taking. That would have the benefit of reducing side effects associated with the drugs. However, I would like to re-emphasize this is a decision to take in consultation with your doctor. [My only caveat is if your doctor is unwilling to even consider natural approaches like omega-3 supplementation, it might be time to find a new doctor.]

· Finally, omega-3 supplementation is only one aspect of a holistic approach to good mental health. A healthy diet, exercise, supplementation, and stress reduction techniques all work together to keep your mind in tip-top shape.

The Bottom Line

There are lots of supplements on the market promising to cure depression and other serious mental health issues. Are they effective or are the claims bogus? Fortunately, a recent meta-review of 33 meta-analyses of high-quality clinical trials has answered that question. Here is their conclusion:

· The evidence is strongest for omega-3s and depression.

o The average dose of omega-3s in these studies was 1,422 mg/day of EPA.

o The effect was strongest for omega-3 supplements containing more EPA than DHA and for studies lasting longer than 12 weeks.

· There is fairly strong evidence for folate/folic acid supplements and depression, although there was large heterogeneity between trials.

· There is emerging evidence for vitamin D (>1,500 IU/day) and depression and N-acetylcysteine (2-3 gm/day) for depression and schizophrenia.

· Evidence for other supplements is currently inconclusive.

However, before you throw away your antidepressants and replace them with an omega-3 supplement, let me put this study into perspective for you.

· The best results were obtained when omega-3s were used in combination with antidepressants. That should be your starting point.

For more details, read the article above.

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.