Hype and baloney
This isn’t the first, nor I daresay will it be the last, time that I tell you about another supplement under attack.
The supplement under the gun this time is selenium.
Researchers are saying that ingesting 200 micrograms of selenium daily raises the risk of diabetes by 50 percent. This study, described as an “unusually well-controlled” trial (which begs the question—what does that mean about the rest of them?), involved 1,202 people taking selenium.
Initially, the study was designed to see if selenium supplements could help prevent skin cancer. The research team looked at the results and drew very preliminary conclusions—suggestions, actually—that were then taken by the mainstream media as proof-positive that there’s a link between selenium and the risk of diabetes.
None of the participants had diabetes at the study’s start. Over the seven years of the study, half of them took 200 mcg of selenium per day and the other half received a placebo. At the end of the study, 58 of the selenium group and 39 of the placebo group developed type-2 diabetes. The researchers considered this a 50 percent increase in relative risk.
Diabetes has become epidemic in this country and around the world. Do these researchers actually believe that selenium is to blame for some of these folks developing diabetes? Actually, the researchers made no such definitive claims! The media were the ones that gleefully latched hold of a very tentative suggestion and turned it into a foregone conclusion.
That’s typical of what passes for reporting in the mainstream media, the more hype they can create, the better for their ratings—even if it means spreading incorrect information.
The very suggestion that selenium is linked to a higher risk of diabetes, especially when you consider the statistics, seems a bit odd. According to a 2005 estimate, 10 percent of people over the age of 20 and more than 20 percent of those over the age of 60 had diabetes. Using just the conservative estimate of 10 percent, these study results would actually fall well within range of what’s considered “normal” in the diabetes epidemic.
In addition to that, the total numbers and study size were so small that just a few more people with diabetes in the control group would have invalidated the conclusion. There are other factors to consider—such as the important fact that the study wasn’t designed to uncover diabetes in the first place. Also, obesity and lack of physical activity are the chief known causes of diabetes. Not to mention that the study group was a narrow one: Older folks with a history of cancer. This is yet another sad attempt to try to get people to avoid supplements, and it’s not even the study researchers instigating the matter. Unfortunately, the instigation is being done in their name by a biased and sensationalism-driven popular press.
This is just one small, very preliminary study set against a preponderance of evidence showing the benefit of adequate selenium in preventing diabetes.
I have to wonder if the drug companies and mainstream doctors can ever make up their minds: Are supplements dangerous, or do they offer no benefit? Because you can’t have it both ways, and as I recall, I’ve heard both versions of the story.
Don’t get me wrong. I am very much in favor of asking for the reason why we take a specific supplement. And in the case of selenium, it’s already available from foods (such as in your basic Brazil nut). This study suggests that people who are already getting enough selenium may not require extra amounts. Fine—that makes sense.
Why doesn’t the media aim for “truth in reporting” and look at the many common drugs that are currently in use and are a ridiculous waste of money.
But don’t hold your breath on that happening any time soon!
