Return To Blog
Fallacy of Minimum Daily Requirement
Russell Louie
Most supplement studies are done using isolated (sometimes synthetic) sources of a single nutrient, for instance calcium. They vary the dosages of the nutrient and then determine the benefits based on these dosages to determine the Minimum Daily Requirement (MDR), Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA) and therapeutic dosages needed to produce results. The fallacy is that these results are only valid if one is using the same exact isolated nutrient source (sometimes synthetic) in the study. If one uses another source of calcium (e.g., bone meal, oyster shells, coral calcium) or perhaps a calcium supplement that contains Vitamin D and magnesium (complementary nutrients Nature dictated are needed to make calcium work in the body), the results might be totally different. New research shows that the absorption and utilization rate of isolated supplements is only 20-25% (the rest goes down the toilet but you still pay for it). Many supplements are tested in short-term studies (e.g., 6 months–1 year) and show great promise. So, everyone jumps on the bandwagon and must have this new great product. But what are the real results and long term effects?
When comparing the MDR, RDA or prescribed therapeutic dosages of supplements to whole foods, one must look at real results in terms of absorption and utilization in the body, not allopathic dosages. It's like comparing the benefits of apples to oranges. For example, if one takes a 1000 mg isolated calcium supplement and multiplies by the absorption rate of 25%, one utilizes only 250 mg of the supplemental calcium. However, whole food products have a 90-95% absorption rate because they contain all the complementary vitamins (i.e., Vitamin D), minerals (i.e., magnesium), amino acids, enzymes, etc. Nature dictated are needed to make calcium work. So, from a whole food product 95% X 350 mg, one will absorb 333 mg of the calcium from the whole food product. Since 333 mg absorption is better than 250 mg from the isolated supplement, a whole food product containing "only" 350 mg calcium is better than an isolated calcium supplement advertising 1000 mg.
When comparing the MDR, RDA or prescribed therapeutic dosages of supplements to whole foods, one must look at real results in terms of absorption and utilization in the body, not allopathic dosages. It's like comparing the benefits of apples to oranges. For example, if one takes a 1000 mg isolated calcium supplement and multiplies by the absorption rate of 25%, one utilizes only 250 mg of the supplemental calcium. However, whole food products have a 90-95% absorption rate because they contain all the complementary vitamins (i.e., Vitamin D), minerals (i.e., magnesium), amino acids, enzymes, etc. Nature dictated are needed to make calcium work. So, from a whole food product 95% X 350 mg, one will absorb 333 mg of the calcium from the whole food product. Since 333 mg absorption is better than 250 mg from the isolated supplement, a whole food product containing "only" 350 mg calcium is better than an isolated calcium supplement advertising 1000 mg.