Antioxidants? Think again.

https://www.statnews.com/2016/04/13/antioxidants-diabetes-drugs/?s_campaign=fb&utm_content=buffer5b83c&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Odysseus wrote:https://www.statnews.com/2016/04/13/antioxidants-diabetes-drugs/?s_campaign=fb&utm_content=buffer5b83c&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

What this article doesn't say:

The pharmaceutical cartel is beginning to see quarterly losses, because deep down their clients (sick people) are catching the drift that the killing machine for profit system is a failure. When they get desperate (and they are), they will use headlines like this in an attempt to destroy confidence in supplements.

Only the synthetic supplements have a pro-cancer effect.

CausticSymmetry wrote:

Odysseus wrote:https://www.statnews.com/2016/04/13/antioxidants-diabetes-drugs/?s_campaign=fb&utm_content=buffer5b83c&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

What this article doesn't say:

The pharmaceutical cartel is beginning to see quarterly losses, because deep down their clients (sick people) are catching the drift that the killing machine for profit system is a failure. When they get desperate (and they are), they will use headlines like this in an attempt to destroy confidence in supplements.

Only the synthetic supplements have a pro-cancer effect.

A good example being synthetic vitamin E vs natural vitamin E in supplements?  I think I remember a study saying vitamin E (they didn't mention they used the synthetic version of course) causes cancer or whatever at 400 IU dose, but natural vitamin E (labeled as d-alpha etc.) is fine.