 |
|
 |
|
|
Advertisement 
|
December 24, 2014
Nutritional Supplements for Eye Health Don’t Measure
New Haven, CT—Nutritional supplements for eye health are advertised with a lot of hype, and seven of the 11 most popular brands don’t even adhere to proven formulas to slow age-related macular degeneration (AMD), according to a new study.
up to Hype The report, published online recently by the journal Ophthalmology, notes that claims made by the products lack scientific evidence, and some do not contain identical dosages to eye vitamin formulas proven effective in clinical trials. AMD is the leading cause of blindness among older adults in the United States, and nutritional supplements are recommended at some stages of the disease based on the landmark Age-Related Eye Disease Study (AREDS). That research found in 2001 that a specific formula of nutritional supplements containing high doses of antioxidants and zinc could slow the worsening of AMD in those who have intermediate AMD and in those with advanced AMD in only one eye. In a follow-up study concluding in 2011, AREDS2, the formula was determined to be still effective if beta-carotene—an original ingredient that was linked to a higher risk of lung cancer in smokers—was replaced with related nutrients, lutein, and zeaxanthin. After release of the two studies, eye supplements claiming to include the proven formulas flooded onto the market and are sold in many drugstores. To test whether the products are consistent with AREDS and AREDS2, the study, led by researchers from Yale-New Haven Hospital-Waterbury Hospital, identified the five top-selling brands—including 11 products—based on market research collected from June 2011 to June 2012. After analysis, the researchers found that, while all of the products studied contained the ingredients from the AREDS or AREDS2 formulas, only four of the products had equivalent doses of AREDS or AREDS2 ingredients. Another four of the products contained lower doses of all the AREDS or AREDS2 ingredients, while four of the products also included additional vitamins, minerals and herbal extracts that are not part of the AREDS or AREDS2 formulas The study also points out that, while all 11 of the products' promotional materials contained claims that the supplements “support,” “protect,” “help” or “promote” vision and eye health, none had statements specifying that nutritional supplements have only been proven effective in people with specific stages of AMD. Furthermore, the packaging and inserts didn’t reveal the lack of sufficient evidence to support the routine use of nutritional supplements for primary prevention of eye diseases such as AMD and cataracts.. “With so many vitamins out there claiming to support eye health, it’s very easy for patients to be misled into buying supplements that may not bring about the desired results,” said first author Jennifer J. Yong, MD. “Our findings underscore the importance of ophthalmologists educating patients that they should only take the proven combination of nutrients and doses for AMD according to guidelines established by AREDS and AREDS2.” Yong recommended that healthcare providers remind patients “at this time, vitamins have yet to be proven clinically effective in preventing the onset of eye diseases such as cataracts and AMD.” A results table of the analyzed products can be found at http://www.aao.org/newsroom/release/upload/Table-1-OcularNutritionalSupplements-InPress.pdf (PDF file). |
U.S. Pharmacist Social Connect
 |
|