Clipping Board » Dangerous Medicinal Tonics ─ Nutrients should be moderate in the body—excessive supplementation only becomes a burden.
Fang Zhouzi
The ancients said that comfort leads to lust, but in fact, another truth should be added: comfort leads to health concerns. Thus, ancient emperors, after filling their palaces with concubines, often sought immortality through alchemy. For ordinary people, lust might remain just a thought, but health supplements seem worth a try once they have some spare money. Ordinary diets cannot guarantee freedom from disease, much less delay aging, leaving people feeling unsatisfied unless they consume something extra. Children hope to become smarter, the elderly desire longevity, men fear declining libido, women obsess over beauty and weight loss, and everyone worries about suddenly developing cancer or cardiovascular diseases... Taking medicine seems the easiest solution. Yet modern science has yet to offer much in this regard, allowing pseudoscience to fill the void. A flood of health products claiming to address these concerns has emerged. Ancient secret formulas are now outdated, replaced by imported high-tech solutions, one after another. Often, these are products that have already fallen out of favor in the U.S. before being introduced to China. Recent health stars like "Brain Platinum" and "nucleic acid supplements" fall into this category. "Brain Platinum" had already been obsolete in the U.S. for five years, where it is now sold merely as a sleep aid. "Nucleic acid supplements" are even more extreme—they were exposed as a scam in the U.S. two decades ago and have largely vanished from the American market.
"Brain Platinum"—what a grand and enticing name! Whoever came up with this "creative" idea deserves credit. Its scientific name, melatonin, is also known as the pineal hormone, a substance secreted by the pineal gland that regulates the human sleep cycle. Its secretion levels are influenced by light; for example, production increases in darkness, inducing sleepiness. It is generally believed that melatonin secretion decreases with age, which some experts use to explain why the elderly sleep less soundly than the young (though recent studies suggest melatonin levels may not decline with age). Melatonin supplements first appeared on the U.S. market in 1993. In 1994, a research team at MIT reported that melatonin could induce sleep, sparking a sensation in the U.S. The following year, Newsweek featured melatonin in a special report, and two best-selling books heavily promoted its miraculous effects, fueling its popularity. Melatonin was not only touted as a natural, harmless sleep aid but also—based on very preliminary animal studies and theoretical speculation—hailed as a "wonder hormone" that could boost immunity, treat cancer, prevent heart disease, enhance sexual function, combat aging, reverse aging, and prolong life, among other claims. After repeated clarifications and warnings from the U.S. medical community, the melatonin craze quickly died down in America. Today, melatonin is sold as a dietary supplement in U.S. supermarkets, health food stores, and pharmacies at a relatively low cost, comparable to ordinary vitamin supplements, with a month's supply costing less than ten dollars. The label lists only one claimed benefit: "helps with sleep," followed by fine print noting that "this statement has not been evaluated by the FDA." The U.S. medical community generally agrees that melatonin is effective for treating jet lag-induced insomnia, but opinions vary on its efficacy as a sleep aid for other types of insomnia. Some clinical trials suggest that melatonin, combined with conventional treatments, may help with certain cancers, but these findings remain highly preliminary.
When taking melatonin, three points warrant caution. First, the optimal dosage remains unclear. Some studies suggest 0.5 mg per day is sufficient for sleep, while others report effectiveness only at doses ten times higher. Second, potential side effects are unknown.Short-term use appears to be quite safe, with no alarming side effects observed. However, research on melatonin has only been conducted for a few years, and no one knows the potential adverse effects of long-term use. Melatonin is a hormone, and the consequences of hormone abuse sometimes take years or even decades to manifest. Third, because melatonin is sold as a dietary supplement rather than a medication, its quality lacks strict regulation.
If melatonin has some efficacy, but its side effects and other impacts remain unclear, making it impossible to outright dismiss its use as a nutritional supplement—only warranting a cautious and skeptical attitude—then so-called "nucleic acid supplements" can be entirely dismissed as fraudulent. As early as the late 1960s, a now-deceased New York doctor named Benjamin Frank published a best-selling book titled *Nucleic Acid Therapy*, promoting the idea that nucleic acid supplements could combat aging and prolong life. Many American health food companies seized the opportunity to profit by marketing nucleic acid preparations. In 1981, the U.S. Postal Service repeatedly sued these companies for deceptive advertising via mail, winning the cases and exposing nucleic acid nutrition as a scam. The nucleic acid craze in the U.S. faded, and nucleic acid products largely disappeared from the market (I checked several local health food stores and found none available). Even Frank’s book went out of print in the U.S. It can be said that "nucleic acid nutrition" has become a relic of history in America, surviving only in the writings of certain quack doctors in "alternative medicine" guides (e.g., Earl Mindell, who never held a medical degree but wrote a series of best-selling books on nutritional supplements. His doctorate came from an unaccredited diploma mill, and while he is regarded as a quack in the U.S., he is hailed as an "internationally renowned nutrition and health expert" in China, where his books have been translated and reportedly sell well).
Recently, however, Frank has suddenly gained prominence in China, being referred to as a "renowned scientist," with some articles even falsely attributing a "Nobel Prize winner" title to him. Some nucleic acid supplement advertisements feature the images of 38 Nobel laureates, though their work—while related to nucleic acid research—has nothing to do with nucleic acid nutrition, and they never advocated nucleic acid supplementation. Anyone with basic biochemical knowledge would find the idea of nucleic acid nutrition utterly absurd. It is well known that nucleic acids are genetic material. If exogenous nucleic acids could integrate into human DNA, it would disrupt genetic systems and cause illness, akin to a viral infection (viruses inject foreign nucleic acids into human cells). Fortunately, this doesn’t happen because dietary nucleic acids are broken down into nucleotides and nucleosides in the digestive tract before absorption. Human cells can synthesize nucleic acids without relying on dietary nucleotides, either by recycling breakdown products (salvage synthesis) or synthesizing nucleotides from scratch using other nutrients. Thus, nucleic acids and nucleotides are never considered essential nutrients. Only a few experts speculate that exogenous nucleotides might benefit the immune system, advocating them as "conditionally essential nutrients" to be added in infant formula or medical nutrition for specific patients. However, no credible expert recommends nucleic acid supplementation for the general population. Some promotional articles in China claim that 1–1.5 grams of nucleic acids should be supplemented daily, falsely attributing this recommendation to the World Health Organization (WHO). This is fabricated misinformation. The WHO lists over 20 essential nutrients, including proteins, energy, vitamins, and trace elements—but not nucleic acids. Medically, there is no such thing as a nucleic acid deficiency. In fact, United Nations documents have repeatedly warned of the dangers of excessive nucleic acid intake.Most exogenous nucleic acids are not utilized in the body but are degraded into small molecules. One of the degradation end products is uric acid. Excessive uric acid in the blood can lead to joint inflammation and gout, while too much in the urine can cause stones. Therefore, excessive nucleic acid intake puts susceptible individuals at risk of gout or kidney stones.
To take a step back, even if the advocates of nucleic acid nutrition were correct in claiming that humans should consume 1–1.5 grams of nucleic acids daily, there would still be no need to purchase nucleic acid supplements. Nucleic acids are present in nearly all foods, with particularly high amounts in legumes, fish, shrimp, chicken, and other common foods. Instead of buying nucleic acid supplements, spending the same money on these foods ensures the intake of real nutrients while also providing an equivalent amount of nucleic acids (for example, a pound of chicken, fresh fish, or shrimp contains roughly 1 gram of nucleic acids), without the risk of overconsumption. This is why the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) states that "oral nucleic acids are neither effective nor impactful" and that "nucleic acid deficiency does not exist."
After the hype around "brain platinum" and "nucleic acid nutrition" fades, new supplements will inevitably emerge. And before they are exposed, their promoters will have already made a fortune. How can consumers identify such marketing gimmicks and scams? Here, I summarize several characteristics of fake nutritional products:
They often claim to address most or all health concerns that people care about, such as boosting intelligence, anti-aging, enhancing sexual function, improving skin, weight loss, anti-cancer effects, and preventing heart disease. Moreover, they typically attribute their effects to vague explanations like "boosting the body's immune system."
They frequently claim to be suitable for all ages with no side effects, enticing many to try them with the mentality that "it won’t kill me anyway." However, "not killing you" only means it’s non-toxic, and non-toxicity does not equate to being free of side effects.
They often boast about being the latest scientific breakthrough or a time-honored secret formula validated by modern science.
They tend to invoke "renowned scientists" to lend credibility, with their experimental or theoretical basis often stemming from a single scientist or doctor’s invention. For example, almost all promotional articles for "nucleic acid nutrition" rely on the work of American doctor Frank. But the hallmark of scientific research is reproducibility—results from a single individual are insufficient, as they may be fabricated or erroneous. Only independent, repeated verification by multiple labs can establish validity.
They often claim that users report excellent results, listing testimonials from individuals, especially celebrities. However, in scientific research, testimonials are never considered evidence. Feeling an effect after consuming something does not necessarily mean the product caused it—it could be due to other factors or the placebo effect. Only rigorously controlled, repeated, double-blind, and placebo-controlled trials yield reliable results.
The bottom line is: Do we really need dietary supplements? If one maintains a balanced and reasonable diet, there is no need for any supplements. If the diet is unbalanced, only essential nutrients (vitamins, trace elements) should be supplemented. Long-term consumption of traditional beverages like tea or wine may benefit health, but there is no solid evidence that dietary supplements provide miraculous health effects. In short, there is no magic pill—fantasies of eternal youth and immortality remain just that: fantasies.
January 13, 2001
Source: http://www. oursci. org/ archive/ special/ 2001/ 009. htm
Fake US Health Products Boom in China
The ancients said that comfort leads to lust, but in fact, another truth should be added: comfort leads to health concerns. Thus, ancient emperors, after filling their palaces with concubines, often sought immortality through alchemy. For ordinary people, lust might remain just a thought, but health supplements seem worth a try once they have some spare money. Ordinary diets cannot guarantee freedom from disease, much less delay aging, leaving people feeling unsatisfied unless they consume something extra. Children hope to become smarter, the elderly desire longevity, men fear declining libido, women obsess over beauty and weight loss, and everyone worries about suddenly developing cancer or cardiovascular diseases... Taking medicine seems the easiest solution. Yet modern science has yet to offer much in this regard, allowing pseudoscience to fill the void. A flood of health products claiming to address these concerns has emerged. Ancient secret formulas are now outdated, replaced by imported high-tech solutions, one after another. Often, these are products that have already fallen out of favor in the U.S. before being introduced to China. Recent health stars like "Brain Platinum" and "nucleic acid supplements" fall into this category. "Brain Platinum" had already been obsolete in the U.S. for five years, where it is now sold merely as a sleep aid. "Nucleic acid supplements" are even more extreme—they were exposed as a scam in the U.S. two decades ago and have largely vanished from the American market.
"Brain Platinum"—what a grand and enticing name! Whoever came up with this "creative" idea deserves credit. Its scientific name, melatonin, is also known as the pineal hormone, a substance secreted by the pineal gland that regulates the human sleep cycle. Its secretion levels are influenced by light; for example, production increases in darkness, inducing sleepiness. It is generally believed that melatonin secretion decreases with age, which some experts use to explain why the elderly sleep less soundly than the young (though recent studies suggest melatonin levels may not decline with age). Melatonin supplements first appeared on the U.S. market in 1993. In 1994, a research team at MIT reported that melatonin could induce sleep, sparking a sensation in the U.S. The following year, Newsweek featured melatonin in a special report, and two best-selling books heavily promoted its miraculous effects, fueling its popularity. Melatonin was not only touted as a natural, harmless sleep aid but also—based on very preliminary animal studies and theoretical speculation—hailed as a "wonder hormone" that could boost immunity, treat cancer, prevent heart disease, enhance sexual function, combat aging, reverse aging, and prolong life, among other claims. After repeated clarifications and warnings from the U.S. medical community, the melatonin craze quickly died down in America. Today, melatonin is sold as a dietary supplement in U.S. supermarkets, health food stores, and pharmacies at a relatively low cost, comparable to ordinary vitamin supplements, with a month's supply costing less than ten dollars. The label lists only one claimed benefit: "helps with sleep," followed by fine print noting that "this statement has not been evaluated by the FDA." The U.S. medical community generally agrees that melatonin is effective for treating jet lag-induced insomnia, but opinions vary on its efficacy as a sleep aid for other types of insomnia. Some clinical trials suggest that melatonin, combined with conventional treatments, may help with certain cancers, but these findings remain highly preliminary.
When taking melatonin, three points warrant caution. First, the optimal dosage remains unclear. Some studies suggest 0.5 mg per day is sufficient for sleep, while others report effectiveness only at doses ten times higher. Second, potential side effects are unknown.Short-term use appears to be quite safe, with no alarming side effects observed. However, research on melatonin has only been conducted for a few years, and no one knows the potential adverse effects of long-term use. Melatonin is a hormone, and the consequences of hormone abuse sometimes take years or even decades to manifest. Third, because melatonin is sold as a dietary supplement rather than a medication, its quality lacks strict regulation.
If melatonin has some efficacy, but its side effects and other impacts remain unclear, making it impossible to outright dismiss its use as a nutritional supplement—only warranting a cautious and skeptical attitude—then so-called "nucleic acid supplements" can be entirely dismissed as fraudulent. As early as the late 1960s, a now-deceased New York doctor named Benjamin Frank published a best-selling book titled *Nucleic Acid Therapy*, promoting the idea that nucleic acid supplements could combat aging and prolong life. Many American health food companies seized the opportunity to profit by marketing nucleic acid preparations. In 1981, the U.S. Postal Service repeatedly sued these companies for deceptive advertising via mail, winning the cases and exposing nucleic acid nutrition as a scam. The nucleic acid craze in the U.S. faded, and nucleic acid products largely disappeared from the market (I checked several local health food stores and found none available). Even Frank’s book went out of print in the U.S. It can be said that "nucleic acid nutrition" has become a relic of history in America, surviving only in the writings of certain quack doctors in "alternative medicine" guides (e.g., Earl Mindell, who never held a medical degree but wrote a series of best-selling books on nutritional supplements. His doctorate came from an unaccredited diploma mill, and while he is regarded as a quack in the U.S., he is hailed as an "internationally renowned nutrition and health expert" in China, where his books have been translated and reportedly sell well).
Recently, however, Frank has suddenly gained prominence in China, being referred to as a "renowned scientist," with some articles even falsely attributing a "Nobel Prize winner" title to him. Some nucleic acid supplement advertisements feature the images of 38 Nobel laureates, though their work—while related to nucleic acid research—has nothing to do with nucleic acid nutrition, and they never advocated nucleic acid supplementation. Anyone with basic biochemical knowledge would find the idea of nucleic acid nutrition utterly absurd. It is well known that nucleic acids are genetic material. If exogenous nucleic acids could integrate into human DNA, it would disrupt genetic systems and cause illness, akin to a viral infection (viruses inject foreign nucleic acids into human cells). Fortunately, this doesn’t happen because dietary nucleic acids are broken down into nucleotides and nucleosides in the digestive tract before absorption. Human cells can synthesize nucleic acids without relying on dietary nucleotides, either by recycling breakdown products (salvage synthesis) or synthesizing nucleotides from scratch using other nutrients. Thus, nucleic acids and nucleotides are never considered essential nutrients. Only a few experts speculate that exogenous nucleotides might benefit the immune system, advocating them as "conditionally essential nutrients" to be added in infant formula or medical nutrition for specific patients. However, no credible expert recommends nucleic acid supplementation for the general population. Some promotional articles in China claim that 1–1.5 grams of nucleic acids should be supplemented daily, falsely attributing this recommendation to the World Health Organization (WHO). This is fabricated misinformation. The WHO lists over 20 essential nutrients, including proteins, energy, vitamins, and trace elements—but not nucleic acids. Medically, there is no such thing as a nucleic acid deficiency. In fact, United Nations documents have repeatedly warned of the dangers of excessive nucleic acid intake.Most exogenous nucleic acids are not utilized in the body but are degraded into small molecules. One of the degradation end products is uric acid. Excessive uric acid in the blood can lead to joint inflammation and gout, while too much in the urine can cause stones. Therefore, excessive nucleic acid intake puts susceptible individuals at risk of gout or kidney stones.
To take a step back, even if the advocates of nucleic acid nutrition were correct in claiming that humans should consume 1–1.5 grams of nucleic acids daily, there would still be no need to purchase nucleic acid supplements. Nucleic acids are present in nearly all foods, with particularly high amounts in legumes, fish, shrimp, chicken, and other common foods. Instead of buying nucleic acid supplements, spending the same money on these foods ensures the intake of real nutrients while also providing an equivalent amount of nucleic acids (for example, a pound of chicken, fresh fish, or shrimp contains roughly 1 gram of nucleic acids), without the risk of overconsumption. This is why the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) states that "oral nucleic acids are neither effective nor impactful" and that "nucleic acid deficiency does not exist."
After the hype around "brain platinum" and "nucleic acid nutrition" fades, new supplements will inevitably emerge. And before they are exposed, their promoters will have already made a fortune. How can consumers identify such marketing gimmicks and scams? Here, I summarize several characteristics of fake nutritional products:
They often claim to address most or all health concerns that people care about, such as boosting intelligence, anti-aging, enhancing sexual function, improving skin, weight loss, anti-cancer effects, and preventing heart disease. Moreover, they typically attribute their effects to vague explanations like "boosting the body's immune system."
They frequently claim to be suitable for all ages with no side effects, enticing many to try them with the mentality that "it won’t kill me anyway." However, "not killing you" only means it’s non-toxic, and non-toxicity does not equate to being free of side effects.
They often boast about being the latest scientific breakthrough or a time-honored secret formula validated by modern science.
They tend to invoke "renowned scientists" to lend credibility, with their experimental or theoretical basis often stemming from a single scientist or doctor’s invention. For example, almost all promotional articles for "nucleic acid nutrition" rely on the work of American doctor Frank. But the hallmark of scientific research is reproducibility—results from a single individual are insufficient, as they may be fabricated or erroneous. Only independent, repeated verification by multiple labs can establish validity.
They often claim that users report excellent results, listing testimonials from individuals, especially celebrities. However, in scientific research, testimonials are never considered evidence. Feeling an effect after consuming something does not necessarily mean the product caused it—it could be due to other factors or the placebo effect. Only rigorously controlled, repeated, double-blind, and placebo-controlled trials yield reliable results.
The bottom line is: Do we really need dietary supplements? If one maintains a balanced and reasonable diet, there is no need for any supplements. If the diet is unbalanced, only essential nutrients (vitamins, trace elements) should be supplemented. Long-term consumption of traditional beverages like tea or wine may benefit health, but there is no solid evidence that dietary supplements provide miraculous health effects. In short, there is no magic pill—fantasies of eternal youth and immortality remain just that: fantasies.
January 13, 2001
Source: http://www. oursci. org/ archive/ special/ 2001/ 009. htm