
Snake-oil supplements? - rjshade
http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/play/snake-oil-supplements/
======
rfreytag
"snake oil" was not listed. Surprising as it is said to offer real relief for
joint pain: [http://healthmad.com/alternative/health-benefits-of-snake-
oi...](http://healthmad.com/alternative/health-benefits-of-snake-oil/)

The origin of the term "snake oil salesman" was to disparage people who sold
fake snake oil or pushed it for diseases it would not treat
(<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snake_oil>).

------
rsheridan6
Hmm, first thing I notice looking at their data is that they put red yeast
rice on top for blood pressure and cholesterol based on two studies, one of
which did not assess red yeast rice, and neither of which assessed blood
pressure.

The study that did not assess red yeast rice did assess lovastatin, which is
assumed to be the active ingredient in red yeast rice, but if you're going to
assume that they are equivalents, red yeast rice is definitely not "worth it"
because you can buy a month's supply of the active ingredient for $4 at most
any pharmacy, less than you would spend on the rice, and get a more precisely
controlled dose.

Still a neat site design.

------
phren0logy
It's a cool visualization, but their cutoff line is labeled "worth it." To
really justify that, they need more information. Thankfully the bubbles are
broken down by specific health claim (so that some supplements have several
bubbles for their effect on different conditions), but to determine "worth
it," they need to include:

1\. Some sort of way to account for type and frequency of side effects. For
example if everyone who takes the supplement gets an intolerably bad taste in
their mouth, that's a mild but prevalent side effect. If one person in 100,000
who takes the supplement dies, that's a comparatively rare but very serious
side effect. This factors heavily into the "worth it" determination, because
risk is a consideration.

2\. Cost. If a supplement has a mild beneficial effect but costs $1,000 a
month, I'm not sure most people would say it's "worth it."

3\. Strength of effect. A statistically significant improvement is not
necessarily clinically significant. For example, with a large sample a 1%
decrease in LDL cholesterol may be statistically significant, but it is not
clinically significant.

Those factors would help a person determine the pros and cons effectively.
What is "worth it" varies considerably from person to person.

------
bhousel
Anyone know how they are generating the visualization automatically from that
google doc? Is there a tool for doing this?

------
nazgulnarsil
Good god, I wish there was a visualization like this for _everything_.
Especially if you could input your own parameters and get your own
personalized "worth it" line.

~~~
Malic
Good god indeed - there's a germ of an idea for a Google Labs project right
there. And if it worked well, it could change decision making of ALL kinds.

------
theycallmemorty
I was wondering why Green Tea is on there three times until I realized you can
click on each circle to see what symptoms its referring to.

~~~
araneae
If you prefer to see the chart with that already on there, use this version:
[http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/snake-o...](http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/snake-
oil-supplements/)

------
araneae
A major problem with this graph is that it mixes data from substance-deficient
groups with data from normal groups, despite claiming that it shows benefits
when taken by "an adult with a healthy diet."

For instance, the data on creatine found an increase in cognitive ability in
vegetarians. Since creatine is found primarily in muscle tissue, it makes
sense that the vegetarians (who were most likely to be deficient in this
substance) would see improvement. However, when they tested the supplement in
normal adults, there was no improvement. Yet creatine is above the "worth it"
line.

Contrast that with vitamin C. It's below the "worth it" line, and it probably
is for any normal person. However, if you were to test it on sailors who had
eaten nothing besides canned meat for the last 6 months, it would probably be
at the top.

Sure, we can assume that most of us are not vitamin C deficient, but we can
also assume that most of us are also not vegetarians and therefore not
creatine deficient.

(Maybe they considered vegetarianism a "healthy diet"? But it should be
obvious that it's not, since it's almost impossible to get many of the top
nutrients on this chart from your diet. For instance, if you want to get
omega-3 fatty acids from a vegetarian diet the only way is consume supplements
extracted from _algae_.)

------
lallysingh
Hmm, two on there I use:

1\. Vitamin E for nerves. Not nervousness, but things like a little random
twitching, especially right below an eye. Clears it up in a few days.

2\. Melatonin for sleep regulation. Never more than 3 days straight, but it's
a really nice reset switch for sleep if I've been hacking late nights
recently.

Of course, ymmv..

(edited for formatting)

------
chris123
Two words: "healthy diet." That's all you need. If you have that, you don't
need supplements.

~~~
ggchappell
I think I understand where you're coming from, and I mostly agree. However, I
think it is a mistake to generalize from the idea that _most_ supplementation
is misguided, to the idea that _all_ of it is.

For example, consider vitamin D. Humans make this in their skin, using
sunlight. Now, what about those of us who live far from the equator and work
indoors? For some time, the standard answer to this has been fortified milk.
Okay, but most people in the world lack the mutation that lets most northern
Europeans, and some Africans, digest milk sugar as adults. With the limited
options available, vitamin D supplements start looking like a worthwhile
option.

And then there are the non-nutrient supplements. A healthy diet should get you
most of your vitamins, etc., but it won't get you the antidepressant found in
St. John's wort. And it might not get you the probiotics that can combat H.
Pylori infections, or the stuff in cinammon that seems to be effective against
some kinds of diabetes.

------
zck
This is about snake oil, but there's no "negative evidence" line?

~~~
gwern
I think negative ones aren't even worth including and would confuse it. Also,
when they prove really negative like ephedra, don't they usually get banned?

~~~
somecanuck
Ephdra is not banned in the US, it's merely restricted. It's still available
over the counter in Canada as well.

~~~
sp332
It's definitely banned in the US. There are some "safe ephedra" products which
are actually some other stimulant - usually bitter orange.

