Sports nutrition interest, application, research, marketing and hype continue to explode in the 1990s and are showing no signs of abating. From peer review journals to health and fitness magazines to supermarket tabloids, nutritional supplements are making news. As the amount of knowledge continues to snowball, it becomes increasingly difficult for those of us in the trenches, working the 8 to 6 shift Monday through Friday, to keep up. What used to be simple -- Gatorade or protein powder -- is now quite complex.
There are seemingly hundreds of products for every type of athletic activity or phase of training. The market is expanding so quickly that many doctors feel they don't have the time to keep up with the latest developments. Asking the right questions can reduce a seemingly infinite amount of purported miracle nutrients to a finite amount of research-backed sports aids. Shortcuts to remaining current will be discussed today. These ideas can be applied both when writing for product information or when product representatives call on you at your office.
The last few years have ushered in many new sports nutrition companies. Although some are reputable, many just want to make a buck. Their target market is the young athlete looking for a magic bullet. Competition for market share is fierce. This results in many products entering the market with inadequate testing or research. There are product labeling problems as well. Many times the amounts listed on the label are incorrect, and the labels do not contain a full disclosure of their ingredients. Where their labels and research may be lacking, their packaging and marketing excel in promoting the next (usually monthly) "miracle, all natural" product that will enhance performance.
Advertisements will typically show a bar graph from a "study" that shows their product against the competitors and pharmacological preparations. Needless to say, "the research shows" how wonderful their product is. The bright side to this sometimes out-of-control situation is that it provokes independent researchers to analyze the substances that various companies are constantly rushing to the marketplace. This does result in an occasional validation of a substance researchers would not have otherwise thought to investigate.
There are two types of representatives who will call on you in your office. The first type are those who work for small, quality conscious companies whose target market is the health care professional. They are generally well-informed about both their product and their competitor's product. This type of person would not work for a company if he or she did not feel they were selling fresh bioactive and bioavailable products. The second type of representative is the classic salesman who last week was selling stereos and is now into nutrition. Although they do not have the background of the aforementioned "reps," their presentation is generally very smooth and they are strong in marketing and selling techniques. You must realize, however, that both types of representatives do have the same goal: to sell you their product. They will overwhelm you with literature on why their formulas work better than others.
When I was a student just learning about nutrition, every time I heard a representative give a presentation at school I would usually buy their products. I would be ready to throw out all the supplements I had just purchased before (and often did) and buy half of the new line. Then I would see an impressive advertisement in a lifting, cycling, or running magazine and buy even more supplements. It took me awhile to realize that I was spending a lot of money based on faith and marketing instead of logic and chemistry.
To save doctors time and to maximize the quality of information received, here are some suggestions to cut the fat out of the literature the representative will give you, and questions to ask that will reduce the time you spend in meetings.
Whether you are talking to a representative or writing for product information, these simple questions will give you a good idea of how likely it is that the product will work. I prefer double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover studies performed by independent institutions that use oral preparations on human subjects in the same age, gender, and activity group to whom I will be supplementing. What I object to and what the above questions will hopefully prevent, are those times when a representative, an advertisement, or a literature packet will result in sales to doctors who are under the erroneous impression that the products they've ordered are based on target group studies.
As an example, the trace mineral boron has been advertised in various publications which target young athletic males to "raise testosterone naturally." These ads state that the testosterone elevation claims are based on human studies. What no advertisement stated was that the "studies" were based on postmenopausal females over 60 years of age. This raises four issues:
For references pertaining to this article please contact:
Douglas Andersen, D.C.
916 E. Imperial Hwy.
Brea, California 92621
Many relevant diagnostic signs are not performed deliberately by the examiner or by the patient at the examiner’s direction. They are observed as the patient reacts to their condition. Fortin’s finger sign, Minor’s sign, and Vanzetti’s sign are three examples of this principle.
Spearheaded by burgeoning scientific and clinical research literature, psychedelics have reached a level of media coverage and popular interest that has not been seen for over half a century. By “psychedelics,” we are referring to the unique class of substances that includes psilocybin (the active compound found in so-called “magic mushrooms”), LSD, dimethyltryptamine (DMT), ayahuasca, 5-MeO-DMT, and mescaline – each of which occurs in the natural world (except for LSD, which is a semi-synthetic compound).
While working at the Lovelace Medical Center in Albuquerque, N.M., one of the primary care physicians stated that imaging every patient prior to receiving chiropractic was not medically necessary. It was at that point I reconsidered the need for the imaging of every patient to avoid malpractice.
