The Facts About Dietary
Supplements And Risks

Why The Attacks On Supplement Safety?

The truth about dietary supplements and risks is that supplements primarily get attacked because they work, rather than because they are a big danger to you.

Nutritional supplements help restore and maintain health. Because of these “disease-forestalling” properties vitamins and health supplements compete with the astronomical profits made from the sale of pharmaceutical drugs which are aimed to maintain disease, long-term.

Conventional medicine has a long and nefarious history of attacking and defeating anyone who's infringing on their self-interests and authoritarian status (Coulter, 1982).

The authors of an investigative report about the pharmaceutical establishment noted among their conclusions that:

“The pharmaceutical industry has proven time and again its ability to fend off any encroachment on the bottom line.” (Aaron & Lincoln, 2003)

In spite of the attacks on dietary supplement safety...

The truth about dietary supplements and risks is that the track record of nutritional supplement safety is exceptional.

The truth about dietary supplements and risks is that the dangers from supplements, such as experiencing (significant) side effects, are low. This is particularly true with vitamin side effects. Putting nutritional supplements and side effects together in the same sentence, expressing a scathing connotation and association, is virtually almost always close to a total misnomer.

However, one of the central facts about dietary supplements is their huge potential for remarkable health benefits with the responsible intake of high-quality, science-based pure vitamins and supplements.

Great upsides, nearly no downsides. The benefits are large, the risks are small. Much to gain, little to lose.

The truth about dietary supplement risks is that the media, the federal regulatory authorities, and various opponents of health supplements keep misrepresenting and exaggerating the facts about the safety of supplements.

In short... they are misleading and deceiving the public. You.

The truth about dietary supplements and risks is that many or most of the parties who are illogically antagonistic towards food supplements are attempting to restrict the free public access to supplements, in an effort to protect the interests of the mainstream medical establishment.

The truth about dietary supplement side effects is that much of the well-publicized attacks on the safety of nutritional supplements is nothing but organized propaganda to distract you from recognizing that these wellness products are highly beneficial and deliver outstanding health gains.

Trust facts, not authorities.

Myths Versus Facts About Dietary
Supplements And Risks

"Despite the fact that dietary supplements are far safer than table salt, aspirin, vaccines and many FDA-approved drugs, they are being demonized." (Bill Sardi, Health Journalist, in 2009)

To make a sound, reasonable judgment about something you need the proper perspective. If things are taken out of context, if things are presented one-sided or lop-sided, if information is (intentionally) presented to you in such a way as to promote a certain view point, you inevitable will draw the wrong conclusion because certain facts had been omitted.

At that point, what you believe doesn't match with the actual reality of things. Because what is presented to you is a misleading constructed premise of reality, a myth basically, disguised as the actual reality (I've written an entire (e)book about one such distortion of reality in The Mammogram Myth).

The realm of health supplement risks is a fine example where a balanced perspective is rarely presented, especially from members and entities of the mainstream. The facts about dietary supplements are more often than not obscured and distorted.

The myth created and relentlessly propagated for decades by regulatory authorities and detractors of nutritional supplements, is that these natural health products are a significant public health risk and unsafe to the extend whereby their free public access needs to be restricted and controlled, akin to medical drugs. Allegedly, all in an sincere, well-meaning effort by the federal authorities to protect you from the “dangers of supplements”.


One of the incontrovertible facts about vitamins and supplements is that these natural health products have a long and strong history of safe use. There are very few dietary supplement dangers. The safety of nutritional supplements, especially of the actual ingredients, is high for the most part.

Dietary Supplements And Risks... The Safety Of Nutritional Supplements Is Not On Trial

-The Irrefutable Evidence That Vitamins And Supplements Are Exceptionally Safe

“Nutritional medicine is backed by the best science and a long history of safety and success.” (Bill Sardi, Health Journalist, in 2002)

The overwhelming majority of all side effects of dietary supplements reported to the US Poison Control Centers every year, numbering in the tens of thousands, are experienced by infants and very young children (American Association of Poison Control Centers, 1983-2008; Bronstein, et al., 2009-2011).


Because of accidental overexposure (Gryzlak, et al., 2007; Bronstein, et al., 2009-2011). In other words, these children unintentionally swallowed an excessive amount, such as half a bottle or an entire bottle, of one or more dietary supplements at once.


in spite of ingesting astronomical amounts of supplements,

in spite that some of the weakest and most vulnerable of human beings ingested very large doses of these natural health products,

the reality is that ...exceptionally few of these young delicate human creatures, fortunately, experience serious adverse reactions or deaths (Bronstein, et al., 2009-2011).

This data unmistakably and undeniably proves that vitamins and health supplements are extremely safe.

In spite of this factual, incontrovertible reality about dietary supplements and risks...

The FDA, various partisans of modern medicine, and detractors of food supplements keep overemphasizing the risks and keep exaggerating the safety profile of nutritional supplements. Thus, they claim, food supplements need to be more “regulated” to protect the public's health. Restricting the public's free access to nutritional supplements is what the FDA truly means by that. As the prolific author G. Edward Griffin once said:

“Pretending to protect the public is the favorite cover for hidden agendas.”

Rules to restrict access to substances or products with high toxicity, such as arsenic, mercury, tobacco products, alcohol, radioactive compounds, and a plethora of pharmaceutical drugs, seems a credible rationale because they cause tremendous harm and destruction and kill large numbers of people every year.


...not for very safe compounds of low toxicity, such as the vast majority of supplement ingredients.

And history shows that if laws don't make sense, if real-life reality and the actions of authorities are contradictory, there's usually an ulterior motive behind their propositions and perspectives.

The fact is that the FDA has a long, despicably history of deceiving the public with false information about dietary supplement safety, even after the errors of their claims had been repeatedly brought to their attention (Passwater, 1991; Schauss, 2007).

Acclaimed nutrition consultant Adrianne Bendich, PhD, uncovered in her extensive research on nutritional supplement safety that:

“Following [...] an in-depth analysis, it is remarkable to find that almost all of the "safety" issues often mentioned are not based on solid data.” (Passwater, 1995) [emphasis added]

Trust facts, not authorities.

The Awful Truth About Dietary Supplements And Risks...

-The Ultimate Risk Remains Not WITH Nutritional Supplements But What Might Happen TO Supplements

“The attack on the safety of vitamins is really an attack on the efficacy of these nutrients." (Abram Hoffer, MD, PhD, 1917-2009)

It is conceivable that the ultimate risk from vitamins and supplements has nothing to do with a dietary supplement safety threat at all.

The biggest risk is what could happen to nutritional supplements. More precisely, to the free public access of vitamins and health supplements...

It is the risk that your free access to these natural health products will get heavily restricted. The truly effective products will be removed for “safety reasons”. The health gains obtained from the still available, tightly controlled supplements will become insignificant. You'll lose out on vitamin benefits, on maximum health gains.

Based on the fact that nutritional supplements are incredibly safe, it follows -by way of logic- that the plentiful, frequently deceptive attacks on supplement safety by the FDA, by proponents of the medial orthodoxy, and by other people who denounce these natural health products, spanning over decades, are basically nothing but a sham, a pretense. A charade to hide something else.

A game of distraction to mislead the public, to obscure the real reasons for the irrational hounding of vitamins and health supplements.

What are they?

High-quality, high potency, pure vitamins and nutritional supplements work. Vitamin benefits are astounding (the benefits of supplements are truly profound).

Nutritional supplements help to preserve your health.

Health supplements also fight serious illnesses with remarkable success.

The safety of supplements is outstanding, the side effects of nutritional supplements are mostly minor.

Dietary supplements are natural health products. They cannot be patented (and thus cannot marketed at steep prices like pharmaceutical drugs).

Nutritional supplements are cost-effective.

Maintaining Health Versus Maintaining Diseases

“The “business with disease” [=mainstream medicine] can only continue as long as you are being kept illiterate about your own health.” (Matthias Rath, MD) [explanation added]

These valuable attributes of nutritional supplements compete with, and cut into, the profits of “the health care system” of traditional allopathic medicine (modern medicine). A system, or rather a huge business, which is primarily built upon, and depended on, the maintenance of diseases instead of health.

With the exceptions of re-establishing wellness of acute, emergency-type cases, the major bulk of health issues treated by traditional medicine involves chronic degenerative diseases, such as heart disease, cancer, diabetes, arthritis, brain diseases, in which instances a cure is rarely achieved, but where, as a result, the big profits for modern medicine dwell.

Pharmaceutical drugs, for instance, are a major source of profits for modern medicine, with hundreds of billions of dollars in net revenues every year. And, very few of these drugs maintain health, or cure diseases. Apparently, these less accessible facts have been obvious to some physicians, both in past times:

"One of the first duties of the physician is to educate the masses not to take medicine." (Sir William Osler, MD, 1849-1919)

And in more recent times:

“The pharmaceutical approach to medicine, with the exception of antibiotics, does not prevent or cure diseases.” (James Howenstine, MD)

(As a side note, the situation is actually worse now since many antibiotics have become virtually worthless because of bacterial resistance to the drugs thanks to medical overuse. Furthermore, microbial antibiotic resistance threatens to quickly become a global occurrence to all antiobiotics [Kumarasamy, et al., 2010; Marra, 2011].)

Another physician, Dr. Matthias Rath, explained:

“The very nature of the pharmaceutical industry is to make money from ongoing diseases. Like other industries, the pharmaceutical industry tries to expand their market--that is, to maintain ongoing diseases and to find new diseases for their drugs. Prevention and cure of diseases damages the pharmaceutical business and the eradication of common diseases threatens its very existence.” (Rath, 1997) [emphasis added]

A biologist, Raymond Peat, PhD, not affiliated with the medical industry, attested to this reality when he recollects a confession by a high-ranking representative of a pharmaceutical company:

“As the head of a drug company told me, a drug that cures quickly isn't a good drug; a good drug is one that the patient has to keep taking for the rest of his life.” (Peat, May 2008)

Still not convinced that what modern medicine and the state-corporate media refer to as “the health care system” is, for the most part, in actuality the disease care system (more precisely: a system of semi-permanent or lifelong care management of chronic disease symptoms)? Reactive sickness care (long-term management of chronic diseases), instead of pro-active health care (preventive health maintenance and optimization).

What do the facts tell?

A Disease Care System... Rather Than A Health Care System

- “A Business Rather Than A Service" (Knelman, 1996)

“The market place for the pharmaceutical industry is our body -but only as long as it is sick. The maintenance and expansion of disease is the basis for the pharmaceutical business and the precondition for its growth.” (Matthias Rath, MD)

In the US over 99% of the health care budget is spent on “the ongoing management of diseases”, while government and medical health authorities (and the media) call it, misleadingly, the health care system.

The award-winning author Fred H. Knelman, PhD, set the record straight when he wrote in a report:

“[...] it is really a disease system with an exclusive concern with treatment [...], and a profound neglect of prevention. This follows naturally from the power of the economic imperative. Since the treatment of disease is a business venture, only those patients who can generate profit will tend to be treated or given preference in treatment. In fact, the insurance companies have a name for these patients —“revenue generators.” (Knelman, 1996) [emphasis added]

Here is the official confirmation of this incontrovertible reality derived from data provided by the ruling authorities...

Disease care system (modern medicine):
In 2011, the budget of the National Institutes Of Health (NIH), which is part of the US Department Of Health And Human Services, was at around $31 billion (NIH, 2011).

Health care system (alternative medicine):
In 2011, the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine, a division of the NIH, had an annual budget of around $128 million (NCCAM, 2011).

This means that less than 0.5% of the entire budget is allocated to the maintenance and prevention of health by the US government.

Trust facts, not authorities.

Two-time Nobel laureate Linus Pauling, PhD, (1901-1994), warned the public about this deception of modern medicine many years ago:

“The medical profession and the powerful medical institutions and enterprises in this country have taken to calling themselves the health profession, health centers, and health companies. This is a misnomer for what is really the sickness industry.” (Pauling, 1986)

You're practically lied to every day by the authoritarian culture.

In an article the acclaimed author Fred H. Knelman, PhD noted:

“[...] the medical-pharmaceutical-insurance complex serves a common goal of maximizing profits, thus reducing them to a business rather than a service.” (Knelman, 1996) [emphasis added]

And he continues with...

“Ancillary groups emerge and attach themselves to the above complex. Association of doctors, health institutes, lobbies, regulators, research institutes, university departments of medicine, all tend, with notable individual exceptions, to indulge in an elite accommodation of the major goals of the complex.” (Knelman, 1996)

More recently, Roby Mitchell, PhD, MD, made mention of this:

“Make no mistake, medical boards across the country are in place to further the agenda of the pharmaceutical industry and others who parasite off the sick state of the American public.”

The authors of a health book, Lynne Eldridge, MD, and David Borgeson, MS, pointed out something rather obvious but not readily believed, and rather denied, by much of the public:

“The pharmaceutical companies are going to invest more of their resources into drugs rather than the prevention of something the drugs would treat, and this is to be expected. We would not expect the automotive industry to invest more money into developing methods of eliminating cars than in manufacturing them!” (Eldridge & Borgeson, 2006)

Matthias Rath, MD, pointed out that:

“Now you will understand why we are bombarded with advertising campaigns by pharmaceutical companies wanting to make us believe that they are “Searching for Cures”, “Striving for the Eradication of Diseases” or “Increasing Life Expectancy” and other false promises. With these deceptive statements the pharmaceutical industry has for decades been able to disguise the true nature of its business: profits from ongoing diseases.” (Rath, 1997)


“The economic interest of the pharmaceutical industry itself is the main reason why no medical breakthrough has been made for the control of the most common diseases such as cardiovascular disease, high blood pressure, heart failure, diabetes, cancer, and osteoporosis, and why these diseases continue like epidemics on a worldwide scale.” (Rath, 1997)

Herbert M. Shelton, PhD, DC, ND, (1895-1985) confirmed Rath's observations about modern medicine's “false promises” when he wrote in 1968:

“At this writing it is being freely and frequently predicted, both in this country and in Europe, that a cure for cancer will be found within two years. Similar predictions have been made at various times during the last 45 years, but have always failed of realization.” (Shelton, 1968) [emphasis added]

Stephen J. Genuis, MD, stated in a scientific article that:

“Most clinical research (predominantly funded by industry) focuses on lucrative maintenance therapies rather than preventions and cures, most medical education focuses on sickness rather than health, most medical journals publish articles about disease management rather than about strategies to promote health and wellness, and most publicly funded health care systems reimburse physicians to treat disease, not to prevent it.” (Genuis, 2007)

Elisabeth Rosenthal, MD, listed in her 2017 book "An American Sickness: How Healthcare Became Big Business and How You Can Take It Back" numerous "economic rules" of the dysfunctional American allopathic medical system. Topping the list are "More treatment is always better. Default to the most expensive option" and "A lifetime of treatment is preferable to a cure" (Rosenthal, 2017).

As one can see, the same degenerate reality about the criminal allopathic medical monopoly remains in place year after year, decade after decade. It's (big) "business as usual" for this gigantic disease-management business operation.

In her book “Innocent Casualties: The FDA's War Against Humanity”, author Elaine Feuer stated:

“I learned that bias against alternative therapies goes far deeper than the FDA. The entire orthodox medical establishment which includes the American Medical Association (AMA), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the various medical foundations, and the pharmaceutical companies– is threatened by alternative medicine.” (Feuer, 1996) [emphasis added]

Therefore, to paraphrase Dr. Rath...

“The eradication of common diseases" with non-orthodox remedies –such as nutritional supplement therapy, also called orthomolecular therapy or orthomolecular medicine (Saul, 2003; Janson, 2006)– "threatens the very existence" of the drug makers and modern medicine.

Unsurprisingly, some honest people, such as Rick Malter, PhD, author and former licensed nutrition counselor and licensed clinical psychologist, had called the reigning commercialized system of sickness care (i.e., the disease symptom care system, or more aptly, the disease symptom suppression system of “scientific” modern medicine) a “disease care con game” (Malter, 2008).

How The US Government Uses Politics To Protect The Disease Care System

“People just don’t know how simple and inexpensive healthcare can be because drug industrialists that control medicine and medical education, with revolving doors to government health agencies like the CDC and FDA, have a vested interest in keeping people profitably ignorant, sick, and enslaved to drugs.” (Leonard G. Horowitz, Health Researcher & Author)

The mainstream establishment's intention is to remove (effective) nutritional supplements by restricting and controlling their public access. Because dietary supplements infringe upon the financial interests of the medical establishment and its bought-off allies among the US government.

Jonathan W. Emord, Esq., a constitutional lawyer who sued and defeated the FDA on numerous occasions, noted in an interview:

“The FDA possesses legislative and executive power and advances an agenda that protects its principal regulatees’ interests, the pharmaceutical companies’ interests, at the expense of all others, including dietary supplement companies and the public (and public health).” (Passwater, 2009)

One common tactic to materialize the establishment's agenda is to suppress the free expression of the truth about the health benefits of supplements (as discussed in the 3-part article on "Exploring The Shady World Of Dietary Supplement Regulation". PART 2: Dietary Supplement Regulation -No FDA Approvals For Supplements!).

As Matthias Rath, MD, observed:

“A precondition for today’s monopoly of the drug industry over global health care was the strategic elimination of its greatest threat: the scientific knowledge about the health benefits of vitamins and other micronutrients.”

Another strategy the medical cartel uses is the propagation of false and misleading information about the efficacy of supplements. Have you noticed how the number of negative “studies” on nutritional supplements have increased since around the mid 1990s, showing that supplements supposedly are ineffective, increase mortality, or do some other significant damage?

That trend coincides with the rapid expansion of the nutritional supplement and health industry after 1994 (see What Are Nutritional Supplements? Information You MUST Know!).

The bigger the competitors (e.g., the supplement industry) get, the bigger the attacks against them become.

As the wellness industry or natural medicine grows in popularity, its competitive impact increases too. And as the competition to orthodox medicine grows, so does the number and severity of attacks against them by the profiteers of the disease care system.

The safety angle, the pretense to convince the public that supplements are a serious health risk, is where the FDA has put in most of its efforts to trying to restrict their free availability.

This particular focus might not be a coincidence. A study on supplement consumption indicates that negative reports on the safety of dietary supplements have a greater public impact on the consumption of these natural health products than reports that nutritional supplements don't work or not as well as previously thought (Tilburt, 2008).

This scheme has been employed for years, and the FDA has tried a few times to re-classify food supplements as drugs (Gibson & Taylor, 2005; Brownie, 2005).

Unsuccessfully so far...

The ugliest truth about health supplements is that the day may come where you lose your unrestricted access to (effective) vitamins and supplements. It's a very tangible risk looking at the history of events.

Clear signs of this risk are abound. In Europe, for instance, laws that restrict the access to supplements by treating them as drugs, the European Food Supplements Directive, are already implemented since 2002.

The original source of this suppression of people's freedom to choose to ingest extremely safe food substances is the World Health Organization (WHO), which is influenced and maneuvered by big multinational corporations, such as pharmaceutical companies (Knelman, 1996).

It was the United Nation's WHO that introduced the "Codex Alimentarius" in 1995, shortly after the corporate medical empire in the US suffered a hefty defeat with the legal implementation of the 1994 DSHEA policy that gave the public free access to vitamins (Rath, 1997).

The Codex Alimentarius, similar in its mission to the European Food Supplements Directive, has a more international focus attempting to marginalize and control the vitamin industry by making dietary supplements "prescription items" (Rath, 1997).

The US FDA wants to harmonize its policies of dietary supplement regulation in accordance with the "Codex Alimentarius" (Null, 2012).

What is the remedy to prevent that fate (or risk) to nutritional supplements?

Attorney Jonathan W. Emord, Esq., gave this basic advice in a 2009 interview:

“Freedom requires eternal vigilance. Those who sit idly by while their freedoms are taken from them do not deserve them.”

And Matthias Rath, MD, admonished:

“The time for the people of the world to unite and act is now. For if we don’t act, the status quo will.”

The truth about dietary supplements and risks is that politics played by various authorities is the greatest (hidden) danger or risk to people's freedom of having unrestricted access to (effective) nutritional supplements.

(Originally published: ca. July-2012 | This is an updated version)

(To stay up-to-date on the release of my very latest articles subscribe to my Free Newsletter)

Recommended next page(s):

Article Index On
The Politics Of Nutritional Supplements
-How You Get Deceived & Misled

-Revealing Hidden Facts About Vitamins & Supplements


  • Aaron C, Lincoln T, “The Other Drug War 2003: Drug Companies Deploy An Army Of 675 Lobbyists To Protect Profits.”, Washington (DC): Public Citizen Congress Watch; June 2003. Available: (accessed Oct. 2010)
  • American Association of Poison Control Centers, “Annual Report from 1983- 2008”,
  • Bronstein AC, Spyker DA, Cantilena LR Jr, Green JL, Rumack BH, Giffin SL, “2008 Annual Report of the American Association of Poison Control Centers' National Poison Data System (NPDS): 26th Annual Report.”, Clinical Toxicology (2009). 47, 911-1084.
  • Bronstein AC, Spyker DA, Cantilena LR Jr, Green JL, Rumack BH, Giffin SL, “2009 Annual Report of the American Association of Poison Control Centers' National Poison Data System (NPDS): 27th Annual Report.”, Clinical Toxicology (2010). 48, 979-1178.
  • Bronstein AC, Spyker DA, Cantilena LR Jr, Green JL, Rumack BH, Dart RC, “2010 Annual Report of the American Association of Poison Control Centers' National Poison Data System (NPDS): 28th Annual Report”, Clin Toxicol (Phila). 2011 Dec;49(10):910-41.
  • Brownie S, “The development of the US and Australian dietary supplement regulations. What are the implications for product quality?”, Complement Ther Med. 2005 Sep;13(3):191-8.
  • Coulter HL, “Divided Legacy -Science and Ethics in American Medicine, 1800-1914: The Conflict Between Homoeopathy And The American Medical Association”, 1982
  • Eldridge L, Borgeson D, “Avoiding Cancer One Day at a Time: Practical Advice for Preventing Cancer”, 2006
  • Feuer E, “Innocent Casualties: The FDA's War Against Humanity”, 1996
  • Genuis SJ, “An ounce of prevention: a pound of cure for an ailing health care system.”, Can Fam Physician. 2007 Apr;53(4):597-9, 605-7.
  • Gibson JE, Taylor DA, “Can claims, misleading information, and manufacturing issues regarding dietary supplements be improved in the United States?”, J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2005 Sep;314(3):939-44. Epub 2005 Apr 15.
  • Gryzlak BM, Wallace RB, Zimmerman MB, Nisly NL, “National surveillance of herbal dietary supplement exposures: the poison control center experience.”, Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2007 Sep;16(9):947-57.
  • Janson M, “Orthomolecular medicine: the therapeutic use of dietary supplements for anti-aging”, Clin Interv Aging. 2006;1(3):261-5.
  • Knelman FH, “The Sociology of Health”, Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine, Vol. 11, 3rd Quarter 1996
  • Kumarasamy KK, Toleman MA, Walsh TR, Bagaria J, Butt F, Balakrishnan R, Chaudhary U, Doumith M, Giske CG, Irfan S, Krishnan P, Kumar AV, Maharjan S, Mushtaq S, Noorie T, Paterson DL, Pearson A, Perry C, Pike R, Rao B, Ray U, Sarma JB, Sharma M, Sheridan E, Thirunarayan MA, Turton J, Upadhyay S, Warner M, Welfare W, Livermore DM, Woodford N, “Emergence of a new antibiotic resistance mechanism in India, Pakistan, and the UK: a molecular, biological, and epidemiological study”, Lancet Infect Dis. 2010 Sep;10(9):597- 602. Epub 2010 Aug 10.
  • Malter, R, “The Great American Con Game: “Health” Care in America”,, 2008 [; accessed 3-July-2017]
  • Marra A, “NDM-1: a local clone emerges with worldwide aspirations”, Future Microbiol. 2011 Feb;6(2):137-41.
  • NCCAM (National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine), U.S Department Of Health And Human Services, Official Website, Accesses Nov. 2011
  • NIH (National Institutes Of Health), U.S Department Of Health And Human Services, Official Website, Accesses Nov. 2011
  • Null G, "War On Health -The FDA's Cult Of Tyranny", Film Documentary, 2012
  • Official U.S Government FDA website, addressing supplements:
  • Passwater RA, “The New Super Nutrition -Your Guide To Super Health And Vitality”, 1991
  • Passwater RA, “Vitamins, Immune response and safety: An interview with Dr. Adrianne Bendich”, Whole Foods Magazine, July 1995
  • Passwater RA, “FDA Confused About Selenium Health Claims: Background and FDA Legal Confusion, Part 1 -An Interview with Jonathan Emord, Esq”, Whole Foods Magazine, Sept. 2009
  • Pauling L, “How To Live Longer And Feel Better”, 1986
  • Peat R, “The GABA system, defenses, and tissue renewal”, Ray Peat's Newsletter,, May 2008
  • Rath M, “Why Animals Don't Get Heart Attacks -But People Do”, 1997
  • Rosenthal E, "An American Sickness: How Healthcare Became Big Business and How You Can Take It Back", 2017
  • Saul A, “Doctor Yourself”, 2003
  • Schauss AG, “False and Misleading Information in the US FDA’s Adverse Events Monitoring System (1994-1999)”, Journal Of Orthomolecular Medicine, Volume 22, 1st Quarter 2007
  • Shelton HM, “Natural Hygiene: Man's Pristine Way Of Life”, 1968
  • Tilburt JC, Emanuel EJ, Miller FG, “Does the evidence make a difference in consumer behavior? Sales of supplements before and after publication of negative research results”, J Gen Intern Med. 2008 Sep;23(9):1495-8. Epub 2008 Jul 10.

You are here: Dietary Supplements And Risks-Attacking Supplements