I don’t know why this article irked me so much, but it did–here’s the link if you want to read it:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/04/antioxidants-fertility_n_3697596.html
Besides being a slap in the face to women already shelling out thousands of dollars on infertility drugs and treatments, it kind of discounts these kinds of extra pursuits as being signs of a desperate mind, using language like ‘Oftentimes, patients latch on to something they heard made a difference for this person or that person.”
What is missing in this article: Dr Wendy Vitek never elaborates on what it means to ‘simply adopt as healthy a lifestyle as they can–to exercise and eat well and attempt to manage their stress’.
Wow, talk about a wandering generality!
I can’t help wondering what ‘as healthy a lifestyle as they can’ means.
Given the growing amount of data that is identifying all of kinds of toxins and chemicals and GMOs in foods that have links to all kinds of health problems, to think that anti-oxidants had a shot at surviving this study if the lifestyle or diet wasn’t also strict and clean to begin with seems ridiculous.
Lisa held on to her morning piece of wheat toast for the first few weeks she was doing personal training.
One day her trainer put her through a grueling work out that Lisa was sure must have burned off a full days worth of calories.
Her trainer kind of smirked and said “Well I hope that toast was worth it. That’s all you burned off today.”
Since the bread she was eating was the fun filled GMO food pyramid endorsed wheat bread that our bodies don’t even recognize as food, her body broke it down into sugar as if she’d eaten a donut.
My question is if the anti-oxidants were not given in conjunction with a clean diet, wouldn’t they just offset the consequences of oxidative stress inherent in the subjects’ diets?
If that is the case, it seems like the ‘major study’ was a major waste of time, and really proves, or disproves nothing.