Why most food supplements are useless
Are supplements really just expensive urine and ultimately useless? Or are there cases where they can actually make sense? Find out here how to separate marketing from evidence and make informed decisions.
Did you know that supplements in Europe are legally classified as food? This means there are rules about what can be added and what maximum amounts may not be exceeded. But once those requirements are met, regulation stops. Whether a manufacturer mixes 99 ingredients in tiny amounts or just one single vitamin is up to them and their marketing skills. No authority checks whether the supplement makes sense or whether the stated dosage is appropriate. A soft drink is not evaluated that way either. That responsibility lies with you.
When you look into supplements, you quickly encounter two camps. On one side are the critics who consider everything unnecessary. On the other side are providers promising eternal youth in a bottle. Especially in the field of longevity, this contradiction is striking. Here your wish for a long healthy life collides with marketing claims that sound far too good to be true.
Still, it is not complicated to evaluate supplements correctly. There are just a few questions you should ask yourself:
- Are there human studies demonstrating efficacy & safety?
- Is the dosage consistent with what has been effective in those studies?
- Are the raw materials high quality and clean?
- Are there independent lab reports that confirm that?
If you answer no to any of these, the product is not worth your attention.
Which ingredients are actually useful?
Well-designed human studies are important because they show whether an ingredient can have a meaningful benefit for people and remain safe at the same time. Only then can you establish a clear benefit-risk profile. Unfortunately, many products promote studies that, on closer inspection, are animal experiments or cell culture tests. Such data say nothing about whether an ingredient has proven benefits for humans or in what dosage it is safe.
→ Evidence-based! For mice or for humans?
Only human studies can prove whether an ingredient is relevant for people and whether its safety is assured. Without such data, its value remains unclear.
→ Scientific studies: Good, bad, and how to understand them
What dosage makes sense?
Even if there are good human studies, dosage is critical. Some products contain amounts so low that they are irrelevant compared to the studies. Others exceed reasonable levels and may pose more risks than benefits.
Health claims: Why they can be misleading
To use an official EFSA health claim, it is enough for a product to contain just 15% of the recommended daily intake. This sounds like a safeguard, but in practice it can be misleading because manufacturers are allowed to advertise bold claims even when the included amounts are far below those tested in studies.
Here are a few examples:
- Vitamin C: 12 mg are enough for the claim contributes to normal immune function (EU reference value: 80 mg). That much is already in half an apple.
- Calcium: 120 mg can be advertised as contributes to the maintenance of normal bones (EU reference value: 800 mg). A glass of milk delivers almost three times as much.
- Magnesium: 56 mg are sufficient for the claim contributes to the reduction of tiredness and fatigue (EU reference value: 375 mg). That amount is in just a few spoonfuls of oats.
- Zinc: 1.5 mg allow the claim contributes to the maintenance of normal skin hair and nails (EU reference value: 10 mg). You get that already from a small handful of pumpkin seeds.
- Coenzyme Q10: There is no official EU reference value. Many products contain only 5 to 10 mg, often just to display the name on the label. Yet most human studies investigated much higher daily doses of 100 to 200 mg.
The issue: On the label it looks credible because the claims are officially approved. In reality, many products contain only token amounts.
Even more important: EU reference values exist only for vitamins and minerals. For plant extracts there are no EU-wide minimum or maximum levels. Manufacturers can decide freely, and often just a tiny amount is enough to list the ingredient on the label – regardless of whether the amount has ever been studied.
Why raw material quality matters
An ingredient may be scientifically studied and correctly dosed, but if the raw material quality is poor, its value is questionable. Especially for plant extracts, differences are huge.
An important benchmark is so-called pharmaceutical quality. Raw materials that meet the standards of official pharmacopeias such as the European Pharmacopoeia must comply with strict requirements for purity and composition. That is a critical aspect.
Ashwagandha: why raw material quality is critical
You definitely don't want to take an ashwagandha extract that isn't of the highest quality. The reason: the leaves and other parts of the plant often contain high levels of withaferin A, a substance that has been linked to liver problems and genotoxic effects in studies. Sneaky businessmen mix other plant parts into the roots to increase profits. If you don't check this, you're actually putting your health at risk.
Traditionally, only the root has been used in Ayurvedic medicine. It contains the characteristic withanolides in a safe composition and has been best described science-based. That's why only a standardized root extract can offer you the safety you expect from a high-quality product.
In addition, for plant-based raw materials these factors matter:
- Extraction method: Determines which compounds end up in the extract.
- Extraction ratio: Indicates how much plant material was used for the extract, for example 10:1.
- Standardization: Ensures a defined amount of active compounds. Example: curcuminoids in turmeric or withanolides in ashwagandha.
Without such details, you have no idea what is really in the capsule.
Why lab analyses are essential
Even if an ingredient is appropriate, properly dosed, and of high quality, proof of purity is still required. Without independent tests for heavy metals, pesticides, or other residues, all you have left is trust.
A supplement without transparent lab reports is at best unverifiable and at worst unsafe.
The right context
Supplements can never replace a healthy diet. Fruits, vegetables, proteins, and healthy fats are the foundation. Only when deficiencies are confirmed does it make sense to add vitamins or minerals in a targeted way.
There is also a third layer. Plant compounds have been used for centuries in traditional medicine. When such substances are scientifically tested today, correctly dosed, produced from high-quality raw materials, and carefully analyzed, they can be a meaningful addition to your longevity journey.
This is where serious products separate from unserious ones. Without these criteria, critics are right. But when they are fulfilled, blanket rejection no longer holds up.
How to find your way
If you apply these criteria when assessing supplements, it quickly becomes clear: in many categories, especially complex blends, most products fall short of a demanding standard. Statistically, the critics are often closer to the truth than the advertising promises.
Still, you are not powerless. A reliable source is Examine.com. There you will find human studies for almost every ingredient, the dosages investigated, and the known risks. Results from animal studies or cell cultures are deliberately excluded.
Supplements can be a useful addition when chosen carefully. With the right criteria, you can decide which products genuinely belong in your routine. Regulation only sets the framework. The responsibility to look critically and choose wisely is yours.