The "Basic Seven" Foods

1. Green and yellow leafy vegetables. These may be used either cooked or raw, fresh or frozen. They include cabbage, lettuce, broccoli, sprouts, asparagus, spinach, celery, and similar greens. These provide vitamin A to protect eyes and skin and to guard against infection. They also provide iron for the blood and roughage for elimination.

2. Fruits—at least two each day. One may be an orange or some other citrus fruit. Another may be a banana, tomato, apple, pear, peach, a bunch of grapes, or some tropical fruit. For variety use strawberries, canteloupe, or some type of melon. These fruits provide vitamin C, which is essential for strong blood vessels and healthy gums and teeth. They also provide roughage for better elimination. Fresh fruits are best for these purposes. Heat destroys vitamin C.

3. Potatoes and other vegetables. Two or more servings should be eaten each day. These include Irish potatoes, sweet potatoes, yams, beets, carrots, parsnips, lentils, onions, peas, beans, soybeans, and many more. Vitamins and minerals are present in all vegetables. Potatoes are a good source, especially when cooked in their skins. Vegetables may be used in various ways. Raw carrots are an excellent source of vitamin A. Vegetables provide bulk, which aids digestion.

4. Milk and dairy products. The very minimum for an adult should be a pint a day, or more, and a quart a day for each growing child or pregnant mother. Nursing mothers need even more. The milk may be in fluid form, as whole milk, buttermilk, skim milk, canned or evaporated milk, condensed milk, dried milk, or some form of cheese. One ounce of cheddar cheese is equal to a cup of milk. The milk can be used as a beverage or in cooking, such as soups, puddings, and desserts. Milk is a fine source of protein. It also provides minerals, vitamins, and especially calcium, which is needed for bones, teeth, nerves, and muscles.

5. Protein foods. Foods that are rich in proteins include beans, peas, soybeans, nuts, peanuts, eggs, meat, or fish. Soybeans are the richest source of proteins known. They are far richer than eggs, liver, kidney, or any other meat products and far less expensive. They have been used in the Orient for many generations. Dried peas, beans, lentils, and peanuts are all similar to meat in food value.

6. Whole-grain breads and cereals, at least two or three slices of bread and one dish of cooked cereal each day. These are particularly valuable for growing children and adults who work hard. Whole grains include wheat, rice, barley, corn, and other grains. "Enriched white flour" is better than ordinary white flour, but it is still lacking in certain essential elements. Grains and cereals provide calories for energy, as well as vitamins, minerals, and roughage. Whole grains, freshly ground, are best.

7. Butter, cream, fortified margarine, or other vegetable fats. A certain amount of fat is essential in every diet. Salad oils, olive oil, corn oil, and similar products may be substituted to meet the daily requirements for fat in the diet. Fats provide calories for heat and energy. They yield more than twice as much energy as carbohydrates.

Other foods rich in fats are egg yolk, vegetable oils, olives, nuts, and soybeans.

These are the "basic seven" food groups. One or two from each group should be included in the diet of the whole family every day. The quantities need not be large. The wider the variety, the better. Serve each food attractively. Eye appeal is always important.

In considering the "basic seven," you will notice that there is no mention of white sugar, spices, or condiments. None of these is essential in the diet. Ordinary white sugar does provide energy, but that is all. There are no vitamins or minerals in refined sugar.

In addition to these "basic seven" food groups one should include at least six to eight glasses of water each day. Water is necessary for removing wastes from the body. It aids in maintaining a normal temperature and in moistening the air we breathe. We do get some water from our foods, but not nearly enough to supply all our needs. Many who complain of sluggishness, fatigue, and nervous headaches would feel better if they were taking more water. It is best to drink between meals. Drinking water should be pure and free from harmful germs. If in doubt, boil the water before using it.

Over two thirds of the human body is composed of water in some form or other. This means that a person weighing 150 pounds has more than one hundred pounds of water in his physical make-up. Even the bones are one-third water. Without sufficient water, the blood cannot circulate properly. Nor can the digestive organs work as they should. All the cells need water. This is the remarkable fluid in which myriads of chemical and electrical reactions are taking place all the time.

A reliable supply of pure water is essential to the life and health of every family. One may live quite a while without food, but not more than a few days without water. There is no substitute for water. It is indeed the liquid of life. Those who follow the "basic seven" in their choice of foods and include a generous supply of pure water need never fear. They will be taking a balanced diet, and they will feel the benefits of good health all their lives.

Choose Your Poisons

Food additives vary tremendously in character, from diethylstilbestrol (DES), a synthetic female hormone used to stimulate cattle growth by 15 percent and boost efficiency of feed by 12 percent, to butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA), an antioxidant used to retard or prevent rancidity and flavor deterioration. Then there is glycerol monostearate, an emulsifying agent derived from partial decomposition of fats, which is used in making ice cream, and a wide variety of artificial coloring compounds (there are now thirty-three permitted in Britain, only nineteen in the EEC, ten in the U.S., and four in the U.S.S.R.). Much of our animal food is laced with antibiotics, which are given to retard meat spoilage. They are also used to suppress evidence of disease in animals that are raised in adverse circumstances and are, therefore, prone to illness. They offer no nutritional benefits.

There are three main ways that food additives can be threats to health: they can be carcinogenic (tending to produce cancer), teratogenic (tending to harm the unborn child in the womb), and mutagenic (tending to produce changes in the gene pattern which can be passed on to future generations). One can add the danger of producing genetic changes in the cell material which promote early aging in the body—of particular concern to a woman intent on preserving her youthfulness and good looks.

Government agencies try to regulate the safety of additives in fabricated foods, but judging from the Canadian and American records of failure and the number of permitted additives that have in recent years been suddenly whisked off the market, this is an impossible task. Only 60 percent of the additives used in Britain have been tested at all and even then only for acute toxicity—that is, to determine whether or not they bring immediate adverse reactions to an organism ingesting them—not for teratogenicity nor for possible genetic effects. In fact, there is simply no way for them to be tested. The tests that are done are carried out on animals, not humans, and as the thalidomide tragedy showed, a substance can appear quite safe from teratogenic effects in laboratory animals, yet result in tragic consequences for a human fetus.

But even our methods of testing are outdated. According to Ross Flume Hall, this is because we have all our assumptions wrong. "Both the standards of nutrition by which these foods are judged and the methods of toxicology used to determine their safety are outmoded nineteenth- century models," he says. Nineteenth-century nutritional theory is based on the notion that all we need from food is protein, carbohydrates, fat, vitamins, and minerals regardless of their source. It is unaware of the interrelationships in natural foods, and of the implications of possible nutrients as yet undiscovered (as with fiber until fifteen years ago) which may be vital for good health. "This limited concept of what constitutes nourishment persists," says Hall, "even though it has been completely outmoded by the enormous advances in understanding of cell and molecular biology."

The nineteenth-century toxicology still practiced today assumes that each chemical tested has its own level of toxicity. As long as one's consumption of that chemical remains below that level, it says, one is safe. It gives no consideration to how different chemicals, tested separately, affect an organism when they are consumed together; nor is any thought given to the cumulative effects of taking a substance regularly over the years.

"What we are beginning to realize," says Hall, "is that not only can chemicals poison in the short term, they can also cause long-term subtle and undetected changes in personal biology. These changes can show themselves in devastating ways such as cancer and other degenerative diseases and birth defects."

Food additives are not the only problems with convenience foods either. Their simple nutritional worth is highly questionable. For in addition to their lack of fiber (natural fiber is largely removed in the manufacture of convenience foods), government surveys in Canada and the United States—where 80 percent of food eaten is now factory-produced —show that in spite of the great wealth of these countries and the availability to the public of a vast variety of foods, in general people are not getting enough vitamins and minerals in their diet. This is in large part because so many of the nutrients are lost in processing.

Researchers at Rutgers University experimented with frozen chicken pies to see what vitamin loss, if any, had taken place in the processing. They chose vitamin C levels. To their amazement, researchers found no vitamin C whatever in commercially prepared frozen pies. Then they added vitamin C to the pies and refroze them. When they were reheated two days later, three quarters of the vitamin had disappeared.

A random sampling of 6.5 million elderly people in Britain, in an investigation sponsored by the Ministry of Health, revealed that four out of five were suffering from vitamin deficiencies—a factor that is probably responsible for a large number of illnesses, including many mental disorders suffered by the elderly. According to Dr. Geoffrey Taylor, who has made a long study of the problem in Britain, "There is every reason to believe these deficiencies are present in other age groups of the population as well."

These are a few of the reasons why the Lifestyle Diet does not include convenience foods. For lasting health and beauty you need the very best complement of nutrients you can get. The McCarrison Society, an organization of doctors and dentists in Britain dedicated to the study of the relationship between nutrition and health, issued a directive that expresses it very well: "Food should be left as close as possible to its natural state. It should be grown on healthy soil. Stored, canned, packaged or precooked food should, whenever possible, be replaced by fresh food. The protective value of a wide range of fresh vegetables, fruits, and low-fat dairy produce is particularly important. Cereal carbohydrates should not be refined and sugar consumption should be at an absolute minimum." These are the basic principles of the Lifestyle Diet. Now let's see how to put it all into practice.

How Fresh is Fresh? (Vital vitamins)

Almost every day, we're bombarded by television and radio programmes, books, newspapers and magazine articles, all telling us that the way to good health is a low-fat, high-fibre diet loaded with fresh vegetables and fruit. So we scour the supermarket shelves for the cream of the crop and (hopefully) plan our family menus around the suggested mix of 12% protein, 30% fat with the 58% balance made up of complex carbohydrates in the form of breads and other grains, pulses, fruits and vegetables. Many of us have taken things one step further, reducing animal protein, lowering fats and upping the quota of fresh produce. In theory at least, we're doing all the right things.

There's just one potential fly in the ointment. Optimum nutrition relies on optimum foods - in many instances, ones that are as close to their natural state as possible and that are on our forks almost as soon as they're out of the ground. In this respect we are in the hands of our suppliers and we owe it to ourselves to shop wisely, to make informed choices on available options (wilted 'fresh' carrots - or would frozen or canned be better?) and to prepare and cook fresh foods as carefully and conservatively as we can.

But before we begin to look at the passage of produce from farmer to family, let's consider the foods in which freshness is a real priority:

Vital vitamins

First on the list has to be the fruit and vegetable group. Although this group is one of our most important sources of vitamins (notably A and C) and minerals, we know there is a deterioration in the nutrient content of the produce that starts as soon as it's harvested and which can be accelerated by poor storage, inadequate transportation and excessive exposure to climatic extremes. Whilst few would suggest that a four-day-old carrot isn't worth eating, none would argue with the fact that a four-minute old carrot has more to offer!

Remembering that one of the most critical factors affecting vitamin loss is the storage of vegetables and fruits after harvesting. Asparagus can lose up to 50% of its vitamin C after one week of storage at 0 °C and a staggering 91% if stored at 21 ^°C. Potatoes, too, are vulnerable: stored at room temperature they lose about 15% of their vitamin C content each month. And apples, when stored under domestic conditions, are reduced to about one-third of their vitamin C value after only 2-3months.

Even worse, green cabbage loses almost all of its vitamin C after just a few days. Orange juice, as long as it is stored in sealed containers, retains almost all of its vitamin C, but once thecontainer is opened, between 30-50% will be lostin one week.

However, since munching away in a farmer's field isn't a practical option for most of us, we need to know how to make the best and freshest choices from available produce. Let's consider a quick comparison between the food values of vitamins A and C, plus the iron and calcium content, of 8 popular fruits and vegetables in their fresh state and when they are cooked.

The most interesting fact to emerge is that in almost every case, the fresh foodstuff offers higher values (in the few cases where cooked values appear to be higher, it's primarily because the raw food has become more compact as part of the cooking process).

Apart from fruits and vegetables, however, there are other foodstuffs in which freshness is unquestionably a desirable factor. Top of the list are the protein foods - meat, chicken, fish and eggs. Freshness here doesn't relate so much to the nutrient value of the foodstuff as to its safety. (For example, egg consumption in the UK recently took a terrific tumble when the then Minister of Health, Edwina Currie,linked them to possible salmonella risk.)

Then there are the foods presented to us as fresh yet which have undergone some form of processing, preserving or packaging treatment. These include fresh fruit juices, fresh milk and herbs and spices, which have been subjected to vacuum packaging, pasteurisation or irradiation, among other processes.

Finally, there are frozen foods. Not technically fresh, for many of us some frozen products have become more a question of necessity than convenience. Really fresh fish is difficult to obtain inland, while fresh peas, for example, have a limited season and an even more limited availability countrywide, yet offer excellent sources of fibre, minerals including iron (commonly inadequate in women), and vitamins. In the absence of fresh, the frozen variety, which retain most of these benefits, are the closest to the real thing that we may be able to get.

Having established that fresh is undeniably best, and extending that principle to the point of saying freshest is best, let's now look at the methods whereby fruit and vegetable produce makes its way from the farm to your shopping basket, for this is where we need to know who, among all our suppliers, is going to give us the freshest of choices.

Performance enhancement in perspective

There are countless nutritional products aimed at the sportsperson, which claim to have some performance-enhancing ability. These substances, called `ergogenic aids', theoretically improve performance to a point above that obtainable through a good training programme. Athletes are very susceptible to any claims for even the slightest improvement in performance, as fractions of a second could mean the difference between winning or losing.

Many ergogenic aids are basically expensive forms of proteins, minerals and vitamins. Their effectiveness is often unproven, based on folklore and reliant on the ignorance of the consumer (for example, substances such as Royal Jelly and wheat germ oil). On the other hand, some performance-enhancing principles are based on reputable scientific evidence that have been shown to improve performance in the laboratory (such as carbohydrate supercompensation - see overleaf).

However, it is interesting that even in cases where the supplement or _special diet has no physical basis, an athlete can sometimes gain purely psychological benefit from consuming something he or she believes in.

Proteins and amino acids

Although certain athletes may need an increased amount of protein, taking excessive amounts in the form of powdered or liquid supplements is unnecessary. Despite the claims of manufacturers, large quantities of protein will have no beneficial effects on muscle growth, strength or on performance. Any excess will simply be used as an energy source or stored as fat. In addition, kidney function may be hampered and dehydration caused as a result of taking in too much protein.

The supplements currently in vogue - especially among body builders and weight lifters - are amino acids, the 'building blocks' of proteins. The theory is that certain amino acids stimulate growth hormones. The increase however is slight and has no practical effect. Amino acids are not 'fat burners' or detoxifiers as has been claimed. Although tablets taken for this purpose are extremely expensive, the amount of amino acids in them is very small. In fact, a single egg contains far more than that found in seven or more amino acid tablets!

Vitamins and minerals

As mentioned earlier in this chapter, supplementing vitamins and minerals has no performance-enhancing properties in an athlete whose normal diet is not deficient. The effects of taking megadoses of certain vitamins may even impair performance.

Manufacturers and quasi-nutritionists have given certain substances vitamin status, although they are not scientifically classified as vitamins. For example, pangamic acid (otherwise known as vitamin B15) supposedly prevents various diseases, slows the ageing process and improves physical performance. None of these claims has been substantiated. Laetrile or vitamin B17 is a source of cyanide and has been banned. Other `pseudovitamins' are orotic acid (vitamin B13), bioflavenoids and vitamin B-T (or carnitine), all of which do not function as vitamins.

Carbohydrate loading

`Carbo-loading' is a phrase which has passed into common use. It has been proved scientifically that carbohydrate loading (otherwise known as carbohydrate supercompensation) is one of the practices which is effective in improving performance. It may be explained in the following way: Exercise which lasts for longer than 60-90 minutes is dependent on the amount of glucose available. Glycogen (glucose) stores in the muscle and liver are small, so enlarging them allows an athlete to continue exercising at a higher intensity for longer. A carbohydrate-loading programme increases the amount of muscle glycogen stored before you need to use it.

The best method of doing this is to gradually reduce the amount of training you do during the six days preceding an event and, during the final three days, eat a diet that is high in carbohydrate (500-600 grams per day). The extra glycogen stored in this way allows the athlete to continue exercising for longer.

Carbohydrates, fluids and sodium during exercise

It has been proved that supplying the body with carbohydrate during endurance-type exercise has a glycogen sparing effect which allows an athlete to exercise for longer. Many studies have been done in attempts to find a solution that will allow the maximum amount of water to be absorbed, while at the same time providing an optimal amount of carbohydrate. So far, it seems that a form of carbohydrate known as 'glucose polymers' has the best absorption rate. These are chains of glucose molecules linked together. A solution containing about 10 per cent carbohydrate in the form of glucose polymers supplies the most glucose to the body during exercise, and at the same time provides sufficient water replacement. (It is important to remember that a carbohydrate solution is only of benefit during prolonged exercise.)

Adding sodium to replacement fluids increases the concentration of the fluid. It was initially thought that this would hamper the absorption of the fluid, but the most recent findings suggest that the addition of a very small amount of salt (1-2 grams per litre) is in fact necessary for absorption.

Alcohol

Not surprisingly, it has been proved that alcohol has no beneficial effect on exercise. In reality alcohol is a depressant that slows reaction time, impairs muscle reflexes and disturbs coordination. In addition, it causes dehydration which interferes with fluid balance and has a negative effect on performance.

Caffeine

Some athletes use caffeine as a stimulant and to increase the amount of free fatty acids in the blood. Theoretically, more fat is then available to be used for energy, resulting in glycogen sparing (see above). However, an excessive amount of caffeine is necessary to produce this effect and, apart from the fact that a very high concentration of it in the urine can disqualify a competitive athlete, there are several other disadvantages to using caffeine in this way. The main one is that it has a diuretic effect, which results in increased fluid losses and a greater risk of dehydration. In addition, overconsumption of caffeine can result in headaches and nausea and it is therefore not advisable to use large doses of this stimulant in an attempt to enhance performance.

Other imposters

Royal jelly, wheat germ oil, ginseng, extracts of various herbs and numerous other products have all at one time or another been touted as performance-enhancers. The truth is, however, that the only possible effect most of these substances could have would be a psychological one.

Cancer – Can Your Diet Make the Difference?

Firstly, can it really be said with confidence that if you eat much less, or much more, of a particular foodstuff - or combination of foodstuffs - you will become immune or less at risk to this or that cancer? To begin with, it has been proved beyond doubt that cancer can be prevented in experimental animals through dietary changes. In particular, reduced energy (kilojoule) and fat intakes and increased consumption of fibre- rich foods and certain vitamins have been found to inhibit the development of cancer. The question is, can these findings be appliedto human beings?

Here there are two very important questions: Firstly, to what extent is there a link between human diet and cancer, and secondly, how drastic are the changes we have to make to our eating patterns in order to bring about a significant drop in cancer development?

The first question is possibly easier to answer than the second. Researchers are now convinced that, in dietary terms, humans share the same cancer risks as animals. Simply put, these are:

• eating too much food in general and too much fat in particular
• not eating enough of the fibre contained in grains, legumes (beans, peas, lentils), fruit and vegetables
• low intakes of certain vitamins

The fat, vitamin and fibre factors

A high fat intake leads to a high concentration of faecal bile acids which can, under certain circumstances, act as carcinogens (cancer- producing substances). A low fibre intake results in a high faecal pH value, which favours the development of carcinogens; it also causes waste to take longer to move through the bowel, allowing time for cancer-causing substances to develop and take effect. On the other hand, a low intake of certain vitamins has a negative effect on the mechanisms which combat damaging reactions in the body's cells.

High fat diets - especially those high in saturated fats - have been linked to cancers of the breast, prostate and colon-rectum and low fibre diets to the latter in particular. A diet low in vitamin C is associated with gastric cancer, while one that is deficient in vitamin A seems to create favourable conditions for prostate cancer; a lack of vitamin D is linked to cancer of the colon. The mechanisms involved in all these processes are far from clear and much research still has to be done. (See also The Cabbage Patch Diet on page 187.)

The challenge to change

Authorities on cancer such as the US National Cancer Institute, the 1988 US Surgeon-General's Report and the 1989 Report of the UK COMA (Committee on Medical Aspects of Food Policy) have laid down guidelines for dietary changes which they regard as vital in the fight against cancer. Firstly, they maintain that fat should supply only 25-30% - instead of the present 40⁰/a - of our total food intake. In effect, this reduction by a third or so would bring our fat consumption to the level of the poorest people in the big cities in the 1920s! No fall in fat intake has occurred recently in Western populations.

For a marked fall, there would have to be a big increase in the intake of carbohydrate, or starchy, foods. But as mentioned above, our bread consumption is low - 120-150g or 3 to 4 slices daily - and possibly decreasing. Why has it fallen? Firstly, there has been a marked increase in the consumption of more 'palatable' foods such as dairy produce, meat, fish and eggs and secondly, the modern era's obsession with slimness has led to the (erroneous) belief that bread is specially fattening. It is invariably one of the first foods to be restricted or cut out totally in any attempts at weight loss.

In practical terms, to reduce our fat intake to the recommended levels, the average person would have to eat a good 50% less of all visible fat - butter, margarine, spreads and obvious fat on meat - than at present. The realization that changes in this area must be large, not trivial, has been underlined by recent studies which show that in the case of breast cancer, only a very low fat intake which supplies as little as 25% of energy (50-60g fat daily), is likely to give protection.

What about fibre? The experts recommend that it be increased from the present 10-15g to 25-30g or more daily, through a higher consumption of fibre-containing foods, cereal products (wholewheat bread, brown rice and unrefined breakfast cereals), legumes, vegetables and fruit. This means adopting a diet similar to that of strict vegetarians. In the USA, surveys show that only half of the population eat one serving of fruit and one serving of 'garden' vegetables on any one day - yet four or five helpings arerecommended. The fact of the matter is that in most countries, there have been no significant increases in the amounts of plant foods eaten daily.

The picture is much the same when it comes to intakes of vitamins and mineral salts. Admittedly, pill manufacturers are doing a roaring trade, but as any doctor will tell you, that is not the way to get your vitamins. Nature has provided us with an abundance of fruit and vegetables which, apart from being excellent sources of vitamins and fibre, are a good deal lighter on the pocket than the packaged variety. In addition, some vegetables have been found to be particularly effective in fighting diet-related cancers because of their high concentrations of certain vitamins.

How drugs affect nutrients

The ways in which drugs alter nutritional balance tend to be subtler and take longer to develop than the effects of food on medication. Drugs may have an influence on food intake due to changes in taste and appetite, they may decrease the absorption of nutrients, change their metabolism or cause them to be excreted in increased amounts (accompanied by diarrhoea and vomiting).

Drugs that affect food intake

Sensitivity to taste is one of the more delicate senses which can be affected fairly easily. Some drugs dull the tastebuds and make eating a less pleasurable experience - which, of course, may have the effect of making you eat less. Three drugs which decrease the sense of taste are clofibrate (a cholesterol-lowering agent), levodopa (an anti-Parkinson agent) and penicillamine (a chelating agent).

One or more of the four basic tastes (sweet, sour, salty and bitter) may be affected. For example, amphetamines decrease sensitivity to sweetness, while fluorouracil (a cytostatic agent) increases it. Diabetics who have to use insulin over prolonged periods find that they experience decreased sensitivity to both salty and sweet tastes. Other drugs - such as allopurinol (an anti-gout agent) - simply leave an unpleasant taste in the mouth.

Drugs that alter appetite

As the table below shows, some drugs directly stimulate the appetite, while others depress it. (Oral contraceptives, for example, tend to have the former effect.)

Drugs that decrease the absorption of nutrients

Drugs can affect the absorption of nutrients in several ways (including changes in the time the food spends in the digestive tract, in the acidity of the stomach, bile acid activity, enzyme systems, mucosal cells, or through binding to nutrients).

Firstly, the absorption of certain nutrients may be affected when the digestion of food is accelerated - a side effect of certain pills given for high blood pressure (ganglion blockers) - or when micro-organisms necessary for digestion are destroyed. In particular, drugs used to prevent indirectly the absorption of cholesterol from food into the body are often accompanied by reduced absorption of other nutrients (especially fat soluble vitamins). As another example, antacids are given to 'mop up' the excess acid in the stomach, but thiamin (vitamin B1) needs an acid medium lower down in the digestive tract to be absorbed, so antacids may impair its absorption.

Drugs that affect nutrient metabolism

Interference with nutrient metabolism can occur when a drug is similar in structure to a vitamin and therefore displaces a vitamin in a metabolic pathway. One example of this is the interaction between methotrexate (amethopterin), a cancer chemotherapeutic agent, and folic acid. Methotrexate kills cancer cells by displacing folic acid

and is therefore called a 'folic acid antagonist'. The problem is that the healthy cells are also prevented from using folic acid, which results in a type of anaemia.

The Pill and vitamin deficiency

The effect of oral contraceptives on nutritional deficiences has received wide attention in recent years. It has been shown that usage of 'the Pill' can decrease the absorption of vitamin B12, vitamin C, folic acid, vitamin B6, riboflavin, magnesium and zinc. On the plus side,however, it increases iron and calcium absorption. Although the Pill does seem to affect absorption and metabolism of many nutrients, there is little scientific evidence that women using it require increased amounts of nutrients to prevent nutritional deficiencies, provided of course that they are healthy and are following a balanced diet. In these circumstances, nutrient levels do not fall to alarming levels.

Some researchers have however established that the depression suffered by certain women who use the contraceptive pill can be due to a deficiency in vitamin B6, which can be treated by supplementation with this vitamin. A number of theories have been proposed regarding the cause of the pre-menstrual syndrome (PMS) and its link to the Pillone of these being that women who suffer from PMS also have low levels of vitamin B6. However, there is as yet not enough scientific evidence to justify fortification of the Pill with vitamin B6, or to suggest that doctors should treat the problem routinely with vitamin B6 supplementation.