I have come to believe in two guiding principles where my supplements are concerned. First and foremost is moderation in all things. The second is that the closer to nature the better.

It does seem to be an interesting study. At least they had a large sample to work with. But something about it makes me uneasy. Anti-oxidants have been studied out the wazoo and there have been hints that have reinforced my moderation credo. I guess I would like to see more reconcilliation with other studies. Selenium, for instance, has been shown repeatedly as being a big help for prostate problems. Just the opposite here. Maybe my unease comes from the "broad brush" approach taken.

Then there is my distrust of any study which hints that the FDA really ought to tell me what to take.

I am drifting toward a belief that adaptogens combined with good nutrition, exercise, and rest may be more sensible than simply extending the mindset of "better living through chemistry" that single ingredient synthesis represents. Ashwagandha anyone?