[EN] Can you take dietary supplements every day?

Preliminary note

The information presented in this article is provided for educational purposes, to support understanding of the biological mechanisms involved in micronutrition and Cellular Nutrition®. It does not constitute personalised medical advice, a diagnosis, or a prescription.

Taking dietary supplements — especially on a daily basis or over a prolonged period — should always be considered in light of each person’s individual situation. Medical advice may be necessary, particularly in cases of chronic illness, ongoing medication, pregnancy, breastfeeding, or any specific medical condition.

Dietary supplements do not replace a varied, balanced diet, nor regular medical follow-up. Nothing replaces the expertise and guidance of a doctor or qualified health professional, who alone can assess genuine needs, potential contraindications, and the appropriateness of an adapted supplementation strategy.

METHODE ESPINASSE is part of a preventive and functional health approach, complementary to conventional medicine — not in opposition to it.

Introduction

A legitimate question — and a biologically grounded answer supported by science

The question of taking supplements daily comes up repeatedly, both among patients and informed consumers: is it truly relevant, useful — and biologically justified — to take nutritional supplements every day? It’s a fair question. It reflects both the rise of preventive health and the ongoing ambiguity around supplementation, still often associated with a short-term or corrective logic rather than a long-term strategy.

Historically, dietary supplements have been viewed as temporary responses to a situation perceived as abnormal: fatigue, stress, an identified deficiency, winter. This perspective largely inherits the symptomatic pharmacological model — one product, one rapid and measurable short-term effect, then discontinuation. But that framework does not match the real mechanisms of nutritional biology as described in today’s scientific literature [1–3].

Micronutrients — vitamins, minerals, trace elements, essential fatty acids, amino acids and bioactive compounds — do not behave like external “corrective agents”. They are indispensable cofactors for thousands of enzymatic and metabolic reactions [4–6]. Their role is expressed at the cellular level within continuous processes such as mitochondrial ATP production, oxidative stress regulation, modulation of low-grade inflammation, immune function, and neuro-metabolic signalling [7–10]. These processes are neither intermittent nor occasional: they operate continuously.

In this context, the biological effectiveness of micronutrients depends less on occasional intake than on regular, stable availability. A large body of data shows that marked fluctuations in micronutrient intake can impair enzymatic activity, metabolic coherence and the body’s adaptive capacity — particularly in contexts of chronic stress, ageing, mitochondrial dysfunction or persistent inflammation [11–14]. The question of daily intake is therefore not an arbitrary lifestyle choice: it is rooted in physiology.

Moreover, even in individuals with a qualitatively sound diet, several factors now limit optimal micronutrient coverage: soil depletion, reduced nutrient density of foods, functional digestive issues, microbiota alterations, increased needs related to age, inflammation or oxidative stress [15–18]. The literature underlines that recommended intakes are designed to prevent severe deficiency states, but do not necessarily guarantee optimal biological functioning [19–21].

This is precisely where the approach developed by METHODE ESPINASSE sits. Cellular Nutrition® is not limited to the notion of “intake”; it focuses on the cell’s real capacity to absorb, transform and use micronutrients. It draws on recent findings in cell biology, mitochondrial physiology and functional nutrition, showing that loss of biological efficiency often precedes the onset of clinical symptoms [22–25]. Restoring this efficiency requires daily, coherent and controlled support for the major systems governing cellular regulation.

From this scientific perspective, the question is no longer whether it is possible to take supplements every day, but whether it is biologically coherent to support continuous cellular functions without ensuring daily availability of the micronutrients those functions depend on. It is on this basis that daily intake — when designed within a Cellular Nutrition® framework — becomes fully meaningful.

Chapter I — Why daily supplementation is biologically coherent

The relevance of taking supplements daily is not a habit, nor a marketing promise. It rests on a documented physiological reality: the body’s functioning is continuous, regulated, and dependent on stable micronutrient inputs. Understanding this biological fact makes it possible to move beyond the artificial opposition between “occasional use” and “daily use”.

I.1 — Micronutrients: structural drivers of metabolism, not occasional boosters

Micronutrients are not optional substances meant to “boost” the body temporarily. They form the invisible framework of cellular metabolism. More than 30% of known human enzymes require a micronutrient cofactor to function correctly — including B vitamins, magnesium, zinc, iron, copper or selenium [26–28].

These enzymes are involved in:

glycolysis and the Krebs cycle,
the mitochondrial respiratory chain,
neurotransmitter synthesis,
hepatic detoxification,
oxidative stress regulation,
modulation of immune response.

An enzyme deprived of its cofactor is not “partly active”: it becomes ineffective. Cellular biology does not run on sporadic bursts; it runs on continuous flux. As a result, irregular micronutrient intake mechanically produces periods of metabolic under-activation, even in the absence of a clear clinical deficiency [29–31].

I.2 — Intake stability and coherence of biological signals

Biological systems rely on fine equilibria. Micronutrients do not only act as structural building blocks; they also function as signals capable of activating or inhibiting certain metabolic pathways. Several studies have shown that excessive variability in micronutrient intake can impair the quality of intracellular signalling — particularly at mitochondrial and immune levels [32–34].

Conversely, consistent availability supports:

better enzymatic efficiency,
finer regulation of low-grade inflammation,
optimisation of ATP production,
improved adaptation to physiological stress.

This concept is central: the cell interprets consistency as a signal of biological safety, whereas irregularity is perceived as an additional stressor [35–37]. In that logic, daily intake is not “too much” — it is a condition for metabolic coherence.

I.3 — Why even a high-quality diet is not always enough anymore

Contemporary large-scale nutrition studies converge on one point: a meaningful proportion of the population shows insufficient or suboptimal micronutrient intakes — including in high-income countries and among individuals who pay attention to diet quality [38–40].

Several factors explain this:

reduced nutrient density linked to intensive agriculture,
micronutrient losses during storage, refining and cooking,
common functional digestive issues (hypochlorhydria, dysbiosis, intestinal permeability),
increased needs driven by chronic stress, inflammation and cellular ageing.

Reference intakes were designed to prevent severe deficiencies, not to optimise long-term biological functioning [41–43]. Many publications therefore highlight the gap between “sufficient” intakes in a regulatory sense and “optimal” intakes in a functional sense [44–46].

In this context, daily use of well-formulated supplements appears not as a replacement for diet, but as its functional extension — designed to secure the availability of micronutrients the cell actually uses.

I.4 — Biological continuity, ageing, and loss of cellular efficiency

Ageing is not solely chronological. To a large extent, it reflects a progressive loss of cellular efficiency affecting, in particular:

mitochondrial function,
oxidative stress management,
intercellular communication,
metabolic adaptability [47–49].

Several studies show that this loss of efficiency is exacerbated by moderate but chronic micronutrient deficits — often clinically silent [50–52]. Conversely, regular and sustained support with key micronutrients may slow certain trajectories of biological dysfunction, without attempting to “artificially correct” ageing itself [53–55].

From this viewpoint, daily supplementation fits within a logic of functional preservation rather than late-stage correction.

I.5 — From daily intake to a true nutrition strategy

Finally, it is essential to distinguish chaotic daily use from a structured micronutrient strategy. The relevance of daily supplementation depends on:

physiological dosages,
bioavailable forms,
coherent combinations,
a duration aligned with the biological objectives.

This framework is precisely what shifts the question from “Should you take supplements every day?” to “How do you integrate them intelligently into a whole-body cellular function strategy?” [56–58].

This scientific foundation naturally opens onto the approach developed by Cellular Nutrition®, which does not treat daily intake as a habit, but as a tool to restore biological coherence. That shift in perspective is what we will address in the next chapter.

Chapter II — Daily supplementation: under what conditions is it genuinely beneficial and safe?

Saying that daily supplementation is biologically coherent does not mean it is automatically appropriate in all circumstances. Science is clear on this point: it is neither frequency alone nor duration alone that determines the value of supplementation, but the quality of its design, how well it matches real biological needs, and how it fits within a broader strategy.

In other words, the real question is not “Can you take supplements every day?” but “In what framework does daily use become a lever for sustainable health rather than a source of inefficiency or incoherence?”

II.1 — The key concept: physiological dosing

One of the most common confusions around daily supplementation is the assumption that regular intake equals chronic overdosing. The scientific literature clearly distinguishes the benefits of micronutrients administered at physiological doses from the effects observed with excessive, prolonged exposure [59–61].

Micronutrients do not follow a linear “more is better” logic. Their actions occur within windows of biological effectiveness, beyond which the body may:

reduce absorption,
reroute metabolic pathways,
activate compensatory elimination mechanisms,
or even trigger paradoxical effects [62–64].

A relevant daily supplementation strategy therefore relies on doses compatible with long-term use, respecting established safety thresholds while still producing a measurable functional effect. This approach is fundamentally different from “megadose” strategies, which have been widely criticised in recent literature [65–67].

II.2 — Bioavailability and active forms: a non-negotiable prerequisite

Taking a supplement daily only makes sense if the micronutrient is effectively absorbed, transported and utilised. Many studies show that the chemical form of a micronutrient strongly influences bioavailability, digestive tolerance and metabolic efficacy [68–70].

At equivalent doses, certain forms may lead to:

limited absorption,
competition with other nutrients,
unnecessary accumulation,
or rapid elimination with no measurable biological effect [71–73].

In the context of daily intake, these parameters become critical. Repeating poor bioavailability day after day does not merely produce inefficacy — it can also disrupt digestive, hepatic or mineral balances [74–76]. Conversely, active, well-tolerated forms enable regular exposure with minimal biological “noise”, consistent with the cell’s fine, adaptive functioning.

II.3 — Daily supplementation and biological interactions

Micronutrients never act in isolation. They interact — sometimes synergistically, sometimes competitively. These interactions are well documented, especially for minerals, water-soluble vitamins and antioxidant systems [77–79].

Poorly designed daily intake can therefore:

disrupt certain physiological ratios,
inhibit the absorption of other nutrients,
alter metabolic pathways in undesirable ways [80–82].

This is why coherent combinations are a cornerstone of healthy daily supplementation. Scientific data show that a systemic approach — accounting for enzymatic interactions, signalling pathways and the role of the microbiota — significantly improves the effectiveness and tolerance of long-term micronutritional strategies [83–85].

II.4 — Duration, cycles and biological adaptation

Daily intake does not necessarily mean indefinite use without reassessment. Human biology is adaptive: needs change with age, inflammation status, stress, physical activity, digestive function and hormonal status [86–88].

Recent functional nutrition research highlights the value of structured supplementation cycles, typically spanning from one to several months, allowing:

gradual restoration of targeted functions,
observation of biological responses,
rational adjustment of inputs [89–91].

This dynamic approach stands in contrast both to erratic consumption and to mechanical long-term use with no functional rationale. It provides a safer, clearer framework for informed daily supplementation.

II.5 — Daily supplementation: active prevention rather than late correction

Finally, one of the most important contributions of contemporary literature is the repositioning of daily supplementation within a model of functional prevention. Many metabolic, inflammatory or mitochondrial imbalances develop slowly, long before identifiable clinical signs appear [92–94].

Intervening only once symptoms are established means acting late on mechanisms that are already impaired. In contrast, a correctly designed daily micronutrient strategy aims to:

maintain metabolic plasticity,
preserve enzymatic efficiency,
limit the drift into chronic low-grade inflammation,
support cellular resilience [95–97].

From this perspective, daily intake is not excessive — it is an anticipatory strategy consistent with current data on functional ageing and lifestyle-related chronic disease.

This scientific framework makes it possible to understand why some daily supplementation approaches fail, while others produce measurable and durable benefits. It naturally sets the stage for Chapter III, dedicated to the specific Cellular Nutrition® approach, which takes this logic of biological coherence even further.

Chapter III — Why daily intake makes full sense in Cellular Nutrition® (METHODE ESPINASSE)

While daily supplementation can be biologically coherent within a traditional micronutrition framework, it becomes structurally central when approached through the lens of Cellular Nutrition®. This approach is not based on accumulating actives, but on a functional understanding of living systems — grounded in the cell’s real capacity to receive, interpret and use micronutrients.

III.1 — From nutritional intake to real biological efficiency

One of the major limitations of conventional supplementation is the persistent confusion between ingestion and utilisation. A growing body of work shows that a micronutrient may be present in the body yet not effectively mobilised at the cellular level due to digestive, metabolic, inflammatory or mitochondrial barriers [98–100].

Cellular Nutrition® operates differently:
it considers that the true issue is not how much is taken in, but the quality of the cellular response.

That response depends in particular on:

the integrity of cell membranes,
mitochondrial function,
availability of enzymatic cofactors,
quality of intracellular signalling,
inflammatory and redox balance [101–104].

These parameters are not corrected quickly or sporadically. They require daily, progressive and coherent support, allowing the cell to return to a functional state compatible with efficient nutrient utilisation.

III.2 — Signal continuity and restoration of cellular coherence

Modern cell biology describes the cell as an adaptive system, more responsive to repeated signals than to isolated stimulations. Low but consistent exposures to key nutrients have shown greater effectiveness than discontinuous higher intakes, notably for mitochondrial, immune and inflammatory functions [105–107].

In this framework, daily intake acts as a regulatory signal rather than artificial stimulation. It supports:

progressive normalisation of metabolic pathways,
improved energy efficiency,
reduced unnecessary biological variability,
better resilience to endogenous and exogenous stressors [108–110].

Cellular Nutrition® uses this continuity to restore what the literature describes as biological coherence: a state in which cellular systems communicate efficiently, without chronic overactivation or inhibition.

III.3 — Daily intake and mitochondria: a central lever

Mitochondria are now central to contemporary understanding of daily supplementation. Mild but chronic mitochondrial dysfunction is implicated in persistent fatigue, accelerated ageing, metabolic disorders and low-grade inflammation [111–113].

Yet mitochondrial biogenesis, respiratory chain quality and mitochondrial oxidative stress handling depend strongly on:

specific micronutrients,
their continuous availability,
synergistic interactions [114–116].

Experimental data show that effective mitochondrial support strategies rely on regular intakes, enabling progressive improvement in oxidative capacity and ATP production efficiency [117–119]. Occasional intake is insufficient to influence these structural parameters.

III.4 — Cellular Nutrition® and prevention of functional ageing

Ageing, as described in contemporary literature, is not only the accumulation of time. It is also a progressive loss in the quality of cellular signalling, metabolic plasticity and adaptive capacity [120–122].

Cellular Nutrition® aligns with this functional understanding of ageing. Its aim is to:

support cellular mechanisms before clinical deterioration,
limit chronic inflammatory drift,
preserve metabolic adaptability,
slow the loss of biological efficiency [123–125].

In this context, daily intake is not an option but a condition of effectiveness. The targeted processes evolve slowly, require repeated exposure, and do not respond to discontinuous interventions.

III.5 — A daily supplementation strategy designed as a system

Finally, one of the foundations of the METHODE ESPINASSE approach is designing supplementation as a functional system, not a random stacking of products. Formulations are designed to:

be compatible with one another,
respect physiological balances,
enable prolonged use without overload,
fit within clear, evolutive protocols [126–128].

This architecture makes daily intake not only possible but logical and safer. It transforms supplementation into a biological support tool serving cellular performance and functional longevity.

Conclusion — Daily supplementation: a biological obviousness when it is designed properly

In reality, the question of daily supplementation reflects a broader debate about how we think about health, prevention and living systems. Behind the seemingly simple question — “Can you take dietary supplements every day?” — lies a persistent confusion between a short-term logic and a functional logic, between a symptomatic response and a biological understanding.

Yet contemporary scientific data are clear: the body’s functioning is continuous, dynamic and finely regulated. Enzymatic, metabolic, immune, mitochondrial and neurobiological systems do not operate intermittently. They function continuously and depend on a stable availability of micronutrients that are not optional add-ons, but structural requirements. In that context, irregular intakes are not neutral: they weaken the coherence of biological signalling and limit the real effectiveness of cellular processes.

Daily supplementation, when based on physiological doses, bioavailable forms, coherent combinations and a duration matched to biological objectives, is not excessive. On the contrary, it respects biological rhythms, supports metabolic stability and aligns with a model of functional prevention. It does not aim to overstimulate the organism, but to provide the conditions it needs to function accurately in an environment that has become structurally demanding: chronic stress, low-grade inflammation, oxidative load, digestive disturbances and progressive cellular ageing.

This is precisely where the conceptual shift of Cellular Nutrition® (METHODE ESPINASSE) sits. By moving beyond the idea of “intake”, this approach puts the cell back at the centre of the model. It asks not what we consume, but what the cell is genuinely able to absorb, transform and use. It recognises that loss of biological efficiency precedes symptoms, and that the central challenge of modern supplementation is no longer late correction but the maintenance of functional coherence.

From this perspective, daily intake is neither a habit, nor an automatic gesture, nor an act of overconsumption. It becomes a strategic tool — serving cellular performance, metabolic resilience and functional longevity. A rational, progressive and measured approach, aligned with current knowledge in cell biology and functional nutrition.

So the real question is no longer whether it is possible to take supplements every day.
The question is whether it is biologically coherent not to — when the goal is to sustainably support cellular function in a world that continuously challenges our capacity to adapt.

That is the demanding, structured and deeply scientific framework proposed by METHODE ESPINASSE — positioning Cellular Nutrition® not as a trend, but as a logical evolution of contemporary micronutrition.

Bibliography

[1] NIH Office of Dietary Supplements (ODS) — Dietary Supplement Fact Sheets (index). https://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/list-all/
[2] EFSA NDA Panel (2012) — Tolerable Upper Intake Level (UL) for Vitamin D. https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2813
[3] EFSA (Press release) — ULs reviewed for vitamin D and calcium (2012). https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/press/news/120727-0
[4] EFSA NDA Panel (2023) — Scientific opinion on UL for vitamin D (incl. derivation). https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10407748/
[5] WHO/FAO — Vitamin and mineral requirements in human nutrition (2nd ed.). https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/42716
[6] WHO — Guideline: Use of multiple micronutrient powders for point-of-use fortification (children). https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241549943
[7] NASEM — Dietary Reference Intakes: Calcium and Vitamin D (2011). https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/13050/dietary-reference-intakes-for-calcium-and-vitamin-d
[8] NASEM — DRI: Vitamin C, Vitamin E, Selenium, and Carotenoids (2000). https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/9810/dietary-reference-intakes-for-vitamin-c-vitamin-e-selenium-and-carotenoids
[9] NASEM — DRI: Thiamin, Riboflavin, Niacin, Vitamin B6, Folate, Vitamin B12, Pantothenic Acid, Biotin, Choline (1998). https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/6015/dietary-reference-intakes-for-thiamin-riboflavin-niacin-vitamin-b6-folate-vitamin-b12-pantothenic-acid-biotin-and-choline
[10] NASEM — DRI: Vitamin A, Vitamin K, Arsenic, Boron, Chromium, Copper, Iodine, Iron, Manganese, Molybdenum, Nickel, Silicon, Vanadium, Zinc (2001). https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/10026/dietary-reference-intakes-for-vitamin-a-vitamin-k-arsenic-boron-chromium-copper-iodine-iron-manganese-molybdenum-nickel-silicon-vanadium-and-zinc
[11] European Commission — EU Register of nutrition and health claims. https://ec.europa.eu/food/safety/labelling-nutrition/nutrition-health-claims/eu-register_en
[12] EFSA — Scientific opinions (NDA Panel) portal. https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/panels/nda

[44] López-Otín C. et al. (2013) — The hallmarks of aging. PubMed. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23746838/
[45] López-Otín C. et al. (2023) — Hallmarks of aging: An expanding universe. Cell (full text). https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(22)01377-0
[46] Wallace D.C. (2005) — A mitochondrial paradigm of metabolic and degenerative diseases. Nat Rev Genet. https://www.nature.com/articles/nrg1606
[47] Nunnari J., Suomalainen A. (2012) — Mitochondria: in sickness and in health. Cell. https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(12)00264-5
[48] Murphy M.P. (2009) — How mitochondria produce reactive oxygen species. Biochem J. https://portlandpress.com/biochemj/article/417/1/1/44784
[49] Brand M.D. (2016) — Mitochondrial generation of superoxide and hydrogen peroxide. Biochem J. https://portlandpress.com/biochemj/article/473/19/2959/49349
[50] Sena L.A., Chandel N.S. (2012) — Physiological roles of mitochondrial ROS. Mol Cell. https://www.cell.com/molecular-cell/fulltext/S1097-2765(12)00638-5
[51] Lane N. (2018) — Power, Sex, Suicide: Mitochondria and the meaning of life (background). https://global.oup.com/academic/product/power-sex-suicide-9780199205632
[52] Nicholls D.G. (2017) — Mitochondrial bioenergetics and beyond. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301479717301659
[53] Smith R.A.J. et al. (2012) — Mitochondria-targeted antioxidants as therapies. Antioxid Redox Signal. https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/ars.2011.4380
[54] Picard M. et al. (2016) — Mitochondrial psychobiology (mitochondria & stress). https://www.nature.com/articles/nrn.2016.72
[55] Lightowlers R.N., Taylor R.W., Turnbull D.M. (2015) — Mutations causing mitochondrial disease. Nat Rev Genet. https://www.nature.com/articles/nrg3961

[56] Furman D. et al. (2019) — Chronic inflammation in the etiology of disease. Nat Med. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-019-0675-0
[57] Hotamisligil G.S. (2006) — Inflammation and metabolic disorders. Nature. https://www.nature.com/articles/nature05485
[58] Calder P.C. (2015) — Fatty acids and inflammation. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212267215001255
[59] Medzhitov R. (2008) — Origin and physiological roles of inflammation. Nature. https://www.nature.com/articles/nature07201
[60] Dinarello C.A. (2010) — Anti-inflammatory agents: present and future. Cell. https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(10)00365-1
[61] Gombart A.F., Pierre A., Maggini S. (2020) — Micronutrients and immune function. Nutrients. https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/12/1/236
[62] Maggini S. et al. (2018) — Vitamins and minerals in immune function. Nutrients. https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/10/11/1680

[63] Human Microbiome Project Consortium (2012) — Structure, function, diversity of the healthy human microbiome. Nature. https://www.nature.com/articles/nature11234
[64] Lloyd-Price J. et al. (2016) — Strains, functions and dynamics in the microbiome. Nature. https://www.nature.com/articles/nature18827
[65] Fan Y., Pedersen O. (2021) — Gut microbiota in human metabolic health and disease. Nat Rev Microbiol. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41579-020-0433-9
[66] Sonnenburg J.L., Bäckhed F. (2016) — Diet–microbiota interactions. Cell. https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(16)30071-6
[67] Belkaid Y., Hand T.W. (2014) — Role of the microbiota in immunity. Cell. https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(14)00490-6
[68] Agus A., Planchais J., Sokol H. (2018) — Gut microbiota regulation of tryptophan metabolism. Cell Host Microbe. https://www.cell.com/cell-host-microbe/fulltext/S1931-3128(18)30107-4
[69] Rowland I. et al. (2018) — Gut microbiota functions: metabolism of nutrients. Eur J Nutr. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00394-017-1445-0

[70] Heaney R.P. (2001) — Factors influencing calcium absorption. https://academic.oup.com/jn/article/131/4/1344S/4686200
[71] Hurrell R., Egli I. (2010) — Iron bioavailability and dietary reference values. Am J Clin Nutr. https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/91/5/1461S/4597223
[72] Hambidge K.M., Miller L.V. (2013) — Zinc deficiency in human health. https://academic.oup.com/jn/article/143/5/747/4571753
[73] Allen L.H. (2008) — Causes of vitamin B12 and folate deficiency. Food Nutr Bull. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/15648265080292S129
[74] O’Leary F., Samman S. (2010) — Vitamin B12 in health and disease. Nutrients. https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/2/3/299
[75] Schümann K. et al. (2007) — Safety of iron fortification/supplementation. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17921405/
[76] EFSA — Guidance on safety of vitamins and minerals in supplements (overview). https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/topics/topic/food-supplements

[77] Bjelakovic G. et al. (2012) — Antioxidant supplements for prevention of mortality (Cochrane review). https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD007176.pub2/full
[78] Moyer V.A. / USPSTF (2014) — Vitamin supplementation to prevent CVD/cancer (statement). https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/1873073
[79] Fortmann S.P. et al. (2013) — Vitamin/mineral supplements and prevention of CVD/cancer (systematic review). https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24103780/
[80] Sesso H.D. et al. (2008) — Vitamin E and C in men (PHS II). https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18997196/
[81] Manson J.E. et al. (2019) — Vitamin D and omega-3 trial (VITAL). https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1811403
[82] Keum N., Giovannucci E. (2014) — Multivitamins and chronic disease prevention. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24438708/
[83] FDA — Dietary supplement labelling & safety (overview). https://www.fda.gov/food/dietary-supplements

[84] GBD 2017 Diet Collaborators (2019) — Health effects of dietary risks (Lancet). https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(19)30041-8/fulltext
[85] GBD 2019 — Global micronutrient deficiencies (overview methods). https://ghdx.healthdata.org/gbd-2019
[86] UNICEF — Micronutrient deficiency (overview). https://www.unicef.org/nutrition/micronutrients
[87] World Bank — The cost of micronutrient deficiencies (overview). https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/nutrition

[88] Calder P.C. (2020) — Nutrition, immunity and COVID-19 (broader immunity context). https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m1515
[89] Ames B.N. (2006) — Low micronutrient status accelerates aging (triage theory). https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17068203/
[90] Langan R.C., Zawistoski K.J. (2011) — Update on vitamin B12 deficiency. https://www.aafp.org/pubs/afp/issues/2011/0615/p1425.html
[91] Gröber U. et al. (2015) — Magnesium in prevention and therapy. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26084460/
[92] de Baaij J.H.F. et al. (2015) — Magnesium in man: implications for health. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25884537/
[93] Wacker M., Holick M.F. (2013) — Vitamin D effects beyond bone. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23306181/
[94] Holick M.F. (2007) — Vitamin D deficiency. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMra070553
[95] Allen L.H. (2009) — Vitamin B12 metabolism and deficiency. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19906274/
[96] Prasad A.S. (2013) — Discovery of zinc for human health and impact. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23525058/
[97] Rayman M.P. (2012) — Selenium and human health. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22709779/

[98] Mozaffarian D., Wu J.H.Y. (2011) — Omega-3 fatty acids and cardiovascular disease. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21266217/
[99] Calder P.C. (2017) — Omega-3 and inflammatory processes. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28110957/
[100] Simopoulos A.P. (2002) — Omega-6/omega-3 ratio in chronic disease. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12442909/

[101] Hernández-Camacho J.D. et al. (2018) — Coenzyme Q10 and health. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29757970/
[102] Mehrabani S. et al. (2019) — CoQ10 supplementation effects (systematic review). https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30920997/
[103] Littarru G.P., Tiano L. (2010) — Clinical aspects of CoQ10. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20101796/

[104] Hill C. et al. (2014) — ISAPP consensus on probiotics. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24965419/
[105] Sanders M.E. et al. (2019) — Probiotics and prebiotics: ISAPP. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30706600/
[106] McFarland L.V. (2015) — Probiotics for prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea (review). https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25891873/

[107] Donath M.Y., Shoelson S.E. (2011) — Type 2 diabetes as inflammatory disease. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21267919/
[108] Gregor M.F., Hotamisligil G.S. (2011) — Inflammatory mechanisms in obesity. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21215983/

[109] NIH NCCIH — Herbs at a Glance & supplement resources (quality/safety). https://www.nccih.nih.gov/health/herbsataglance
[110] USP — Dietary Supplements (quality standards overview). https://www.usp.org/dietary-supplements
[111] NSF International — Certified for Sport / supplement certification. https://www.nsf.org/consumer-resources/health-and-safety-tips/dietary-supplements

[112] Gaziano J.M. et al. (2012) — Multivitamin in men (Physicians’ Health Study II). https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23117775/
[113] Jenkins D.J.A. et al. (2018) — Dietary patterns and cardiometabolic health (review). https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29325690/
[114] Schwingshackl L. et al. (2018) — Food groups and health outcomes (umbrella review). https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29707725/

Tous vos besoins

La gamme de compléments

Découvrez AGE

Journal