Mostly true Certainty of evidence: moderate provisional C-SUP-03

High-dose vitamin E (400 IU/day) increases prostate cancer (SELECT, +17%) and may increase all-cause mortality (Miller 2005: +39 per 10,000).

Conclusion: Mostly true: vitamin E pills raised prostate cancer risk; the mortality effect is uncertain.

Original statement

وفي السرطان، أوقفت تجربة CARET عام 1996 مبكراً بعد أن رفع البيتا كاروتين وفيتامين A الإصابةَ بسرطان الرئة لدى المدخنين بنسبة 28%، وأكدت تجربة ATBC الفنلندية النتيجة نفسها. أما تجربة SELECT فأظهرت أن فيتامين E بجرعة 400 وحدة دولية يومياً يزيد سرطان البروستاتا بنسبة 17%. | ثم جاء التحليل التلوي لميلر عام 2005 ليُظهر أن جرعات فيتامين E العالية (≥400 وحدة دولية يومياً) ترفع الوفيات الكلية بمعدل 39 لكل 10,000 شخص.

not verbatim – paraphrase. Translation by the project; the Arabic wording is authoritative.

Translation

High-dose vitamin E (400 IU/day) increases prostate cancer (SELECT, +17%) and may increase all-cause mortality (Miller 2005: +39 per 10,000).

Origin

Source status
Archive editors
Attribution
Archive editors (eltayebat.com); not verified as Elawady's own words
Origin
https://eltayebat.com/rule/oral-supplements/
Attribution uncertainty
Written by the archive operators; study selection is the archive's, not necessarily Elawady's.
Claimed mechanism

Not specified.

Claimed health effect

Prostate cancer; mortality.

Population concerned

Healthy men (SELECT); mixed, often chronically ill populations (Miller).

Geographic restriction by Elawady

none found

Scientific assessment

Mostly true – Correct at its core, but with limitations or minor inaccuracies.

Certainty of evidence: moderate – Further research may still affect the assessment.

1. What was claimed?

Vitamin E pills raise prostate cancer and mortality.

2. What is demonstrably correct?

SELECT: 620 vs 529 prostate cancers, HR 1.17 (99% CI 1.004–1.36). Miller 2005: pooled risk difference +39/10,000 in high-dose trials. USPSTF recommends against vitamin E for prevention (no net benefit).

3. What is wrong or exaggerated?

The mortality increase is uncertain and is not supported by SELECT itself, which found no difference in all-cause mortality (vitamin E HR 1.01, 99% CI 0.86-1.17) and no significant increase in Gleason >=7 cancer (A-SUP-23). Miller's authors note that high-dose trials were often small and in chronically ill people; later pooled analysis (USPSTF 2022) found no significant mortality effect.

4. What remains unclear?

Why SELECT and ATBC differ for prostate cancer is unclear (dose, form, population).

5. Which studies support it?

A-SUP-23 (prostate cancer incidence only), A-SUP-03 (mortality, meta-analysis), A-SUP-24, A-SUP-30.

6. Which studies contradict it?

O'Connor 2022 (I-SUP-08): vitamin E OR 1.02 for mortality; ATBC (A-SUP-05) fewer prostate cancers with 50 mg.

7. What applies to Germany and Europe?

Applies equally.

8. What is known about Egypt?

Applies equally.

9. What practical conclusion is appropriate?

High-dose vitamin E supplements are not recommended for disease prevention.

Assessment details

Rationale for certainty of evidence

SELECT is a large RCT (35,533 men) with a statistically significant increase (HR 1.17; absolute +1.6 per 1,000 person-years). The mortality signal comes from meta-analyses of heterogeneous, often small trials in sick populations; the USPSTF 2022 review found no significant effect of vitamin E on all-cause mortality (OR 1.02, 0.97–1.07).

Source quality

Correctly cited; mortality part less robust.

Regional transferability

High.

Individual exceptions

ATBC found fewer prostate cancers with low-dose (50 mg) alpha-tocopherol – a contrasting result.

Regional scope of the claim
general (biological/medical)
Last reviewed
25 October 2026 provisional

In plain language

A large trial in healthy men found that daily high-dose vitamin E pills slightly increased prostate cancer: about 1.6 extra cases per 1,000 men each year. Whether vitamin E pills also increase deaths is less certain. Either way, they do not help prevent disease and are not recommended.

Studies on this claim

Studies supporting the claim (4)

  • SELECT: vitamin E and prostate cancer

    Klein EA et al.. JAMA 2011 · PMID 21990298 · DOI 10.1001/jama.2011.1437
    Randomised controlled trialcited by the Tayebat archivefull text checked★ key study

    Vitamin E pills raised prostate cancer by 17% (1.6 extra cases per 1,000 men per year).

    Does the study support the specific claim? Yes · Methodological quality: high · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Prostate cancer prevention.

    How was the study done?

    RCT.

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    35,533 men.

    What was actually found?

    More prostate cancer with vitamin E.

    How large was the observed effect?

    HR 1.17; +1.6/1,000 py.

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Avoid vitamin E pills.

    What are the study's limitations?

    Modest effect.

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Supports.

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    Applicable.

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Mortality effects.

    Scientific details →

  • High-dose vitamin E and mortality

    Miller ER et al.. Ann Intern Med 2005 · PMID 15537682 · DOI 10.7326/0003-4819-142-1-200501040-00110
    Meta-analysiscited by the Tayebat archiveabstract only checked★ key study

    In high-dose trials, 39 more deaths per 10,000 people with vitamin E.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Vitamin E and death.

    How was the study done?

    Meta-analysis.

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    135,967.

    What was actually found?

    Small increase at high dose.

    How large was the observed effect?

    +39/10,000.

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Avoid high-dose vitamin E.

    What are the study's limitations?

    Sick populations.

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Partly supports.

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    Applicable.

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Effect in healthy adults.

    Scientific details →

  • Antioxidant pills and mortality

    Bjelakovic G et al.. JAMA 2007 · PMID 17327526 · DOI 10.1001/jama.297.8.842
    Meta-analysiscited by the Tayebat archiveabstract only checked★ key study

    In low-bias trials, beta-carotene, vitamin A and vitamin E were linked to slightly more deaths.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Mortality.

    How was the study done?

    Meta-analysis.

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    232,606.

    What was actually found?

    Small increase in low-bias trials.

    How large was the observed effect?

    RR 1.05.

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    No benefit, possible harm.

    What are the study's limitations?

    Debated methods.

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Supports.

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    Applicable.

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Precise harm.

    Scientific details →

  • USPSTF 2022: vitamins for prevention

    US Preventive Services Task Force et al.. JAMA 2022 · PMID 35727271 · DOI 10.1001/jama.2022.8970
    Guideline / position statementcited by the Tayebat archiveabstract only checked★ key study

    Recommends against beta-carotene and vitamin E; evidence insufficient for most others.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Yes · Methodological quality: high · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Prevention guidance.

    How was the study done?

    Guideline.

    What was actually found?

    D for beta-carotene, vitamin E; I for others.

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Don't take for prevention.

    What are the study's limitations?

    Not for pregnancy/deficiency.

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Supports.

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    Applicable.

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Advice on deficiency or pregnancy.

    Scientific details →

Studies contradicting or limiting the claim (1)

  • USPSTF evidence review 2022

    O'Connor EA et al.. JAMA 2022 · PMID 35727272 · DOI 10.1001/jama.2021.15650
    Systematic reviewindependent cross-checkabstract only checked★ key study

    Supplements gave little or no protection; beta-carotene harmful; multivitamins slightly fewer cancers.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: high · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Supplement benefits/harms.

    How was the study done?

    SR.

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    739,803.

    What was actually found?

    Little benefit; some harms.

    How large was the observed effect?

    OR 0.93 MV cancer; 1.20 beta-carotene lung cancer.

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Supplements are not a prevention strategy.

    What are the study's limitations?

    Not for deficiency.

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Mixed.

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    Applicable.

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Effects in deficient people.

    Scientific details →

Studies with mixed or unclear results (1)

  • ATBC: beta-carotene raised lung cancer in Finnish smokers

    ATBC Study Group. N Engl J Med 1994 · PMID 8127329 · DOI 10.1056/NEJM199404143301501
    Randomised controlled trialcited by the Tayebat archiveabstract only checked

    Beta-carotene raised lung cancer by 18% and deaths by 8%; vitamin E did not prevent lung cancer.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Yes · Methodological quality: high · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Cancer prevention in smokers.

    How was the study done?

    Factorial RCT.

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    29,133 men.

    What was actually found?

    Harm from beta-carotene.

    How large was the observed effect?

    +18% lung cancer.

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Avoid beta-carotene pills.

    What are the study's limitations?

    Men smokers only.

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Supports C-SUP-02.

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    Applicable.

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Non-smokers.

    Scientific details →

Regional context

Germany / EU

Applies equally.

Egypt

Applies equally.

What applies in my country?

General scientific assessment

Mostly true Mostly true: vitamin E pills raised prostate cancer risk; the mortality effect is uncertain.

This statement concerns biological or medical relationships. The scientific assessment above applies regardless of the country; country-specific food data do not change it.

References

  1. Vitamin E and the risk of prostate cancer: the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT).. Klein EA et al.. JAMA 2011 · PMID 21990298 · DOI 10.1001/jama.2011.1437
  2. Meta-analysis: high-dosage vitamin E supplementation may increase all-cause mortality.. Miller ER et al.. Ann Intern Med 2005 · PMID 15537682 · DOI 10.7326/0003-4819-142-1-200501040-00110
  3. Mortality in randomized trials of antioxidant supplements for primary and secondary prevention: systematic review and meta-analysis.. Bjelakovic G et al.. JAMA 2007 · PMID 17327526 · DOI 10.1001/jama.297.8.842
  4. Vitamin, Mineral, and Multivitamin Supplementation to Prevent Cardiovascular Disease and Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.. US Preventive Services Task Force et al.. JAMA 2022 · PMID 35727271 · DOI 10.1001/jama.2022.8970
  5. Vitamin and Mineral Supplements for the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease and Cancer: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force.. O'Connor EA et al.. JAMA 2022 · PMID 35727272 · DOI 10.1001/jama.2021.15650
  6. The effect of vitamin E and beta carotene on the incidence of lung cancer and other cancers in male smokers.. ATBC Study Group. N Engl J Med 1994 · PMID 8127329 · DOI 10.1056/NEJM199404143301501

← Back to overview