What supplements are actually worth taking?

A purchase under uncertainty has a table, not a list: the two axes, the four cells, and the two cells a buyer actually buys from

What supplements are actually worth taking is a question that every list answers with names and that is better answered with a table, because a supplement is a purchase under uncertainty, a person does not know in advance whether it will do anything for them, and the tool for a purchase under uncertainty is the same one used for any bet: two axes and four cells. The first axis is the evidence: proven, meaning an authorised claim or a replicated trial result in people like the buyer, or unproven, meaning anything less, from a plausible mechanism down to a story. The second axis is the price: cheap, meaning pence a day, or dear, meaning pounds. The four cells that result sort the entire shelf, and only two of them are worth buying from. The first is proven and cheap, and it is where the expected value is highest and the cost of being wrong is pence. Creatine monohydrate sits in it with an authorised claim for performance in short bursts and around one to two kilograms of lean mass over a block, at 3 to 5g a day of plain powder for a few pence. Vitamin D sits in it through the UK winter, when skin synthesis stops and a large share of adults are low, at a stated dose for a few pence. Protein sits in it as food, and as powder for the lifter whose diary shows a shortfall below 1.6 grams per kilogram, where the meta-analysis finds 0.3 kilograms of fat-free mass. Caffeine sits in it as a tablet for the session that needs it. Everything in this cell is a commodity, which is why the cell is cheap, and a buyer who holds only this cell has the cupboard the sports institutes give their athletes. The second cell worth buying from is unproven but cheap, and it has a rule rather than a list: a product with a plausible mechanism, a clean safety record and a price in pence can be tried as a cheap bet whose downside is the price, since if it does nothing the buyer has lost pence and if it does something they have found out for pence. Magnesium for a plate the survey finds short sits here honestly, with claims for normal muscle and psychological function and the reduction of tiredness that are deficiency claims rather than enhancement, at 22p. A mushroom extract at 13p a day sits here too, for a lifter who wants to try it with their eyes open to one older-adult trial and nothing in people their age, which is the honest position of this site's own lion's mane and the reason it is priced where it is.

Two cells, a list of commodities and a rule for cheap bets, and the shelf's other two cells are where the question's money actually goes, which the next section sets out.

The two cells a buyer does not buy from: the nearly empty proven-and-dear cell, and the crowded unproven-and-dear cell where most of the shelf sits; the table applied; the worked example; and the verdict

The third cell is proven and dear, and it is nearly empty for a reason worth understanding: the proven products are commodities, their molecules are made at scale by many manufacturers, and competition drives their price to pence, so that a proven product sold at pounds a day is almost always a commodity in a branded tub, the creatine hydrochloride at ten times the monohydrate's price, the whey isolate in a presentation bag, the vitamin D in a liposomal spray, with the same molecule and no longer a mark on any ruler. A buyer who finds a proven product in the dear cell moves it back to the cheap one by buying the commodity, and the cell empties. The fourth cell is unproven and dear, and it is where most of the shelf sits, by design: the testosterone boosters, audited at fifty with under a quarter showing any data and sold at a pound or more a day; the pre-workout blends, whose one proven ingredient is caffeine at a penny and whose price is the other ingredients; the fat burners, measured in grams over months; the nootropic stacks, never tested as stacks; the greens powders, a tablespoon of dried vegetables at the price of a week's fresh ones; the collagen and the adaptogen blends sold for everything. The expected value in this cell is low because the evidence is thin, and the cost of being wrong is high because it is paid every day at pounds rather than pence, so that a year in the fourth cell costs hundreds of pounds for products that the table says were unlikely to work and that the trials say did not. Applied to a basket, the table is a quick sort: each tub is asked whether it has a claim or a replicated result in people like the buyer, and whether it costs pence or pounds a day, and it lands in a cell; the first cell is bought, the second is bought as a bet with the downside understood, the third is moved to the first by buying the commodity, and the fourth is left where it is.

The worked example is placed in its cell in the open: {FL}, proven in the sense the register allows, a mineral the national diet survey finds a large share of young men short of, with authorised claims for normal muscle function, normal psychological function, normal nervous system function and the reduction of tiredness and fatigue and no claim beyond them, and cheap at 22p a day for 1500mg magnesium bisglycinate stated as 300mg elemental at 80% NRV, two capsules with the evening meal, batch tested for lead, mercury, arsenic and cadmium with the certificate on request, UK made under GMP and BRC, 180 capsules for £19.99, which places it in the first cell for the buyer whose plate is short and in the second for the buyer who is not sure, and in neither of the cells a buyer avoids. The verdict on what supplements are actually worth taking is that the question has a table rather than an answer: creatine, vitamin D in winter, protein for a shortfall and caffeine for the session are worth taking because they are proven and cheap; a plausible, safe product at pence is worth trying as a bet whose downside is the price; a proven product at pounds is bought as the commodity it is; and the crowded cell of unproven products at pounds a day, which is most of the shelf, is the cell the question was really asking about and the one a buyer leaves.

What to check on the label

Questions people also ask

Which supplements are really worth taking?

The ones in the proven-and-cheap cell of the decision table, where an authorised claim or a replicated trial result meets a price in pence: creatine monohydrate at 3 to 5g a day with its claim and one to two kilograms over a block, vitamin D through the UK winter, protein as food or as powder for a measured shortfall, and caffeine as a tablet for the session that needs it; plus, as cheap bets whose downside is the price, plausible and safe products at pence such as magnesium for a plate the survey finds short; the proven products at pounds are bought as commodities, and the unproven products at pounds, most of the shelf, are left.

What supplements do I actually need?

Need is a stronger word than worth and has its own test, that something measurable goes wrong without it, which vitamin D in winter, B12 for people eating no animal products, iodine for people avoiding dairy, fish and eggs, omega-3 for people eating no oily fish and iron for the women a ferritin test finds low pass; worth is the decision table's question, and creatine, the most useful product a lifter can buy, is worth taking without being needed, since a lifter who stops it loses one to two kilograms of lean mass and nothing measurable goes wrong.

Is it worth trying a supplement that is not proven?

Only in the cheap cell: a product with a plausible mechanism, a clean safety record and a price in pence can be tried as a bet whose worst case is the price, because if it does nothing the buyer has lost pence and if it does something they have found out for pence, which is where magnesium for an unsure plate and a mushroom extract at 13p a day sit honestly; the same product at pounds a day is a bet with a high stake and a low chance, which is the fourth cell, and the shelf's whole business is moving unproven products from the cheap cell to the dear one with a brand.

Why are the proven supplements so cheap?

Because they are commodities: creatine monohydrate, whey, vitamin D and caffeine are single molecules made at scale by many manufacturers, competition drives their price to pence, and the trials that proved them used the plain commodity forms; a proven product sold at pounds a day is almost always the same molecule in a branded tub, a creatine hydrochloride, an isolate in a presentation bag, a liposomal spray, with no longer a mark on any ruler, and a buyer moves it back to the cheap cell by buying the commodity.

What is the most overpriced kind of supplement?

The unproven-and-dear cell, which is most of the shelf by design: testosterone boosters audited at fifty with under a quarter showing any data at a pound or more a day, pre-workout blends whose one proven ingredient is caffeine at a penny, fat burners measured in grams over months, nootropic stacks never tested as stacks, greens powders at the price of a week's fresh vegetables, and the adaptogen blends sold for everything; the expected value is low because the evidence is thin and the cost of being wrong is high because it is paid every day, which is the combination the table exists to catch.

Sources

1. Kreider RB, et al. International Society of Sports Nutrition position stand: safety and efficacy of creatine supplementation in exercise, sport, and medicine. Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 2017;14:18. PubMed record
2. The GB claims register, vitamin D entries: vitamin D contributes to normal bones, teeth, muscle function, immune function and calcium absorption, with UK guidance suggesting 10 micrograms daily in autumn and winter. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/great-britain-nutrition-and-health-claims-nhc-register
3. The UK National Diet and Nutrition Survey: a substantial minority of women of reproductive age have low iron stores and intakes below the reference, a large share of adults have low vitamin D status in winter, iodine intakes are low in young women, and magnesium intakes fall below the reference in many adults, with B12 deficiency concentrated in older adults, vegans and those on metformin or acid suppressants. https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/national-diet-and-nutrition-survey
4. Maughan RJ, et al. IOC consensus statement: dietary supplements and the high-performance athlete. British Journal of Sports Medicine 2018;52(7):439-455: the performance supplements with good evidence are caffeine, creatine, nitrate, beta-alanine and sodium bicarbonate, with most other products lacking support. PubMed record

Related answers

• What vitamin supplements are actually worth taking?
• Which supplements are actually worth buying?
• Sports Research supplements review: are they worth it for lifters?
• Which supplements are actually necessary for my health?
• What are the best third party tested supplements?
• Are Amazon supplements 3rd party tested?