The mere availability of a supplement does not automatically imply a health benefit. Over the last few decades, the nutritional supplementation market has grown exponentially, fueled by the belief that vitamins and minerals can improve health status, prevent diseases, or slow down aging. Although these molecules are essential for the proper functioning of the body, the most recent scientific evidence paints a much more complex picture. The effectiveness of supplementation actually depends on the clinical context, initial nutritional status, age, physiological conditions, and the presence of any documented deficiencies. In other words, supplements cannot be considered a universal solution, but rather represent therapeutic tools that are truly useful when they correct a deficit or meet an increased physiological requirement.
This principle emerges with particular clarity during pregnancy, a phase of life in which the requirement for vitamins and minerals increases considerably to support fetal growth, placental development, and the mother's metabolic adaptation. Two of the largest systematic reviews published on the subject have analyzed a total of 72 clinical trials and over 450,000 pregnant women, comparing different vitamin-mineral supplementation strategies. The results show that traditional supplementation with iron and folic acid significantly reduces the risk of maternal anemia and contributes to decreasing the incidence of low birth weight. However, the greatest benefits were observed with supplements containing multiple micronutrients (Multiple Micronutrient Supplements, MMN), which proved superior in reducing the risk of low birth weight, small-for-gestational-age infants, and stillbirths, while also improving some indicators of infant development and the newborn's nutritional status (Oh et al., 2020) [7] (Keats et al., 2021) [8].
A particularly interesting aspect concerns the composition of the supplements. Formulations containing a higher number of vitamins and minerals produced better results than those consisting of only a few nutrients, suggesting that during pregnancy, proper fetal development depends on the interaction of numerous simultaneous biological processes, such as DNA synthesis, mitochondrial energy production, placental angiogenesis (the formation of blood vessels in the placenta), and nervous system development. None of these mechanisms depends on a single micronutrient, but rather on their coordinated action. It is important to emphasize that these benefits were obtained without any increase in maternal, neonatal, or infant mortality, confirming the good safety profile of multiple supplementation when used in populations characterized by a high risk of nutritional deficiencies (Oh et al., 2020) [7]; (Keats et al., 2021) [8].
The same logic has also been observed in public health interventions aimed at the entire population. A Cochrane review (which rigorously analyzes the results of multiple scientific studies on the same topic) analyzed 43 studies and nearly 20,000 participants, evaluating the effects of food fortification with multiple micronutrients. Compared to non-fortified foods, this strategy resulted in a marked reduction in anemia, iron-deficiency anemia, and deficiencies of iron, vitamin A, vitamin B2, vitamin B6, and vitamin B12, confirming how the simultaneous correction of multiple nutritional deficits can significantly improve the population's nutritional status. This highlights how the improvement of nutritional biomarkers does not automatically translate into a measurable clinical benefit and underscores the need for longer-term prospective studies (Das et al., 2019) [9].
The most recent evidence also suggests that the very concept of nutritional deficiency should be re-evaluated. For many years, international programs have focused almost exclusively on preventing deficiencies of iron, iodine, vitamin A, folates, and zinc. A recent review promoted by the Micronutrient Forum instead draws attention to at least nine other frequently overlooked micronutrients, including thiamine, riboflavin, niacin, vitamins B6 and B12, vitamin D, vitamin K, calcium, and selenium. The authors emphasize that so-called "hidden hunger" represents one of the main global nutritional emergencies today and that the scarcity of epidemiological data for many of these nutrients should not be interpreted as an absence of the problem, but rather as a consequence of the limited nutritional surveillance available. According to this view, the future of prevention should be based on a broader approach, capable of assessing the individual's entire micronutrient profile rather than focusing exclusively on a few vitamins or minerals (Brown et al., 2025) [10].
Interest in nutritional supplementation concerns not only the prevention of deficiencies but also the possible role of vitamins and minerals in improving the prognosis of already diagnosed pathologies. In oncology, for example, many patients spontaneously resort to supplements with the goal of supporting the body during treatments or reducing the risk of recurrence. A systematic review with meta-analysis that evaluated the available studies suggests that some micronutrients may indeed be associated with favorable outcomes, while still calling for a cautious interpretation of the results.
In particular, calcium intake after a cancer diagnosis was found to be associated with a reduction in total mortality and cancer-specific mortality, while vitamin D was correlated with an improvement in overall survival. Furthermore, in women with breast cancer, vitamin C, vitamin E, and multivitamin preparations were associated with a lower risk of recurrence and better survival. However, the authors emphasize that most of the evidence comes from observational studies, in which it is difficult to distinguish the effect of the supplement from that of an overall healthier lifestyle. For this reason, although these are promising results, supplementation cannot be recommended indiscriminately to all cancer patients, but should be personalized based on nutritional status, the type of neoplasm, ongoing therapies, and any documented deficiencies (Kanellopoulou et al., 2021) [11].
A similar message also emerges in the prevention of melanoma. A recent review highlighted how various micronutrients participate in the regulation of biological processes involved in carcinogenesis, including immune response, DNA repair, control of oxidative stress, and cell proliferation. Among all, vitamin D is supported by the most solid epidemiological evidence: low serum levels have been associated with a higher risk of developing melanoma, more aggressive tumors, and a worse prognosis. Vitamins A, C, and E, along with selenium, zinc, and copper, also play important antioxidant and immunomodulatory functions. However, the review highlights a fundamental concept: the effect of some micronutrients is strongly dose-dependent. Vitamin C and selenium, for example, can exert favorable effects when correcting a deficiency, but excessive dosages could alter the cellular redox balance, producing different biological effects depending on the clinical and genetic context. It follows that the principle that "more is better" has no scientific foundation in vitamin supplementation. Correcting a deficiency represents a rational intervention, while the indiscriminate use of high doses currently lacks sufficient evidence to be recommended as a melanoma prevention strategy (Pec et al., 2026) [12].
The same cautious approach also characterizes the literature regarding the pediatric age. A systematic review that analyzed the use of supplements in major chronic childhood diseases shows that many products are biologically active, but not always capable of producing relevant clinical benefits. Probiotics, omega-3, vitamins, minerals, and other supplements have been shown to modulate the gut microbiota, reduce some inflammatory markers, and improve specific metabolic parameters in children affected by autism spectrum disorders, cystic fibrosis, type 1 diabetes mellitus, gastrointestinal diseases, and juvenile idiopathic arthritis.
However, these biological modifications have only rarely translated into consistent and reproducible clinical improvements. The most promising evidence concerns probiotics in cystic fibrosis and in some subgroups of children with autism spectrum disorders, while for many other conditions, the available studies are still too small and heterogeneous to allow for definitive recommendations (Inchingolo et al., 2026) [13].
Taken together, this evidence outlines a common principle. Nutritional supplementation should not be considered an alternative to a balanced diet nor a preventive intervention to be applied indiscriminately to the entire population. The most consistent benefits emerge when it is used to correct documented deficiencies, meet increased physiological needs, such as during pregnancy, or support specific clinical conditions where there are solid biological bases and adequate scientific evidence. Conversely, in people with good nutritional status, the indiscriminate intake of vitamins and minerals has not shown consistent benefits. Supplementation should therefore be interpreted as a tool of personalized nutritional medicine, guided by the clinical and laboratory assessment of the individual rather than by the idea that a higher intake of micronutrients is always synonymous with better health.