As knee-jerk reactions go, these are valid. Research does suggest that certain antioxidants may reduce risk for stroke, diabetes, and cancer, while improving memory and preventing skin damage, among a host of other things. But that doesn’t mean more antioxidants are better. Just like other natural, good-for-you substances (water, oxygen, iced tea), too much can be harmful. Here, we bust four of the biggest antioxidant myths wide open so you can stop shelling out your cash for those goji berries (but keep drinking the wine: You’ll need it after realizing blueberries really aren’t superior to apples): Myth: When it comes to antioxidants, more is always better.Truth: This myth was first busted in 1996 with the CARET study, which tested the effects of antioxidant supplements beta-carotene and vitamin E in people at a high risk for lung cancer. Researchers thought antioxidants would reduce cancer risk, but the study had to be halted almost two years early because the supplements caused an increase in tumors. Newer research raises similar concerns: A 2015 study of Chinese people with high risk for liver cancer found that those with the highest intake of catechins—an antioxidant found in green tea—had even greater liver cancer risk. Other papers find no meaningful association between antioxidant intake and disease risk at all. Myth: Our bodies can utilize most of the antioxidants we eat.Truth: Most phytochemicals (healthy plant compounds high in antioxidant activity) are super low in bioavailability, meaning they’re difficult to absorb. And there’s a huge amount of variation in how they are utilized by one person’s body versus another’s. This makes the research—and blanket claims about phytochemical health benefits—very complex. Further complicating the matter: The health benefits of phytochemicals may not be due to their antioxidant activity, but could be related to some other chemical quality yet to be isolated and examined. MORE: The One Food Label That’s Always Worth the Extra Cash Myth: Food products with antioxidants are superior.Truth: Browse any grocery store and you’ll find dozens of products that market antioxidant activity as a selling point. Some even use bar graphs to compare their antioxidant activity against other foods. But the test that manufacturers use to make these claims, the Oxygen Radical Absorbance Capacity (ORAC), is a poor predictor of any health benefits. The ORAC measures a food’s ability to neutralize free radicals in a test tube—and antioxidants behave very differently in our bodies than they do in test tubes. That’s why, in 2010, the USDA completely shut down its public database of ORAC values, citing “evidence that the values indicating antioxidant capacity have no relevance to the effects of specific bioactive compounds…on human health.” Simply stated: You can ignore every single ORAC score or antioxidant claim you see on a package. Myth: All free radicals, which antioxidants fight, are evil and dangerous. Truth: Oxidative stress causes the body to be flooded with free radicals, which research has linked to diseases like cancer, diabetes, Alzheimer’s, and Parkinson’s. But correlation is not causation, friends—and newer research shows that you can actually have too few free radicals. “[Free radicals] aren’t as bad as we once thought they were. They activate beneficial stress responses and may actually extend lifespan,” says Diane McKay, PhD, a scientist at the Antioxidants Research Laboratory at Tufts University. “If you increase antioxidant intake, you’re also reducing free radicals to such a low level that you’re limiting the body’s normal adaptation to stress.” MORE: Is Stevia Safe? The bottom line: Even if we don’t know exactly why they’re beneficial, experts agree we still need to get antioxidants from our diet (especially vitamins C and E, which are essential nutrients). So how to make sense of the madness? It really boils down to the same advice we’re always harping on: Opt for a wide variety of whole foods over supplements and don’t go overboard on any one food, McKay says. Ah, boring old common sense—doesn’t it seem to win out every time?
