Paul Saladino· MD
if people have persistent migraines they're not gonna get enough they're not gonna get that dose of riboflavin from food and in that case the supplement is probably beneficial
Loading…
The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
if people have persistent migraines they're not gonna get enough they're not gonna get that dose of riboflavin from food and in that case the supplement is probably beneficial
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
if you take a gene like mg far and there's variations in there that don't allow it to to bind riboflavin very well by giving it a lot more riboflavin there's a higher likelihood that that riboflavin actually is going to bind to that enzyme it's gonna be able to perform and do work so when you start thinking of it this way you know why is it that people who have chronic persistent migraines realize that they can take 400 milligrams of riboflavin and they got their life back right if the RDA is 1.2 milligrams
there's good evidence that like that's really big doses of riboflavin for migraines like 300 milligrams