15 Supplements Worth Skipping (And the Ones That Hold Up)

15 supplements worth skipping, and the handful that actually hold up

Most supplement content falls into two camps: hype everything, or dismiss everything. Neither is honest. Some categories genuinely don't clear the evidence bar for most healthy adults, and a few clear it convincingly. Here's the honest split, with the specific research behind the ones worth naming individually.

What the research actually shows

Start with the one nearly everyone takes: the daily multivitamin. A 2025 rapid review in Ageing Research Reviews, pooling 19 meta-analyses covering over 5.5 million participants, found no benefit from multivitamin and mineral supplementation for all-cause mortality, COVID-19 outcomes, or most cognitive domains, and even flagged a higher risk of age-related macular degeneration progression in one analysis (Wang et al., 2025). It did find modest cognitive and blood-pressure benefits in specific subgroups, older or at-risk adults, but "insurance policy for a healthy adult" isn't what the evidence supports.

Biotin for hair and nails is next. A study of women specifically complaining of hair loss found only 38% actually had measurable biotin deficiency, and the author was direct that indiscriminate biotin supplementation for hair loss should be rejected unless deficiency is actually confirmed through testing (Trüeb, 2016). If your biotin levels are normal, which is most people's case, there's no mechanism for extra biotin to do anything for your hair.

BCAAs (branched-chain amino acids) sold as a standalone muscle-building supplement are a near-miss dressed up as a win. A 2025 meta-analysis of 12 randomised trials in older adults with sarcopenia found BCAA-rich supplements combined with resistance training improved only one narrow measure, skeletal muscle index, with no significant improvement in grip strength, chair-stand performance, walking speed, or total lean mass (Li et al., 2025). If you're already eating adequate protein, isolated BCAAs aren't adding meaningfully more than the amino acids already in your food.

The one that genuinely surprises people: high-dose vitamin C and E, taken specifically around workouts as antioxidant "recovery" support, can backfire. A randomised trial in the Journal of Physiology found that vitamin C and E supplementation blunted the cellular signalling response to a strength-training session and dampened certain strength gains over 10 weeks, without providing any measurable benefit to muscle growth (Paulsen et al., 2014). The mechanism: the muscle-building process partly relies on the same oxidative stress the antioxidants are neutralising. More antioxidants isn't automatically protective here, it can work against the adaptation you're training for.

What this means for you

Beyond those four, worth naming plainly without a dedicated study each, because the general nutrition-science consensus on them is well established: detox teas and fat-burner blends (no meaningful independent fat-loss evidence beyond their caffeine content), glutamine for healthy non-clinical populations (the body produces enough on its own), apple cider vinegar capsules (minimal, inconsistent metabolic effect at supplement doses), DIM and other "hormone-balancing" blends marketed without a diagnosed need, mega-dose vitamin C beyond what a normal diet or a basic supplement provides, testosterone-boosting blends like tribulus terrestris (repeatedly fails to raise testosterone in trials), and most "greens powder" products marketed as a multivitamin replacement (real nutrients, but not equivalent to whole food, and priced accordingly). That's a reasonable shortlist most people can skip without losing anything measurable.

The handful that do hold up, and that I've written full breakdowns on separately: creatine monohydrate has the deepest, most consistent evidence base of any supplement studied, vitamin D3 is genuinely high-value specifically for correcting a confirmed deficiency, and omega-3 EPA/DHA has robust evidence across cardiovascular and inflammatory markers. Magnesium is the honest near-miss that still earns a place for most people eating a typical modern diet.

The biotype angle

Ectomorphs chasing muscle gain are the group most likely to waste money on BCAAs specifically, since they're usually the ones already prioritising protein intake where isolated BCAAs add the least. Endomorphs are the most common target for detox teas and fat-burner marketing, and the group with the least to gain from them relative to just addressing diet quality and activity directly. Mesomorphs in heavy training blocks are the group where the antioxidant-timing nuance actually matters most in practice, since they're the ones most likely to be taking vitamin C and E specifically to aid recovery around hard sessions.

The honest verdict

None of this is "supplements don't work," that's its own kind of oversimplification. It's that the evidence bar varies enormously by category, and a handful of well-studied basics do more than most of what's marketed harder. The multivitamin and biotin sit in this list because the mechanism for benefit requires a deficiency most people don't have. BCAAs and antioxidant timing sit here because the research directly tested them and found either a ceiling or a real downside. Spend where the trial data is strongest, not where the marketing budget is biggest.

For the full breakdown of what does hold up: → If You Only Take 3 Supplements, Make Them These

Want a supplement approach built around your actual biotype and training load, not a shelf full of guesses?
→ milenium.com.au/pages/biofit-training

References:
1. Wang W, Wazny VK, Mahadzir MDA, Maier AB. Multivitamin and mineral use: A rapid review of meta-analyses on health outcomes. Ageing Res Rev. 2025. DOI: 10.1016/j.arr.2025.102965. PMID: 41308839.
2. Trüeb RM. Serum Biotin Levels in Women Complaining of Hair Loss. Int J Trichol. 2016. DOI: 10.4103/0974-7753.188040. PMID: 27601860.
3. Li H, Zhang R, Ma Y, He J, Li G, Sun J, Li D. Effects of branched-chain amino acid-rich nutritional supplements combined with resistance training on body composition and body function in older patients with sarcopenia. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2025. DOI: 10.1016/j.archger.2025.106063. PMID: 41202431.
4. Paulsen G, Hamarsland H, Cumming KT, et al. Vitamin C and E supplementation alters protein signalling after a strength training session, but not muscle growth during 10 weeks of training. J Physiol. 2014. DOI: 10.1113/jphysiol.2014.279950. PMID: 25384788.