AREDS2 formula

View my plan →

The short answer

Reduces progression risk in selected intermediate or advanced age-related macular degeneration; it is not for everyone.

Evidence and scope: Established for an indicated use
This status does not grade the ingredient for every goal, outcome, or person.
Important limitation: The benefit is tied to the stated indication, dose, and population; it is not evidence of broader disease prevention or longer life.
Before deciding: Key concern: High zinc/vitamin E interactions matter; smokers should avoid old beta-carotene AREDS formulas.

01 / PRACTICAL GUIDE

Dose, absorption, and combinations

These are indication-specific reference or studied ranges—not a personalized prescription. Start with the objective, then check the form, label, medicines, and health conditions.

Reference range by objective

Eye-health indicationVitamin C 500 mg, vitamin E 400 IU, zinc 80 mg, copper 2 mg, lutein 10 mg, zeaxanthin 2 mg daily

Reference or studied range—not a personalized prescription. The product label or a clinician may specify a different dose.

Dose source ↗

More is not automatically better. A clinician or product label may specify a different amount.

Absorption / solubilityFat-soluble / lipid-based

Fat-soluble or lipid-based. Absorption generally improves with a meal containing fat.

How it is commonly taken

Take in divided doses with meals under eye-clinician guidance.

Do not combine casually

High zinc/vitamin E interactions matter; smokers should avoid old beta-carotene AREDS formulas.

Dose and use source ↗

Dose and use links lead to primary or official source material. Search links are discovery tools, not proof that every returned paper applies.

02 / EVIDENCE

What the research says

We keep supportive, mixed, negative, safety, and contextual findings together. The headline never replaces the underlying papers.

1research papers in this ledger

1unique primary studies represented

4,203unique participants represented

These are audited counts for this JIVANA collection, not search-result totals. Participants are counted once when multiple papers use the same cohort; review papers are not added again to participant totals.

Open the research timelineResearch timeline

Entries are ordered by publication year. A study period appears only when the source reports it.

2013

Mixed or qualifiedPMID 23644932 · NCT00345176

AREDS2 nutrient formulation and progression to advanced macular degeneration

Neither lutein plus zeaxanthin nor DHA/EPA significantly improved the prespecified primary comparison when added to AREDS. More lung cancers occurred with beta-carotene, mostly in former smokers, supporting beta-carotene-free substitution; the evidence applies to people already at high progression risk, not general prevention.

Published: 2013Duration: Median 5 yearsn=4,203 participants

Study design and methods

Design: Multicenter, randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled 2×2 factorial phase 3 trial
Population: 4,203 adults aged 50–85 years with bilateral large drusen or advanced age-related macular degeneration in one eye
Intervention: Lutein 10 mg plus zeaxanthin 2 mg, DHA/EPA, both, or placebo layered onto the original or modified AREDS formulation
Outcome: Progression to advanced age-related macular degeneration and safety

Open research record ↗

Unscreened discovery appendix—not evidence42 candidate publicationsSearch run: Aug 21, 2026

Complete for the displayed PubMed query at the search timestamp—not for all databases or every possible synonym. Candidates can be irrelevant, duplicate the same study, or report negative findings. They are never summed as evidence or participants until screened.

03 / SOURCES

Start with the source material

Official evidence overviewPubMed bounded human-evidence search Live PubMed discovery searchNational Library of Medicine

The live search is for discovery only. Search-result counts change and are not included in the audited totals above.

Recent PubMed discovery recordsDirect links to the first 12 records returned by the reproducible search. These are discovery candidates—not reviewed summaries or a count of supportive findings.

04 / EXPERT CONTEXT

Expert context—not evidence

Expert positions are dated context—not scientific evidence. They never raise the evidence status or become consensus by repetition.

No direct, source-verified endorsement is currently recorded. Research authorship or discussion alone is not treated as endorsement.