Myths vs. Facts

AREDS 3 vs AREDS 2: Should You Switch Your Eye Vitamins?

Written and edited by Todd Driver, MD · Board-Certified Ophthalmologist · Cataract and Refractive Surgeon, Irvine, CA

Published September 29, 2026 · Medically reviewed by Todd Driver, MD

There is a new bottle on the shelf next to the one you have been taking for years. The old one says AREDS 2. The new one says AREDS 3. So: should you switch?

Here is what I tell my patients. AREDS 2 is still the gold standard. And the "3" on the new bottle is not what most people think it is.

The short version

There is no AREDS 3 study yet. AREDS 3 is a product name. Bausch + Lomb launched PreserVision AREDS 3 in May 2026, and the company's own launch materials say the clinical data is still in progress. Two retina specialists, Dr. Rishi Singh and Dr. Priya Vakharia, wrote this year that no dedicated trial has tested whether it slows macular degeneration. The National Eye Institute is designing a real AREDS 3 trial, but it has not run.

AREDS 2, by contrast, is the finished trial. The first AREDS study, in 2001, found that one high-dose recipe of vitamins and minerals cut the odds of intermediate macular degeneration progressing to the advanced stage by about a quarter over five years. AREDS 2, in 2013, took out the beta-carotene, which raises lung cancer risk in smokers, put in two plant pigments called lutein and zeaxanthin, and the formula still worked. That is the bottle most of my patients are on.

What is actually different in the AREDS 3 bottle?

Two things changed, and the one I find more interesting is the zinc.

AREDS 2 has 80 milligrams of zinc a day. AREDS 3 has 25. Bausch + Lomb's reason is that the AREDS 2 trial itself compared the high and low zinc doses and the lower one seemed to do about as well. Zinc is usually the ingredient that bothers your stomach. I did hear from my patients that the AREDS 3 has less stomach irritation than AREDS 2, and the lower zinc is the most likely reason.

The other change is the B vitamins. AREDS 3 adds eight of them on top of the AREDS 2 ingredients, and the amounts of each are on the label. They are there because of one study that was not about eyes at all, which is the next section.

Where did the B-vitamin idea come from?

The idea came from a heart study, not an eye study.

Researchers gave about 5,200 women with heart disease, or a high risk of it, three B vitamins, folic acid, B6, and B12, or a placebo, and followed them for about seven years. Their eyes were a side question. But by circumstance, the women taking the B vitamins developed fewer cases of macular degeneration, 55 compared with 82, roughly a third fewer.

That is a real result, and it is why the B vitamins are in the new bottle. It is also a result in women, in a high-cardiac-risk group, from a study that was watching their hearts. It tested three B vitamins, and AREDS 3 contains eight. Nobody has run the AREDS 3 combination against AREDS 2 head to head. The B vitamins may help. We do not know yet.

So, is it worth switching?

Here is how I walk my patients through it.

If you are happy with your AREDS 2, stick with it. It has the evidence, and you are not missing anything proven by staying.

If AREDS 2 bothers your stomach, then maybe consider trying AREDS 3. The lower zinc is a real difference, and it is the one my patients notice.

If the prices are close, going to AREDS 3 is an okay thing to try. You keep the AREDS 2 ingredients, at a lower zinc dose, and you add the B vitamins.

If AREDS 3 is significantly more expensive and price is an issue, just stick with AREDS 2. The extra money is buying the part that has not been tested yet.

Whichever bottle you are on, tell your eye doctor. The zinc dose is a change, and your doctor should know which one you take.

What if you do not have macular degeneration?

This is the other question I get, usually from someone whose mother or father had it: should I start taking these now?

There is no evidence suggesting that you should start these vitamins if you do not have macular degeneration. The AREDS studies were done in people who already had intermediate disease, and Bausch + Lomb's own FAQ says its AREDS 2 and AREDS 3 vitamins "are not intended to prevent AMD."

As long as you do not mind paying for the vitamins, there is very little downside to taking them. I would add two things if you are healthy and planning to take a high-dose vitamin for decades. The 400 IU of vitamin E in these formulas came with a higher rate of prostate cancer in a large trial of healthy men, the SELECT trial. And the 80 milligram zinc dose in AREDS 2 came with more hospital admissions for urinary problems in the AREDS trial itself. If you have macular degeneration, keep taking your vitamins. If you do not, know that they are not free of risk.

If you want to do something for your eyes because of family history, the useful step is a dilated exam, so you know where you actually stand. If a cataract is part of the picture, macular degeneration also changes which lens is safe for you: who should not get a multifocal lens covers that.

So, here's the bottom line.

AREDS 2 is the finished trial. AREDS 3 keeps its ingredients, lowers the zinc, and adds B vitamins that a heart study suggested might help. If AREDS 2 works for you, keep taking it. If your stomach cannot handle it, or the prices are close, AREDS 3 is a reasonable thing to try.

I hope this clears up the two bottles. If you have macular degeneration and you are on AREDS 2, you are on the formula with the evidence. If the new one is easier on your stomach, it is a reasonable switch.

Common questions

Is there an AREDS 3 study?

Not yet. AREDS 3 is a product name from Bausch + Lomb. The National Eye Institute is designing a real AREDS 3 trial, but it has not run, and no completed trial has tested whether the AREDS 3 product slows macular degeneration.

What is the difference between AREDS 2 and AREDS 3?

AREDS 3 keeps the AREDS 2 ingredients (vitamin C, vitamin E, lutein, zeaxanthin, copper), lowers the zinc from 80 milligrams to 25, and adds eight B vitamins. Neither contains beta-carotene.

Should I switch from AREDS 2 to AREDS 3?

If you are happy with AREDS 2, stick with it. If AREDS 2 bothers your stomach, or the prices are close, AREDS 3 is an okay thing to try. Tell your eye doctor which one you take.

Should I take AREDS vitamins to prevent macular degeneration?

There is no evidence that starting them before you have macular degeneration helps, and Bausch + Lomb says its AREDS 2 and AREDS 3 vitamins are not intended to prevent AMD. A dilated eye exam is the useful first step.

Sources: National Eye Institute, AREDS/AREDS2 frequently asked questions · Glance by Eyes On Eyecare, PreserVision AREDS3 launch, May 20, 2026 · Singh and Vakharia, Eyes On Eyecare, The Role of AREDS3 in Slowing the Progression of AMD, 2026 · Retinal Physician, The Evolution of AREDS, May/June 2026 · PreserVision frequently asked questions (Bausch + Lomb) · Archives of Internal Medicine, February 2009, folic acid, B6 and B12 and age-related macular degeneration in women (Harvard Gazette summary) · SELECT trial, vitamin E and prostate cancer, JAMA 2011 · High dose zinc and genitourinary hospital admissions, Journal of Urology 2007

Related reading: can a fruit clear cataracts overnight? · how to slow cataracts down · who should not get a multifocal lens · what happens at your first visit · or call to arrange an eye exam in Irvine.

Read next

Myths vs. FactsCan a Fruit Clear Cataracts Overnight? A Surgeon Fact-Checks the Viral ClaimPreventionThe Only 5 Things That Actually Slow CataractsLens OptionsWho Should NOT Get a Multifocal or EDOF Lens

This article is for educational purposes and is not a substitute for a medical examination or personalized medical advice. Supplement formulas and labels change; check the label of the product you buy and talk with your own eye doctor before starting or switching an eye vitamin.