Petition to FDA on Vitamin C Labeling

[Guest guest]

I find that my personal experience differs greatly from the

statements in the post below. Whether my system is very atypical,

or whether the statements below refer to people who are very

atypical, I do not know. I sure can't speak for anyone besides

myself.

 

I have been taking vitamin C daily for about 25-30 years now.

Sometimes in the form of mineral ascorbates (mainly Sodium Ascorbate)

and at other times in the form of ascorbic acid. Up until the

beginning of this year, I used the 2 forms more or less

interchangeably. For the past 8-9 months I have uses ascorbic acid

exclusively. I have taken at least 12 grams of vitamin C daily now

for over a quarter of a century. Sometimes as much as 35 grams a

day. Most of this has been in the form of ascorbic acid, not a

mineral salt.

 

I have *never* noticed any urinary tract discomfort.

 

I periodically check the pH of my urine & have never detected a pH as

low as the article below indicates. Yesterday, I ingested

approximately 28 grams of ascorbic acid. I just checked my urine pH

and it measures approximately 5.8-6.0. My eyes have never been

able to use test strips or color titrations in chem lab with a great

deal of precision, so I my reading could be off by another .2 pH

units one way or the other -- but certainly it does not seem to me to

be anywhere near 4.0. And I use over 25 grams of ascorbic acid

daily these days.

 

I fail to believe that the cells in my body are starving for sodium.

Potassium or Magnesium, probably would not harm me -- but certainly

not Sodium. And from what I have read, there are damn few people in

this culture with Sodium deficiencies. Generalizing here -- most

people eat far more Sodium in relationship to Potassium than is good

for them. So adding more Sodium just does not seem to be a good

idea to me.

 

Oranges. lemons, and other natural sources of vitamin C contain

ascorbic acid, not mineral salts. As fruits are the way in which

most people not taking supplements ingest vitamin C, I fail to see

the reasoning behind wanting to say that ascorbic acid is not vitamin

C.

 

Alobar

 

 

 

 

-

" wingsofsong " <wingsofsong

 

Sunday, August 03, 2003 2:49 PM

Petition to FDA on Vitamin C

Labeling

 

 

 

 

Petition to FDA on Vitamin C Labeling

 

 

AN ALACER PROPOSAL TO THE FDA

REGARDING CORRECT NAMING OF VITAMIN C

 

A PETITION

 

 

In listing of the ingredients on our products we have been complying

with your stipulation that ascorbic acid be listed as Vitamin C.

 

However, we are not inclined to continue this practice, because we

know full well that it is only an intermediate of Vitamin C.

 

Indeed, it is in fact, a highly acidic material that can react with

almost anything around, that is present in many citrus products,

such as

oranges and lemons.

 

Actually, you are following world practice, which involves

mislabeling of this chemical.

 

Investigation shows that animals who produce Vitamin C in their own

livers utilize a fifth stage wherein

it is reacted with minerals present in the liver to form the neutral

mineral ascorbates.

 

These mineral ascorbates can then act as wonderful transporters of

ascorbate into the cells, which are often in grave need of minerals,

as

well as ascorbate.

 

Were this reaction not to occur, the 2-3 pH acidity of ascorbic acid

would have a highly deleterious action on the arteries and linings

of

the animal and would not be picked up so readily by body cells as

the

mineral ascorbates.

 

We maintain that any product which is labeled a vitamin should be

either naturally occurring in the animal body or of such a nature as

to be readily acceptable to body arteries and cells.

 

It is true that humans can ingest ascorbic acid in its present

state.

However, the ability of the body to handle it in its acid

form is quite limited and varies from person to person. As Irwin

Stone, world pioneer on Vitamin C, told the writer some 30 years

ago, " If one takes much ascorbic acid, it makes the whole urinary

tract acid, since it brings the urine down from 7 to a pH of about

4. "

 

While this may discourage the growth of bacteria in the tract,

it also tends to be quite painful to the subject and, also, steps-up

urination with subsequent loss of minerals.

 

Thus, the view that one can obtain the truly healthful level of

Vitamin C with ascorbic acid is very much in error. This is

primarily because Vitamin C is required by the human body for full

health at levels enormously above the level at which a person may

tolerate the highly acidic intermediate.

 

Consequently, the whole world's nutritional approach in regard to

the

ascorbates is badly in error. They have not been investigating the

true

Vitamin C, the neutral mineral ascorbates, but only an

intermediate ascorbic acid, which is not totally effective in the

body and causes, as the level advances, serious diarrhea,

flatulence,

heartburn and nausea in many. (Reference Cancer and Vitamin C, by

Ewin

Cameron and Linus Pauling)

 

The ridiculous USRDA of 60 mg. daily of ascorbic acid for an adult

is on

its way out. But researchers who recommend higher levels are

still on the wrong track.

They are using the highly acidic ascorbic acid which contains no

minerals whatsoever that can neutralize the

product and facilitate its transport into the cells.

 

It is true that two mineral ascorbates are available to the public,

the first being sodium ascorbate, which is used widely in

intravenous

introduction of ascorbate.

 

There, researchers such as Dr. Frank Klenner, have utilized in I.V.

introduction, as much as 200 grams daily in order to kill off many

vicious diseases such as: Insidious

Virus; Encephalitis; Virus Pneumonia; Poliomyelitis; Hepatitis;

Herpes Simplex and Zoster; Chicken Pox; Measles; Mumps;

Mononucleosis; Pancreatitis; Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever;

Trichinosis; Tetanus (Lock Jaw); Urethritis and Cystitis;

Alcoholism;

Arthritis; Cancer; Leukemia; and others.

 

Truly remarkable results have been reached with high doses in this

manner.

 

However, we submit that the sodium form is not readily

accepted by the cells of the body.

 

This is because the average person's intake of sodium is from 10-38

times the requirement of ½ gram daily (as sodium chloride).

 

Thus, the sodium potassium pump of the cell becomes overwhelmed as

it

seeks to maintain a ratio of 20

parts of potassium to 1 part of sodium.

 

This means that a logical, more efficient approach is not being

followed

in getting ascorbate

into the cells.

 

Calcium ascorbate, usually offered at a very high price, has also

been used for various purposes -- sometimes for I.V. However, it is

only one of the major mineral ascorbates and is not fully acceptable

into the cells without the other minerals.

 

We find that the best way to get into the cells is to offer the

range of

mineral ascorbates, approximating the desirable level of the

minerals

the cells want for good cellular health.

 

Thus, we believe a mineral ascorbate should be very high in

potassium

and be fed with

all the other basic minerals as mineral ascorbates.

 

Incidentally, the idea that most people tend to suffer from a

shortage of sodium appears to be much in error.

 

This error is due

not only to the extraordinarily high level of sodium in our food,

but

also to the fact that there exists in the body, a mechanism inducing

the retention of sodium when sodium levels become too low.

 

However, there is no such mechanism to conserve potassium.

 

So, potassium levels among people tend to be low, whereas it is

quite

the contrary with sodium. High sodium loss does occur under

considerable

physical stress. It must occur because the body is probably loaded

with

sodium and the individual could die without some release of the

product.

 

 

This phenomenon has misled many researchers into believing that high

intake of sodium is a necessity, especially for athletes. We believe

that far superior results regarding many body ailments can be

obtained by the oral or intravenous introduction of the full range

of

the principal mineral ascorbates -- potassium, sodium, calcium,

magnesium, manganese, and zinc.

 

There is a problem, however, of introducing tablets high in

potassium. Because the molecular bond is very weak in this product,

the two products may readily disassociate. Such disassociation of

potassium in the animal body is not a problem, because the potassium

ascorbate produced in the liver goes promptly into circulation and

tends to be quickly picked up as a potassium ascorbate.

 

However, in seeking to get these vital substances into the human

body in

a way in which it might approach the efficiency of animals that

produce

mineral ascorbates in their own bodies, we have found that the

assimilation of an effervescent drink containing the basic

mineral ascorbates is a highly efficient procedure to be followed.

 

The potassium gets quickly to the cells with the other components,

and the mitochondria can do a better job of producing 90% of the

energy of the body, so a step-up of energy can almost immediately be

felt.

 

In a ten-year study of inhabitants of Rancho Bernardo, California,

it

was found that those who managed to get 1,000 mg. of potassium in

their bodies daily suffered no strokes whatsoever in the ten-year

period.

 

So, the incorporation of 200 mg. of potassium in each

effervescent drink mix packet, as the major element, has been fully

justified through some 21 years of experience with the product.

Indeed, the daily ingestion of five packets of the mix will furnish

1,000 mg. of potassium.

 

We believe that much superior results can be obtained with I.V. use

of ascorbate if all of the major ascorbates are used together, as

compared with sodium ascorbate alone. We are constructing a

mechanism that will make this possible.

 

Most animals produce mineral ascorbates at levels of many grams, not

milligrams, as the FDA seems to believe. Even the lowly rat produces

it at 19.4 grams when equated to a 70-kilo (154-lb.) human.

 

So, most

of the research on humans has been, consequently, at levels far

below

the requirement at which this product, which is actually not a

vitamin, because it is required at something like 1,000 times the

level of vitamins, but as Irwin Stone described it is a " liver

metabolite " .

 

Consequently, when the world comes to acknowledge this

major difference between the two substances: the acidic ascorbic

acid vs. the neutral mineral ascorbates, radical benefits will occur

to the converted users of high levels of the mineral ascorbates.

 

 

TO THE FDA

We regard it as the business of the FDA to look at the facts and act

accordingly -- to know what the correct scientific policy is

regarding the utilization of food supplements in the body. These

facts cannot be disregarded.

 

However, we do not expect that you will pay much attention to this

petition, so we are suing your adviser, the National Academy of

Sciences, in Federal Court for correction of these mislabeling

procedures.

 

 

 

ALZHEIMER'S ADDENDUM

As the life expectancy of people rises, more and more are acquiring

Alzheimer's. We feel that there is evidence that this is due to the

steadily declining level of ascorbate in their bodies, especially

the

brain.

 

Indeed, the brain seeks to utilize most of the ascorbate of

the body. It contains, generally, more than 10 times the level of

ascorbate of the blood plasma, and ascorbate is surely a very

essential nutrient for the full function of the brain. The eyes seek

to retain a level of ascorbate at least 25 times the plasma level.

 

A very recent research announcement discloses that an antibody to

amyloid protein has been discovered through research on mice, which,

it is hoped, can prevent Alzheimer's.

 

We believe that shrinkage of the brain that occurs at a level of 15-

40% in men and at least 1% in women is a factor that requires

enormous research.

 

Since mice are very high producers of the mineral

ascorbates, they seem an inappropriate subject for this research.

Guinea pigs, which cannot produce the mineral ascorbates, are a more

logical subject of such investigation.

 

Shrinkage of the brain seems to attend Alzheimer's.

 

Women, we believe, produce modest amounts of ascorbate during much

of

their lives, else they would not be able to produce complete babies,

since ascorbate is essential for the formation, with amino acids, of

the connective tissue that separates every organ of the body, which

is 30% of the body protein.

 

Yet, as many women as men, do ultimately, get Alzheimer's, but these

seem to be women whose

production of ascorbate has radically declined, since they show

brain

shrinkage in excess of the usual 1%, which is an attendant factor in

the ailment, you may be sure.

 

Accordingly, we feel that the outstanding subject for

research in regard to this dreaded disease is the full investigation

of the factor of mineral ascorbates in the human brain.

 

WHY NOT OTHER ANIMALS?

 

Very old animals have been known to get the symptoms of

Alzheimer's. But, scientists are also aware that their production of

mineral ascorbates declines steadily with their aging. So, there

again, we believe we know where the responsibility lies.

 

Of course, this evidence is anecdotal. However: the

writer has been taking mineral ascorbates for some 30 years at

levels

of 8-12 grams daily. A recent MRI of his brain (shown herewith)

showed essentially no brain shrinkage and enlargement of the

hippocampus area, which at least one brain specialist regards as

quite significant.

 

People who have been taking mineral ascorbates and who

are now reaching advanced age can be identified. Accordingly, the

first thing that should be done regarding this research is to seek

out these people, have MRIs performed on their brains, and determine

if they have little or no brain shrinkage. The probability is that

they are not getting Alzheimer's. Of course the usual cognitive test

for Alzheimer's can also be conducted.

 

These procedures can be quickly followed and will help

give clues for further research on this important subject.

 

So, we know that the misnaming of ascorbic acid as

Vitamin C enormously hinders its use, since the quantities required

for fantastic benefit are multi-gram quantities, yet most people

react adversely to much smaller quantities of ascorbic acid.

 

Accordingly, researchers of the world are following the wrong star

and should be brought to their senses. People who take 4-10 grams of

mineral ascorbates can benefit fantastically, curb the incidence of

disease, and extend their lives.

 

I have not had a cold for 30 years, or even a touch of

the flu for 18 years. The remarkable thing is I never even get the

hint of a runny nose that a cold virus might be attacking me. On the

other hand, we are told that when a virus attacks our bodies, it

takes several days for us to summon the antibodies, etc., so forth,

to hold it down. This is not so with me, and I regard it as a

phenomenon worthy of great investigation.

 

I also have 20/20 vision in my 89th year, the bone

density 118% of a 30-year old man, and zero level of plaque in my

arteries, as do 8 out of every 10 of Alacer employees who have been

checked at the UCLA Cardiovascular Center.

 

I challenge any physician in the world to equal these

results.

 

Yours truly,

 

ALACER CORP.

www.alacercorp.com

 

INFURIATING?

60 mg. of Vitamin C per day, for an adult, for many decades the

USRDA, is about 167th of the average animal's production of mineral

ascorbates (10,000 mg.), when equated to a 154 lb. human. Does this

make any sense?