Outcome of Vit.C/ascorbic acid studies

[Guest guest]

This I believe is simply an attack on Vitamin C.

 

It is like the Studies that refute the work done by Pauling. Pauling would

use 500 mg in a study so the study to prove Pauling wrong would use 100 mg.

 

Lorenzo

 

 

 

Re: Outcome of Vit.C/ascorbic acid

studies

 

>

I do wish you would back up those statements with links to

real research. I have been wrong in the past, and probably will be

wrong in the future, but without substantive evidence I sure am not

going to throw out I believe to be real about ascorbic acid.

 

Alobar

 

 

-

" wingsofsong " <wingsofsong

 

Tuesday, September 30, 2003 6:35 PM

Outcome of Vit.C/ascorbic acid

studies

 

 

>> Outcome of Vit.C/ascorbic acid studies-

>

> I read an article the other day that really explained the

negative

> controversy over vit. C & ascorbic acid in the Pure Planet

> newsletter. I couldn't find the article on their site at

>

> www.pureplanet.com

> and thought I'd share some of it with you.

>

> ......Thousands of bottles of ascorbic acid are purchased everyday

> under the misguided assumption that ascorbic acid is the same as

> Vitamin C. In reality, ascorbic acid is an isolated nutrient that

> is part of vitamin C but it is not the whole Vitamin C.

>

> So you are getting cheated if you buy ascorbic acid thinking it

> is Vitamin C.

>

> But that might be the least of the consequences you

> may suffer. Studies over the last several years have demonstrated

> that people who take high doses of ascorbic acid actually put

> themselves at risk for a number of health challenges.

>

> One study demonstrates that doses of 500 mg a day or more of

> ascorbic acid increases the incidence of arterial plaque buildup.

> another study indicates that gallstones are more likely to appear

in

> those taking large doses of ascorbic acid.

>

> Are these backlash studies against the health food industry? No,

> they are legitimate studies.

>

> Wait a minute, you may be thinking. What about all the studies

> done by Linus Pauling and a multitude of other reputable

researchers

> who have proven the health promoting benefits of Vitamin C and

> ascorbic acid?

>

> Let us put a little perspective on the subject.

>

> Back in the 1930's ascorbic acid was isolated out of little red

> peppers.

>

>

> The man who first performed this experiment was Dr. Albert

> Szent-Gyorgyi who won a Nobel Prize for this work. What he also

> found, which has mostly been ignored until recently, was that

> ascorbic acid was far more biologically available and active, while

> it was still in the red pepper.

>

>

> Scientists of the era of " Better Living Through Chemistry and

> Science " (which we have been experiencing for the last fifty years)

> decided to take the discoveries about Vitamin C and " improve " on

> Mother Nature.

>

>

> First they found that extracting ascorbic acid from foods, such as

> red peppers is expensive.

>

>

> Ascorbic acid can be created in the laboratory much less

> expensively (and of course much more profitably).

>

>

>

> Scientists discovered that they could take corn syrup, mix it with

> hydrochloric acid, and voila: ascorbic acid!

>

>

>

> (By the way, the corn is more likely than ever to be genetically

> modified.)

>

>

>

> Later, scientists discovered what Dr. Szent-Gyorgyi had

> discovered about ascorbic acid, it is not as effective when

detached

> from the whole food matrix!

>

>

> So they went about trying to determine what other factors could be

> in the whole food that would make the ascorbic acid work better.

>

> First they discovered the importance of bioflavoinoids, so they

> figured out how to produce these synthetically in the laboratory,

to

> be added to the ascorbic acid.

>

>

> Then they found that fat-soluble ascorbic acid was superior,

because

> it went directly to the liver vs. water-soluble ascorbic acid.

>

>

> In fact if you put 100 mg of ascorbic acid in the body, within a

> few hours at least 90% of it will be excreted in the urine.

>

>

> If you put 10 times more into the body to account for 90% loss it

> may cause diarrhea.

>

>

> Scientists experimented with various things and concluded

> that if the ascorbic acid molecule was attached to a metabolite,

the

> ascorbic acid would stay in the body longer (they didn't seem to

> care why it stayed in the body longer, but it stayed in the body

> longer and hopefully that was a good thing).

>

> Today there is a broad verity of ascorbic acid products with

> various things attached to them.

>

> With all this research, time, thought and dollars being put into

> creating a synthetic Vitamin C, the fact remains that no scientist

> can even come close to the potentials of what Mother Nature

> created.

>

> One important factor that science has been unable to

> duplicate is the special kind of energy that holds living food

> together.

>

> Whether this energy is found in the enzymes or in the

> energy patterns of whole food structure, it is unlikely that

science

> will ever be able to reproduce it in a laboratory.

>

> This may be on of several reasons why studies have shown that the

> body will absorb close to 100% of the Vitamin C that is consumed as

> part of whole food, whereas barely 10% of the " stripped down "

> ascorbic acid is absorbed.

>

>

> Then the article goes on--

>

> Ascorbic acid is an acid and acids stress the body

> setting the stage for all kinds of malfunctions and disease.

>

> I thought this article explained in simple terms why we

> hear such conflict in the Vitamin C studies!

> Thought you may have been as interested as I was.

>

> Hugs, Katherine

>