Re: Re:Pre-Conception Vitamin Amount Recommendations?

[Guest guest]

Vijay,

> In the case of pantothenic acid, remember it is a B vitamin, and Vit B & C

> are water soluble. Excess intake of pantothenic acid or any other Water

> -soluble Vits, are excreted and not stored in the body, perhaps on a daily

> basis. So you may have got 10000% one day, and the body took 100%, and the

> next day, you did not take any, and the body is starving for it.

The fact that they can be excreted does not mean they can't be

harmful. The body is good at regulating levels, but it doesn't

maintain a constant level regardless of intake by any means.

Supplementing wtih one B vitamin and not the others could cause

relative deficencies, or could induce a deficiency in some other

cofactor, and if they are not the coenzyme form, could perhaps reduce

biological activity by diluting the coenzyme form if you are

supplementing beyond the capacity to activate the vitamin.

> But, the Fat Solubles are different story(Vit A,D,E). Too much can be

> dangerous. That is why there is a controversy of having too much Vit D from

> CLO etc. It probably will be severe damage or fatal if someone megadosed on

> Fat vitamins.

The chances of dying from fat-solubles in CLO at any dose anyone would

actually take is zero and the chances of dying from them if one was to

deliberately try to commit suicide with CLO would probably be very

slim if not zero also. There are one or a few isolated cases of dying

from polar bear liver, which is attributed to the unthinkably massive

dose of vitamin A but could perhaps be other things as has been

suggested -- in any case one could not get that from cod liver oil.

Animal experiments show that massive doses of A are not toxic if

massive doses of D are supplied and vice versa.

The idea that water-soluble vitamins are not toxic but fat-soluble

vitamins are is a huge oversimplification.

Chris

[Guest guest]

On 2/10/08, penciloid <hoppythetoad@...> wrote:

> made a good point about 4 grams of vitamin C being way more than

> I could ever get from food. I struggle with figuring out what the

> truth is, since there seem to be two perspectives: 1. Eat well and you

> won't need vitamins. 2. The RDAs are too low and with poor soil

> quality, etc, you'll never get enough from food only.

Many people criticize the RDA for being based on what is necessary to

prevent overt deficiency. This is not true. The goal of the DRIs for

the last 8 years has been to develop rigorous evidence about what is

needed to support optimal health and prevent chronic disease. If the

RDA for vitamin C was based on what is necessary to prevent scurvy,

for example, it would be 10 mg/day rather than 90 mg/day for men and

75 mg/day for women. The current RDA is not really based on health

outcomes, but rather on maximizing blood neutrophil concentrations and

minimizing urinary excretion.

The RDA for vitamin C is similar to what Australian Aborigenes got on

their native diet, much lower than what Fuhrman's near-vegan diet is,

and probably considerably higher than what some of Price's primitive

groups got.

Although soil quality definitely makes a difference in nutrition,

there is virtually no hard evidence quantifying this difference for

specific nutrients. Too often, this is put forth as a vague

generality to advocate mega-dosing with supplements. But the amount

that you would probably have gotten 100 years ago when soils were less

depleted was probably higher than what you'd get today, yet much

closer to the RDAs than to the megadoses.

Obviously this can be different for certain vitamins. For vitamins A

and D, you could get way more simply by changing your food choices.

But for vitamins that are widely distributed like C, this is much less

true.

You could probably make up for poor soil quality to a degree by

changing food choices. For example, copper might be a lot lower, but

if you eat a little more liver, you'll get plenty. C might be lower,

but the typical primitive diet would probably give under 100 mg,

whereas Fuhrman has shown you can get up to 500 mg from food by

changing your food choices.

Chris

[Guest guest]

On 2/10/08, Masterjohn <chrismasterjohn@...> wrote:

> Although soil quality definitely makes a difference in nutrition,

> there is virtually no hard evidence quantifying this difference for

> specific nutrients. Too often, this is put forth as a vague

> generality to advocate mega-dosing with supplements. But the amount

> that you would probably have gotten 100 years ago when soils were less

> depleted was probably higher than what you'd get today, yet much

> closer to the RDAs than to the megadoses.

I should point out that a lot of genetic defects can increase needs

for vitamins or minerals, and genetic defects are probably more common

today due to poor nutritional choices.

Chris