|Nutritional Trials that are Designed to Fail
What’s wrong with the Research?
December 12, 2008
So I opened up my Internet Browser the other day and was hit between the eyes with the following headline on Google News: "Supplements Do Not Reduce Cancer, Heart Disease Risk".
Now when I see misinformation like this blasted across major news pathways I get a bit riled up and that little voice inside my head starts yelling something to the effect of "that's a bunch of garbage"!
So you may ask whats wrong with these articles on Vitamins and why are they considered to be garbage?
Lets break it down by the numbers:
First the authors of the study wow you with large trial numbers of 10,000 to 35,000 participants over an equally impressive length of 8 to 10 years of research (depending on the trial).
This would be impressive if they had actually tested something but when you get to the nuts and bolts of the trial you find that they designed these studies to fail. They did so by using synthetic dl-alpha-tocopherol at a non-therapeutic dose of 400IU per day and then for Vitamin C they used pure ascorbic acid and again like the Vitamin D study they used a non-therapeutic dose of only 500mg of C per day (therapeutic dosing starts at 2000mg/day).
OK, so whats wrong with this picture? Well, to begin with synthetic Vitamin E has none of the benefits of the members of the E family (the tocotrienols and tocopherols). In fact it has been shown more than once to be an agent in thinning of the blood as well as free radical damage. So if you are to use Vitamin E you want to use a source of mixed tocopherols and tocotrienols at a much higher and clinically beneficial dosage. Ideally this would be in a food form to optimize absorption and bioavailability such as from Standard Process.
This particular manufacturer has a philosphy that when nutrients remain intact and are not split from their natural state of biologically associated synergists both known and unknown their bioactivity is greatly enhanced over what could be achieved with synthetic nutrients. I have seen this to be true in the clinical setting and am therefore a strong advocate of food form nutrients to the extent possible that we can utilize them.
As for the Vitamin C, taking pure ascorbic acid and calling it Vitamin C is akin to eating a TV dinner with beef in it and then saying you know what Fillet Mignon tastes like. True Vitamin C is a blending of ascorbates because that is what you find in nature. Ascorbic Acid is simply the protective outer shell of the Ascorbate complex. It is a very important component but by no means should it be considered a complete Vitamin C.
I came across a great ad for this concept from Standard Process that conveys the point quite well and you can see it here.
When our body utilizes nutrients it does so by seeking out entire nutrient families. In the absence of a complete nutrient family the body often has to "borrow" from any available nutrient stores it may have accumulated along the way. This borrowing becomes a problem when we are eating calorie dense but nutrient deficient food and we have no complimentary nutrients to "loan". This is when you can experience adverse side effects of high dose "single element vitamins" such as diarrhea from high dose ascorbic acid.
Don't let the deception in the world of research dissuade you from taking control of your health. Join the numbers of patients that are seeing their life improve through knowledge of their own blood work and properly applied whole food nutrition. Put simply, Nutrition Works!
Best of health,
[an error occurred while processing this directive] website: www.lasertherapyhealing.com