Harold Mac
Mon, Feb-24-03, 05:59
The piece was titled "Vitamin: You Can Get Too Much of a Good
Thing." by Colette Bouchez.
It presents the standard vitamin/mineral phobic line in which
ultra-orthodox nutritionist are inculcated in. It is this line
of doctrine that makes such "experts" a laughing stock among
many. Now to the specifics of the article and it's failing.
First of all, Ms Bouchez quotes a certain Jyni Holland in the
twelfth paragraph as saying that vitamin B-3 is used to and I
quote, "Even though B3 is often used to treat high blood
pressure if you have a preexisting condition.............".
This is false perhaps not completely false but false. High
B-3/niacin is used to treat high cholesterol levels and only
indirectly to PREVENT hypertension. I find it worrying that Ms
Bouchez doesn't challenge this misstatement and this suggests
perhaps a rather shallow background in science IMHO. And the
so-called "expert" is at best guilt of a clumsy statement and
worse perhaps a shallow understanding of the science.
Second, Ms Bouchez doesn't insist on numbers, when "her"
so-called experts say people are at risk of too much, she
doesn't ask how much. Granted maybe she did in the interview
but perhaps her editor is one those know-nothing that avoids
numbers and specifics in science reporting because they don't
seem to want anyone else to know anything either:-). And
granted what the reporter is covering is in part a collection
of old wives/farts tales that masquerade as science IMHO.. The
author doesn't pin the clinical nutritionist Laurie Tansman to
what an excess intake of vitamin D is. The recent evidence
shows that even 4000 IU isn't too much and can go along way in
helping to prevent osteoporosis. Even using the very
conservative Upper Limit of 2000 IU (dangerously low IMHO ) as
the standard, very few people get more than 1200 IU's is if
one assumes that they drink a quart of milk, take
multi-vitamin with D and calcium supplement with D. Understand
that a good biochemist knows that a person getting a good dose
of sun can produce huge levels of vitamin D that dwarf all
these numbers including the recently scientifically checked
level of 4000 IU (no not 400, I mean what I say). Moreover,
poor vitamin D status can be found in large numbers persons
during the winter and this includes those taking a vitamin
supplements with vitamin D at doses like what Tansman would
FEEL comfortable with.. I doubt Tansman would feel comfortable
with more than 400 IU or perhaps on the outside 600 IU's.
One has got to love half truths. Holland says " Vitamin D is
one of the most toxic supplements there is,....." Come on,
Holland that is rhetoric, 400 or 1000 IUs are low safe doses,
true these are microgram doses but so what, considering that
capsules are by definition measured doses. Of course, a
milligram dose would be too much but that isn't how most
consumers uses vitamin D. Recall that low vitamin D status
results in high continuous levels of PTH which robs the bone
in order to maintain blood calcium levels. High continuous
levels of PTH result in accelerated with bone thinning and
hardening of the arteries. These are extremely common
conditions that result from in part from the shortage of
vitamin D which results in part from the so-called experts
fears/cautions/imposed limits on others IMHO.
Third, the concern about vitamin E "thinning blood" is
overblown especially IF one is willing to take a vitamin K
supplement or even eat cooked green leafy vegetables on a
daily basis or even three times a week, I 'd think. Anyway,
huge numbers in the population have taken 1000 to 1200 IUs per
day for decades without apparent problems. I have taken 1200
IU for over thirty five years, in addition to my diet that
contains 30 to 60 IUs. And for the last several years, I've
added a gamma supplement. Most dieticians struggle to get 15
IU in their suggested diets, shows what they don't know.
Fourth, except for those taking so-called blood thinners, most
adults should be taking milligram level doses of vitamin K in
order to slow bone thinning and hardening of the arteries IMHO
Recall that it a good diet can easily contain a half milligram
of phylloquinone (Vitamin K1) but the nutritionist/dietician
likely will be ill equipped to suggest such a diet.
I do agree that preformed vitamin A should be used quite
sparingly; yet, for some preformed vitamin A is needed as they
have an impaired ability to convert carotene to vitamin A such
as in diabetes. Indeed, these days many supplements contain
all trans beta-carotene in order to prevent vitamin A
over-doses since the body converts carotene on something of a
as need basis to A. Frankly, one is better off eating carrots
as they contain both trans and cis isomers of beta-carotene
plus alpha carotene.
It is the ill informed consumer that takes a multi vitamin
mineral containing iron. Many supplement users know that!
These "experts" act like this unknown to we "dabbling"
consumers. I'd trust my dabbling to the stale opinions of
these so-called experts.
Ironically, on the basis of this article, it might be such an
iron containing supplement that the know-nothing consumer
would choose. Moreover most multi's don't contain vitamin K at
any level much less a reasonable one.
The Dabbler with a degree.----------------Harold
.
-----------== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Uncensored Usenet News
==----------
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----= Over 100,000 Newsgroups - Unlimited Fast Downloads - 19
Servers =-----
Thing." by Colette Bouchez.
It presents the standard vitamin/mineral phobic line in which
ultra-orthodox nutritionist are inculcated in. It is this line
of doctrine that makes such "experts" a laughing stock among
many. Now to the specifics of the article and it's failing.
First of all, Ms Bouchez quotes a certain Jyni Holland in the
twelfth paragraph as saying that vitamin B-3 is used to and I
quote, "Even though B3 is often used to treat high blood
pressure if you have a preexisting condition.............".
This is false perhaps not completely false but false. High
B-3/niacin is used to treat high cholesterol levels and only
indirectly to PREVENT hypertension. I find it worrying that Ms
Bouchez doesn't challenge this misstatement and this suggests
perhaps a rather shallow background in science IMHO. And the
so-called "expert" is at best guilt of a clumsy statement and
worse perhaps a shallow understanding of the science.
Second, Ms Bouchez doesn't insist on numbers, when "her"
so-called experts say people are at risk of too much, she
doesn't ask how much. Granted maybe she did in the interview
but perhaps her editor is one those know-nothing that avoids
numbers and specifics in science reporting because they don't
seem to want anyone else to know anything either:-). And
granted what the reporter is covering is in part a collection
of old wives/farts tales that masquerade as science IMHO.. The
author doesn't pin the clinical nutritionist Laurie Tansman to
what an excess intake of vitamin D is. The recent evidence
shows that even 4000 IU isn't too much and can go along way in
helping to prevent osteoporosis. Even using the very
conservative Upper Limit of 2000 IU (dangerously low IMHO ) as
the standard, very few people get more than 1200 IU's is if
one assumes that they drink a quart of milk, take
multi-vitamin with D and calcium supplement with D. Understand
that a good biochemist knows that a person getting a good dose
of sun can produce huge levels of vitamin D that dwarf all
these numbers including the recently scientifically checked
level of 4000 IU (no not 400, I mean what I say). Moreover,
poor vitamin D status can be found in large numbers persons
during the winter and this includes those taking a vitamin
supplements with vitamin D at doses like what Tansman would
FEEL comfortable with.. I doubt Tansman would feel comfortable
with more than 400 IU or perhaps on the outside 600 IU's.
One has got to love half truths. Holland says " Vitamin D is
one of the most toxic supplements there is,....." Come on,
Holland that is rhetoric, 400 or 1000 IUs are low safe doses,
true these are microgram doses but so what, considering that
capsules are by definition measured doses. Of course, a
milligram dose would be too much but that isn't how most
consumers uses vitamin D. Recall that low vitamin D status
results in high continuous levels of PTH which robs the bone
in order to maintain blood calcium levels. High continuous
levels of PTH result in accelerated with bone thinning and
hardening of the arteries. These are extremely common
conditions that result from in part from the shortage of
vitamin D which results in part from the so-called experts
fears/cautions/imposed limits on others IMHO.
Third, the concern about vitamin E "thinning blood" is
overblown especially IF one is willing to take a vitamin K
supplement or even eat cooked green leafy vegetables on a
daily basis or even three times a week, I 'd think. Anyway,
huge numbers in the population have taken 1000 to 1200 IUs per
day for decades without apparent problems. I have taken 1200
IU for over thirty five years, in addition to my diet that
contains 30 to 60 IUs. And for the last several years, I've
added a gamma supplement. Most dieticians struggle to get 15
IU in their suggested diets, shows what they don't know.
Fourth, except for those taking so-called blood thinners, most
adults should be taking milligram level doses of vitamin K in
order to slow bone thinning and hardening of the arteries IMHO
Recall that it a good diet can easily contain a half milligram
of phylloquinone (Vitamin K1) but the nutritionist/dietician
likely will be ill equipped to suggest such a diet.
I do agree that preformed vitamin A should be used quite
sparingly; yet, for some preformed vitamin A is needed as they
have an impaired ability to convert carotene to vitamin A such
as in diabetes. Indeed, these days many supplements contain
all trans beta-carotene in order to prevent vitamin A
over-doses since the body converts carotene on something of a
as need basis to A. Frankly, one is better off eating carrots
as they contain both trans and cis isomers of beta-carotene
plus alpha carotene.
It is the ill informed consumer that takes a multi vitamin
mineral containing iron. Many supplement users know that!
These "experts" act like this unknown to we "dabbling"
consumers. I'd trust my dabbling to the stale opinions of
these so-called experts.
Ironically, on the basis of this article, it might be such an
iron containing supplement that the know-nothing consumer
would choose. Moreover most multi's don't contain vitamin K at
any level much less a reasonable one.
The Dabbler with a degree.----------------Harold
.
-----------== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Uncensored Usenet News
==----------
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----= Over 100,000 Newsgroups - Unlimited Fast Downloads - 19
Servers =-----