7

votes

Vitamin C supplementation?

Answered on September 12, 2014
Created October 16, 2011 at 2:20 PM

Several people seem to be recommending vitamin C supplements lately and when I looked I was surprised there was not much on the subject here. So...

Do you take vitamin C supplements?

  • If so why?

What dose to you take and recommend?

  • What are your reasons?

When do you take your vitamin C?

  • Such as with or apart from meals?

  • With other supplements?

  • Single or multiple doses?

What type of vitamin C supplement do you take?

  • Pills, powder etc.

Finally:

On what evidence do you base your answers to these questions?

  • Any interesting links are appreciated.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on January 09, 2012
at 01:26 AM

LOL? That must be the stupidest thing I ever heard. Maybe you should actually check what he did to get the peace prize. Tip: he didn't give cookies to kids in Africa.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 19, 2011
at 12:18 PM

@Matt: We also 'thrived' and 'evolved' without antibiotics, vaccines, etc... :) Funny!

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 19, 2011
at 12:17 PM

@Matt: I agree that we don't require large C doses to evolve. We evolve faster without C

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 19, 2011
at 12:16 PM

@Matt: I agree that we don't require large C doses to evolve. We evolve faster without C.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 19, 2011
at 12:15 PM

@Joan: Little or none. AA acificies urine which is good as it prevents urinary infections. SA alkalizes it which is good for specific people and stones. SA is the only one used in IV as AA can not be used directly into the vein since blood is pH neutral. Use whatever you want.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 19, 2011
at 12:13 PM

Obviously, the same reasoning is then true for all other stuff, including vitamin D3. We obviously do not require 5000 IU and 70-100ng as we thrive on 20 and are in every biome on earth. I guess you must be saying that all animals are actually wrong and poisoning themselves by making such big amounts. I don't know about 'thrive' part tho... It doesn't look like most of us are thriving.

32f5749fa6cf7adbeb0b0b031ba82b46

(41757)

on October 19, 2011
at 11:17 AM

We obviously don't require gram doses to survive, thrive and evolve over the years. We wouldn't be 6 billion strong and in every biome on earth otherwise.

7b494127ac67e85e572c5222aaee9b4d

(668)

on October 19, 2011
at 09:16 AM

Is there a difference between Sodium Ascorbate vs. Ascorbic Acid as far as dose/effectiveness, etc?

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117

(25477)

on October 18, 2011
at 02:12 AM

Maj just wonderful! Plus one.

368568eb91f1b58d2f52c9c566d331b5

(182)

on October 17, 2011
at 07:17 PM

Great post. Regarding "people should learn to use search" - Ideally, yes. However, if one initiates a search for "vitamin c" and a hack about said vitamin doesn't appear in the results it's not the user who is at fault.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19235)

on October 17, 2011
at 05:36 PM

@mem: I understand mem, it was intended as a light-hearted remark :)

Cbb1134f8e93067d1271c97bb2e15ef6

on October 17, 2011
at 05:30 PM

@Matthew: The camps I am referring to are the larger, overarching belief systems that then tend to color all responses. My response to Maj was not in any way wedded to this single question. My observation is that in general, as demonstarted on this board, he seems to function and perceive out of a much cleaner headspace than a great many of us.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 05:24 PM

There are few adaptations so far - we recycle ascorbate from dehydroascorbate while no other creatures AFAIK do that and we are only mammals that have GLUT1 transporters in RBC with stomatin switch that shifts preference from glucose to ascorbate transfer - however this is I think popor mans solution - GLUT1 are needed to provide glucose to RBC which do not have mitos and would starve without it, so cells can not use this extensively. Also, our high carb diet interferes with ascorbate utilization which may nullify this adaptation.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 05:20 PM

Clinical studies show its not enough. Our closest relatives which do not produce C require gram doses orally. Some other creatures lost ascorbate synthesis and returned it back [some birds and vampire bats]. Loss was maybe beneficial once as context was different. You can't look at evolution without space-time frame. Sickle cell is bad but protects from malaria. Loss of ascorbate was good then when there was let of it in the plants and other animals, now this benefit is over.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19235)

on October 17, 2011
at 05:12 PM

I was wondering about possible adaptations to the loss of function in endogenous ascorbate synthesis. Have we not had 60? or so million years without our own vitamin C? That is a long time in evolutionary terms. Could this not mean that our physiology is fundamentally different from other mammals that do synthesize their own?

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 05:12 PM

It may very well finish as this: **we are animals, all animals share similar genome, all animals produce gram amounts of ascorbate**. Just this fact is enough for many people out there.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 05:11 PM

@Matt: The fact that it doesn't keep the whole dose orally taken is left of of our vitamin c producing ancestry. All animals produce and excrete large doses of ascorbate wasting precious glucose. Do you think thats wise if ascorbate is not needed ?

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 05:10 PM

@Matt: The fact that it doesn't keep the whole dose orally taken is left of of our vitamin c producing ancestry. All animals produce and excrete large doses of ascorbate wasting precious glucose. Do you think thats wise if ascorbate is not needed ? Also, I can't stress enough that **we are animals** and we *share similar genome**.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 05:08 PM

@Matt: graphs above are not about urinary output but about utilization. Cells grab ascorbate as fast as they can. Urinary output changes with different individuals and with stress. In severe stress even megadoses can produce zero urinary output.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 05:06 PM

So again, we must consider what is right on 3 levels - level of species, level of individual, level of cell. The observations are radically different - on species level for instance, wheat was not only a good thing, but winning thing. On the level of individual wheat may be harmful. On the level of cell, it can be detrimental.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 05:04 PM

@Matt: Actually, its one theory of why humans evolved faster and survived longer then all other creatures. Vitamin C prevents DNK mutations so while beneficial on individual level it imposes limits on species level - faster mutations ,i.e. adaption. Scientist use this fact to speed up evolution in the laboratory. The other thing is that in times of starvation, we don't 'throw' glucose around trying to repair stress damage but have recycling mechanism. However, many pathways of other animals are still in us and ascorbate still have similar role in our body. We did adapted somewhat to loss.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 05:00 PM

@mem: thx for your kind words. That is the sole purpose of my research - to find the truth. I don't belong to any camp. I use for instance Piracetam daily which is Big Pharma product and I think there are other interesting gems in various 'medicine' types around. I don't claim I am not biased, I try not to be as much as I can in this human body.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 04:57 PM

@Matt, all animals produce it at gram doses and excrete it also. Why do you think they have food to throw around ?

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 04:57 PM

Its simple - you would starve otherwise. Glucose is used to make ascorbate. There are other possible scenarios - hyperoxaloemia for instance or cytotoxic effect in very high doses, but I believe in the first one since hyperoxaloemia is theoretical and cytotoxic effect is IV stuff, no animal produces for long such mega mega doses. So its purely resource management, IMO.

32f5749fa6cf7adbeb0b0b031ba82b46

(41757)

on October 17, 2011
at 04:53 PM

Not only do we not produce our own vitamin C, we also eliminate it rather quickly (looking at your pharmacokinetics graphs)... Definitely makes you think about it...

32f5749fa6cf7adbeb0b0b031ba82b46

(41757)

on October 17, 2011
at 04:49 PM

We scientists don't think much of a double Nobel laureate when one of them is a peace prize.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19235)

on October 17, 2011
at 04:45 PM

I think most animals do suck at sports, I have yet to see a goat that is any good tennis :) j/k to lighten the mood.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19235)

on October 17, 2011
at 04:40 PM

Out of curiosity, why do you think the body so tightly controls the absorption of oral doses to limit plasma levels? If it is so beneficial why would evolutionary changes not occurred to absorb and retain the whole dose whatever the amount ingested?

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19235)

on October 17, 2011
at 04:38 PM

Out of curiosity, why do you think the body so tightly controls oral doses? If it is so beneficial why would the body not absorb and retain the whole dose whatever the amount ingested?

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19235)

on October 17, 2011
at 04:34 PM

@mem: I'm pretty sure majkinetor is firmly in the Vitamin C camp :)

Cbb1134f8e93067d1271c97bb2e15ef6

on October 17, 2011
at 04:27 PM

+1 - And i just want to say that I really appreciate your presence on PH. You offer info freely and best of all is that I do not see you as being in any particular "camp." You do not seem to be have a need to prove anything to yourself or anyone else. I really appreciate the info you share and the clean, "unloaded" no-drama, no chest-beating way in which you contribute here. You genuinely seem to be focused on finding and sharing whatever the knowable "truth" is, given any particular question. Thank you.

7d64d3988de1b0e493aacf37843c5596

(2861)

on October 17, 2011
at 04:03 PM

Umm, that link I posted shows that Marie Curie (Physics/Chemistry), John Bardeen (Physics/Physics), and Frederick Sanger (Chemistry/Chemistry) all have two Nobel Prizes. Pauling is unique because one of his was the Nobel Peace Prize.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 04:02 PM

Maybe, but being crazy has nothing to do with being right or wrong. Also, Pauling was first one to recognize how fructose dooms the body, its all in his book.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 03:59 PM

Its not such a big problem, especially if you allow IP6 to enter you body. The good thing is that protein boosts absorption and utilization.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19235)

on October 17, 2011
at 03:42 PM

Maybe winning two Nobel Prizes makes you twice as crazy :)

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 03:39 PM

In this case we have 2 Nobel winners - Pauling & Szent. But again, they might be idiots who got lucky with those prizes....

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 03:38 PM

In this case we have 2 Nobel winners - Pauling & Szent. But again, they might be idiots, who knows...

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 03:37 PM

LPI is no longer something Pauling would approve. Vitamin C foundation fallows original Pauling thought, they are most representative of his ideas IMO.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 03:36 PM

Yet no one gained 2 Nobel prizes so far, so Pauling is unique in that sense. He would also get the 3td one if it wasn't for politics. Even more unique.

32f5749fa6cf7adbeb0b0b031ba82b46

(41757)

on October 17, 2011
at 03:33 PM

There's no doubt that the current recommendation is a tad on the low side, you'll get no argument with me otherwise. However the mega-dosing I see advocated has rather dubious support, in my opinion.

32f5749fa6cf7adbeb0b0b031ba82b46

(41757)

on October 17, 2011
at 03:30 PM

I work down the hall from one of last year's Nobel winners. Definitely can say, it goes to their heads.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19235)

on October 17, 2011
at 02:43 PM

Nobel Syndrome is apparently quite common. Maybe one day I should win a Nobel Prize to see if it happens to me :P

7d64d3988de1b0e493aacf37843c5596

(2861)

on October 17, 2011
at 02:20 PM

Multiple Nobels: http://nobelprizes.com/nobel/double.html

F261881ab8346e796718522de51ddef9

on October 17, 2011
at 02:06 PM

The Linus Pauling institute is now run by a bunch of talking heads-don't pay attention to the man behind the curtain! You make mention that there are more than LP who won the Nobel prize twice. Can you provide those persons name?

7d64d3988de1b0e493aacf37843c5596

(2861)

on October 17, 2011
at 01:47 PM

It is interesting that the Linus Pauling Institute's RDA is 400mg, and the Vitamin C Foundation's RDA is 3000mg.

7d64d3988de1b0e493aacf37843c5596

(2861)

on October 17, 2011
at 01:28 PM

Actually, a couple of other guys won the Nobel Prize twice.

F261881ab8346e796718522de51ddef9

on October 17, 2011
at 01:24 PM

Dr. Sidney Bush out of the UK does retinal exams before and after usage of VC, with amazing reduction in sclerotic lesions. You can go to www.vitamincfoundation for add'l info.

F261881ab8346e796718522de51ddef9

on October 17, 2011
at 01:23 PM

Matt, Linis Pauling is the only man to win the Nobel Prize twice. I think his argument is more than just speculation; Have you read his book? The lipid hypothesis was posed by A. Keys to all our detriment. He built a straw man specifically in regards to cholesterol and heart disease. Now we have a man who says that Vitamin C is a viable supplement to combat heart disease; this is not based upon any large studies-Big pharma would not get involved w/ a supplement study, but it had been studied by some independent groups, with amazing results.

32f5749fa6cf7adbeb0b0b031ba82b46

(41757)

on October 17, 2011
at 12:57 PM

Ever heard of argumentum ad verecundiam? Just because Linus Pauling bought into mega-dosing vitamin C doesn't make it anymore valid.

B0fe7b5a9a197cd293978150cbd9055f

(8938)

on October 17, 2011
at 12:24 PM

"I avoid taking vitamin C with iron-rich meals". Makes me worry, I take 1 g of vitamin C with every meal and eat meat at almost each meal.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 09:47 AM

You don't get megadose to prevent scurvy, thats what modern medicine whats you to think. If you think only scurvy is important, then you should ditch your vitamin D too and go live in a cave as you will for sure not get rickets.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 09:47 AM

Scurvy is final fallout of entire organism. Sub clinical scurvy appears far before final meltdown. 10mg per day is enough to not get scurvy and that is amount even produced by intestinal bacteria. Thats why some people and g. pigs never get scurvy - the body can recycle C fast enough if you are not under severe stress and have normal microbiota.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 09:45 AM

Furthermore, all animals would suck at sports if that was true, because they all produce very high amounts. The research is obviously wrong.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 09:44 AM

@Dean, the studie you reffered is wrong, there are at least 10 studies with oposite conclusions, for instance http://goo.gl/eXAps http://goo.gl/LhCKK http://goo.gl/Yd86w http://goo.gl/e5zvS http://goo.gl/8XpCK http://goo.gl/6nKiH http://goo.gl/7l4Ja

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 09:37 AM

I don't see a point to copy/paste it here. It is against DRY principle. As Dragonfly nicely said, people should learn to use search.

B22e5946e28a1845a6006737e59edfc6

(2437)

on October 17, 2011
at 01:37 AM

Thanks for the link !

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19235)

on October 16, 2011
at 10:25 PM

@Korion: If you think Belgium is lacking in sunshine you should try living in the north of Scotland :) I get my vitamin D from pills too.

B0fe7b5a9a197cd293978150cbd9055f

(8938)

on October 16, 2011
at 08:07 PM

@Stacey Maybe because I was severely deficient according to my last blood test 3-4 months ago (level was 9ng/ml)? I actually followed Dragonfly's advice for this. I could supplement only 100mg, but why would I do that? It's working fine right now.

Ce41c230e8c2a4295db31aec3ef4b2ab

(32556)

on October 16, 2011
at 07:47 PM

Stacey~ The Vitamin D Council recommends getting your 25(OH)D blood level up to 50-80 ng/ml via sun exposure, tanning lights or D supplements. The recommended maintenance dosage is 1000 IUs per 25 lbs of body weight. My n=1 experience shows me that this is fairly accurate.

15c0cfc9e64ad10661692c9e42441074

(70)

on October 16, 2011
at 06:41 PM

why on earth would you take 5000IU of vitamin D per day? The recommended dosage is only 1000IU

Ce41c230e8c2a4295db31aec3ef4b2ab

(32556)

on October 16, 2011
at 06:15 PM

"...everyone's favorite, vitamin D, can cause B deficiencies if megadosed in pill form)." Source, please? First time I've heard of this.

Ce41c230e8c2a4295db31aec3ef4b2ab

(32556)

on October 16, 2011
at 06:13 PM

...and more tags to this thread.

Ce41c230e8c2a4295db31aec3ef4b2ab

(32556)

on October 16, 2011
at 06:12 PM

I did a search for *supplements*. I've worked in a lot of libraries, so I know how to play around with search terms. Just added some tags to the thread.

Ce41c230e8c2a4295db31aec3ef4b2ab

(32556)

on October 16, 2011
at 06:09 PM

I did a search for supplements. I've worked in a lot of libraries, lol!

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19235)

on October 16, 2011
at 05:51 PM

@Dean: As a curiosity I have seen some evidence that only 7-10 mg a day is needed to prevent clinical scurvy as a disease.

2870a69b9c0c0a19a919e54cb3a62137

(1520)

on October 16, 2011
at 05:39 PM

You need less than 100mg to prevent scurvy. That's why I mentioned not arguing against supplementing sensible amounts to be on the safe side. I'm curious though about the extact diet of those cases who got scurvy?

2870a69b9c0c0a19a919e54cb3a62137

(1520)

on October 16, 2011
at 05:34 PM

Funny you should say that, I got side effects after taking 5000IU Vitamin D3 for a while. We think we're so smart taking our supplements, right? http://ctheblog.cforyourself.com/2008/12/overdosing-on-vitamin-d-side-effects.html

Af1d286f0fd5c3949f59b4edf4d892f5

(18452)

on October 16, 2011
at 05:32 PM

I agree with Matt. The answer needs to be findable by a search... hence the purpose of this pointed hack.

B0fe7b5a9a197cd293978150cbd9055f

(8938)

on October 16, 2011
at 05:23 PM

Sure it's unnatural, so is ingesting 5000IU of vitamin D, but it helps, and that's what's important. Besides, I heard of people getting scurvy after 3 months.

2870a69b9c0c0a19a919e54cb3a62137

(1520)

on October 16, 2011
at 05:15 PM

A proper ZC diet doesn't seem to require supplementation of Vitamin C. I'm taking much less since I went ZC. I'm not arguing against supplementation, but 4g daily seems quite unnatural, especially on ZC. I used high dose vit C for a few months before and currently only take what's in my multi and use NAC to let my body make its own antioxidants, which incidentally get reduced under Vitamin C supplementation: http://www.ajcn.org/content/87/1/142.abstract

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on October 16, 2011
at 04:28 PM

vitamin c degrades pretty fast so unless you are getting fruits and vegetables directly from the source theres a good chance you aren't getting as much as you think. "vitamin C specifically interferes with glucose uptake" Since when? Why would it be in fruit?

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19235)

on October 16, 2011
at 03:03 PM

I know, maybe he can copy it here. You would not find that answer by searching the site.

Ce41c230e8c2a4295db31aec3ef4b2ab

(32556)

on October 16, 2011
at 02:28 PM

Maj explains his take very clearly here: http://paleohacks.com/questions/65801/the-ultimate-supplemental-paleohacks-thread#axzz1as0ho6HV

  • 0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

    asked by

    (19235)
  • Views
    3K
  • Last Activity
    1256D AGO
Frontpage book

Get FREE instant access to our Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!

10 Answers

13
77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 10:09 AM

I don't see a point to copy/paste my previous writings here. It is against DRY principle. As Dragonfly nicely said, people should learn to use search.

The studie that Dean reffered to [vitamin c and/or antioxidants prevent exercise benefits http://www.ajcn.org/content/87/1/142.abstract] is wrong, there are at least 10 studies with oposite or neutral conclusions, for start

http://goo.gl/8XpCK http://goo.gl/7l4Ja http://goo.gl/eXAps http://goo.gl/Yd86w http://goo.gl/e5zvS http://goo.gl/6nKiH

Furthermore, all animals would suck at sports if that was true, because they all produce very high amounts. This is not what happens and the research is obviously wrong.

Additionally, in almost all studies it becomes apparent that fat oxidation increases which means that mitochondria actually work better.

Scurvy is final fallout of entire organism. Sub clinical scurvy appears far before final meltdown. 10mg per day is enough to not become fluffy ball of cells without structure [scurvy] and that is amount even produced by intestinal bacteria. Amounts for optimal health are FAR greater. Thats why some people and g. pigs never get scurvy - the body can recycle C fast enough if you are not under severe stress and have normal microbiota.

You don't get megadose to prevent scurvy, thats what modern medicine whats you to think. If you think only scurvy is important, then you should ditch your vitamin D too and go live in a cave as you will for sure not get rickets. There are bunch of other effects of C in the healthy body:

An unexpected finding with clinical implications is that SLC23A1 knockout mice have a functional outcome in relation to ascorbate concentrations that is not scurvy. Pregnant SLC23A1 knockout mice lose approximately one-half of their pups despite ascorbate concentrations that are several-fold above those associated with scurvy. Raising plasma ascorbate concentrations from ???30 to 40 ??mol/L prevents fetal loss in these mice

Urinary losses may not be important at all for AA requirement, because SVCT1-/- mices excrete 18 fold more and yet require it badly and upregulate bioshythesis thus basically losing food (see here):

Although Slc23a1-/- mice lost as much as 70% of their ascorbate body stores in urine daily, we observed an unanticipated compensatory increase in ascorbate synthesis.

RDA of 60mg borders with criminal and is obviously wrong, based on flawed study measuring body and plasma saturation with white blood cells serving as proxy for tissue levels. Its described extensively in the book "Ridiculous Dietary Allowance" by Hickey and Roberts or their next superb book "Ascorbate: The Science of Vitamin C". Mr Levin conducted new study only year later and proved his method was wrong before and proposed new RDA to be almost 4 times higher, yet, this never materialized [you have to wonder why, 15 years later]. This only reflects what might happen with healthy young individuals, in stress this rises many fold.

I contacted most of the prominent vitamin C authors during my research. For instance, Harri Hemil?? MD PhD, very conservative when C supplementation is in question wrote me:

In the case of a disease the good doses can be much higher. The highest dose in a controlled trial was 6 g/day during a cold, but I think that the best dose can be much higher still - but that is during the disease.

Many (I dare to say most) people older then 25 are now chronically sick and for them AA is most important:

In theory, dose concentration relationships can be affected by changes in utilization rates. Healthy participants had different utilization rates, although this did not affect steady-state concentrations for different doses (10, 18, 21, 38, 39). It is possible that ascorbate utilization increases in disease by acceleration of ascorbate-dependent enzymatic reaction rates, by decrease in reduction of ascorbate radical dehydroascorbic acid, or by accelerated nonenzymatic degradation due to disease-associated oxidants. Ascorbate concentrations are lower in smokers, probably because of smoking-associated oxidants (40). Ascorbate concentrations are lower in patients with pancreatitis, sepsis, crucial illness, acute myocardial infarction, and diabetes

The other thing is that Mayo clinic flawed studies are responsible for the denial we have today:

The Mayo Clinic investigators administered only oral ascorbate, but Cameron administered both i.v. and oral ascorbate. This difference was not recognized previously by any investigators, because no one provided plasma measurements so that the pharmacology explanation remained obscured. Given its potential promise, a call was issued for oncologists to investigate ascorbate anew (57). But there was no response, perhaps due to skepticism and even bitterness engendered by the earlier battles among Pauling, Moertel, oncologists, and complementary and alternative medicine (integrative medicine) practitioners (53).

Very high IV doses - from 50 to 250g per day - are without any adverse effects. If we compare this to absorption of oral doses, you would have to take 10x that amount, i.e. 0.5kg - 2.5kg. However, you wouldn't achieve IV levels which are with oral doses always <250 microM/L, far bellow pro oxidant effects of C which are often touted by various people as reason why not to take C oral megadoses which is obviously wrong.

It is apparent both from in vitro and clinical studies that adverse effects of pharmacologic ascorbate are few. It is possible that as clinical studies increase and/or as dose frequency increases, more adverse effects will emerge. Nevertheless, the absence of toxicities is striking compared with many chemotherapeutic agents. Why are normal cells and tissues unaffected? Normal cells have redundant mechanisms for H2O2 disposal and/or repair of H2O2 damage. In contrast, susceptible cancer cells may have a series of mutations that signal cell death in the context of H2O2 formed by pharmacologic ascorbate; the specific pathways affected likely vary between cancer cells.

This graph from vitamin c pharmacokinetics study is telling:

vitamin-c-supplementation?

From it, it seems like 4x3g (level teaspoon = 3g) is around maximal oral dose in healthy state. This is true only for powder form. Liposhperic vitamin C is absorbed 100% and can give higher values. This physiological uptake and determination is similar to that of D (D3 megadose) or Iodine (orthoiodine supplementation) yet nobody reacts to it for some reason. Its probably because its just vitamin C, its so well known that people fail to see its importance. Its typical for humans, the importance every day stuff is hard to see.

I take between 8-12g per day when I am healthy, as 4x3g of powder either in carbonated water with Mg or as custom made sodium ascorbate when I don't feel like acid. My entire family does this for more then 2 years, including babies/kids which are on 1g/year-of-age/day protocol [and are never sick]. Its very important for kids because their immune system is overactive judged by their high lymphocyte count and lymphocytes are one of the biggest users of ascorbate. Check out also about vitamin c babies.

When I think I catched something, I rise it up to 30, 60, 100 g or more. This happens maybe once per year. If I guessed wrong, it shows because I get diarrhea after 15g. On severe stress I don't have any GI problems with 100+ grams which is a sign that body pumps ascorbate like mad.

The most important thing you can do for yourself is taking some form of ascorbate multiple times per day. Its primal thing. Furthermore, if you have hard time believing me, Pauling is the only person who got 2 Nobel prizes, he invented the medicine as it is today and is one of the greatest scientist that ever existed. He was taking 18g per day.

You can check around how non-toxic and important for every condition it is. There are thousdands of researches conducted each year. This guy did such experiment searching just-like-that for research from only year 2009. Check out his 4 part article:

http://healthjournalclub.blogspot.com/2010/10/vitamin-c-past-year-part-i.html http://healthjournalclub.blogspot.com/2010/10/vitamin-c-past-years-research-part-ii.html http://healthjournalclub.blogspot.com/2010/11/vitamin-c-past-years-research-part-iii.html http://healthjournalclub.blogspot.com/2010/11/vitamin-c-past-years-research-part-iv.html

The fact is, I collected bunch of those papers, I have read fully hundreds of them and even more to some extent. I still didn't find any negative effect. Those that are frequently mentioned are either wrong, inconclusive or related to very small subset of individuals, like those with heavy kidney disease.

See bellow Hickey's mails about criminal RDA level.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19235)

on October 17, 2011
at 04:40 PM

Out of curiosity, why do you think the body so tightly controls the absorption of oral doses to limit plasma levels? If it is so beneficial why would evolutionary changes not occurred to absorb and retain the whole dose whatever the amount ingested?

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 05:11 PM

@Matt: The fact that it doesn't keep the whole dose orally taken is left of of our vitamin c producing ancestry. All animals produce and excrete large doses of ascorbate wasting precious glucose. Do you think thats wise if ascorbate is not needed ?

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 05:06 PM

So again, we must consider what is right on 3 levels - level of species, level of individual, level of cell. The observations are radically different - on species level for instance, wheat was not only a good thing, but winning thing. On the level of individual wheat may be harmful. On the level of cell, it can be detrimental.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 05:24 PM

There are few adaptations so far - we recycle ascorbate from dehydroascorbate while no other creatures AFAIK do that and we are only mammals that have GLUT1 transporters in RBC with stomatin switch that shifts preference from glucose to ascorbate transfer - however this is I think popor mans solution - GLUT1 are needed to provide glucose to RBC which do not have mitos and would starve without it, so cells can not use this extensively. Also, our high carb diet interferes with ascorbate utilization which may nullify this adaptation.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 05:08 PM

@Matt: graphs above are not about urinary output but about utilization. Cells grab ascorbate as fast as they can. Urinary output changes with different individuals and with stress. In severe stress even megadoses can produce zero urinary output.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19235)

on October 17, 2011
at 05:12 PM

I was wondering about possible adaptations to the loss of function in endogenous ascorbate synthesis. Have we not had 60? or so million years without our own vitamin C? That is a long time in evolutionary terms. Could this not mean that our physiology is fundamentally different from other mammals that do synthesize their own?

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 04:57 PM

@Matt, all animals produce it at gram doses and excrete it also. Why do you think they have food to throw around ?

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 05:20 PM

Clinical studies show its not enough. Our closest relatives which do not produce C require gram doses orally. Some other creatures lost ascorbate synthesis and returned it back [some birds and vampire bats]. Loss was maybe beneficial once as context was different. You can't look at evolution without space-time frame. Sickle cell is bad but protects from malaria. Loss of ascorbate was good then when there was let of it in the plants and other animals, now this benefit is over.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 05:00 PM

@mem: thx for your kind words. That is the sole purpose of my research - to find the truth. I don't belong to any camp. I use for instance Piracetam daily which is Big Pharma product and I think there are other interesting gems in various 'medicine' types around. I don't claim I am not biased, I try not to be as much as I can in this human body.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19235)

on October 17, 2011
at 05:36 PM

@mem: I understand mem, it was intended as a light-hearted remark :)

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19235)

on October 17, 2011
at 04:38 PM

Out of curiosity, why do you think the body so tightly controls oral doses? If it is so beneficial why would the body not absorb and retain the whole dose whatever the amount ingested?

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 05:10 PM

@Matt: The fact that it doesn't keep the whole dose orally taken is left of of our vitamin c producing ancestry. All animals produce and excrete large doses of ascorbate wasting precious glucose. Do you think thats wise if ascorbate is not needed ? Also, I can't stress enough that **we are animals** and we *share similar genome**.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 05:12 PM

It may very well finish as this: **we are animals, all animals share similar genome, all animals produce gram amounts of ascorbate**. Just this fact is enough for many people out there.

Cbb1134f8e93067d1271c97bb2e15ef6

on October 17, 2011
at 04:27 PM

+1 - And i just want to say that I really appreciate your presence on PH. You offer info freely and best of all is that I do not see you as being in any particular "camp." You do not seem to be have a need to prove anything to yourself or anyone else. I really appreciate the info you share and the clean, "unloaded" no-drama, no chest-beating way in which you contribute here. You genuinely seem to be focused on finding and sharing whatever the knowable "truth" is, given any particular question. Thank you.

32f5749fa6cf7adbeb0b0b031ba82b46

(41757)

on October 17, 2011
at 04:53 PM

Not only do we not produce our own vitamin C, we also eliminate it rather quickly (looking at your pharmacokinetics graphs)... Definitely makes you think about it...

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 04:57 PM

Its simple - you would starve otherwise. Glucose is used to make ascorbate. There are other possible scenarios - hyperoxaloemia for instance or cytotoxic effect in very high doses, but I believe in the first one since hyperoxaloemia is theoretical and cytotoxic effect is IV stuff, no animal produces for long such mega mega doses. So its purely resource management, IMO.

368568eb91f1b58d2f52c9c566d331b5

(182)

on October 17, 2011
at 07:17 PM

Great post. Regarding "people should learn to use search" - Ideally, yes. However, if one initiates a search for "vitamin c" and a hack about said vitamin doesn't appear in the results it's not the user who is at fault.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19235)

on October 17, 2011
at 04:34 PM

@mem: I'm pretty sure majkinetor is firmly in the Vitamin C camp :)

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 05:04 PM

@Matt: Actually, its one theory of why humans evolved faster and survived longer then all other creatures. Vitamin C prevents DNK mutations so while beneficial on individual level it imposes limits on species level - faster mutations ,i.e. adaption. Scientist use this fact to speed up evolution in the laboratory. The other thing is that in times of starvation, we don't 'throw' glucose around trying to repair stress damage but have recycling mechanism. However, many pathways of other animals are still in us and ascorbate still have similar role in our body. We did adapted somewhat to loss.

Cbb1134f8e93067d1271c97bb2e15ef6

on October 17, 2011
at 05:30 PM

@Matthew: The camps I am referring to are the larger, overarching belief systems that then tend to color all responses. My response to Maj was not in any way wedded to this single question. My observation is that in general, as demonstarted on this board, he seems to function and perceive out of a much cleaner headspace than a great many of us.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117

(25477)

on October 18, 2011
at 02:12 AM

Maj just wonderful! Plus one.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 19, 2011
at 12:15 PM

@Joan: Little or none. AA acificies urine which is good as it prevents urinary infections. SA alkalizes it which is good for specific people and stones. SA is the only one used in IV as AA can not be used directly into the vein since blood is pH neutral. Use whatever you want.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 19, 2011
at 12:17 PM

@Matt: I agree that we don't require large C doses to evolve. We evolve faster without C

32f5749fa6cf7adbeb0b0b031ba82b46

(41757)

on October 19, 2011
at 11:17 AM

We obviously don't require gram doses to survive, thrive and evolve over the years. We wouldn't be 6 billion strong and in every biome on earth otherwise.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 19, 2011
at 12:13 PM

Obviously, the same reasoning is then true for all other stuff, including vitamin D3. We obviously do not require 5000 IU and 70-100ng as we thrive on 20 and are in every biome on earth. I guess you must be saying that all animals are actually wrong and poisoning themselves by making such big amounts. I don't know about 'thrive' part tho... It doesn't look like most of us are thriving.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 19, 2011
at 12:16 PM

@Matt: I agree that we don't require large C doses to evolve. We evolve faster without C.

7b494127ac67e85e572c5222aaee9b4d

(668)

on October 19, 2011
at 09:16 AM

Is there a difference between Sodium Ascorbate vs. Ascorbic Acid as far as dose/effectiveness, etc?

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 19, 2011
at 12:18 PM

@Matt: We also 'thrived' and 'evolved' without antibiotics, vaccines, etc... :) Funny!

4
B0fe7b5a9a197cd293978150cbd9055f

(8938)

on October 16, 2011
at 03:11 PM

I take 4x1gram a day, it helps with a lot of little things, but I mostly take it because I'm doing ZC. Some benefits I got from it :

  • Less problems with sickness (I remember not being able to sleep when I was little because of a runny, painful nose)
  • The day I started the vitamin C the skin on my hands became very nice (which is important to me, when I was vegan my hands were filled with wounds from the cold, they looked like the hands of a 90yo)

15c0cfc9e64ad10661692c9e42441074

(70)

on October 16, 2011
at 06:41 PM

why on earth would you take 5000IU of vitamin D per day? The recommended dosage is only 1000IU

2870a69b9c0c0a19a919e54cb3a62137

(1520)

on October 16, 2011
at 05:15 PM

A proper ZC diet doesn't seem to require supplementation of Vitamin C. I'm taking much less since I went ZC. I'm not arguing against supplementation, but 4g daily seems quite unnatural, especially on ZC. I used high dose vit C for a few months before and currently only take what's in my multi and use NAC to let my body make its own antioxidants, which incidentally get reduced under Vitamin C supplementation: http://www.ajcn.org/content/87/1/142.abstract

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19235)

on October 16, 2011
at 05:51 PM

@Dean: As a curiosity I have seen some evidence that only 7-10 mg a day is needed to prevent clinical scurvy as a disease.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 09:47 AM

You don't get megadose to prevent scurvy, thats what modern medicine whats you to think. If you think only scurvy is important, then you should ditch your vitamin D too and go live in a cave as you will for sure not get rickets.

2870a69b9c0c0a19a919e54cb3a62137

(1520)

on October 16, 2011
at 05:34 PM

Funny you should say that, I got side effects after taking 5000IU Vitamin D3 for a while. We think we're so smart taking our supplements, right? http://ctheblog.cforyourself.com/2008/12/overdosing-on-vitamin-d-side-effects.html

Ce41c230e8c2a4295db31aec3ef4b2ab

(32556)

on October 16, 2011
at 07:47 PM

Stacey~ The Vitamin D Council recommends getting your 25(OH)D blood level up to 50-80 ng/ml via sun exposure, tanning lights or D supplements. The recommended maintenance dosage is 1000 IUs per 25 lbs of body weight. My n=1 experience shows me that this is fairly accurate.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 09:45 AM

Furthermore, all animals would suck at sports if that was true, because they all produce very high amounts. The research is obviously wrong.

B0fe7b5a9a197cd293978150cbd9055f

(8938)

on October 16, 2011
at 08:07 PM

@Stacey Maybe because I was severely deficient according to my last blood test 3-4 months ago (level was 9ng/ml)? I actually followed Dragonfly's advice for this. I could supplement only 100mg, but why would I do that? It's working fine right now.

2870a69b9c0c0a19a919e54cb3a62137

(1520)

on October 16, 2011
at 05:39 PM

You need less than 100mg to prevent scurvy. That's why I mentioned not arguing against supplementing sensible amounts to be on the safe side. I'm curious though about the extact diet of those cases who got scurvy?

B0fe7b5a9a197cd293978150cbd9055f

(8938)

on October 16, 2011
at 05:23 PM

Sure it's unnatural, so is ingesting 5000IU of vitamin D, but it helps, and that's what's important. Besides, I heard of people getting scurvy after 3 months.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19235)

on October 16, 2011
at 10:25 PM

@Korion: If you think Belgium is lacking in sunshine you should try living in the north of Scotland :) I get my vitamin D from pills too.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 09:47 AM

Scurvy is final fallout of entire organism. Sub clinical scurvy appears far before final meltdown. 10mg per day is enough to not get scurvy and that is amount even produced by intestinal bacteria. Thats why some people and g. pigs never get scurvy - the body can recycle C fast enough if you are not under severe stress and have normal microbiota.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 09:44 AM

@Dean, the studie you reffered is wrong, there are at least 10 studies with oposite conclusions, for instance http://goo.gl/eXAps http://goo.gl/LhCKK http://goo.gl/Yd86w http://goo.gl/e5zvS http://goo.gl/8XpCK http://goo.gl/6nKiH http://goo.gl/7l4Ja

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19235)

on October 17, 2011
at 04:45 PM

I think most animals do suck at sports, I have yet to see a goat that is any good tennis :) j/k to lighten the mood.

3
F261881ab8346e796718522de51ddef9

on October 17, 2011
at 12:07 AM

Do you take vitamin C supplements? yes I do. About 12-15 grams daily of lyposhperic

If so why? See "Linus Pauling and Orthomolecular medicine" What dose to you take and recommend? See above.

What are your reasons? Vascular health When do you take your vitamin C? Throughout the day

Such as with or apart from meals? 20 minutes before meals;on an empty stomach

With other supplements? I have a list. I can provide that if you like.

Single or multiple doses? Single doses generally.

What type of vitamin C supplement do you take? Granulated, pure ascorbic

Pills, powder etc. Finally:

On what evidence do you base your answers to these questions? Linis Pauling was a 2 time Nobel Prize winner.

Any interesting links are appreciated. Start here: www.vitamincfoundation.org

32f5749fa6cf7adbeb0b0b031ba82b46

(41757)

on October 17, 2011
at 03:30 PM

I work down the hall from one of last year's Nobel winners. Definitely can say, it goes to their heads.

32f5749fa6cf7adbeb0b0b031ba82b46

(41757)

on October 17, 2011
at 04:49 PM

We scientists don't think much of a double Nobel laureate when one of them is a peace prize.

32f5749fa6cf7adbeb0b0b031ba82b46

(41757)

on October 17, 2011
at 12:57 PM

Ever heard of argumentum ad verecundiam? Just because Linus Pauling bought into mega-dosing vitamin C doesn't make it anymore valid.

7d64d3988de1b0e493aacf37843c5596

(2861)

on October 17, 2011
at 02:20 PM

Multiple Nobels: http://nobelprizes.com/nobel/double.html

32f5749fa6cf7adbeb0b0b031ba82b46

(41757)

on October 17, 2011
at 03:33 PM

There's no doubt that the current recommendation is a tad on the low side, you'll get no argument with me otherwise. However the mega-dosing I see advocated has rather dubious support, in my opinion.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19235)

on October 17, 2011
at 02:43 PM

Nobel Syndrome is apparently quite common. Maybe one day I should win a Nobel Prize to see if it happens to me :P

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 03:37 PM

LPI is no longer something Pauling would approve. Vitamin C foundation fallows original Pauling thought, they are most representative of his ideas IMO.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 03:38 PM

In this case we have 2 Nobel winners - Pauling & Szent. But again, they might be idiots, who knows...

F261881ab8346e796718522de51ddef9

on October 17, 2011
at 01:24 PM

Dr. Sidney Bush out of the UK does retinal exams before and after usage of VC, with amazing reduction in sclerotic lesions. You can go to www.vitamincfoundation for add'l info.

F261881ab8346e796718522de51ddef9

on October 17, 2011
at 01:23 PM

Matt, Linis Pauling is the only man to win the Nobel Prize twice. I think his argument is more than just speculation; Have you read his book? The lipid hypothesis was posed by A. Keys to all our detriment. He built a straw man specifically in regards to cholesterol and heart disease. Now we have a man who says that Vitamin C is a viable supplement to combat heart disease; this is not based upon any large studies-Big pharma would not get involved w/ a supplement study, but it had been studied by some independent groups, with amazing results.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb

(19235)

on October 17, 2011
at 03:42 PM

Maybe winning two Nobel Prizes makes you twice as crazy :)

F261881ab8346e796718522de51ddef9

on October 17, 2011
at 02:06 PM

The Linus Pauling institute is now run by a bunch of talking heads-don't pay attention to the man behind the curtain! You make mention that there are more than LP who won the Nobel prize twice. Can you provide those persons name?

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 04:02 PM

Maybe, but being crazy has nothing to do with being right or wrong. Also, Pauling was first one to recognize how fructose dooms the body, its all in his book.

7d64d3988de1b0e493aacf37843c5596

(2861)

on October 17, 2011
at 01:47 PM

It is interesting that the Linus Pauling Institute's RDA is 400mg, and the Vitamin C Foundation's RDA is 3000mg.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 03:39 PM

In this case we have 2 Nobel winners - Pauling & Szent. But again, they might be idiots who got lucky with those prizes....

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 03:36 PM

Yet no one gained 2 Nobel prizes so far, so Pauling is unique in that sense. He would also get the 3td one if it wasn't for politics. Even more unique.

7d64d3988de1b0e493aacf37843c5596

(2861)

on October 17, 2011
at 04:03 PM

Umm, that link I posted shows that Marie Curie (Physics/Chemistry), John Bardeen (Physics/Physics), and Frederick Sanger (Chemistry/Chemistry) all have two Nobel Prizes. Pauling is unique because one of his was the Nobel Peace Prize.

7d64d3988de1b0e493aacf37843c5596

(2861)

on October 17, 2011
at 01:28 PM

Actually, a couple of other guys won the Nobel Prize twice.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on January 09, 2012
at 01:26 AM

LOL? That must be the stupidest thing I ever heard. Maybe you should actually check what he did to get the peace prize. Tip: he didn't give cookies to kids in Africa.

3
6869a1f2294b3a717a53645589a91d18

(1689)

on October 16, 2011
at 11:34 PM

RDA is 90 mg.

In the U.S., 17% are deficient, and up to 23% are 'depleted' 167).

70 mg/day vitamin C supplement in free living people: -46% decrease in plasma TBARS (a measure of lipid peroxidation)168).

Vitamin C supplementation is associated with 10%-35% decrease in total mortality 169).

Vitamin C saturation in healthy young people occurs at 400 mg daily 170). No toxicity up to 2 g daily, diarrhea is worst possible symptom. http://perfecthealthdiet.com/?p=636 . Sources @ http://flare8.net/health/doku.php/nutrients#vitamin_c

I avoid taking vitamin C with iron-rich meals, since C increases iron absorption and I'd like to avoid excess iron.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 17, 2011
at 03:59 PM

Its not such a big problem, especially if you allow IP6 to enter you body. The good thing is that protein boosts absorption and utilization.

B0fe7b5a9a197cd293978150cbd9055f

(8938)

on October 17, 2011
at 12:24 PM

"I avoid taking vitamin C with iron-rich meals". Makes me worry, I take 1 g of vitamin C with every meal and eat meat at almost each meal.

2
7dc950fc76a046048e683d2a27dced37

on October 16, 2011
at 02:52 PM

I don't normally take C as a supplement, maybe occasionally with my magnesium at night if I've been fasting or had an off-plan meal. But I find the link between C, cortisol and stress compelling, so I keep some of LivOn Labs' Lypo-Spheric C on hand to take when stressed.

B22e5946e28a1845a6006737e59edfc6

(2437)

on October 17, 2011
at 01:37 AM

Thanks for the link !

2
E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on October 16, 2011
at 02:28 PM

I take about 2 grams, usually split up in two doses with my morning and dinner meal. I use the absorbic acid powder from trader joes.

I find that it helps me tolerate dairy a lot better, it might have other benefits but that is the one I notice the most.

0
Cf4576cbcc44fc7f2294135609bce9e5

on January 16, 2012
at 07:53 PM

i take a gram a day. if i stop taking it i get clinical scurvey within 2-3 months. of course a clinician will not see a shin rash as scurvey naturally. but it matches pictures of scurvey posted on the internet, and we all know that gums weekend to bleed is scurvey and renamed gingivitis.

0
77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 19, 2011
at 08:35 AM

This is VERY Interesting.

From Merc Veterinary Manual - Nutrient Requirements of Nonhuman Primates

Vitamin C   200 mg/kg
Vitamin D   2,500 IU/kg
Vitamin E   100 mg/kg
Vitamin K   0.5 mg/kg
Choline     750 mg/kg
Zinc        100 mg/kg
Iodine      0.35 mg/kg

This really makes you wonder. Primates, as humans, can't synthesize vitamin C, they have the same GULO gene mutated. Yet they require 200mg/kg. This is 16g/day for 80kg human.

In non-human, furry primates, vitamin D is synthesized in the skin and then secreted into the fur. It is then digested orally through the process of grooming themselves and others. I guess amount made is not that high as with humans as Sun exposure and IV radiation is also used to create it. Thats why they require such large amounts. For 80 kg human that would be 200 000 IU, which is also sometimes used with humans in treatment of various disease states. However, since humans are probably more efficient it is probably safe to assume that we would need much more reduced levels. That primates need much more D3 could be find around, for instance:

The level of vitamin D supplementation (2000 to 4000 IU/day) used in this study population are insuficient to maintain chimpanzee vitamin D levels, suggesting that a dietary or absorption problem exists in chimpanzees; or (c) chimpanzees may require more sun exposure than do humans to produce the same amount of vitamin D3 (possibly due to the fact that chimpanzees have more hair covering the skin).

Iodine translated to 80kg gives 28mg which is only double of recommended orhoiodine supplementation of ~14mg.

Why are primates, are closest relatives so different from us when optimal amounts of nutrients are in question? I bet we are not, and if we are better or more optimized at some things it couldn't be that we are so much better.

At the end, those requirements had not been directly tested and there are probably some mistakes, however, it strikes me that for humans values are 1000 times or more less and animal values are probably non-directly tested in various zoos and any serious adverse effects from those vitamins would be easily seen.

0
7255a87872b75e6f691d84dca769b87e

on October 16, 2011
at 04:21 PM

I don't. I also eat pounds of vegetables in a day and get 5 times my recommended daily value of the thing; I don't feel like I need a supplement. It seems that mega-dosing with vitamins and minerals causes short term absorbtion problems of other nutrients (vitamin C specifically interferes with glucose uptake; everyone's favorite, vitamin D, can cause B deficiencies if megadosed in pill form). In general, 'tis best to get vitamins and minerals from food sources. Vitamin C is really easy to get from whole foods, and if you want to increase the amount of that vitamin in your system (cold season, etc.), eat more cruciferous veggies and citrus fruits instead of eating something in isolated pill form.

Ce41c230e8c2a4295db31aec3ef4b2ab

(32556)

on October 16, 2011
at 06:15 PM

"...everyone's favorite, vitamin D, can cause B deficiencies if megadosed in pill form)." Source, please? First time I've heard of this.

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on October 16, 2011
at 04:28 PM

vitamin c degrades pretty fast so unless you are getting fruits and vegetables directly from the source theres a good chance you aren't getting as much as you think. "vitamin C specifically interferes with glucose uptake" Since when? Why would it be in fruit?

0
24df4e0d0e7ce98963d4641fae1a60e5

on October 16, 2011
at 03:14 PM

I take it erratically but perhaps should take it more regularly for my bruising issues (had all my life, no abnormalities in platelets, etc.). VitC falls in my "why not" category. It's cheap, and you'll pee out any excess if you take too much.

Answer Question


Get FREE instant access to our
Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!