08-31-07, 07:49 AM #1
Years ago someone informed me that the only proven vitamin was cod liver oil, is this still the case?
08-31-07, 07:50 AM #2
08-31-07, 08:24 AM #3
08-31-07, 08:45 AM #4
I will not advocate supplements unless clinically necessary. In my own personal unpeer reviewed opinion and based on my observations, people who take supplements as a means of avoiding paying attention to their diet are more likely to have imbalances rather than balances in nutritional intake ( ie I take supplements so I'm covered).
Secondly, we are still completely in the dark as to nutrient nutrient interactions and taking isolated hyperdoses of one nutrient while ignoring its potential interactions with others is not a sensible approach to health.
08-31-07, 09:39 AM #5
06-20-12, 09:24 PM #6
07-19-12, 06:33 AM #7
Vitamins are important. You can consume it and has no side effects. On the other hand, still ask your doctor about this.
Last edited by finch74; 07-21-12 at 01:28 AM.
07-19-12, 11:55 AM #8
In my experience, the establishment does not want a healthy population. The death care industry, HMO's, insurance companies, doctors, and bureaucrats all make a lot more money treating the ill than keeping people healthy. Why do you think we are, "still completely in the dark" about what the human body needs to stay healthy and operate at optimum efficiency? Duh. Because that would be bad for the economy. Do you think America's recent health care overhaul has any room for nutritionists and natural care practitioners? Absolutely not. They want people continually treated, not cured. Health care in the western paradigm isn't about wellness, it is about treating illness.
If cod liver oil is so miraculous, why don't we hear more about it?
The answer to this question is simple: scientific research is no longer focused on the healing power of real food. For the most part, science today focuses on trying to prove the validity of pharmaceutical drugs which can be patented and sold for high profit. There is little interest in inexpensive natural treatments that can't be patented. When you look into communities which focus on healing through traditional, whole-food methods, you will find cod liver oil receives the attention it deserves.
What about vitamin A toxicity, especially regarding pregnant and nursing mothers?
There are two common misconceptions associated with vitamin A. One is that adequate levels of this vitamin can be obtained through fruits and vegetables, but these sources contain only carotenes which must be converted into retinol in the body. Many factors can interfere with this conversion, including diabetes, thyroid problems, stress, and infancy.
The second confusion results from studies indicating vitamin A is highly toxic. This only pertains to synthetic vitamin A; natural vitamin A consumed through natural foods like cod liver oil can be beneficial even at high doses.
From the research I have done though, it really matters WHICH product you buy though. Many of these cod oils are faked, and their vitamins contents are artificial, and/or have been tampered with or contaminated. Only purchase oils originating from the North Atlantic.
07-19-12, 12:22 PM #9
I sadly confess that from my observation of people being treated by the 'health care industry' and from years of working in retail grocery and watching all the manufacturers first resist new labeling and nutritional guidelines and then scramble to be first to be politically correct, I have become quite cynical whether any of these organizations has any incentive for the population to be healthy.
Doctors should be the first ones to advocate good nutrition yet many of them look less healthy than their patients and they would rather prescribe pills and if the pills don't provide a quick fix, then perhaps some tests and a new round of medication. I tend to think that this is pretty close to the mark...
Originally posted by The Esotericist
In my experience, the establishment does not want a healthy population. The death care industry, HMO's, insurance companies, doctors, and bureaucrats all make a lot more money treating the ill than keeping people healthy.
07-19-12, 02:58 PM #10
Why do you think we are, "still completely in the dark" about what the human body needs to stay healthy and operate at optimum efficiency?Do you think America's recent health care overhaul has any room for nutritionists and natural care practitioners?Only purchase oils originating from the North Atlantic.
07-19-12, 03:11 PM #11
I've been on and off with various health kicks. I have since determined that the human digestive tract is so versatile, that we can exist on just about anything. In recent years I have experimented a lot. I've gone many years without eating meat, with no side effect. I finally stopped worrying about heavy metals and added a lot of seafood to my diet. But the only time I take vitamins is when I have the flu, or whenever I think I'm not getting a balanced diet.
When you think about, we seem to have an odd doubt about whether the stuff we eat is sufficient in nutrients. The nutritional supplements industry is leveraging this. In my opinion it's mostly a scam. Obviously people with certain illnesses will need supplements. But why do we tend to think the stuff we are eating is insufficient? If pandas can exist on bamboo, then we ought to do fine on just about any protein source, with a few fruits, grains and vegetables to supplement it.
In other words, this need for something else, or the fear of a nutritional imbalance, must be some kind of delusion.
07-19-12, 05:51 PM #12
As our evolutionary line diverged from the chimpanzees, one of our ancestral species figured out how to knap flint and make blades. They used these blades to scrape the leftover meat off the bones left by the predators. This greatly increased their protein consumption. This allowed their brains to grow much larger (your brain metabolizes more protein than all the rest of your body, IIRC) and they kept getting smarter. Before long they were attaching their blades to sticks and going hunting. Each subsequent species had a slightly larger brain and a slightly larger protein intake. Eventually a species called Homo sapiens emerged that had (proportional to size) a colossal brain. He developed language, planning and organizational skills, fancy new weapons, and became the first full-time predatory ape.
During this transition (which took several million years) his gut got smaller. He was getting so many calories from the meat he was eating that he no longer needed to eat leaves and no longer needed that large bacterial culture.
This is the reason that you're wrong: we indeed cannot exist on just about anything. We need massive amounts of protein, we need vitamins that we can no longer synthesize, and although we can digest starch to increase our calorie intake, we cannot eat it raw. Cellulose has to be broken down by heat ("cooked") before we can digest it.
If we're diligent and careful, we can get our protein from plant tissue. The seeds of most plants have quite a bit of protein. This includes nuts, legumes, and grains, in addition to obvious sources like sunflower seeds. But many of these protein sources are wrapped in cellulose. This is why we have to cook our grains and our legumes, although we can eat most nuts and seeds raw.
But there's more. Our bodies are pretty good at taking the amino acids in the protein we eat and converting them into whichever amino acids are needed for today's maintenance and repair. However, there are several amino acids that we need in relatively small quantities, so our bodies never developed the ability to synthesize them. They're abundant in meat, of course. Regardless of your ethical feelings about meat, we are carnivores just like tigers and weasels, and can subsist exclusively on meat. But if we're trying to get by on the protein in plant tissue, we have to be careful. Several of those "essential amino acids" are missing in grains and legumes but plentiful in nuts and seeds, while another set is missing in nuts and seeds but plentiful in grains. So you have to be sure to balance your plant proteins or you'll get some icky protein-deficiency disease like marasmus or kwashiorkor. (Ooh, just typing their names makes me feel icky.)When you think about, we seem to have an odd doubt about whether the stuff we eat is sufficient in nutrients.
At the end of the Paleolithic Era, just before the Agricultural Revolution ushered in the Neolithic, when everybody ate three meals a day of meat, the life expectancy of a human who had survived childhood (infant mortality was around 80%) was 50-55 years. Then civilization was founded. Raising animals for their meat is a very inefficient use of land. When communities started growing to the size that we would call genuine "cities," it took a lot of farmland to feed all those people meat. Remember, there was no transportation technology yet. No wheels, no carts, no oxen, goats or horses to pull them. Everything had to be carried by hand, or on a travois, a triangle of sticks that people put over their shoulders and let one point drag on the ground. Imagine not just growing enough pigs, chickens or cattle to feed all the people in a city, and then imagine getting the meat to them before it spoiled. Sure, they could dry the meat, but that just made the process even slower and more complicated.
Instead of growing crops to feed the cattle, it was much more efficient to feed the crops to the humans. Bread (or rice, corn, or whatever grain was growing in a particular region) became a staple. Augmented with a little bit of milk or eggs (which are much more efficient use of the land and which also can be kept longer than meat), humans had their full complement of protein.
However, people in the Bronze Age and even the Iron Age knew nothing about vitamins and minerals. People could survive for quite a while on grains with a little dairy, but their bodies began to break down before long.
Bottom line? Starting with the 50-55 year adult life expectancy of the Stone Age, the life expectancy of a surviving adult in the Roman empire was less than 30 years. Of course the nobility got lots of meat and they lived longer, but the peasants and slaves did not.
So if you think we eat bad now, look how far we've come from the Romans.If pandas can exist on bamboo, then we ought to do fine on just about any protein source, with a few fruits, grains and vegetables to supplement it.
So don't be envious of the panda. If some horrible pest gets loose and kills all the world's bamboo forests, pandas will become extinct.In other words, this need for something else, or the fear of a nutritional imbalance, must be some kind of delusion.
07-23-12, 11:48 AM #13
07-23-12, 04:10 PM #14
We are very fortunate to be living in this day and age, and grocery stores are a prime example of why. Unfortunately many do not take full advantage of our access to a wide range of cheap, nutritious foods from around the world.
S.A.M. hit the nail on the head: we should get our nutrition from food.
Linus Pauling Institute at Oregon State (link). Many governments and universities have made quality information available as to assist people in making informed decisions. I recommend using these sources.
Last edited by Mr K; 07-23-12 at 04:50 PM.
07-23-12, 09:40 PM #15
There's a common story amongst doctors who treat the elderly, particularly surgeons who have to do comprehensive examination of the patients before surgery..
They have two kinds of patients.
1. The normal kind on a laundry list of prescription drugs.
2. The kind where they ask the patient if they forgot to list their drugs, and find out they have been taking vitamins for years.
Over the course of a lifetime supplements make a huge difference. The marketing that you take them and you knee stops hurting next week, or that type 'instant fix' stuff is not accurate. They work over the long term.
Good vitamins and supplements like those made by Twinlabs, the kind where when analyzed they actually have the ingredients in the amounts the list on the label(most vitamins don't), are a very good thing for people to take long term.
You can overdo anything, including vitamins. Anything in life can become toxic if you overdo it, including water, oxygen, fluoride, etc.
07-24-12, 01:39 AM #16
I kid, I kid. But with regards to nutritional supplements, the studies I've read over the years paint a different picture than you do. Here's one published in March of this year:
The present systematic review included 78 randomised clinical trials. In total, 296,707 participants were randomised to antioxidant supplements (beta-carotene, vitamin A, vitamin C, vitamin E, and selenium) versus placebo or no intervention....
...the analysis...demonstrated that antioxidant use did slightly increase mortality (that is, the patients consuming the antioxidants were 1.03 times as likely to die as were the controls)....
...The increased risk of mortality was associated with beta-carotene and possibly vitamin E and vitamin A
Also be careful because some supplement companies try to deceive customers into thinking their multivitamin is derived entirely from food sources. Such is likely not the case, even if it seems like it is. This is indicative of a dishonest company.
By MetaKron in forum The CesspoolLast Post: 02-14-07, 07:33 AMReplies: 186
By sderenzi in forum Free ThoughtsLast Post: 12-06-06, 05:10 PMReplies: 13
By firecross in forum Biology & GeneticsLast Post: 04-19-06, 01:29 PMReplies: 36
By Quigly in forum HistoryLast Post: 01-19-06, 04:13 PMReplies: 8
By Trilairian in forum Physics & MathLast Post: 10-11-05, 04:46 PMReplies: 1