Re: Ascorbic Acid thread

August 30, 2007

>I am kind of confused here and the June thread ended w/o really

>ending. So is Ascorbic synthetic or not?

Interesting that you brought this subject up as I just ordered some Ascorbic

acid powder from the Vitamin C Foundation and I have *never* taken straight

ascorbic acid in my life! Most of my information came from chiropractors who

sold such brands of supplements as Standard Process or other naturalists and

they all believe that ascorbic acid is synthetic. But after reading the

material on this site, www.vitamincfoundation.org

<http://www.vitamincfoundation.org/> I am convinced that I need to be

taking this product. Certainly I am not an expert on the subject and I am

still a little confused, but I thought the information on that site was

really good and interesting to say the least. Maybe someone else has more

info they can share with us!

amanda

" freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to know. " george

orwell

<http://minimaliste.wordpress.com> http://minimaliste.wordpress.com

August 31, 2007

here's a natural form of vitamin C, made with amla berries

http://www.luckyvitamin.com/091401864100.html

--- In , " " <beauty4ashesisaiah61@...>

wrote:

>

> I am kind of confused here and the June thread ended w/o really

> ending. So is Ascorbic synthetic or not? I ordered some of the

> powdered kind to add to smoothies or juice to help us load up during

> winter. I also use the " better " forms of C - Palmitate and Acerola,

> the Ascorbic was just to get in a bit more in the various forms.

> Plus my younger children can't swallow pills so they have to have a

> chewable form or the powder. I do make sure that we take with

> Bioflavonoids etc...

>

August 31, 2007

I'm glad you brought this up again. I very much would like to know

the truth about " natural " forms of C such as amla, acerola, camu

camu... and " chemical " forms such as ascorbic acid and sodium

ascorbate. Palmitate is synthetic.

Reading Frederick Klenner research ( Levy's book " Curing the

Incurable " http://www.patrickholford.com/content.asp?id_Content=1472)

has given me a tremendous body of knowledge on using megadoses and

IVs of ascorbic acid or sodium ascorbate for numerous conditions that

I, as a mama with a vax-free child, need have in my arsenal for the

years to come!

And yet WAPF says amla or acerola can provide the same protection.

I'm skeptical and unsure as there is such a paucity of information on

dosage and the stakes seems to be too high to get this one wrong.

Combatting pertussis, measles, etc. takes sometimes hundreds of grams

of AA or SA and the research on megadosing seems to be vital. What

gives me the most pause is that research into other mammals who have

not lost the enzyme to produce their own ascorbic acid show that they

make several grams/day rising to fourfold or more in times of bodily

stress.

FWIW, we like NOW Acerola Powder. It makes a fruit punch tasting

drink, with or without stevia, and has a relatively high natural

vitamin C content of 180mg/teaspoon (and therefore cheaper than the

albeit more convenient amla capsules on the market).

JaneS

>

> I am kind of confused here and the June thread ended w/o really

> ending. So is Ascorbic synthetic or not? I ordered some of the

> powdered kind to add to smoothies or juice to help us load up

during

> winter. I also use the " better " forms of C - Palmitate and

Acerola,

> the Ascorbic was just to get in a bit more in the various forms.

> Plus my younger children can't swallow pills so they have to have a

> chewable form or the powder. I do make sure that we take with

> Bioflavonoids etc...

>

> I am concerned now as on another forum one poster was very much

> adamant that Ascorbic is really bad period. I know most feel

getting

> it from food is best, but i am of the opinion that even food - soil

> is totally lacking so even thought we may be eating the right foods

> with C i doubt we are getting enough of any vitamin/mineral. So i

do

> not mind supplementing with vitamins/minerals if i can find the

right

> ones. I try to follow the WAPF guidelines for choosing the correct

> forms and using the superfood list. Their article on Ascorbic in

the

> primer list only cautions taking it and being deficient in vit.P -

> Bioflavanoids, as i mentioned above.

>

> More conversation on this whether on here or private email would be

> helpful as i would like to read some reliable info/research on

this.

> Is there different forms of ascorbic acid or not? I thought there

> was only 1 form of it. That Acerola and Palmitate are C but not

> Ascorbic. Confused - dialogue anyone?

>

> TIA

>

> WAPF:

http://www.westonaprice.org/basicnutrition/vitaminprimer.html

>

> Vitamin C: A water-soluble vitamin best known for its use in

> treatment of the common cold, it is also needed for a host of

> processes including tissue growth and repair, strength of capillary

> walls, lactation and adrenal gland function. It is vital for the

> formation of collagen, the body's structural substance. It promotes

> healing of wounds and is a powerful antioxidant. Dr. Linus ing

> and others have promoted megadoses of Vitamin C for cancer while

> others have used large doses to treat schizophrenia and drug

> addiction. But megadoses of isolated ascorbic acid may lead to

> imbalances and deficiencies in vitamin P. New evidence suggests

that

> vitamin C works synergistically with vitamin E. Hypoglycemics and

> individuals on a high-protein diet require more vitamin C as these

> conditions interfere with the metabolism of ascorbic acid. It is

> found in many fruits and vegetables and in certain animal organs.

> Vitamin C is destroyed by heat. Alcohol and many common drugs

> including aspirin and oral contraceptives may reduce vitamin C

levels

> in the body.

>

> http://www.westonaprice.org/basicnutrition/superfoods.html

>

> Acerola Tablets: A berry rich in ascorbic acid, acerola provides

> vitamin C with numerous cofactors, including bioflavonoids and

rutin,

> to optimize the body's uptake and use of ascorbic acid. Vitamin C,

> the most important dietary antioxidant, was popularized by Linus

> ing who recommends taking pure ascorbic acid in amounts up to

15

> grams a day for a variety of ailments. But large quantities of

> vitamin C may be harmful to the kidneys and can lead to

deficiencies

> in bioflavonoids. Only small quantities of natural vitamin C in the

> form of acerola tablets can provide the same protection as large

> amounts of pure ascorbic acid, without the side effects.

>

August 31, 2007

,

I'll reiterate my opinion stated in the June discussion:

" The foremost chemist of the 20th century is unequivocal that there

is no difference [between synthetic ascorbic acid and natural vitamin

C occurring in plants] at the molecular level, and I agree. I have

just completed a lot of science courses at the university here,

including biochemistry this spring, and there is no doubt in my mind

that the vitamin C produced commercially...is ABSOLUTELY IDENTICAL to

the molecule found in foods. The ONLY question for me is whether there

are ADDITIONAL related compounds in foods containing vit. C that work

synergistically with it to increase the benefits.

On that note, however, ing cited many studies that showed no

significant difference between experimental groups taking vit. C plus

bioflavonoids or other natural antioxidants and groups taking vit. C

alone. "

/message/92391

Tom

September 1, 2007

I would think the answer is in the supporting research for the food

based claims that WAPF makes but so far I cannot find a cite...

" Acerola Tablets: A berry rich in ascorbic acid, acerola provides

vitamin C with numerous cofactors, including bioflavonoids and rutin,

to optimize the body's uptake and use of ascorbic acid. Vitamin C,

the most important dietary antioxidant, was popularized by Linus

ing who recommends taking pure ascorbic acid in amounts up to 15

grams a day for a variety of ailments. But large quantities of

vitamin C may be harmful to the kidneys and can lead to deficiencies

in bioflavonoids. Only small quantities of natural vitamin C in the

form of acerola tablets can provide the same protection as large

amounts of pure ascorbic acid, without the side effects. "

http://www.westonaprice.org/basicnutrition/superfoods.html

On the Paradise Herbs bottle:

" Amla is known for its nutrient dense levels of food nutrient vitamin

C, which is approximately 10-15 times better assimilated than

isolated USP vitamin C (ascorbic acid). "

Can you help find?

JaneS

--- In , " Tom Jeanne " <tjeanne@...>

wrote:

>

> ,

>

> I'll reiterate my opinion stated in the June discussion:

>

> " The foremost chemist of the 20th century is unequivocal that there

> is no difference [between synthetic ascorbic acid and natural

vitamin

> C occurring in plants] at the molecular level, and I agree. I have

> just completed a lot of science courses at the university here,

> including biochemistry this spring, and there is no doubt in my mind

> that the vitamin C produced commercially...is ABSOLUTELY IDENTICAL

to

> the molecule found in foods. The ONLY question for me is whether

there

> are ADDITIONAL related compounds in foods containing vit. C that

work

> synergistically with it to increase the benefits.

>

> On that note, however, ing cited many studies that showed no

> significant difference between experimental groups taking vit. C

plus

> bioflavonoids or other natural antioxidants and groups taking vit. C

> alone. "

>

> /message/92391

>

> Tom

>

September 2, 2007

--- Tom Jeanne <tjeanne@...> wrote:

> I'll reiterate my opinion stated in the June discussion:

> " The foremost chemist of the 20th century is unequivocal that there

> is no difference [between synthetic ascorbic acid and natural

> vitamin C occurring in plants] at the molecular level, and I agree.

> I have just completed a lot of science courses at the university

> here, including biochemistry this spring, and there is no doubt in

> my mind that the vitamin C produced commercially...is ABSOLUTELY

> IDENTICAL to the molecule found in foods. The ONLY question for me

> is whether there are ADDITIONAL related compounds in foods

> containing vit. C that work synergistically with it to increase the

> benefits.

>

> On that note, however, ing cited many studies that showed no

> significant difference between experimental groups taking vit. C

> plus bioflavonoids or other natural antioxidants and groups taking

> vit. C alone. "

Tom,

Besides bioflavonids, what about the other compliment of nutrients

that often come with fruits high in vitamin C? Perhaps vitamin C

works better with the whole package? Could there be positive

synergistic effects from the other complimentary nutrients?

For instance, I checked up on guava fruit. It contains about 336 mg

of vitamin C per 100 calories (about 3 fruits) or 228 mg of C per 100

g of fruit. Guava also has about 613 mg of potassium, 32 mg of

magnesium, 26 mg of calcium, 8 mg of lycopene, and 72 mcg of folate

per 100 calories. Acerola cherries have about 5.2 g of C per 100

calories or about 1.7 g of C per 100 g of fruit. They also have about

456 mg of potassium, 56 mg of magnesium, 38 mg of calcium, and 44 mcg

of folate per 100 calories. Oranges have about 113 mg of C per 100

calories or about 53 mg per 100 g of fruit and also have about 385 mg

of potassium, 85 mg of calcium, 21 mg of magnesium, and 64 mcg of

folate per 100 calories. Strawberries have about 184 mg of C per 100

calories or 59 mg per 100 g, with about 478 mg potassium, 50 mg of

calcium, 41 mg of magnesium, and 75 mcg of folate per 100 calories.

In the past, in many areas, fruits were available only seasonally,

although in the more recent past, fruits have often been preserved for

eating in the off season. But I have to wonder about vitamin C levels

in the diet of our ancestors. I suspect that it was often quite low

for large portions of the year, during winter and/or dry seasons.

Maybe that's not optimal, but likely the way it was. We now have

access to a much wider variety of fruits than our ancestors and

throughout the year.

September 3, 2007

Just a question about Vitamin C - isn't there quite a good amount of

Vitamin C in lactofermented sauerkraut and other ferments eaten more widely

in our ancestors' diets?

--

April Streeter

Gothenburg SWEDEN

September 3, 2007

,

It's certainly probable that there are certain synergistic

relationships between vitamin C and other nutrients (and some have

been identified already, no doubt). However, I have a hunch that

vitamin C alone is what is needed in such large amounts that many

advocate. This is merely speculation at this point, but here's a

hypothesis:

Most animals and plants produce their own ascorbic acid through a

sequence of four enzyme-driven steps, which convert glucose to vitamin

C, and humans have a defective gene that cannot make the last enzyme

in the synthesis process, L-gulonolactone oxidase. The other three

enzymes are intact in humans. So we're all set to produce as much

vitamin C as we need except for the missing enzyme. Therefore, we

should have everything we need to make vitamin C work in our bodies

and shouldn't need much larger amounts of other nutrients to assist in

the roles that ascorbic acid plays.

This is vastly simplified but it seems plausible to me.

Tom

September 3, 2007

--- April Streeter <april.streeter@...> wrote:

> Just a question about Vitamin C - isn't there quite a good amount

> of Vitamin C in lactofermented sauerkraut and other ferments eaten

> more widely in our ancestors' diets?

April,

Sauerkraut does have a good amount of vitamin C, but from what I have

been able to find, no more than about 15 to 30 mg of C per 100 g of

sauerkraut. The 15 mg figure is from the USDA and is for canned

sauerkraut that most likely is not lacto-fermented. The 30 mg figure

was provided by Wilderness Family Naturals for their lacto-fermented

product: http://www.wildernessfamilynaturals.com/sauerkraut.htm

Even at 30 mg per 100 g, that is less than raw cabbage. Here is a

list of some foods high in vitamin C, showing the amount of vitamin C

in mg for 100 grams of each food (from USDA except where noted):

1678 Acerola, (west indian cherry), raw

243 Peppers, hot chili, green, raw

228 Guavas, common, raw, pink fleshed

171 Peppers, sweet, red, cooked, boiled, drained

128 Peppers, sweet, red, raw

93 Broccoli, flower clusters, raw

74 Peppers, sweet, green, cooked, boiled, drained

65 Broccoli, cooked, boiled, drained, without salt

64 Wolfberries (goji), raw (from Navitas Naturals)

62 Brussels sprouts, cooked, boiled, drained

59 Strawberries, raw

57 Cabbage, red, raw

53 Oranges, raw, all commercial varieties

46 Cauliflower, raw

45 Cabbage, chinese (pak-choi), raw

44 Cauliflower, cooked, boiled, drained

40 Broccoli, frozen, chopped, cooked, boiled, drained

38 Cabbage, cooked, boiled, drained

37 Melons, cantaloupe, raw

37 Cabbage, raw

33 Grapefruit, raw, white, all areas

31 Grapefruit, raw, pink and red, all areas

31 Garlic, raw

30 SAUERKRAUT (from Wilderness Family Naturals)

29 Spices, cinnamon, ground

28 Spinach, raw

28 Chicken, liver, all classes, cooked, simmered

28 Gooseberries, raw

26 Cabbage, chinese (pak-choi), cooked, boiled, drained

24 Asparagus, frozen, cooked, boiled, drained, without salt

23 Turkey, liver, all classes, cooked, simmered

22 Mollusks, clam, mixed species, canned, drained solids

22 Tomato products, canned, paste

With the exception of acerola cherries, you have to eat hundreds of

grams of these foods to get a gram of vitamin C. You would have to

eat over 3 kg of sauerkraut to get 1 g of vitamin C. Just to get the

RDA (male) of 90 mg per day, you would have to eat 300 g of sauerkraut

every day. Not very practical for most of us

September 4, 2007

The adrenal glands are a rich source of C.

There's a passage in NAPD about it.

-Lana

In the past, in many areas, fruits were available only seasonally,

> although in the more recent past, fruits have often been preserved for

> eating in the off season. But I have to wonder about vitamin C levels

> in the diet of our ancestors. I suspect that it was often quite low

> for large portions of the year, during winter and/or dry seasons.

> Maybe that's not optimal, but likely the way it was. We now have

> access to a much wider variety of fruits than our ancestors and

> throughout the year.

>

September 4, 2007

,

> Besides bioflavonids, what about the other compliment of nutrients

> that often come with fruits high in vitamin C?

Bioflavonoids are plant toxins and enzyme inhibitors, whereas vitamin

C is an enzyme cofactor, so I have difficulty imagining why they would

be candidates for members of a " vitamin C complex. " If they have

health benefits, it is probably through the the principle of hormesis

-- low-dose toxins revving up the defense systems of the body. Even

if it is through direct antioxidant effects, vitamin C's function as a

*vitamin* is not to be an antioxidant, but to be a cofactor for

essential enzymes.

I would think if there were viable candidates for complementary

nutrients they would be copper and heme iron, each of which are

sometimes co-cofactors for certain enzymes with vitamin C. There may

be others I don't know about.

> In the past, in many areas, fruits were available only seasonally,

> although in the more recent past, fruits have often been preserved for

> eating in the off season. But I have to wonder about vitamin C levels

> in the diet of our ancestors. I suspect that it was often quite low

> for large portions of the year, during winter and/or dry seasons.

> Maybe that's not optimal, but likely the way it was.

The Australian Aborigenes got an estimated 90 mg/day from what I've

read. I imagine a number of the groups Price studied got quite a bit

less than that.

Chris

September 4, 2007

Hi Tom,

> Most animals and plants produce their own ascorbic acid through a

> sequence of four enzyme-driven steps, which convert glucose to vitamin

> C, and humans have a defective gene that cannot make the last enzyme

> in the synthesis process, L-gulonolactone oxidase. The other three

> enzymes are intact in humans. So we're all set to produce as much

> vitamin C as we need except for the missing enzyme. Therefore, we

> should have everything we need to make vitamin C work in our bodies

> and shouldn't need much larger amounts of other nutrients to assist in

> the roles that ascorbic acid plays.

Has it been verified that we actually possess this gene, but that it

is defective, or is it just assumed that because we do not produce

this enzyme and most other animals do, we must possess a deactivated

form of it?

Such deactivation or absence could also be purposeful.

Chris

September 4, 2007

Both scenarios are correct. We possess it, in part, and as a result,

it is nonfunctional. There is enough there to hybridize to a small

probe but it seems that much of the gene has been lost - mutations

causing extra stop codons, Alu and LINE insertions, and single

nucleotide deletions. Only 5 exons of the GULO gene (compared to 12

in Rat) remain in the human genome.

Gene record for GULO

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/viewer.fcgi?db=nuccore & id=20270500

(see references listed in gene record for more details)

-jennifer

On Sep 4, 2007, at 8:16 AM, Masterjohn wrote:

> Hi Tom,

>

>> Most animals and plants produce their own ascorbic acid through a

>> sequence of four enzyme-driven steps, which convert glucose to

>> vitamin

>> C, and humans have a defective gene that cannot make the last enzyme

>> in the synthesis process, L-gulonolactone oxidase. The other three

>> enzymes are intact in humans. So we're all set to produce as much

>> vitamin C as we need except for the missing enzyme. Therefore, we

>> should have everything we need to make vitamin C work in our bodies

>> and shouldn't need much larger amounts of other nutrients to

>> assist in

>> the roles that ascorbic acid plays.

>

> Has it been verified that we actually possess this gene, but that it

> is defective, or is it just assumed that because we do not produce

> this enzyme and most other animals do, we must possess a deactivated

> form of it?

>

> Such deactivation or absence could also be purposeful.

>

> Chris

>

September 4, 2007

On 9/4/07, Steinbachs <jen@...> wrote:

> Both scenarios are correct. We possess it, in part, and as a result,

> it is nonfunctional. There is enough there to hybridize to a small

> probe but it seems that much of the gene has been lost - mutations

> causing extra stop codons, Alu and LINE insertions, and single

> nucleotide deletions. Only 5 exons of the GULO gene (compared to 12

> in Rat) remain in the human genome.

That's interesting, thanks. Another interpretation would be that

these 5 exons are used for something else.

Chris

September 4, 2007

A while back there was a discussion about Amla as not being vitamin C.

I forget what it really is.

On Sep 1, 2007, at 2:47 PM, Jane Sherwood wrote:

> " Amla is known for its nutrient dense levels of food nutrient vitamin

> C, which is approximately 10-15 times better assimilated than

> isolated USP vitamin C (ascorbic acid). "

Parashis

artpages@...

zine:

artpagesonline.com

portfolio:

http://www.artpagesonline.com/EPportfolio/000portfolio.html

September 4, 2007

> Has it been verified that we actually possess this gene, but that it

> is defective, or is it just assumed that because we do not produce

> this enzyme and most other animals do, we must possess a deactivated

> form of it?

>

> Such deactivation or absence could also be purposeful.

Yes the defective gene (=pseudogene) has been identified; looks

like a missense mutation. This summary page should have enough info to

satisfy you (even includes link to gene map):

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/dispomim.cgi?id=240400

Tom

September 4, 2007

--- Masterjohn <chrismasterjohn@...> wrote:

> I would think if there were viable candidates for complementary

> nutrients they would be copper and heme iron, each of which are

> sometimes co-cofactors for certain enzymes with vitamin C. There

> may be others I don't know about.

Maybe it's just coincidence that many fruits high in vitamin C also

have significant amounts of potassium, magnesium, and folate, but I

have to wonder if maybe it's not just coincidence. These fruits may

have evolved to attract consumption to disperse seeds. Maybe

evolution tends to favor fruits that benefit both the plant and the

consumer that disperses the seeds? Of course, that doesn't

necessarily mean that these nutrients are co-factors for vitamin C -

but it makes me wonder.

> The Australian Aborigines got an estimated 90 mg/day from what I've

> read. I imagine a number of the groups Price studied got quite a

> bit less than that.

Yes, maybe that's part of why I'm still suspicious of taking megadoses

of refined vitamin C for anything other than perhaps acute illness.

It just seems intuitively unnatural to me.

September 4, 2007

, if the fruits were not chemical and were allowed to ripen before

harvest then indeed we would be fortunate to enjoy such a bounty. I recall

a old university study that compared organic fruits and vegetable and found

organic far exceeded those of the commercial type. I do wonder how accurate

the food values are.

Peace

Ed Kasper LAc. & family

www.HappyHerbalist.com

.................................

Re: Ascorbic Acid thread

Posted by: " " oz4caster@... oz4caster

Sun Sep 2, 2007 2:46 pm (PST)