Allergies: The Threshold of Reactivity

[Guest guest]

-

" JoAnn Guest " <angelprincessjo

 

Sunday, August 03, 2003 3:38 PM

Re: Allergies: The Threshold of

Reactivity

 

 

> , " thessa "

> <thessabelcher@h...> wrote:

> > Alobar, here is an article from the same website from which the

> > Allergies article was taken on why ascorbic acid is not vitamin C

> >

> > http://www.thedoctorwithin.com/articles/whole_food_vitamins.html

> >

> > , " Alobar "

> > <alobar@b...> wrote:

> > > Dear JoAnn,

> Would you please give me your reasoning for the statement

> below which says that Vitamin C is not Ascorbic Acid? All the

rest

> of the items on the long list I agree with.

> > > Alobar

>

> Alobar,

>

> According to certain sources on the Net, Ascorbic acid labeling

> as such, is determined by the FDA. They have determined that

> Ascorbic acid is not vitamin C however just a small derivative of

C.

>

> The article that Kristine sent on to the list from Alacer Corp.

> helps to explain their position somewhat. I am still reading and

> researching into the matter and apparently many of these

supplements

> are synthetic varieties which the FDA feels are inferior. This is

> not my opinion. The jury is still out on this as far as I'm

> concerned.

> If you want to read all the pros and cons of the matter, I have

some

> other articles that list some studies regarding synthetic C linking

> it to everything from kidney disease to cardiovascular buildup and

> plaque. when reading these articles however it is important to

> remember that this is just an opinion.

> If you want them sent on to the list I will be happy to comply,

> however please remember this is not in any way my personal opinion.

> I take most of what I read with a grain of salt and then try to

form

> an opinion when and if I find a consensus of reliable experts that

> agree with it.

>

> There are even some sites/studies that claim that synthetic C will

> contribute to artery plaque as well, however that seems rather far

> fetched to me.

> At the moment I'm just wondering why many of these synthetics are

> genetically engineered. Also, just wondering if the public would

> ever have been made aware about the tryptophan if the mishap had

not

> occurred. Up until that time they were getting away with it.

Really!

>

> Think about Showa Denko tryptophan. The real significance of that

> episode was that the public was at least alerted to the dangers

> involved and of the genetic engineering that was being carried out

> on them.

> I simply wish that supplements could be formulated from entirely

all-

> natural sources as they were in our parents time. The fact that

they

> are tampering with our food supply is horrific. Our supplements

> should be off-limits for this in my opinion. gosh, the damage that

> the FDA is attributing to our supplements may very well be from

> genetic manipulation. Who knows really. Another good reason to

> thoroughly search out our source.

>

> Cheers, JoAnn

 

 

OK. I read the web page you gave above some time ago, so I

am familiar with the arguments. More semantic (imo) than anything

else. Ascorbic acid is very useful to the body in quantities of

10-20 grams & higher each day. I fully concede that bioflavanoids,

etc. are also needed along with the vitamin C for some of the needed

biochemical interactions ascribed to vitamin C. But (from what I

have read) in much lower amounts. Just like certain of the B

vitamins need other B vitamins, minerals, etc, to enable the body to

use them properly.

 

Whatever you send to the list I shall skim, JoAnn. Maybe

read fully -- but I can't know that until I see it. There is a

*lot* of material which comes on this list nearly every day. Some

essays grab my attention more than others.

 

Alobar