Not all vitamins are the same

[the_arcane_archivist]

Vitamins are goods but you have to source them naturally, I read a lot back when I was a teen about synthetic vitamins and found that can be quite dangerous sometimes.

I even experimented on them, as a teenager someone's mother a rich kid left him a lot of vitamins and he wouldn't take them his body was probably smart, or he was just lazy, and he gave them to me, I didn't take more then the dose, by the time I finished them I got "Furunculosis" and even more than a few white hairs and didn't feel at all well.

I remember in the past last time I got "Furunculosis" was from margarine. Then I got to search on google books inside books at that time google had all sort of books just scanned ant it wouldn't favour anyone. Also I discovered other sources. I discovered

I don't have them now , the same sources, but you can still find information:

https://www.seleneriverpress.com/historical/synthetic-versus-natural-vitamins/

https://essentialsportsnutrition.com/blogs/news/are-synthetic-vitamins-doing-more-harm-than-good-side-effects-exposed





Even if they were the same substances, which they are not, bioavailability and efficacy for synthetic vitamins compared to their natural counterparts. Natural vitamins are readily absorbed and utilized by the body due to the presence of co-factors, other substances. In contrast, synthetic vitamins may lack these co-factors, potentially reducing their bioavailability and efficacy. ​


There are structural differences between synthetic and natural vitamins, revealed through spectrographic analysis. I remember seeing Lousi Kervran looking into this, and said they have different spectrographic print from natural one but now the internet is prety bad, all that good information from 90's and early 2000's are replaced by corporate dadaism garbage.


Synthetic vitamin can be like margarine and just plug your receptors and impeding them to take the real thing just like margarine and just like the synthetic mRNA for that matter.

Take a look at the difference and judge by yourself:


https://thechifarm.com/synthetic-versus-natural-vitamins/


I remember seeing here in the open thread that even Doctor Campbell experimented with D supplements and found that it doesn't incread Vitamin D levels in the blood.

Want vitamin D:

Natural dairy products, souce them locally, exercise in the sun (outside of big cities) and dry the mushrooms in the sun (maximum 3 days) they develop D2(D2 instead of D3, effective just that it doesn't store longer in the body).





This debate is not new, check out this arguments, made in the Hearings Before the Subcommittee on Public Health and Environment of the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, House of Representatives, Ninety-third Congress made in 1974

The whole document can be downloaded for free and is pretty good because is not poluted with the whole garbage from internet era

https://www.google.ro/books/edition/Vitamin_Mineral_and_Diet_Supplements/xJ7gnOgyUdYC?hl=ro&gbpv=1&pg=PA869&printsec=frontcover&dq=synthetic

If the medical doctors know all about health, you would expect them to be the healthiest group in the country. But they definitely are not.

Reliable statistics of several different groups of people show that doctors have the worst health record of any of the following groups: (deaths per hundred thousand)

[blocks in formation]
When it comes to persons afflicted with hardening of the arteries (arteriosclerosis the figures are:

[blocks in formation]
There are only two possible conclusions to be drawn. Either the doctors do not follow their own advice, or else that they do not know "all about health." Myth No. 7.-There is never any difference between natural and synthetic vitamins.

That myth is stated in the FDA Decree in these words:

"There is no scientific evidence to suggest that there is a difference in the metabolic actions or toxic effects of synthetically produced vitamins as compared with those from natural sources." (Federal Register, Aug. 2, 1973, p. 20724) This is probably the most mystical myth of all.

As a scientist trained in biochemistry I know that for some of the vitamins, such scientific evidence does exist. But it is deeply hidden in the books on biochemistry, and relates to highly technical subject matter. For these reasons we must not impugn the motives of those who circulate this myth. They are acting out of ignorance of the scientific facts.

The truth. To bring to light these hidden scientific facts it will be necessary for me to discuss them under three headings:

7(a). Right-handed v. Left-handed Substances.

7(b). Synthetic D May Contain a Toxic Substance.


7(a). Right-handed v. left-handed substances

We all know that where a piece of machinery requires a right-handed screw, a left-handed screw will not fit. A similar condition exists with respect to some food elements.

Louis Pasteur[my note: this is obvious a mistake is obviously Louis Kervan], the famous French biologist, was the first one to discover that some of the "organic" chemicals (those containing carbon) exist in two forms, both having exactly the same chemical analysis. They are said to be the same "chemically."

However, the two forms can be readily distinguished from each other when they are dissolved in separate solutions. If a beam of polarized light (similar to a beam that has gone through a prism) is now passed through the two solutions, one solution will deflect the beam to the right. In that case the material being tested is said to be "dextro-rotary" (from the Latin "dexter," meaning "right.") Materials that produce this effect are identified by placing the letter "d" before the name of the substance. We may call them "right-handed" substances.

When we test the other form of the substance in the other solution, it may deflect the beam of light to the left. In that case it is called "levo-rotary" (from the Latin "laevus," meaning "left"). These substances are identified by placing the letter "1" before the name of the substance. We may call them "left-handed substances."

There is an entire branch of chemistry devoted to the study of compounds of this nature. It is called "stereo-chemistry", because the two forms of the same chemical compound contain exactly the same number and kinds of atoms, but the atoms are arranged differently in space. That difference causes the deflection of the beam of light in opposite directions.

The body rejects wrong-handed substances

The body is very particular about the materials it requires. If its specifications call for a right-handed molecule, the left-handed counterpart is useless, or even poisonous.

As a simple example, let us take lactic acid. Natural lactic acid coming from sour milk, consists entirely of right-handed molecules. When eaten it is converted into a form of sugar that can be used and is a food.

On the other hand, synthetic lactic acid contains only left-handed molecules, which cannot be used in the body, and actually is a poison to the body.

The ordinary chemist or doctor can see no difference between the two. They look alike and have the same chemical formula. But the human body knows the difference.

In 1944 the Journal of the American Medical Ass'n. carried an article that told of the deaths of a number of infants due to the accidental addition of lefthanded lactic acid (the poison) instead of right-handed lactic acid (the food) as a modifier in the milk formula of the babies. (Jr. AMA, 125:1179)

Natural vitamin E is a right-handed substance

Vitamin E was discovered in 1922 by Prof. Herbert Evans, of the University of California. Experiments on rats revealed an “anti-sterility" vitamin present in

green beans, cereals, and the germ of seeds. It is now known that wheat germ oil is the richest source.

Later experiments on other animals proved that vitamin E also prevents muscular dystrophy, and that it could also be called the "anti-dystrophy" vitamin.

Current biochemical opinion is that this vitamin acts to protect all cells and tissues of the body from breakdown by oxidation of body fatty substances, and that it is therefore one of the most important vitamins for human nutrition.

In 1938 three Swiss chemists developed a synthetic form of vitamin E, but soon thereafter they reported that the synthetic product had only about one-half the biological activity of the natural product. (Helvetia Chim. Acta, 211,820. P. Karr et al)

One of the most authoritative books on the biochemistry of the vitamins is "Vitamins and Co-enzymes" by Wagner and Folkers, published in 1964. That book repeats the statement made by the inventors of synthetic E, that it has only onehalf the biological activity of the natural vitamin. (p. 374)

Final and conclusive testimony is found in a comprehensive survey of the biological effects of vitamin E that was published in 1961. The article was written by Max K. Horwitt, Associate Professor of Biological Chemistry at the University of Illinois College of Medicine. In discussing the poor results from using synthetic vitamin E he said:

"It is probably fait to say that no complete, non-toxic substitute for alphatocopherol has been found.

"Not only do the other tocopherols (beta, gamma, etc.) not fill the bill in animal tissues, but to date all the synthetic tocopherols have been shown, in one way or another, to produce different physiological effects when used." (Borden's Review of Nutritional Research, Vol. 22, No. 1, p. 10)

The vitamin as obtained from natural sources is a right-handed substance. The product obtained by the synthetic process is composed of 1⁄2 right-handed molecules, and 2 left-handed molecules. The body needs the right-handed form. Vitamin E was originally called "tocopherol," meaning "child bearing" from two Greek words.

The commercially available forms of natural vitamin E carry these names: d-alpha tocopherol; d-alpha tocopherol acetate; d-alpha succinate; mixed tocopherols.

The synthetic forms either carry no prefix or have the prefix "dl," meaning that it is a mixture of right-handed and left-handed molecules.

A standard medical text, "The Physiological Basis of Medical Practice" by Best and Taylor (1961) states that:

"Today much of the vitamin E available commercially is not the natural d— alpha-tocopherol, but a synthetic dl-alpha-tocopherol acetate." (p. 912)

Many medical doctors have obtained surprising results with vitamin E When vitamin E was discovered in 1922 the news spread like wildfire over the entire medical world. Doctors everywhere started to experiment with it. So many of them reported dramatic success that in 1949 an International Conference on Vitamin E was held in New York.

Almost 100 papers were read by doctors representing universities and medical clinics from all over the world. Their evidence clearly showed that vitamin E can be successfully used in the control or cure of; complications of pregnancy; muscular dystrophy; diabetes; high blood pressure; obstruction of blood vessels; and formation of ceroid pigment (brown spots that represent the aging process) due to defective metabolism of fats.

This evidence of actual results (not mere theory) was well summed up by the presiding officer, Henry A. Matiel, M.D., of the University of Iowa College of Medicine, in this language:

"Perhaps no other of the vitamins mysteriously affects so many and so varied body processes."