Health Supreme by Sepp Hasslberger

Networking For A Better Future - News and perspectives you may not find in the media

Networking For A Better Future - News and perspectives you may not find in the media

Health Supreme

News Blog

Site Map

NewsGrabs

Economy

Environment

Epidemics

Health

Human Potential

Legislation

Pharma

Science

Society

Technology

The Media

War Crimes


Articles Archive

 

See also:

 

Communication Agents:

INACTIVE  Ivan Ingrilli
  Chris Gupta
  Tom Atlee
INACTIVE  Emma Holister
  Rinaldo Lampis
  Steve Bosserman
  CA Initiative
  CA Journal

 

Robin Good's
Web sites:

 

Other Interesting Health Sites:

 

The Individual - Human Ability:

 

Society/Politics:

 

Economy & Environment:

 

Technologies -
New Energy:

 

Physics:

 

Information:

 

The blog universe:

June 14, 2003

Vitamins - good or bad?

Categories

Health authorities around the world, despite their intimate knowledge of the benefits of vitamins as demonstrated in a variety of scientific publications, are reluctant to recommend these vital substances. Some have even gone so far - as the UK Medicines Control Agency, to issue high profile warnings against "taking too much" although actual statistics show that vitamins and minerals are by far the safest things you could ever swallow, safer than food and safer by a huge margin than pharmaceutical drugs.

To illustrate the deep contradiction, I would almost say the schizofrenic way of thinking which pervades those august halls in which sit our "health guardians",

I want to share with you some comments received from a friend today:

So, yesterday we learn (yet again) that 'vitamins might be bad for your health', and this morning we hear that taking folic acid during pregnancy may reduce the risk of having a baby with cleft lip and palate and that giving cancer patients a form of vitamin D could help radiotherapy work more effectively.

Note however that the 'vitamin D' used here was actually a 'derivative' of vitamin D called EB 1089, and that EB 1089 is apparently modified so it has "fewer calcium-related side-effects". Hmmm, can't have cancer patients taking that nasty natural unpatented stuff, now can we? And never mind all of the studies that have shown that ergocalciferol (one of the dietary forms of vitamin D) can inhibit tumour growth, as the researchers obviously forgot to mention that it is bad for your health.

Is this the future of medicine? Small wonder that many consumers must be confused.....

 


posted by Sepp Hasslberger on Saturday June 14 2003
updated on Tuesday December 4 2007

URL of this article:
http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/sepp/2003/06/14/vitamins_good_or_bad.htm

 

 


Readers' Comments















Security code:




Please enter the security code displayed on the above grid


Due to our anti-spamming policy the comments you are posting will show up online within few hours from the posting time.



 

 

RGTV News

 

The Individual Is Supreme And Finds Its Way Through Intuition

 

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

These articles are brought to you strictly for educational and informational purposes. Be sure to consult your health practitioner of choice before utilizing any of the information to cure or mitigate disease. Any copyrighted material cited is used strictly in a non commercial way and in accordance with the "fair use" doctrine.

 

108



Enter your Email


Powered by FeedBlitz