Natural vs. synthetic vitamins
My recent post on minerals (Are mineral supplements a waste of money?) has sparked a discussion on synthetic vs. natural vitamins, which I think may be of interest. This is an exchange of e-mails between myself and Dr. Leo Rebello from India, an ayurvedic physician, homeopath and naturopath who is an outspoken critic of the prevailing paradigm on AIDS.
Leo correctly points out that we should all eat fresh, live food and that our digestive process is of decisive importance in allowing us to absorb what we eat. He is generally against supplying "synthetic" nutrients in the form of supplements, saying that we must change our ways to really be healthy.
I cannot fault him for that view, but I do believe that in a pinch, even vitamins that have not been synthesized in the intestinal tract but outside of it, supplied in supplement form, can be life-saving.
Here is the e-mail exchange here between myself and Dr. Leo Rebello from India.
From: "Dr. Leo Rebello"
To: "Josef Hasslberger"
Subject: Re: What the vitamin crowd never tells you
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2003For the following reasons Josef, why I wished to know from Dr. Rath whether his Vitamins were safe or not. And since, Ralf knew it, he avoided to reply to my direct question and did not invite me to Hague.
I, being a naturopath, know the importance of pure food and good GI tract -- nothing more, nothing less.
Leo
To: "Dr. Leo Rebello"
From: Josef Hasslberger
Subject: Re: What the vitamin crowd never tells youDear Leo,
there are serious scientists who research nutrition. There is much data of how the presence or absence of certain vital elements in our bodies affects our health. Vitamins and minerals are safe from experience and from statistical evidence available to us.
You may well prefer to use homeopathy, ayurvedic methods, fasting or whatever, but please do not discount or make less of the work that is being done on nutrition and health.
There are so many toxic pharmaceutical products and outright dangerous medical practices to vent your anger on that it would seem ridiculous to split hairs over whether "Rath's vitamins are safe". We both know that thousands of people are taking them and apparently are in better health than before. So that would indicate that they are safe, would it not? Or do you want Rath to provide you with pharmaceutical studies of possible toxic effects done on mice and guinea pigs?
I respect your being a naturopath, but please respect from your part the fact that there can be nutritional intervention by means of vital substances such as vitamins, minerals, aminoacids and enzymes and that such intervention has been shown to be successful. Just as I do not urge you to change your methods or convictions, you should respect that part of the natural health movement that uses nutritional intervention to cure the sick.
You are sending a text on minerals. What this very uninformed text says is that "[s]upposedly, too much of some of these elements can have toxic effects on your body."
I could say the same thing about every one of your ayurvedic medicines and herbs. Take too much of it and it can have toxic effects. To me, that is not an argument but demagoguery.
Let's not make our differences divide us. Rather, let's recognize that each one of us has their methods which he/she thinks are the best and that NONE of us are killing people with pharmaceutical medicines or useless medical interventions for profit.
Kind regards
Josef
From: "Dr. Leo Rebello"
To: "Josef Hasslberger"
Subject: Re: What the vitamin crowd never tells you
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003DEAR JOSEF, MY ANSWERS ARE BELOW -- CAPS BLUE. BEST WISHES, LEO
there are serious scientists who research nutrition. There is much data of how the presence or absence of certain vital elements in our bodies affects our health. Vitamins and minerals are safe from experience and from statistical evidence available to us. THIS ARGUMENT IS FAULTY. BECAUSE IN THE SCIENTIFIC FIELD, DATA IS MANIPULATED. INCIDENTALLY, NUTRITION IS A MUCH ABUSED WORD. NUTRITION MEANS TO NOURISH. NUTRITION INVOLVES ALL PROCESSES -- INGESTION, DIGESTION, ABSORPTION AND METABOLISM (ASSIMILATION). WHEN YOU EAT FOOD IN NATURAL FORM, NO ASH OR TOXIC RESIDUE IS LEFT BEHIND. NUTRITIONAL ADEQUACY OR INADEQUACY MEANS THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN INTAKE OF NUTRIENTS AND INVIDUAL REQUIREMENTS.
YOUR FOOD SHOULD GIVE YOU ALL THE VITAMINS, MINERALS, BODY BUILDERS IF THE FOOD THAT YOU EAT IS LIVING AS AGAINST DEAD, ALKALINE AS AGAINST ACIDIC, CONSTIPATING (OR CLOGGING) AS AGAINST LAXATIVE, FRESH AS AGAINST STALE. NUTRITION IS NOT GARBAGE IN, GARBAGE OUT AND YOUR STOMACH IS NOT A GROCERY BAG! ALSO NUTRITIONAL PROCESS BEGINS IN THE MOUTH AND ENDS UP IN THE LARGE INTESTINE -- IF ANY OF THESE IS FAULTY, YOUR BOTTLED VITAMINS, MINERALS OR OTHER SUBSTANCES ARE NOT GOING TO HELP YOU.
You may well prefer to use homeopathy, ayurvedic methods, fasting or whatever, but please do not discount or make less of the work that is being done on nutrition and health. TAKING SYNTHETIC VITAMINS NEED NOT MEAN ADEQUATE NUTRITION OR THAT IT WOULD LEAD TO HEALTH.There are so many toxic pharmaceutical products and outright dangerous medical practices to vent your anger on that it would seem ridiculous to split hairs over whether "Rath's vitamins are safe". I AM NOT SPLITTING HAIRS, I AM ASKING PERTINENT QUESTION, WHICH SINCE IT HAS NOT BEEN ANSWERED, MEANS THERE IS SOMETHING TO HIDE.
We both know that thousands of people are taking them and apparently are in better health than before. So that would indicate that they are safe, would it not? MILLIONS ARE ALSO TAKING CARCINOGENIC ARVs, LETHAL ANTIBIOTICS AND SWEAR BY THEIR SAFETY. DOES THAT MAKE THEM SAFE?
Or do you want Rath to provide you with pharmaceutical studies of possible toxic effects done on mice and guinea pigs? I DO NOT BELIEVE IN MICE AND PIGS BASED RESEARCH. INFACT, IF RATH WERE TO FLASH SUCH PAPERS TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS CLAIMS, I WOULD OUTRIGHT DISCOUNT HIM. LET HIM ANSWER A SIMPLE QUESTION WHETHER HIS VITAMINS ARE SYNTHETIC OR NATURAL?I respect your being a naturopath, but please respect from your part the fact that there can be nutritional intervention by means of vital substances such as vitamins, minerals, aminoacids and enzymes and that such intervention has been shown to be successful. ALL THESE BELIEFS ARE PART AND PARCEL OF ALLOPATHY OR MODERN MEDICINE, WHICH IS A PSEUDO SCIENCE. IF A CAPSULE OF MULTIVITAMINS CAN BE INVENTED, THEN THERE IS NO NEED TO EAT. YOU CAN SWALLOW ONE CAPSULE FOR BREAKFAST, ONE FOR LUNCH AND ONE FOR SUPPER. THE ONLY VITAMINS THAT I KNOW OF AND PRESCRIBE ARE SPROUTS, FRUITS, NUTS, YOGURTS AND AQUA PURA.
Just as I do not urge you to change your methods or convictions, you should respect that part of the natural health movement that uses nutritional intervention to cure the sick. FAULTY REASONING.
You are sending a text on minerals. What this very uninformed text says is that "[s]upposedly, too much of some of these elements can have toxic effects on your body." THAT TEXT WAS PART OF YOUR EMAIL. I THOUGHT IT WAS YOU WHO HAD WRITTEN IT AND ADI WAS RESPONDING TO IT. AS I WROTE TO TJARKO SOMETIME BACK, I AM NOT INTERESTED IN REHASHED MATERIAL LIKE THAT.
I could say the same thing about every one of your ayurvedic medicines and herbs. Take too much of it and it can have toxic effects. To me, that is not an argument but demagoguery. EVEN SEX IN EXCESS IS TOXIC!!! WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO PROVE?
Let's not make our differences divide us. HOW HAVE YOU COME TO THAT CONCLUSION? INFACT, UNLESS WE ASK PERTINENT QUESTIONS, WE MAY WILLY-NILLY BECOME SOMEONE'S PUPPETS.
Rather, let's recognize that each one of us has their methods which he/she thinks are the best and that NONE of us are killing people with pharmaceutical medicines or useless medical interventions for profit. THERE ARE NO BETTER METHODS THAN NATURAL METHODS -- MAKING USE OF FIVE ELEMENTS OF THE EARTH. I HAVE NOT DOUBTED GRANNY METHODS BASED ON COMMONSENSE. AS REGARDS USELESS MEDICAL INTERVENTIONS AND LETHAL PHARMA DRUGS WE ARE UNANIMOUS. SO WHY ARE YOU SPLITTING YOUR HAIRS, JOSEF?
PLEASE READ MY BRIEF LETTER ONCE AGAIN.To: "Dr. Leo Rebello"
From: Josef Hasslberger
Subject: Re: What the vitamin crowd never tells you
Dear Leo,thank you for your reply to my message. Let me attempt to explain the concept of supplying nutrients - whether "natural" or "synthetic", to keep people alive and (reasonably) healthy, versus the philosophy that we should all live an ideal life and have an ideal nutrition.
First, however, I want to take up your question, which seems to have metamorphosed between your first and your second message.
In your first message, you say "I wished to know from Dr. Rath whether his Vitamins were safe or not." Statistics (official government statistics comparing causes of death) show unequivocally that vitamins are safe. These statistics have been collected by Ron Law from New Zealand and are published on the website of La Leva.
The statistics include deaths from all supplements, whether natural or synthetic, and they show that as a category of products, vitamins are exceedingly safe, meaning they cause less deaths than even insect stings or lightning strikes, not to speak of other more frequent causes of death, such as food poisoning or - even worse - properly registered and administered "medicines" (or pharmaceutical drugs).
In your response to my message, you have changed the question to "LET HIM ANSWER A SIMPLE QUESTION WHETHER HIS VITAMINS ARE SYNTHETIC OR NATURAL?"
Now that is a different question altogether. It gets us into the area of preferences - what kind of healing philosophy we prefer. As shown above, both natural and synthetic vitamins are safe in comparison with other things we ingest, safer than both food or medicine, for that matter.There is also no chemical difference between a molecule of a "natural" vitamin and that of one that has been synthesized. They look the same under a microscope and they have the same identical function in body chemistry. Of course the food source is much better because it also contains vital co-factors that are synergistic with the vitamins and so enhance the way they work. Some manufacturers of supplements take pains to include these synergetic factors where that is possible.
I understand and agree with you, the ideal would be that we get all the nutrients we need by eating fresh food, assuming that it has not been genetically modified.
Sometimes however, intervention with nutrients (vitamins), even synthetic ones, can be life saving. I would only like to give two examples.
B vitamins and the digestive tract
Normally, we obtain B vitamins from food (some) and from internal synthesis of these vitamins in the digestive tract. As you well know, a large majority of our contemporaries has a disgestive tract that does not function properly. The main culprit here is overloading the system with crap, probably closely followed by pharmaceutical medicines wreaking havoc with the friendly intestinal bacteria. Antibiotics are just great for that. We even feed them to animals and then ingest them with their meat.
What we do when supplying "externally synthesized" B vitamins by giving a supplement is admittedly a stop-gap measure, but sometimes a necessary one because it will allow someone to function until they can be brought back to optimal intestinal health.
Vitamin C and heart disease
Human bodies are unable - in contrast to those of almost all of the animals - to synthesize their own vitamin C. When vitamin C is insufficient, a severe shortage causes scurvy. This disease has killed many a sailor until the British (the "Limeys") discovered that they could keep the sailors alive on long voyages stocking their vessels with a good supply of lime or other citrus fruit.
However, while scurvy is the most severe shortage of vitamin C and leads to a quick death, a long term, less severe shortage of the vitamin has been scientifically proven to cause vascular disease. If we go back to the statistics on vitamin safety, we see that heart disease is the number one killer in the industrialized countries.
Dr. Rath's great merit is to have scientifically researched this connection, proving that vitamin C, if ingested in liberal amounts, can prevent heart disease. This data has found its way into scientific publications but not into the mainstream of medical science, which unfortunately is conditioned by the pharmaceutical paradigm.
My point is that supplementation with vital nutrients, while not a substitute for natural living, is saving lives in a situation where millions of people - either by reason of bad intestinal health or by reason of their lifestyle - are not able to get these elements in sufficient amounts or to absorb and utilize them properly.
posted by Sepp Hasslberger on Wednesday July 16 2003
updated on Wednesday November 24 2010URL of this article:
http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/sepp/2003/07/16/natural_vs_synthetic_vitamins.htm
