Does Evolution Tell Us to Take More Vitamin C?

by metatron 6 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  metatron

  Here's one for you evolution/creation enthusiasts: vitamin C

  Most animals don't need vitamin C because they have the ability to make it in their livers. However, guinea pigs , chimps, gorillas, and

  humans don't have this ability. The argument goes that monkeys lost the ability because they didn't need it, what with sitting in trees eating

  fruit all day - and , evolved from them, we didn't get it either.

  Anyhow, various vitamin C fans have pointed out that if most of these vitamin C synthesizing animals were brought up to human size, they'd

  be crankin' out gram quantities of the stuff in their furry little bodies. This then becomes an argument for large regular doses of the stuff.

  Even gorillas would end up with a lot more than a 100 milligrams or so per day, just munching on plants.

  After reading a lot on the subject - especially Linus Pauling ( famous biochemist and only guy to win two Nobel prizes) I have found

  frequent success with this practise. In my twenties, I was diagnosed with mononucleosis and told to take some weeks off work.

  After a few days of 6 - 8 grams of vitamin C, nearly all the symptoms vanished - and decades later -

  something like this happened again, as I got frequent flushing, feeling hot and generally awful for some weeks. After establishing

  that it must be a low level viral infection, I went on 6 - 8 grams a day and started getting better immediately.

  see: www.garynull.com/Documents/vitaminc.htm

  There have been studies suggesting that huge doses could even turn back polio!

  Anyway, if that bird flu comes to town, you might wanna remember this and give it a try. It has certainly worked for me.

  metatron
• 

  Enigma One

  I guess you can take the Shakley Salesman out of the KingDumb Hall but you can't take the KingDumb Hall out of the Shakley Salesman. LOL
• 

  metatron

  Read the studies, dude. I buy mass quantities at Walmart, where it's cheapest. You better stay away from poultry.

  metatron
• 

  luna2

  I have one of Dr. Andrew Weil's books and he too recommends large doses of vitamin C. It sounds very beneficial.

  My problem is that I'm rotten at taking anything regularly. I have a box of fancy smancy multi vitamin packets that my mother gave me...I keep forgetting to take them.
• 

  Sam Beli

  Met, I have long admired your observations on the WTS. In the matter of vitamin “C,” however, I must call attention to the controversial
  nature of your contentions. You refer to Linus Pauling as a biochemist. This may
  seem a small thing, but WHO2? Refers to his as a chemist: Linus Pauling, Chemist
  • Born: 28 February 1901
  • Birthplace: Portland, Oregon
  • Died: 19 August 1994
  • Best Known As: Two-time winner of the Nobel Prize Linus Pauling is considered one of the greatest chemists of the 20th century, a
  winner of the Nobel Prize for chemistry in 1954. He was an outspoken activist against
  nuclear testing, and won the Nobel Prize for peace in 1962. After 1970 his fame -- and
  controversial reputation -- centered on his insistence that Vitamin C had the power to
  fight cancer and the common cold. Not everyone, by any means, agreed with him about vitamin “C” including the author of
  “The Dark Side of Linus Pauling's Legacy.” This article can be found here: http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/pauling.html Regarding your reference to Gary Null and his web site, the Quack Watch site expresses
  concern over his views of vitamin “C” http://www.quackwatch.org/04ConsumerEducation/null.html There is anecdotal evidence, such as your own experiences with vitamin “C” that support
  its use in various disease processes, but in the view of many medical experts, scientific
  evidence is lacking.
• 

  John Doe

  Can anyone say placebo effect? :-)
• 

  metatron

  I stand corrected on the biochemist vs chemist technicality.

  As to people like Mr. Barrett and other pseudo skeptics, they often love ad hominen arguments - and rather hypocritically so.

  www.quackpotwatch.org/quackpots/quackpots/barrett.htm

  Turnabout is fair play.

  As to evidence on mononucleosis and Vitamin C, see www.orthomed.com/titrate.htm

  The remarks about mono are entirely consistent with my experience in having mono and other viral illnesses.

  What is the greatest and best evidence of efficacy? That it works in your experience! Double- blind test, you say?

  No, any such test concerns persons I don't know - conducted in circumstances I wasn't a part of - together with claims

  I can't prove or disprove. If you find my opinion radical, then consider the bizarre logic which tells a person "what you are

  taking doesn't work, even though it represents a more direct evidence than anything else this world can provide".

  Placebo? Some "professional" skeptics ( and who pays them, I wonder?) are now denying the placebo effect completely -

  an event I think is motivated by their intense distaste for anything that might look miraculous and non-reductionistic.

  If otherwise, the hypocrisy - and lack of ethics - that needs attention here is , if we blame so many good effects on the placebo

  effect, then billions should be poured into finding its secret, as it may be the most powerful influence on healing ever

  observed.

  I believe the whole field of medicine is headed into a crisis in which the development of new drugs simply halts, crushed under

  the weight of regulatory costs - and a profound lack of understanding of how health is really maintained. Almost 80 years ago,

  the Lancet decried the utter lack of progress in cancer research, especially involving animal experiments. Here we are in 2005,

  in much the same condition. Something is very wrong.................

  metatron