Suzanne Humphries on "Natural" versus Bio-identical vitamin C

[ofonorow]

youtube direct link

I only had time to listen to the first 3 minutes - but its clear Dr. Humphries has it right - per usual.

Okay, so youtube banished this "Natural versus Synthetic" video. If anyone can locate a copy on a free platform, let us know!

In the meantime here is the great doctor's wonderful lecture on Vitamin C.

https://www.brighteon.com/462b3ff0-23fb ... de42615567

[skwoodwiva]

I only had time to listen to the first 3 minutes - but its clear Dr. Humphries has it right - per usual.

One of the first comments for this vid produced this link
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 8708001500
Showing better results for a low dose of camu camu vs AA.
Hmmm



Also from comments
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rk1_EA7cHA8

[ofonorow]

Oxidative stress as well as inflammation plays a pivotal role in the pathogenesis of atherosclerosis

The anti-oxidant property is not the key to atherosclerosis - it is the scurvy (inability to make collagen) that is the key property.

Proof.

There are 4 "sterio isomers" of vitamin C: The L-, D-, LD- and DL- ascorbates. (read Pauling's HTLLAFB for the description of the ascorbate (vitamin C) molecule in 3D space)

All forms are equal "anti oxidants" yet only the L- version of Vitamin C cures scurvy (and thus, only the L- shape cures CVD - chronic scurvy)

[Opti]

She recommends sodium ascorbate form orally. You can even snort it like cocaine.

[ofonorow]

To be fair, she assumed it was like snorting cocaine which she claims to have never used

I finally watched the entire video - agree with her almost 100% - and appreciated that plug for the Foundation and our White Paper https://www.vitamincfoundation.org/NaturalC.htm

[Frodo]

[Frodo]

[Steve Brown]

I think Dr. Humphries makes a mistake when she uses the term "whole vitamin C" to refer to what I would call "citrus nutrient complex" which would include ascorbate, bioflavonoids, citric acid, etx. I do not doubt that citrus nutrient complex is beneficial, as it includes antioxidants besides ascorbate, including citric acid, and citrates which prevent kidney stones. However, some people have attempted to hijack the term "vitamin C" to mean citrus nutrient complex, and that is an incorrect and overbearing tactic used to promote a view that is hostile to synthetic ascorbate. So, using the term "whole vitamin C" is an unnecessary concession to that group. It is well established that the term "vitamin C" refers to a specific molecular compound known as ascorbic acid and its ascorbate salts.

[ofonorow]

Except, don't blame Dr. Humphries for the term. It is her followers who are questioning her for not getting behind the "whole vitamin C complex" fiction. She is defending her recommendations and did not make that up.

And in case you don't know, those who promote the "vitamin C complex" specifically say that ascorbic acid is not vitamin C, i.e. ascorbate is not part of the complex, but a "protector" of the vitamin C complex.

Well-meaning Weston-Price people have written books which hold that ascorbic acid is not vitamin C!!!.

We have covered this a great deal, including this "White Paper." https://www.vitamincfoundation.org/NaturalC.htm

[Steve Brown]

Except, don't blame Dr. Humphries for the term.

I don't blame her for the term, but if I were in her position, I would avoid using the term "whole vitamin C" and would refer to it by a different term. It just seems to me that using their term "whole vitamin C" sounds too much like a validation of their wrong terminology. It is really quite ridiculous of them to say that ascorbate is not vitamin C, similar to those who say the world is flat.

[experimental1]

When vitamin C became commercially available in the late 1930's, it was just 'vitamin C' or ascorbic acid. I read an interview with Dr. Irwin Stone on Andrew Saul's site. Yes, there are various forms of ascorbic acid, now, but Dr. Stone, his family and friends with illnesses just used the readily available vitamin C and it proved to be quite effective. The same can be said of the form used by Dr. Klenner.

Sometimes, as I read, it seems as if the wheel is being reinvented. I see the same with B12. When it became commercially available, the only form was cyanocobalamin. My father had a boyhood friend who became a doctor and B12 shots were a mainstay of his practice. Maybe cyanocobalamin isn't an 'ideal' form of B12 but it has helped many people, saved many lives and is still used throughout the world because of its low cost as compared to methylcobalamin and hydroxycobalamin.

[C-can]

I'm not a doc, but for me, Dr. Klenners results alone are enough to demonstrate that it's not necessary to have a c complex.

60 out of 60 patients cured of polio. Are we trying to do better than 100%?

[Blanko]

[pamojja]

That's also the conventional view on vaccines, which primed the public for accepting the COVID shots.

I've been for over a decade on health forums, and personal experiences over those years tell vaccines either do little, or hurt badly, especially with pre-existing diseases. Conventional views usually don't consider other's personal health journey experiences, and are therefore mere statistical constructs, believed blindly with little practical value.

On the other hand, as personal health journey experiences do show: there are many bio-chemical individualities: what helps or hurts one, doesn't the same to another. Those who don't take responsibilty for their own health - expirience first hand what helps or hurts their individuality - but hand it over to their doctors are the ones who fall for blind conventions.

Your believe my personal experience of Orthomolecular medicine putting my 3 main chronic disease all into remission - PAD, COPD and ME/CFS symptoms - all considered by 'conventional view' incurable, is just the ignorance of someone how doesn't speak from own experiences (maybe because your bio-chemical individuallity has put you in a place of excellent health, therefore lacking any experiences with it. Yet for me those experiences also only came with advanced age..)

Bottom line, do you trust God, or are you dependent on man-made creations to stay and get well?

That bottom line of yours is also just a blind believe without any experience.

If one doesn't believe in a Creator god, but just what one experiences from day to day - co-dependent arising and passing: We all depend on the oxigen molecules, where some of them in each breath may already have been passed through Cesar, Jesus, and uncountable beings who breath it before The plants and animals grown on this earth (arising and passing without any merely believed creator god), our ancestors who learned to prepare and thereby making nutrients more accessible, in turn how to extract certain natural molecules which enhance and protect the ever increasing onslaught of modern-day toxicity - like ascorbic acid - too.

Of course, as long you don't experience for yourself you are only able to believe or not believe blindly. So for you the statement about vaccines and ascorbic acid appear the same: mere beliefs. Doesn't mean others never had experiences with vaccines or ascrobic acid. And aren't merely believing or not believing anymore.

[Blanko]

"This video is no longer available because the YouTube account associated with this video has been terminated."

Regarding the video in the first post. Why would the account be terminated?