Vitamin C Forum

They say anti-oxidants above what can be found in diet are no good.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/st ... 02,00.html

Such bullshit. Sometimes a true statement can contain enormous lies.

It is true statement that a good diet gives everything that one needs. However, getting this good diet is impossible in today's world. I highly recommend reading Weston Price's classic, "Nutrition and Physical Degeneration" in order to fully understand this. There is no way that a person living within a hundred miles of developed civilization can eat a diet which gives all the necessary nutrients. Additionally, even if a person could get all the nutrients from a perfect, natural diet, this would not be enough to deal with the environmental oxidant burden. Each molecule of pollution entering the lungs needs an antioxidant to deal with it. Each adrenalin molecule made because of a modern psychological stress uses a molecule of vitamin C for its formation. Etc...

Dolev wrote:Such bullshit. ...

I don't think you read the article well. This is not a bullshit article. It refers to the very real results of many recent studies that are showing unexpected adverse effects from high dose anti-oxidant supplementation. This isn't just one study or one person's opinion. The unexpectedly bad results have been confirmed many times. We need an intelligent discussion of this effect.

you can find the articles here:
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Car ... TF-8&hl=en

This is a search for the so-called CARET studies. There was another study called ATBC. And there have been more.

Here is a link to an ATBC summary:
http://www.cancer.gov/newscenter/pressr ... BCfollowup

I read the article well. I read it twice. I concur with Dolev.

Thanks for posting those links. It is very disconcerting that a US government site would still be posting invalid data! See:
http://www.nutraingredients.com/news/ne ... p?id=54057

NEW LOOK, OLD FINNISH DATA! contradicts long held and widely reported belief that beta carotene increases cancer risk in smokers...

In the 'new' study, researchers from Yale University and other US institutes together with colleagues from the National Public Health Institute in Helsinki, Finland analysed the same data but looked at the total intake of antioxidants, including selenium, vitamin E, vitamin C as well as carotenoids and flavonoids, rather than one single antioxidant.

The researchers report that smokers in the top quintile of dietary antioxidant intake had a 16 per cent lower risk of lung cancer compared to those with the lowest intake.

Smokers who ate large amounts of meat had a 25 per cent decrease, despite red meat having a high oxidative effect.

The results counter the earlier findings of the Finnish ATBC study, carried out in the 90s, which found an increased risk of the disease for smokers with high beta-carotene intake.

There are a great many lessons to be learned here.