3 ms·
Vitamin C is simply an electron donor for other chemical reactions. That can be very very important if not critical. However more is not better. Endurance athle
by ck2 5y ago
Vitamin C is simply an electron donor for other chemical reactions. That can be very very important if not critical. However more is not better. Endurance athletes know that taking more than say 200mg (twice the RDA) of C per day will defeat training adaptations because it calms the stress response too much.
However people get more than a bit overboard and woo-woo about Vitamin C.
Linus Pauling was a chemist and was obsessed with it but at least he was scientific about his quest.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linus_Pauling#Medical_research_and_vitamin_C_advocacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linus_Pauling#Medical_research...
and it gave us the Linus Pauling Institute which is a great thing for factual nutrition, I use it often as a reference:
https://lpi.oregonstate.edu/mic/vitamins/vitamin-C https://lpi.oregonstate.edu/mic/vitamins/vitamin-C
- Maursault 5y ago
- ck2 5y agops. meta analysis of 60 years of Vitamin C studies with placebo controls showed the opposite of what you are remembering, C did not prevent or reduce the common cold symptoms/severity - and the electron donor principle can be googled or it's right on that LPI link above. But ha I have the same size complaint. I have to sit there with a safety blade and cut 500mg tablets into four and then of course it's so imprecise. They market what sells. People don't want to buy 100mg if 500mg is next to it for the same price. Everyone think more is better, super-size it. BTW you can buy high quality Vitamin C gummies (ie. Vitafusion Power C) which because of their limited capacity per gummy are around only 100mg and the bottle says to take 4-6 but of course you can just take one. Studies show gummies have the same absorption quality of pills, downside is only the added sugar, which is tiny.
- Maursault 5y ago> ps. meta analysis of 60 years of Vitamin C studies with placebo controls showed the opposite of what you are remembering, C did not prevent or reduce the common cold symptoms/severity Looks like there were two conflicting studies [1][2]. One concludes Vitamin C reduces frequency of common cold, but has no effect on severity, and the other concludes Vitamin C reduces severity of common cold, but has no effect on incidence. This is disconcerting, because I recall quite clearly that the study was around 2010, was a massive study and concluded as I described above in my reply to OP. But these studies are from 2005 and 2013. Another from 2005, concerning a boost to immune system, states "These trials document that adequate intakes of vitamin C and zinc ameliorate symptoms and shorten the duration of respiratory tract infections including the common cold. Furthermore, vitamin C and zinc reduce the incidence and improve the outcome of pneumonia, malaria, and diarrhea infections, especially in children in developing countries." [3] [1] https://www.nature.com/articles/1602261 https://www.nature.com/articles/1602261 [2] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23440782/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23440782/ [3] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16373990/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16373990/
- simion314 5y ago>BigPharm Still nobody could explain with logic how American "BigPharm" and their profits and patents influence other countries from Europe ,China ,russia. Say CheepX cures Covid why would non american use it? same for the cancer miracle cure? Do all this countries ahte their people?
- dekhn 5y agomuch of pauling's quest for vitamin C wasn't scientific, that's the problem since he was otherwise scrupulous.