BellaOnline Forums Food and Wine Low Carb How do we know about the potency of vitamins?

I think our minds must be in sync <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> I was in fact researching Vitamin C all day yesterday because the OJ makers are whining that the low carb dieters are harming their sales. But if in fact you look at the "health" of an orange vs the "health" of Orange Juice you realize the OJ is really pretty bad for you, it has no fiber, much less vitamin C (which degrades to even worse levels) and lots of sugar. Plus the vitamin C it has isn't even the good kind. So yes while digging into all of that I found that Vitamin C is made up of two parts and it's the L part that is good, while the D part really doesn't do anything.

What's even more funny / interesting is that after these forum chats we've been having I went and looked at my multivitamin container which isn't a generic brand but it's not a "high end" brand either. It's a "spring valley" which says to compare with one-a-day for women. The vitamin values are reasonable although for example it has 100% Vitamin E which is only 30 IU. I take a supplement which is 500 IU <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> As if 30 IU does you much good, those silly RDA people <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

So anyway, it uses "calcium carbonate" which is the bad limestone version. As if we eat limestone in our daily diet <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> Then it has DL-alpha tocopheryl acetate which is the synthetic version of vitamin E. I'm taking extra E anyway but it means that the "mesley" 100% of E it is giving is bad E. Third is Vitamin A. Mine lists Vitamin A Acetate which is a synthetic version of Vitamin A and not nearly as good as beta carotene.

So my multivitamin scored a 0 out of 3 <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

On the C front it just says "ascorbic acid" so lord only knows which type (D or L) it has <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Well I imagine given its other problems I do know <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Let me look into the others <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Janet and Lisa,

Thanks for all the info.
Lisa, you bring up a very important point, regarding the mulit-vitamins. I had read somewhere that the multi doesn't give you enough, usually of any one vitamin to be beneficial.
Although, if I took all of the vitamins individually I would be popping pills all day!

Lisa <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

See, Pam and Lisa, I agree about 1 multi not being enough, especially considering that the RDA levels are way too low. For example, Nature Sunshine brand "Super Supplemental" require you to take 4 pills to get all you need.

Natures Sunshine doesn't use synthetics and that's why I trust them implicity; it's not about "name brand" to me, but about their particular brand. Otherwise, you're taking stuff that's the wrong form of vitamin, not easily absorbed, and in miniscule amounts.

For example, their Vitamin E contains all 8 types of E:

Regarding CA, when I take that, I take NS's Herbal CA. Just some thoughts...

It's not really the multis' fault for not giving you "enough" because they give you the full RDA in most cases. Really it's the RDA's fault for having such low values for vitamins. Really their values are *minimum* values not to get really sick. But what they should be recommending is *optimal* values for full health. But I suppose on the other hand, if someone can only afford the 'bare minimum' they should know what that is. So they should have 2 values. One to 'not get sick' and one for 'optimal health' maybe an ODA. So people on tight budgets can aim for the RDA and people with a bit more money can go for the ODA.

So yes the multivitamin keeps your basic needs covered and then you can take supplements to get good amounts of critical vitamins. No wonder people back in the middle ages died at age 35, given the way they ate <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Exactly--low RDA guidelines. But companies can also choose to do their own independent research and go beyond and above the minimum requirements. With money the bottom line for most companies, that's probably not going to happen!

Well actually I feel for the companies on this one. If they gave you OVER the RDA on a regular multivitamin, some people would be worried that they are "overdosing" on say vitamin E even though we know that the RDA amount is less than 1/10th of what you really should be taking. So they might in fact scare people off of buying the vitamins. So I think it's good that they give a vitamin that lists 100% of everything so people think "OK I get my basics here, this is safe". Then we have to educate people better on what supplements to then add in so they know not to be scared of those scary much higher numbers. And then like we said we should have ODAs too <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

We were just all talking about this at dinner, me and Bob and some friends. They agree completely that we should have a secondary range of values which is the optimal value which people can aim for, which is about maintaining great health vs just avoiding scurvy <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

personally, i do not take a "multi-vitamin", as i like to take them individually, so i can get the mix i want. twice a day, after my protein/essential fat meal, i take the following: 2 grams of c/bioflavonoids; b(100 mg of all 9 or 10 of the various b vitamins); several drops of vitamin e oil, a&d, chelated mineral for better absorption, plus a few other pills.

if you buy vitamin e oil, it is way cheaper than in pill form. vitamin c and most minerals also come in powder form, so one does not necessarily have to sacrifice quality to fit supplements into one's budget.

Ack! I'm also taking that same Spring Valley Brand, Lisa. I guess I'll be more careful the next time around. I had no idea there was a difference.

I have a question. Is it considered unhealthy to take more than the recommended dose of my multi?

Also, I'm taking flax seed oil in the pill form, but my mom told me that a health food store owner told her that it was six times more effective to take it in regular oil form. Do you know anything about this?

hi alicia,
the next time someone tells you something, ask them why? to much mis-information is spread by someone repeating something that they were told.

the flax oil in pill form, SHOULD BE exactly the same as that in regular oil form.

but perhaps during the encapsulating process, the oil is exposed to more oxygen and light, degrading it some. but i doubt by as much as the health food store owner says.

or perhaps he was overstocked on flax oil. without knowing why he said what he said, it is hard to make any definitive comments.

I wouldn't just take multiple multis because of all the vitamins in there. Some vitamins are OK (and in fact good) to take in larger doses but there are vitamins that your body can get too much of. What I do for example is take a multi and then take additional vitamin E and C which I know are shown in studies to be beneficial in larger doses.

On flax seed oil, actually in the natural flax seed, 1/3rd of it IS oil. That contains great EFAs. So I really have to wonder, if they make it into a pill, they must either take the oil out (at least some of it) or add a ton of filler IN to it to make it a solid. Meaning that if you take 8oz of flax seed oil, and compare it to 8ox of flax seed "solid pill", in the solid pill a lot of what you are ingesting is the filler. That can't be good for you. So just on that basic logic I would have deduced that the oil form is better. If you're talking about a CAPSULE and not a pill, that might be OK ...