• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
- - - - -

are we in agreement that all copper supplements are bad because they're copper 2?

pills

  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic
⌛⇒ write a quiz!

#1 ironfistx

  • Guest
  • 755 posts
  • 23
  • Location:Chicago

Posted 11 October 2018 - 12:13 AM


So copper 2 is inorganic most likely which means your body can't use it.  Then this means that all copper supplements not including the one that was posted in that other thread are awful, including standard copper and balance zinc.  Is this factual?



#2 Skyguy2005

  • Guest
  • 278 posts
  • 9
  • Location:London
  • NO

Posted 11 October 2018 - 08:33 PM

No, not in my opinion. For one thing, I think the millions of copper tablets that have been consumed, the idea that they actually do nothing is a bit tinfoil. For another thing, I noticed an effect in my body that it was doing *something*.

 

But you certainly don't want loads of copper. In my opinion the best thing to do is to take 2mg copper bisglycinate weekly, and stop worrying about it. That's what I do.


Edited by Skyguy2005, 11 October 2018 - 08:41 PM.


sponsored ad

  • Advert
Click HERE to rent this advertising spot for SUPPLEMENTS (in thread) to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#3 Daniel Cooper

  • Member
  • 853 posts
  • 128
  • Location:USA

Posted 12 October 2018 - 02:08 PM

I'm not sure I agree with your conclusion.  I'm more inclined to believe that the body has a limited need for cooper and it is therefore easy to get too much if you're supplementing with it.  Copper is a trace mineral most foods.  Supplementing with concentrated quantities is not natural and can be problematic.

 

Copper (I) vs Copper (II)?  I don't think which cation you're getting is as important as the amount.

 

If you want extra copper I think you're far better off seeking out foods that contain higher quantities than using a supplement.  

 

I take a number of supplements but I won't touch any with copper in them.  

 

 

 


  • Good Point x 1

#4 Daniel Cooper

  • Member
  • 853 posts
  • 128
  • Location:USA

Posted 12 October 2018 - 02:15 PM

BTW - which cation we're talking about (Copper (i) vs. Copper (II)) does determine whether it is organic or inorganic.  Both Copper(I) Oxide and Copper(II) Oxide are inorganic compounds.  A compound is organic if it has no C-H bonds.

 

 

 


Edited by Daniel Cooper, 12 October 2018 - 02:21 PM.

  • like x 1

#5 Daniel Cooper

  • Member
  • 853 posts
  • 128
  • Location:USA

Posted 12 October 2018 - 03:23 PM

BTW - that post above should read "a compound is inorganic if it has no C-H bonds".

 

 



#6 Dorian Grey

  • Guest
  • 896 posts
  • 193
  • Location:kalifornia

Posted 12 October 2018 - 03:45 PM

Acu-cell has a good opinion on the copper issue here: https://acu-cell.com/crcu.html

 

"Chromium (Cr) and Copper (Cu) are associated trace elements, and considered essential to human health. Next to calcium and magnesium, chromium and copper are important nutrients for their anti-inflammatory properties. While neither one - with few exceptions - is generally found to be very deficient level-wise, chromium is on average always lower than copper, with virtually no exceptions.

 

Copper on the other hand is elevated in the majority of patients, which creates a chronic copper / chromium conflict ratio-wise in these individuals.  Of thousands of patients tested since the mid 1970s from different continents around the world, nearly 90% exhibited a chemical profile that in addition to their own unique chemistry, contained an underlying pattern that reflected the impact of elevated copper levels on various opposing nutrients, which include Vitamin C, chromium, sulfur, nickel, molybdenum, and hesperidin, an essential flavonoid, among others."

 

A bit further down the page: "High cellular copper levels, along with related sulfur deficiencies, can be considered to be one of the most prominent causes of many physical and mental health problems, including ADD and Alzheimer's Disease."

 

"Copper Toxicity or excessive copper levels [13] have been associated with physical and mental fatigue, sleep disorders, depression and other mental problems, schizophrenia, learning disabilities, ADD / hyperactivity, mood swings (sometimes violent, criminal or psychotic behavior) and general behavioral problems, memory and concentration problems, some dementias, postpartum depression, increased risk of infections, vascular degeneration, hemangiomas, headaches, weight gain, arthritis, spinal / muscle / joint aches and pains, and several types of cancer.

Copper is a necessary component to support angiogenesis (formation of new blood vessels in tumors), so to some extent, lowering copper reduces the risk to develop benign and malignant (cancerous) tumors. "
 
And finally: "One common effect of supplementing copper is weight gain as much as 5% or more, which is also possible when absorbing extra copper from non-dietary sources such as copper bracelets or copper IUDs. So unless gaining weight is a welcome benefit, or a reliable test indicates insufficient levels, most people should avoid mineral formulations containing either iron (which also causes weight gain), or more than 0.5 mg of copper."

Edited by Dorian Grey, 12 October 2018 - 03:55 PM.


#7 Dorian Grey

  • Guest
  • 896 posts
  • 193
  • Location:kalifornia

Posted 12 October 2018 - 04:42 PM

Yet another opinion on inorganic copper and Alzheimer's Disease from the Townsend Letter.  

 

http://www.townsendl...copper1013.html

 

"The epidemic of AD took off after 1950, about the time that the use of copper plumbing in developed countries became widespread. It is our belief that the leaching of copper from copper plumbing into the drinking water is a major causal factor in the AD epidemic. Let's examine the evidence."



#8 Skyguy2005

  • Guest
  • 278 posts
  • 9
  • Location:London
  • NO

Posted 12 October 2018 - 11:36 PM

Yet another opinion on inorganic copper and Alzheimer's Disease from the Townsend Letter.  

 

http://www.townsendl...copper1013.html

 

"The epidemic of AD took off after 1950, about the time that the use of copper plumbing in developed countries became widespread. It is our belief that the leaching of copper from copper plumbing into the drinking water is a major causal factor in the AD epidemic. Let's examine the evidence."

 

I think describing alzheimers as an epidemic is slightly incorrect because it's wrong. Alzheimers is not an epidemic because it's not infectious. The largest cause of Alzheimers is apoe4 and there is jack smack shit you can do about it.


I'm sorry I don't mean to seem unfriendly. But in my opinion it's mostly genetic.



#9 Dorian Grey

  • Guest
  • 896 posts
  • 193
  • Location:kalifornia

Posted 13 October 2018 - 12:31 AM

Point taken Skyguy.  The term epidemic was the author's, but I get your point.  

 

Regarding apoe4, do all with this variation invariably develop AD?  What of those without apoe susceptibility (do they still get AD)?  Is apoe4 a new variant?  The author made what I thought a good point when he opined: 

 

"Why is a disease that became so prevalent in the latter part of the 20th century apparently absent in the 19th century? Some say that it was there back then, just not recognized as a disease. Waldman and Lamb examined this question.5 They reviewed the extensive writings of Osler, an internist, and Gowers, a neurologist, during the latter part of the 19th century, and found no mention of an AD-like disease.6,7 More important, the textbook of pathology written by Boyd during that period and updated until 1938 made no mention of amyloid plaques and neurofibrillary tangles in brains at autopsy.8 The failure to observe AD, particularly the failure of it to show up in brain pathology at autopsy makes it unlikely that AD was present in any significant frequency in the latter part of the 19th century."

 

"Another common explanation is that since AD is a disease of aging, there were not enough old people in the 19th century to show a significant prevalence. Waldman and Lamb showed that in 1911, half the population of France was living to age 60, the age now when high prevalence of AD begins.5 US census figures for 1900 show that 3.2 million people were over 60 years of age. At today's prevalence, there would have been 36,300 US cases of AD – plentiful enough to have been present in clinics and particularly to have shown up at autopsy."

 

----------------------------------

 

If apoe4 isn't a recent genetic shift, it seems odd it was never noticed or alluded to throughout history until the 20th Century.  It's not like there weren't doctors studying disease and documenting what they found back then.  



sponsored ad

  • Advert
Click HERE to rent this advertising spot for SUPPLEMENTS (in thread) to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#10 pamojja

  • Guest
  • 1,646 posts
  • 353
  • Location:Austria

Posted 13 October 2018 - 11:15 AM

 If apoe4 isn't a recent genetic shift, it seems odd it was never noticed or alluded to throughout history until the 20th Century.

 

Maybe I've got this wrong but thought ApoE4 is protective of infection. Which with other environmental changes probably has become a complete epigenetic mismatch since the fifties.

 

 

https://en.wikipedia...polipoprotein_E

 

The three major human alleles (E4, E3, E2) arose after the primate-human split around 7.5 million years ago. These alleles are the by-product of non-synonymous mutations which led to changes in functionality. The first allele to emerge was E4. After the primate-human split there were four amino acid changes in the human lineage, three of those changes had no effect (V147L, A18T, A135V), but the fourth substitution traded a threonine for an arginine altering the protein's functionality. This substitution occurred somewhere in the 6 million year gap between the primate-human split and the Denisovan-human split, since the exact same substitutions were found in Denisovan APOE.[64]

About 220,000 years ago, an arginine to cysteine substitution took place at amino acid 112 (Arg112Cys) of the APOE4 gene and this resulted in the E3 allele. Finally, 80,000 years ago another arginine to cysteine substitution at amino acid 158 (Arg158Cys) of the APOE3 gene created the E2 allele.[65][63]

 

Also don't the Nigerian have particular high prevalence of ApoE4, but lower in Alzheimer?


Edited by pamojja, 13 October 2018 - 11:19 AM.

  • Informative x 1





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: pills

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users