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

Photo
- - - - -

Eating too many antioxidants?

antioxidants

  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1 illerrre

  • Guest
  • 29 posts
  • 2
  • Location:Malta
  • NO

Posted 15 October 2021 - 09:41 AM


Lately, I've become concerned about eating too many antioxidants as I eat a lot of vegetables, fruits and also supplements. 

 

How would one go about balancing a healthy intake of antioxidants with consuming too many? Because, as I think many are aware, too many antioxidants can have a pro-oxidant effect and be contra productive. 

 

I think many on this board should have this concern too as we're all concerned about our health and with all supplements out there it would be easy to overdose antioxidants, no?



#2 pamojja

  • Guest
  • 2,572 posts
  • 585
  • Location:Austria

Posted 15 October 2021 - 12:31 PM

First of all, antioxidants is a classification with many nutrients included, which for a big part have much more important multiple functions to healthy human metabolism.

On the antioxidation side, it all depents on which amounts of oxidation does occure, which can vary a lot. It is for example very fast depleted with something like sepsis arising from covid.

To be on the save side, do test for your oxidation. In my case with chronic diseases it took mega-doses amounts of supplemented 'antioxidants' for about 10 years (the multiple remissions of - by conventional medicine considered irreversible chronic conditions - took 3/6 years less), to get for example the oxidation marker of oxdized LDL (oxLDL) finally down to a healthy level.

2 weeks ago I recovered from a positive PCR test. My only symptom: 1 evening of a running nose.

As example, my intake of 'too many antioxidants' in average per day for the last 13 years: 25g vitamin C, 20.000 IU vitamin A (balanced with 200mcg vitamin D3 and 20mgs of K-vitamins in my case), 800mg mixed tocopherols incl. tocotrienols, 160mg CoQ10, 7mg Astaxanthin, 1.8 g Magnesium, 51mg of Zinc, 15mg iodine, also for example 300mg OPC, 260mg EGCG, 200mg Quercetin, 750mg cucurminoids, to mention a few. As already mentioned, that much might be needed (in my case tested for) to effect remission in 'irreversible' diseases only.

How would one go about balancing a healthy intake of antioxidants with consuming too many?


Most important is first to weight every bite of food you take and enter in a software like Cronometer to see how much 'antioxidants' you actually get from diet - and supplement at least those below the RDA. And for getting rid of the illusion one could get all nutrients sufficiently from diet..

Better would be laboratory testing of levels. Especially important: RBC Magnesium, 25(OH)D3, retinol, homocysteine, electrolytes, Glutathione peroxidase, SOD, zinc...

And again most telling, testing for oxidation levels, for example oxLDL, Malondialdehyd, 8-epi-Prostaglandin, 4-Hydroxynonenal..

Edited by pamojja, 15 October 2021 - 12:41 PM.

  • Informative x 1

sponsored ad

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

#3 illerrre

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 29 posts
  • 2
  • Location:Malta
  • NO

Posted 15 October 2021 - 01:31 PM

Thanks for that long reply, much appreciated!

 

I've already made a schedule of all vitamins and minerals to make sure I get all recommended daily intake of them through diet. I eat about 12 kilos of vegetables (mainly) and fruits every week and on top of that I live on chicken, olive oil, nuts, oat and cacao, pretty much. 

 

Supplements I do curcumin (used to do 2500 mg per day, but cut back to 700 now since I got concerned about the antioxidants), glucosamine 3000mg, lions mane extract 2000mg and vitamin D 1500 iu. 

 

I also used to do ginseng extract, alpha lipoic acid and beta carotene but stopped with that completely for now because of my concerns.

 

 

Testing is probably best yes. I actually sent a request already to the hospital here before making this thread. They only told me to consult a health center though so guess I have to make some calls. Not sure a test like that would be possible to do here. Do you know if it's an easy and common one? 



#4 pamojja

  • Guest
  • 2,572 posts
  • 585
  • Location:Austria

Posted 15 October 2021 - 04:57 PM

Testing is probably best yes. I actually sent a request already to the hospital here before making this thread. They only told me to consult a health center though so guess I have to make some calls. Not sure a test like that would be possible to do here. Do you know if it's an easy and common one?


Standard for care usually doesn't tests for oxidation markers, or even the important vitamins. One usually has to find speciality labs which do offer them, and one has to pay out of pocket oneself. oxLDL in my case with CVD was crucial, and for a reasonable price, which is important for consistent retesting (if off). The other tests can be really expensive.

The claim, that antioxidants would blunt the beneficial excercise response, is easy to test, and wasn't found to be true in my case. My excercise capacity increased.

Edited by pamojja, 15 October 2021 - 05:02 PM.


#5 GanryGazda

  • Guest
  • 4 posts
  • 2
  • Location:Lewes
  • NO

Posted 02 November 2021 - 10:36 AM

I also take supplements with antioxidants. Not because I’m suffering from a chronic disease, but to just enhance my immune system and perhaps live longer. I don't think that your thought is right. I always take many greens, herbal tea instead of coffee and the usual tea and after reading this article https://mybloommy.com/blogs/news/glutathione-foods-benefits-for-liver-skin-and-weight-loss I have started to take glutathione as one of the sources of antioxidants



#6 illerrre

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 29 posts
  • 2
  • Location:Malta
  • NO

Posted 02 November 2021 - 11:15 AM

I also take supplements with antioxidants. Not because I’m suffering from a chronic disease, but to just enhance my immune system and perhaps live longer. I don't think that your thought is right. I always take many greens, herbal tea instead of coffee and the usual tea and after reading this article https://mybloommy.com/blogs/news/glutathione-foods-benefits-for-liver-skin-and-weight-loss I have started to take glutathione as one of the sources of antioxidants

Hey, 

 

Nice to see some action in the thread!

 

But why don't you think my thoughts are right? Everywhere I read it says that consuming too many antioxidants will have a prooxidative effect and actually be harmful to the body.



#7 GanryGazda

  • Guest
  • 4 posts
  • 2
  • Location:Lewes
  • NO

Posted 02 November 2021 - 12:55 PM

Hey, 

 

Nice to see some action in the thread!

 

But why don't you think my thoughts are right? Everywhere I read it says that consuming too many antioxidants will have a prooxidative effect and actually be harmful to the body.

 

how much is it? were there any numbers?



#8 GanryGazda

  • Guest
  • 4 posts
  • 2
  • Location:Lewes
  • NO

Posted 02 November 2021 - 12:59 PM

Okay, I'll tell you right away, I'm not an expert. but if we turn to critical thinking, then we can conclude:
if all detoxification processes work normally (go to the toilet every day, sweat normally, women have monthly periods), then the body will remove all unnecessary (in its opinion)
Our body is a unique smart system!



#9 Hip

  • Guest
  • 1,355 posts
  • -135
  • Location:UK

Posted 02 November 2021 - 08:16 PM

Taking antioxidants has been shown to cause a 12% increase in mortality compared to not taking antioxidants. 


  • Disagree x 1

#10 pamojja

  • Guest
  • 2,572 posts
  • 585
  • Location:Austria

Posted 02 November 2021 - 09:09 PM

Taking antioxidants has been shown to cause a 12% increase in mortality compared to not taking antioxidants.

 
One would need access to the whole paper to know what this study really means.
 

Data extraction: We included 68 randomized trials with 232 606 participants (385 publications).

 
12% increased mortality could mean 56 persons died in the treatment arm, while 50 on placebo or nothing (ie. partly not placebo controlled). Could also mean 1200 vs. 1000, or 44000 vs. 40000....
 

Data extraction: We included 68 randomized trials with 232 606 participants (385 publications).
 
Context: ...All randomized trials involving adults comparing beta carotene, vitamin A, vitamin C (ascorbic acid), vitamin E, and selenium either singly or combined vs placebo or vs no intervention were included in our analysis. ...
 
Data synthesis: When all low- and high-bias risk trials of antioxidant supplements were pooled together there was no significant effect on mortality (RR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.98-1.06).

 

Or again, no significant effect on mortality at all.

 

...Multivariate meta-regression analyses showed that low-bias risk trials (RR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.04[corrected]-1.29) and selenium (RR, 0.998; 95% CI, 0.997-0.9995) were significantly associated with mortality. .... Vitamin C and selenium had no significant effect on mortality.

How can selenium first be significantly associated with mortality. But have no significant effect on mortality at the same time?

 

..In 47 low-bias trials with 180 938 participants, the antioxidant supplements significantly increased mortality (RR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.02-1.08). In low-bias risk trials, after exclusion of selenium trials, beta carotene (RR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.02-1.11), vitamin A (RR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.10-1.24), and vitamin E (RR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.01-1.07), singly or combined, significantly increased mortality. Vitamin C and selenium had no significant effect on mortality.

 

Again, after selenium, beta-carotene, vitamin A and E trials being excluded, only vitamin C as culprit for increased mortality would remain. But no: it too had no significant effect on mortality.

 

Conclusions: Treatment with beta carotene, vitamin A, and vitamin E may increase mortality. The potential roles of vitamin C and selenium on mortality need further study.

Aha, now we are told beta carotene, vitamin A and E increase mortality. Opposite to what just above was said:

 

If that is really the case, in 2008 all 4 forms of tocopherols and tocotrienols were not available. Additional mostly the synthetic version of vitamin E was used. Which most considerate supplementers nowadays avoid. Also remember trials with beta-carotene using unnatural high doses again of synthetic forms with worse outcomes. Vitamin A in high doses of course has to be balanced with vitamin D and Ks, which all these studies never did.

 

..In low-bias risk trials, after exclusion of selenium trials, beta carotene (RR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.02-1.11), vitamin A (RR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.10-1.24), and vitamin E (RR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.01-1.07), singly or combined, significantly increased mortality.

I'm baffled about so many contradictions in the short version of this meta-analysis, do you have the full paper?

 

 


  • Agree x 1

#11 Hip

  • Guest
  • 1,355 posts
  • -135
  • Location:UK

Posted 03 November 2021 - 12:17 AM

12% increased mortality could mean 56 persons died in the treatment arm, while 50 on placebo or nothing (ie. partly not placebo controlled). Could also mean 1200 vs. 1000, or 44000 vs. 40000....

 

In terms of the actual number of extra people who died in the antioxidant group, that number is small. It said so in the the BBC Horizon documentary about Dr Gluud's paper: Vitamin Pills: Miracle or Myth? Horizon 2018 (not available to view unfortunately). 

 

So it is more like your first example, that 56 persons died in the antioxidant group, and 50 people died in the non-antioxidant group. Thus nothing major to be worried about; you are not going to suddenly drop dead if you are taking antioxidants. 

 

But Dr Gluud's paper does show that the general belief taking antioxidants prolongs life does not appear to be true. Or at least it does not appear to be true for the common antioxidants vitamins A, E and C. Possibly some of the less well known antioxidants like Q10, N-acetyl cysteine, lycopene, alpha lipoic acid might have longevity benefits, but I have not seen any data on that.

 
An article on Dr Gluud's research into antioxidants says that:
  • Vitamin A supplements increased the risk of death by 16%
  • Beta-carotene supplements increased the risk of death by 7%
  • Vitamin E supplements increased the risk of death by 4%
  • Vitamin C supplements did not have any effect on risk of death

Edited by Hip, 03 November 2021 - 12:19 AM.






Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: antioxidants

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users