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

Photo
- - - - -

High Ferritin Levels for Optimal Hair Growth - Dilemma

ferritin iron saturation hair

  • Please log in to reply
69 replies to this topic

#1 JBForrester

  • Guest
  • 350 posts
  • 147
  • Location:Auckland, NZ

Posted 14 September 2013 - 09:22 PM


So, I was recently tested by my dermatologist, who specializes in hair, for my iron/ferritin levels because of my thinning hair and lack of growth. For optimal hair growth and health, ferritin needs to be up to 70 ng/mL and mine was at 20. So he put me on Ferrex 150 Forte Plus, which is a folic acid, B12, elemental iron prescriptive supplement. The only problem is that I got tested about 2 months later after taking one pill every night, and although my ferritin went up to 26, my iron saturation levels were at 57%, which exceeds the range at what they should be at, suggesting slight iron overload (range is 15-50%). What should I do in this case? I'm worried that if I continue to take the Ferrex, my iron saturation will continue to rise, which can put me at risk for many problems, or suggest hemochromatosis. At the same time, it's a Catch-22 because if I stop taking the Ferrex, my ferretin will continue to be low and my hair will not grow at it's peak level. Are there any things I can do to get my ferritin levels up without affecting my saturation? Or is it a lost cause?

#2 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 14 September 2013 - 10:49 PM

JB, are you eating enough protein? Maybe you just aren't making enough transferrin. Not making protein is also consistent with hair and skin issues. Could you have amino acid absorption problems? How is your GI health?

sponsored ad

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

#3 JBForrester

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 350 posts
  • 147
  • Location:Auckland, NZ

Posted 15 September 2013 - 01:19 AM

Hey niner, good questions/observations... It may be that I don't eat enough protein. I stopped eating a lot of protein in the past years because of a bad experience with the Paleo diet while having an undiagnosed thyroid problem. It seemed to have caused some type of irritation during that time because I was eating so many raw vegetables and so much protein, but without enough calories in total to suffice my caloric expenditure. And I was a backpacking alone in a foreign country at the time. So I'm not sure if it's just psychological - the thought of eating a lot of protein brings my body back into some type of "ptsd" mode, or physical - if I truly did do some damage to my liver, etc. In terms of GI health, there's nothing outstanding that would cause concern physical-wise, outside of the fact that I have a few food sensitivities, but lab-wise I haven't been tested. I don't feel well eating dairy, raw veggies (outside of tomatoes), or lots of animal proteins. But some days I just can't eat that much at all otherwise I feel too sick. Do you think I should take labs or suggest any to find out about my GI health? Or maybe eat daily nutritional yeast to get the full dietary aminos?

#4 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 15 September 2013 - 02:09 AM

It might be a good idea to make sure that you're getting the right nutrients for hair production. Hair is made of keratin, which has a lot of sulfur in it. I've seen hair nutrient formulas that contained MSM and cysteine, among other things. Also silica, in some bioavailable form. (BioSil or JarrowSil should work.) Collagen derivatives are often claimed to improve hair growth. If you're not sure about your diet, you could run it through Cron-O-Meter, a free software package that computes the micronutrients from all the food you eat. You have to tell it exactly what you're eating, and how much you eat. Kind of a hassle, but at least it's free. If it uncovers a deficiency, it would be totally worth it.
  • like x 1

#5 JBForrester

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 350 posts
  • 147
  • Location:Auckland, NZ

Posted 15 September 2013 - 04:02 AM

It might be a good idea to make sure that you're getting the right nutrients for hair production. Hair is made of keratin, which has a lot of sulfur in it. I've seen hair nutrient formulas that contained MSM and cysteine, among other things. Also silica, in some bioavailable form. (BioSil or JarrowSil should work.) Collagen derivatives are often claimed to improve hair growth. If you're not sure about your diet, you could run it through Cron-O-Meter, a free software package that computes the micronutrients from all the food you eat. You have to tell it exactly what you're eating, and how much you eat. Kind of a hassle, but at least it's free. If it uncovers a deficiency, it would be totally worth it.


Brilliant! I've been looking for a nutritional app like Cron-o-meter for ages! Thank you so much for that! I tried MSM before for my hair, maybe I'll pick it up again. I haven't seen many valid studies on it though. So far, I'm taking a multi for hair, fish oil, pycnogenol, ALCAR, and alpha lipoic acid, vit. d, CoQ10 and synthroid. And then the Ferrex, which I'll be starting again shortly. I'm going to start on Cron-o-meter tomorrow though, and hopefully that'll uncover something about this mysterious ferritin issue.

#6 ta5

  • Guest
  • 952 posts
  • 324
  • Location: 

Posted 15 September 2013 - 04:55 AM

I can't answer your question, but...

+1 for all niner's suggestions.

Plain old gelatin has been shown to increase hair growth. Cysteine too. You could add the major amino acids in gelatin like lysine and proline.

Vitamin C can increase iron absorption. Foods high in phytic acid can inhibit it.
I see Ferrex has Vitamin C too:

Elemental Iron:

(as Sumalate®*) 50 mg

(as Polysaccharide Complex) 100 mg

Succinic Acid 50 mg

Vitamin C

Ascorbic Acid (as Calcium Ascorbate) 60 mg

Threonic Acid (as Calcium Threonate) 0.8 mg

Folic Acid, USP 1 mg

Vitamin B12 (Cyanocobalamin) 25 mcg


Silly. You could take way more C and B12.

You can actually buy keratin supplements. I'm not sure there's any evidence they help grow hair though:
http://www.iherb.com...ggie-Caps/34433
https://www.swansonv...n-50-mg-60-caps
http://www.vitacost....n-60-capsules-1
http://www.iherb.com...0-Capsules/7914

If there's any inflammatory component to your hair loss, a dandruff shampoo could help, like Nizoral.
Inositol is often quoted as encouraging hair growth. I'm not sure how.
Other B vitamins, like B5 and Biotin could help if you were deficient, which you probably aren't. It wouldn't hurt to take a B complex though.
There's some connection between Vitamin D and hair growth too.
I would guess your doc has ruled out other hormone issues, and it's not androgenic hair loss.

#7 mikey

  • Guest
  • 987 posts
  • 171
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 15 September 2013 - 06:58 AM

So, I was recently tested by my dermatologist, who specializes in hair, for my iron/ferritin levels because of my thinning hair and lack of growth. For optimal hair growth and health, ferritin needs to be up to 70 ng/mL and mine was at 20. So he put me on Ferrex 150 Forte Plus, which is a folic acid, B12, elemental iron prescriptive supplement. The only problem is that I got tested about 2 months later after taking one pill every night, and although my ferritin went up to 26, my iron saturation levels were at 57%, which exceeds the range at what they should be at, suggesting slight iron overload (range is 15-50%). What should I do in this case? I'm worried that if I continue to take the Ferrex, my iron saturation will continue to rise, which can put me at risk for many problems, or suggest hemochromatosis. At the same time, it's a Catch-22 because if I stop taking the Ferrex, my ferretin will continue to be low and my hair will not grow at it's peak level. Are there any things I can do to get my ferritin levels up without affecting my saturation? Or is it a lost cause?


That isn't a large increase in ferritin.
Vitamin A is required for utilization of iron in the body.
Are you getting enough vitamin A - say 5,000 IU to 10,000 IU/day?

In an eight-week double-blind, placebo-controlled study of 251 anemic pregnant women, the combination of 8,000 IU of vitamin A (retinol palmitate) and 60 mg of iron was effective in eliminating anemia in 97% of the women compared with only 68% for those women who supplemented with 60 mg of iron alone.
http://www.ncbi.nlm..../pubmed/7901636

Also taking iron with acids, like vitamin C, increases absorption tremendously.
One study showed that taking iron with orange juice increased absorption 87%. (I don't have the reference close at hand.)

Vitamin A deficiency may also impair mobilization and excretion of iron, so having adequate vitamin A is important to reduce the potential for toxicity.
http://www.ncbi.nlm..../pubmed/8054324

So, supplementing with 5,000 - 10,000 IU of vitamin A/day along with iron will improve utilization, as well as reduce the potential for accumulation that might result in toxicity.

Further, iron's potential for toxicity is primarily its pro-oxidant potential.

A mouse study showed that having adequate vitamin E entirely protected the mice from the lethal oxidative toxicity of iron.
http://jn.nutrition....23/10/1649.long

Important for absorption and utilization of iron are vitamin C (1,000 mg when taking iron) and vitamin A (5,000 - 10,000 IU/day).

And then protection from the potential for toxicity requires vitamin A for mobilization and excretion of iron and vitamin E to inhibit iron's potential oxidative toxicity. (800 IU/day).

There are a number of nutrients that are required for healthy hair, as Niner said, but the product that caused the most improvement in my hair count was Tocomin SupraBio - tocotrienols.

I wrote a page on healthier hair that covers my use of tocotrienols, viewable here - http://www.michaelmooney.net/hair.html
  • like x 2

#8 JBForrester

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 350 posts
  • 147
  • Location:Auckland, NZ

Posted 15 September 2013 - 08:28 PM

This is all great info. Thanks so much you guys.

@ ta5 - I'll definitely try the gelatin, though I haven't found any studies on it's efficacy, only anecdotal reports. Couldn't hurt to try? As for cysteine, are you talking about NAC? My Dr. said I still have very thick hair in terms of how group-compact it is up-close, if that makes sense. My worries are more that the individual hairs have thinned to a frightening degree, as well as the color fading (I'm a bright red-head turning blonde). I do have male-patterned hair loss on the corners of my hair line (yikes! Thanks dad) but I think the low ferritin has exacerbated it tremendously. I'll try your suggestions though and see if it helps. Vitamin C I definitely need to uptake.

@ mikey - That's a really good observation about Vitamin A. I just checked my intake of vitamin A in Cron-O-Meter, and on average my vit. A intake is about 4% of my daily recommendation! Wow. Time to change my dietary habits and/or supplementation. I read the bit about Tocomin SupraBio (plan to read more of your page when I have more time, too), and it definitely seems quite worthy of trying out. I noticed Tocomin SupraBio is part of the vitamin E family - weighing it's positive anti-oxidant effects, would this suggest that it is safer than taking plain vitamin E supplements? There have been studies that show the dangers of taking Vitamin E as a supplement, so I'm pretty hesitant about that.

And back @ niner - You noted that it could be an amino acid absorption problem - and I think you may be onto something. Tell me if this a stretch:

In case any of you don't already know this, 3 years ago I was naively duped into going for free to a Cosmetic Spa to get what I now know was a procedure that kills subcutaneous fat. Before this, my health was at it's finest; stable weight, no health issues, clear smooth skin, and extremely energetic. About 2 weeks after this procedure, things started to go awry - my weight, my energy, my concentration, my hormones, were not acting the same as they had been. It took 1.5 years later after mounds of research to understand that this procedure (called "Thermage") indeed melted my fat, and thus stormed up huge metabolic problems. By deleting fat storages, it wreaked havoc on my ability to store essential nutrients as well as storing important hormones within my body. Also, any time subcutaneous fat is reduced in a person, the percentage of visceral fat increases (in liposuction patients, visceral fat increased by 13%), if caloric expenditure via vigorous exercise is not done on a daily basis. Metabolic issues have been reported in those who have less subcutaneous fat (such as those with apple-shaped bodies), and a common way of treating Type II Diabetes is through something called TZD, which increases subcutaneous fat. Anyway, a recent study has shown that indeed, essential amino acids are not processed properly in those with metabolic issues, and fat transplantation helps the break down of such amino acids. So, could it be that after such a procedure 3 years ago, it wreaked havoc to my processing abilities of nutrients? Hmm... Check it out:
http://www.futurity....c7488-206322057

#9 ta5

  • Guest
  • 952 posts
  • 324
  • Location: 

Posted 15 September 2013 - 10:00 PM

@ ta5 - I'll definitely try the gelatin, though I haven't found any studies on it's efficacy, only anecdotal reports.


Hautarzt. 1989 Aug;40(8):490-5.
[Low dosage retinol and L-cystine combination improve alopecia of the diffuse type following long-term oral administration].
[Article in German]
Hertel H, Gollnick H, Matthies C, Baumann I, Orfanos CE.
Universitäts-Hautklinik und Poliklinik, Freien Universität Berlin.
In a pilot study (I) the efficacy of a new combination therapy for hair loss of the diffuse type was tested in 36 patients, followed by a double blind study with 47 patients. The daily dosage was 18,000 IE retinol, 70 mg L-cystine and 7000 mg gelatin. The clinical efficacy was evaluated by standard methods, such as the preparation of trichograms and measurement of the hair density before and after treatment. The pilot study demonstrated a significant improvement, with reduction of the telogen rate by 8.3%, an increase of the anagen rate by 11%, and an increase of the hair density by 6.9%. In the double blind study (II) the trichogram showed a significant decrease of the telogen rate by 13.5% compared with pathological baseline values. There was no change in the placebo group. The lowered anagen rate of 47.2% was improved by 8%, whereas the mean value in the placebo group decreased from 47.7% to 39.9%. In addition, the percentage of dysplastic anagen hairs improved by 7.4%, as against further impairment with an increase of 26% in the placebo group. During oral therapy no systemic side-effects were detected. We conclude that long-term oral therapy with high doses of L-cystine and gelatin in combination with vitamin A may have beneficial effects on diffuse hair loss.
PMID: 2676911

This one isn't very good, but it's the only other reference I could find on pubmed:

Boll Soc Ital Biol Sper. 1983 Jan 31;59(1):20-5.
[Gelatin-cystine, keratogenesis and structure of the hair].
[Article in Italian]
Morganti P, Bruno C, Colelli G.
It is known how noticeable modifications may be induced in the high sulphur content proteins of wool, by enrichment of the diet of sheep with cysteine or sulphur amino acids. It is also well known how the oral ingestion of gelatin significantly increases hair diameter and the degree of hardness of finger and toe nails. To the end of verifying the possible stimulating selective action performed by cystine and gelatin in the keratinization processes of the hairy structures, it was controlled: amino acids content in hair of normal rat after oral ingestion of a controlled quantity of gelatin-cystine added in the diet. The same experiments have been carried out on rats in which the condition of sufference of the hair was induced by means of a biotin-free diet. From the obtained data it seems that gelatin-cystine, added in the diet of normal or suffering rats, helps to modify the cysteine content of the sulphur-rich hair proteins (+ 50% abt.). The diet supplement bring about a considerable increasing of CYS (+ 35%) with a decreasing of GLY (- 15%).
PMID: 6189501

Wikipedia cites these references for gelatin and hair growth:
  • Morganti P., Randazzo S.D., Bruno C, (1982) "effect of gelatin cysteine on hair after a three months treatment" J. Soc. Cosmet. Chemists 33, 95.
  • Randazzo S.D., Morganti P., (1982) "The influence of gelatin cysteine supplementation on the amino acids composition of human hair", accepted for presentation on XVI intern. Congress of Dermatology May 23–28 Tokyo.
  • Morganti P., Bruno C. Colelli G (1983) Geltina - cistina. Cheratogenesi e struttura pilifcra Boil, Soc, It. Biol Sper 59:20.
  • M.P DE Padova, A. TOSTI, Gelatin - Cyctine in Seborrheic Alopecia, department of dermatology university of Bologna – Italy, February 15, 1985. J Appl. Cosmetol 1968;4;55-60 (April/June 1986).
  • Morganti P., G. Fabrizl. B james, C. Bruno, titled: "Effect of gelatin-cystine and serenoa repens extract on free radicals level and hair growth". Presented at Singapore clinical dermatology 200 – Singapore 18–20 June 1998.
  • Dr. Zeev Pam, dermatologist presented a lecture titled: "Low dosage gelatin based treatments with single dose, daily, for minimum of 3-6 months in female pattern hair loss." Presented at the first International Annual Convention on the advance in hair research of the Israeli Society of Dermatology and Venereology at the Technion, faculty of medicine, Israel, in June 2010. www.drzeevpam.com
  • Dr. Nadav Pam, defended successfully the diploma work on April 2011 – “Therapeutic Effect of Gelatin as a Dietary Supplement for Female Hair Loss”, tutored by Norbert M. Wikonkál, M.D., Ph.D at the department of Dermatology, Venereology and Skin Oncology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary. No. T000538/F162573. AA187-105/06.11. The above mentioned diploma work was presented as a poster in the 15th Annual Meeting of the European Hair Research Society (EHRS), Jerusalem, Israel, and July 6–9, 2011
This and this are by Drs. Zeev Pam and Nadav Pam, probably the same as above.

#10 JBForrester

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 350 posts
  • 147
  • Location:Auckland, NZ

Posted 16 September 2013 - 12:48 AM

Excellent, thank you ta5 for posting all this. Not sure how you came across the sources as it seemed like I searched high and low, but kudos to however you found them. I'm going to buy Gelatin and L-Cystene tomorrow and see if that works in a couple weeks. I probably won't see results for around month I'm guessing.

I realize after recording in Cron-O-Meter that I also don't eat enough protein... It's a dilemma though because if I eat too much protein it seems to cause a very upset stomach for me as well as visceral weight gain oddly enough. Can nutritional/brewer's yeast work as fulfilling protein/amino acid requirements? I'd assume they'd be gentler on the stomach.

Btw, apologies to all if my last post was TMI, just wanted to provide more info that could potentially solve a problem. I don't get too embarrassed talking about it as I see it as a warning to others, but I realize some are uncomfortable learning about it.

#11 ta5

  • Guest
  • 952 posts
  • 324
  • Location: 

Posted 16 September 2013 - 01:26 AM

I'm going to buy Gelatin and L-Cystene tomorrow and see if that works in a couple weeks.


You asked about NAC before, and yes, I think NAC would be a better choice. That should supply cysteine in a more beneficial form. Plus, if there's any chance that your hair loss is associated with PCOS, or a similar mechanism, NAC should help there too. There are a number of studies on NAC over the last few years for PCOS that look good. Not that you have PCOS, but at least NAC has been shown to help for hair loss from a different cause. It should be positive in any case.

As far as judging the effects of any hairloss treatments, pcosfaq.com says, "it's important to understand that the hair cycle is long, and it is practically impossible to see new hair growth before 3 to 6 months. Also, the hair cycle progresses through its stages in order. Hair enters the resting (telogen) phase, then the hair is shed before a new hair starts growing (anagen). Any hair in telogen must fall out before it will start growing again. This means that any hair loss treatment that works will probably be associated with initial shedding as new hairs come out of telogen. This is naturally alarming to see."

If you have PCOS, or you have androgenic alopecia, the root of the problem and the most effective treatments will be completely different. In that case you would want to target your hormones, androgens and insulin. I'm sure your doctor is aware of that though.

#12 mikey

  • Guest
  • 987 posts
  • 171
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 16 September 2013 - 01:32 AM

This is all great info. Thanks so much you guys.

@ ta5 - I'll definitely try the gelatin, though I haven't found any studies on it's efficacy, only anecdotal reports. Couldn't hurt to try? As for cysteine, are you talking about NAC? My Dr. said I still have very thick hair in terms of how group-compact it is up-close, if that makes sense. My worries are more that the individual hairs have thinned to a frightening degree, as well as the color fading (I'm a bright red-head turning blonde). I do have male-patterned hair loss on the corners of my hair line (yikes! Thanks dad) but I think the low ferritin has exacerbated it tremendously. I'll try your suggestions though and see if it helps. Vitamin C I definitely need to uptake.

@ mikey - That's a really good observation about Vitamin A. I just checked my intake of vitamin A in Cron-O-Meter, and on average my vit. A intake is about 4% of my daily recommendation! Wow. Time to change my dietary habits and/or supplementation. I read the bit about Tocomin SupraBio (plan to read more of your page when I have more time, too), and it definitely seems quite worthy of trying out. I noticed Tocomin SupraBio is part of the vitamin E family - weighing it's positive anti-oxidant effects, would this suggest that it is safer than taking plain vitamin E supplements? There have been studies that show the dangers of taking Vitamin E as a supplement, so I'm pretty hesitant about that.

And back @ niner - You noted that it could be an amino acid absorption problem - and I think you may be onto something. Tell me if this a stretch:

In case any of you don't already know this, 3 years ago I was naively duped into going for free to a Cosmetic Spa to get what I now know was a procedure that kills subcutaneous fat. Before this, my health was at it's finest; stable weight, no health issues, clear smooth skin, and extremely energetic. About 2 weeks after this procedure, things started to go awry - my weight, my energy, my concentration, my hormones, were not acting the same as they had been. It took 1.5 years later after mounds of research to understand that this procedure (called "Thermage") indeed melted my fat, and thus stormed up huge metabolic problems. By deleting fat storages, it wreaked havoc on my ability to store essential nutrients as well as storing important hormones within my body. Also, any time subcutaneous fat is reduced in a person, the percentage of visceral fat increases (in liposuction patients, visceral fat increased by 13%), if caloric expenditure via vigorous exercise is not done on a daily basis. Metabolic issues have been reported in those who have less subcutaneous fat (such as those with apple-shaped bodies), and a common way of treating Type II Diabetes is through something called TZD, which increases subcutaneous fat. Anyway, a recent study has shown that indeed, essential amino acids are not processed properly in those with metabolic issues, and fat transplantation helps the break down of such amino acids. So, could it be that after such a procedure 3 years ago, it wreaked havoc to my processing abilities of nutrients? Hmm... Check it out:
http://www.futurity....c7488-206322057


First, the poor quality studies that attempted to make vitamin E look toxic have been dismissed.
For instance, a better quality study came out this year that showed that it's almost impossible to take too much natural form vitamin E - http://www.medicalne...ses/259150.php.
Here's a list of rebuttals to the notion that vitamin E causes health problems, along with some enlightening information about vitamin E's benefits:
http://newhope360.co...id=nl_npi_daily
Too Much Vitamin E Linked to Bone Disease - Wrong!
Vitamin E Attacked Again - Of Course - It Works
Vitamin E Study Used Synthetic Vitamin E Resulting in More Prostate Cancer
Negative Vitamin E Study by Miller Rebutted 2004
Another Excellent Rebuttal to Negative Vitamin E Study by Miller
Vitamin E Study Misinformation Again
Vitamin E Resource Page Helps Clear Up The Nonscience
Rebuttal To The JAMA Vitamin E Study From The Canadian Asthma Prevention Institute
Vitamin E Prevents Lung Cancer
Vitamin E Improves Immune Response to Fight Colds

But tocotrienols, while being in the same molecular family as d-alpha tocopherol (vitamin E), have somewhat different roles in health.

I remember reading data that showed that, I believe it was gamma and delta tocotrienols exhibited ~40 times more antioxidant effect in skin, which might explain how Tocomin SupraBio could increase hair count.

If its antioxidant effects counters super-oxide's deleterious effects on hair follicles, this might allow the )(dysfunctional/dormant) hair to grow, which is what I experienced - more hair count and healthier hair, too.

As we age our body's control of super oxide (SO) via SOD doesn't function as well, and so SO can damage hair follicles. Note that we don't lose hair, they just becomes dysfunctional and go dormant.

That's what balding is, dysfunctional hair follicles.

Also, note that Carotech, the manufacturer of Tocomin SupraBio claim that it absorbs about three times better than other tocotrienols.

I don't know if that's true, but I do know that my hair became considerably thicker after five months of daily use of their product - taking three capsules every morning, at least an hour before taking my multi that contains high doses of vitamin E, because any amount more than a tiny amount of vitamin E inhibits tocotrienol absorption.

I received independent confirmation that it wasn't just my imagination that my hair was thicker from a good friend who lives about an hour away, so I only see him every few months.

He came to visit after my hair had thickened. He sat down and the first thing out of his mouth was, "Your hair is thicker. What are you doing to make it like that?"

I also gave a lecture in Albuquerque about a year ago and one of the people in the audience had moved their from LA back when my hair was thinner and had more salt in it.

During the Q & A after the lecture, someone asked about losing hair and I got into my explanation of what's on my hair page.

The guy who had moved there from LA raised his hand and said, "The last time I saw in you in LA three years ago, your hair was definitely thinner and whiter. No question. It's maybe two shades darker and definitely thicker now."

To sum it up, if you take vitamin C (1,000 mg at the time you take iron) and vitamin A (8,000 IU/day - as was in the study - but anywhere between 5,000 and 10,000 IU/day is known to be safe) you will not only absorb the iron better but the vitamin A will increase iron's utilization, thus your ferritin should increase significantly. The vitamin A will also improve your body's ability to mobilize and excrete iron, so that it's safer.

Hope all this helps.

#13 JBForrester

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 350 posts
  • 147
  • Location:Auckland, NZ

Posted 18 September 2013 - 11:29 PM

Thanks both of you guys.

@ ta5 - I'm pretty sure I don't have PCOS as my hormones to test for that via labs all came out normal. I'm not sure how one would treat androgenic alopecia though aside from Rogaine or Propecia (both to which I'm allergic). Definitely going to check out NAC though. Thank you very much for all the help! :)

@ mikey - Excellent, thank you for posting the studies on vit. e toxicity. It's so interesting how you targeted vitamin E as most helpful - for the past 3 days in a row in journaling via cron-o-meter, my vitamin e levels have been consistently #1 in the lowest of all vitamins and minerals! I look forward to getting the Tocomin Suprabio in the mail. I'm sold by your story. I will definitely check out Carotech. I just changed my vitamin A & C minimum target to your suggestion on cron-o-meter so I'll see if that helps too.

Thanks so much you guys, you've been a great deal of help! :)

I'll post back in a month as an update, and in 2 months when I get my ferritin/iron sat. blood-work done.

#14 JBForrester

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 350 posts
  • 147
  • Location:Auckland, NZ

Posted 21 September 2013 - 01:55 AM

Hmm. Mikey - what do you think of this study? http://www.nytimes.c...tudy-finds.html

I do notice that whenever I take around 2000 mg of vitamin C via supplements, I feel pretty awful. Do you have any studies that counter the one above?

#15 mikey

  • Guest
  • 987 posts
  • 171
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 21 September 2013 - 02:50 AM

Hmm. Mikey - what do you think of this study? http://www.nytimes.c...tudy-finds.html

I do notice that whenever I take around 2000 mg of vitamin C via supplements, I feel pretty awful. Do you have any studies that counter the one above?


I remember reading that nonsense back when it was published.

My opinion is it was just more snot made up by the anti-vitamin vampires, generally whore scientists in cahoots with
the medical/pharmaceutical industry - to cook up bogus studies to scare people from taking nutrients that might make them healthier, so they need less drugs over the long term.

That study is simply the product of competition with the vitamin industry.

More credible is the research of Dr. Carol S. Johnston, head of USDA nutrition for 30+ years, who was assigned to find a tolerable upper limit for vitamin C and could not find it.

I wrote the following for a white paper on nutrient dosing:

There is no solid scientific reason for an LOAEL (Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level) or NOAEL (No Observed Adverse Effect Level) for Vitamin C. The National Academy of Sciences established a NOAEL for Vitamin C in June, 2000 because they were directed to establish one. They could not find support for any toxic dose for Vitamin C, so they arbitrarily placed an NOAEL with no solid data to validate it.

The above statement regarding “no solid data to validate it” is supported by a study sponsored by the U.S. Government Institute of Medicine-sponsored Food and Nutrition Board.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Johnston CS. Biomarkers for establishing a tolerable upper intake level for vitamin C. Nutr Rev 1999 Mar;57(3):71-77.
Dietary reference intakes (DRIs) for vitamin C for healthy U.S. populations are currently being formulated by the Panel on Dietary Antioxidants and Related Compounds of the Food and Nutrition Board of the Institute of Medicine. A major task of the Panel is to analyze the evidence of adverse effects of high-dose vitamin C intakes to derive, if appropriate, a Tolerable Upper Intake Level (UL) for vitamin C. The present report details current and past research examining potential adverse effects of supplemental vitamin C. The available data indicate that very high intakes of vitamin C (2-4 g/day) are well tolerated biologically in healthy mammalian systems. Currently, strong scientific evidence to define and defend a UL for vitamin C is not available.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Johnston said that there is no "strong scientific evidence” to defend a position for a "tolerable upper limit" (UL) for Vitamin C --- because Vitamin C has not been shown to cause toxicity to cells in the body, even at very high doses. (Note: UL equals the Tolerable Upper Limit, which is generally in the same dosage range as the NOAEL.) She also noted that 2000 to 4000 mg was a daily dose that may be optimal for humans, based on her extensive review of the scientific literature.

I see no credible data being published since she determined this in her comprehensive review of the published literature to change anyone's perspective on vitamin C's lack of cytotoxicity.

Vitamin C is actually safer than milk, as mother's milk was shown to have killed 155 babies because of drugs that passed through breast milk in the 2010 report of the US Poison Control Centers.

Vitamin C doesn't kill cells, even when dosing exceeds bowel tolerance levels.

In fact, higher cell concentrations of vitamin C have been noted to kill cancer cells by US Govt researcher Mark Levine.
Please read: http://www.michaelmo...forvitaminC.htm

I don't understand why you would feel bad when taking 2,000 mg of vitamin C, but we are each unique.

By the way, I routinely take 3,000 mg of vitamin C several times per day and have for 46 years. But that's just me.
As I said, we are each unique.

Edited by mikey, 21 September 2013 - 02:48 AM.


#16 JBForrester

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 350 posts
  • 147
  • Location:Auckland, NZ

Posted 21 September 2013 - 03:00 AM

Really interesting. Thanks Mikey. I do remember when I ate bags upon bags of tangerines when I came down with mono in college, and within a week I was up and running again. When I stopped with the bags it seemed to come back.
So wait, when you say 3000 mg several times per day, are we talking about over 11,000 mg? I've read somewhere that that is the extreme UL but again, it seems you've shown otherwise, and you sound perfectly healthy. I've realized that the Vit C supplements I take have corn syrup as its first ingredient, which could possibly explain the awful feeling, though not entirely sure. Do you have any specific brand suggestions?

#17 mikey

  • Guest
  • 987 posts
  • 171
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 21 September 2013 - 04:14 AM

Really interesting. Thanks Mikey. I do remember when I ate bags upon bags of tangerines when I came down with mono in college, and within a week I was up and running again. When I stopped with the bags it seemed to come back.
So wait, when you say 3000 mg several times per day, are we talking about over 11,000 mg? I've read somewhere that that is the extreme UL but again, it seems you've shown otherwise, and you sound perfectly healthy. I've realized that the Vit C supplements I take have corn syrup as its first ingredient, which could possibly explain the awful feeling, though not entirely sure. Do you have any specific brand suggestions?


I take 3,000 mg several times a day, because I find vitamin C's bowel tolerance effect happens in the 4,000 to 5,000 mg range for me. So, I keep my dosage far below those levels.

Since it only lasts in the blood stream for a few hours, it is prudent to take it several times a day.

Ah. NEVER take a supplement that has odd ingredients that aren't necessary. Avoid any products that contain corn syrup.

Is that a chewable vitamin C product?

The reason the manufacturer puts corn syrup in a pill is to entertain people's want for sweets.

As Linus Pauling said, "Just buy the cheapest vitamin C you can get."

But make sure that it doesn't have additives. And don't buy chewables, because vitamin C is an acid, and might damage the enamel on your teeth.

Here's a list of things to avoid in supplements:

Gluten, gelatin, nuts, wheat, yeast, pollen, sugar, buckwheat, dairy, corn, soy, sodium aluminosilicate, dyes or artificial colorings.

Normal ingredients that are required to make tablets that are OK include:


Microcrystalline Cellulose, Croscarmellose Sodium, Magnesium Stearate, Stearic Acid, Calcium Silicate.

These are just tabletting agents, and are harmless.

#18 JBForrester

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 350 posts
  • 147
  • Location:Auckland, NZ

Posted 21 September 2013 - 05:58 AM

Ah gotcha. Yes, it was a chewable, and it had most of the ingredients you put in the blacklist. Oops :-/
Interesting about Vitamin C lasting in the body only a few hours. I'll take on the habit of taking a non-chewable Vit C supp every couple hours.

Thank you once again Mikey for the informative posts!

#19 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 21 September 2013 - 07:08 PM

My opinion is it was just more snot made up by the anti-vitamin vampires, generally whore scientists in cahoots with
the medical/pharmaceutical industry - to cook up bogus studies to scare people from taking nutrients that might


Hmm. I'd rather hear what's wrong with the study than this well-worn conspiracy theory... We've known for a very long time that vitamin C can have pro-oxidant behavior. This paper demonstrates something that C is doing to DNA that no one has looked at before. I think we should try to explain why this oxidation of adenine nucleotides is irrelevant, if that's the case, rather than just dismiss it out of hand.

As an aside, vitamin C enhances the absorption of iron, and in this era when we're all trying to avoid excess transition metals, It would be nice to know that C doesn't also result in increased absorption of other bad actors, like copper.
  • like x 2
  • Well Written x 1

#20 ta5

  • Guest
  • 952 posts
  • 324
  • Location: 

Posted 21 September 2013 - 08:29 PM

Hmm. I'd rather hear what's wrong with the study than this well-worn conspiracy theory...


The article refers to this study:
Vitamin C exhibits pro-oxidant properties.
Podmore ID, Griffiths HR, Herbert KE, Mistry N, Mistry P, Lunec J.
Nature. 1998 Apr 9;392(6676):559. No abstract available.
PMID: 9560150
Full text
Related citations
Cited by on Google Scholar

The Linus Pauling Institute published a review a year later:

FASEB J. 1999 Jun;13(9):1007-24.
Does vitamin C act as a pro-oxidant under physiological conditions?
Carr A, Frei B.
Source
The Linus Pauling Institute and the Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon 97331, USA.
Abstract
Vitamin C readily scavenges reactive oxygen and nitrogen species and may thereby prevent oxidative damage to important biological macromolecules such as DNA, lipids, and proteins. Vitamin C also reduces redox active transition metal ions in the active sites of specific biosynthetic enzymes. The interaction of vitamin C with 'free', catalytically active metal ions could contribute to oxidative damage through the production of hydroxyl and alkoxyl radicals; whether these mechanisms occur in vivo, however, is uncertain. To examine this issue, we reviewed studies that investigated the role of vitamin C, both in the presence and absence of metal ions, in oxidative DNA, lipid, and protein damage. We found compelling evidence for antioxidant protection of lipids by vitamin C in biological fluids, animals, and humans, both with and without iron cosupplementation. Although the data on protein oxidation in humans are sparse and inconclusive, the available data in animals consistently show an antioxidant role of vitamin C. The data on vitamin C and DNA oxidation in vivo are inconsistent and conflicting, but some of the discrepancies can be explained by flaws in experimental design and methodology. These and other important issues discussed here need to be addressed in future studies of the role of vitamin C in oxidative damage.
PMID: 10336883

1998 saw the publication of a highly controversial and well-publicized paper in Nature entitled “Vitamin C exhibits pro-oxidant properties” (51) (Table 2) . In this study, Podmore and colleagues supplemented 30 healthy volunteers with 500 mg of vitamin C daily for 6 wk following 3 wk each of baseline and placebo periods. The plasma concentration of vitamin C was elevated by 60% after vitamin C supplementation. The levels of oxidized DNA bases [8-oxogua and 8-oxoadenine (8-oxoade)], were measured in peripheral blood lymphocytes using GC-MS. The baseline levels of 8-oxogua and 8-oxoade were reported to be 30 and 8 lesions per 105 unoxidized bases, respectively (51). After vitamin C supplementation, 8-oxogua levels were significantly reduced relative to baseline and placebo, whereas the levels of 8-oxoade were significantly elevated. The reduced 8-oxogua and the elevated 8-oxoade levels returned to baseline levels after a vitamin C washout period of 7 wk.

Serious issues have been raised about this study (59, 60). First, as mentioned above, GC-MS is prone to artifactual ex vivo oxidation, particularly during DNA isolation, extraction, and derivatization for analysis. The levels of 8-oxogua reported in this study are ∼10- to 100-fold higher than those reported by others for human lymphocytes (35). Second, 8-oxoade is thought to be at least 10-fold less mutagenic than 8-oxogua (61). Third, lymphocyte vitamin C levels were not determined, even though this was the tissue in which the oxidative DNA damage was assessed. The baseline level of vitamin C in plasma, which was 51 μmol/l (62), is already saturating with respect to intracellular lymphocyte vitamin C levels (60); as such, supplementation with 500 mg/day of vitamin C could not have affected these levels. Last, the experimental design is questionable, since it was without a proper placebo group throughout the entire duration of the study.


And it goes on discussing the issues. I don't want to post the whole thing. The full text is available.

The conclusion:

Does vitamin C act as a pro-oxidant under physiological conditions? The answer appears to be ‘no’. Of the 44 in vivo studies discussed (Tables 2 3 4) , 38 showed a reduction in markers of oxidative DNA, lipid, and protein damage, 14 showed no change and only 6 showed an increase in oxidative damage after supplementation with vitamin C. Several of the studies showed a combination of effects depending on the study systems or experimental design. Even in the presence of iron (summarized in Table 5 ), vitamin C predominantly reduced in vivo oxidative damage, despite its well known pro-oxidant properties in vitro in buffer systems containing iron. In more complex and physiologically relevant in vitro systems, such as isolated or cultured cells (Table 2) and biological fluids (Tables 3 and 4) , an antioxidant role, or no effect of vitamin C, predominated over a pro-oxidant role. Studies that report a pro-oxidant role for vitamin C need to be evaluated carefully as to their choice of biomarkers, methodology, study system, and experimental design to rule out any oxidation artifacts. It is hoped that these four important considerations will be taken into account in all future studies of the role of vitamin C in oxidative damage.



#21 mikey

  • Guest
  • 987 posts
  • 171
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 22 September 2013 - 01:26 AM

Thank you, ta5. I have reviewed so many of this type of study - I think I have over two dozen rebuttals on my website, written by myself or by someone who did a good job - that I'm sorry for being a bit rude, but my patience for the garbage science wears thin.

I haven't seen one study that tried to make vitamins look dangerous that was truly good science. Not one - in a few dozen years of studying nutrition.

Vitamins are among the safest things we put in our mouths.

And there truly is a conspiracy sourced from the medical/pharmaceutical industry that tries to make the public confused about nutrients and even diet. If people are confused, they don't do anything.

A study came out a couple years ago that showed that eating fruits and vegetables didn't reduce the risk of cancer. Rubbish!

The medical vampires want to keep people so confused that they don't know how to take care of their health, so that they can be preyed upon, having to take drugs and having to use medical services.

My opinion - but there's plenty of smoking gun evidence to confirm it.
  • like x 1
  • dislike x 1

#22 mikey

  • Guest
  • 987 posts
  • 171
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 22 September 2013 - 01:31 AM

My opinion is it was just more snot made up by the anti-vitamin vampires, generally whore scientists in cahoots with
the medical/pharmaceutical industry - to cook up bogus studies to scare people from taking nutrients that might


Hmm. I'd rather hear what's wrong with the study than this well-worn conspiracy theory... We've known for a very long time that vitamin C can have pro-oxidant behavior. This paper demonstrates something that C is doing to DNA that no one has looked at before. I think we should try to explain why this oxidation of adenine nucleotides is irrelevant, if that's the case, rather than just dismiss it out of hand.

As an aside, vitamin C enhances the absorption of iron, and in this era when we're all trying to avoid excess transition metals, It would be nice to know that C doesn't also result in increased absorption of other bad actors, like copper.


Copper - a bad actor?
I'm surprised at you, Niner.

Without copper we don't make copper/zinc based super-oxide dismutase (SOD), an important anti-aging enzyme.

Copper is required for health and life itself.

But like all essential minerals it has a healthy dosage range.
Bad - good? What?

#23 mikey

  • Guest
  • 987 posts
  • 171
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 22 September 2013 - 01:38 AM

At any rate, I've been taking 45 mg/day of vitamin K2 (MK4) for two weeks and my blood pressure has definitely dropped 5 - 10 points, both systolic and diastolic.

That's not the only change I've made, so I can't say that MK4 caused this, but I'm pleased.

#24 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 22 September 2013 - 02:34 PM

As an aside, vitamin C enhances the absorption of iron, and in this era when we're all trying to avoid excess transition metals, It would be nice to know that C doesn't also result in increased absorption of other bad actors, like copper.


Copper - a bad actor?
I'm surprised at you, Niner.

Without copper we don't make copper/zinc based super-oxide dismutase (SOD), an important anti-aging enzyme.

Copper is required for health and life itself.

But like all essential minerals it has a healthy dosage range.
Bad - good? What?


You should take a look at these recent anti-copper threads: Here, here, and here. The gist of it is that copper deficiency is rare in the developed world, but with 80% of our homes plumbed with copper, and with copper in most multis, sometimes at excessive dosage, the real problem is copper overload. This is highly associated with Alzheimers. That's probably just the tip of the iceberg. I'd recommend that people don't supplement with copper without a proven deficiency.

Regarding that study finding a pro-oxidant effect with high dose C, first let me apologize for not realizing that it was from 1998! I thought that LA Times article must have just popped up on someone's newsfeed. The rebuttal from the Linus Pauling Institute was helpful- thanks for that, ta5. One thing concerns me though. The LPI is presumably pro-vitamin C, given their namesake. They mentioned a number of studies showing antioxidant effects from C, and a half dozen showing pro-oxidant effects. Rather than treat it as a vote where the majority wins, I'd like to know what circumstances lead to pro-oxidant effects, and whether or not they're significant.

#25 mikey

  • Guest
  • 987 posts
  • 171
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 23 September 2013 - 02:30 AM

As an aside, vitamin C enhances the absorption of iron, and in this era when we're all trying to avoid excess transition metals, It would be nice to know that C doesn't also result in increased absorption of other bad actors, like copper.


Copper - a bad actor?
I'm surprised at you, Niner.

Without copper we don't make copper/zinc based super-oxide dismutase (SOD), an important anti-aging enzyme.

Copper is required for health and life itself.

But like all essential minerals it has a healthy dosage range.
Bad - good? What?


You should take a look at these recent anti-copper threads: Here, here, and here. The gist of it is that copper deficiency is rare in the developed world, but with 80% of our homes plumbed with copper, and with copper in most multis, sometimes at excessive dosage, the real problem is copper overload. This is highly associated with Alzheimers. That's probably just the tip of the iceberg. I'd recommend that people don't supplement with copper without a proven deficiency.

Regarding that study finding a pro-oxidant effect with high dose C, first let me apologize for not realizing that it was from 1998! I thought that LA Times article must have just popped up on someone's newsfeed. The rebuttal from the Linus Pauling Institute was helpful- thanks for that, ta5. One thing concerns me though. The LPI is presumably pro-vitamin C, given their namesake. They mentioned a number of studies showing antioxidant effects from C, and a half dozen showing pro-oxidant effects. Rather than treat it as a vote where the majority wins, I'd like to know what circumstances lead to pro-oxidant effects, and whether or not they're significant.


I understand the potential problems with excess copper. However, if one takes a multi with zinc and they don't have enough copper to work with zinc to make SOD, there will be problems with SOD production.

I remember hearing a supplement manufacturer's researcher state the dangers of zinc above 25 mg, because of a study that showed that taking more than 25 mg of zinc cause decreased production of SOD. I asked the question, "Did they include copper in the study?"

Of course, the answer was no. So, unless one knew that zinc requires copper for SOD production they might think that zinc at 25 and above is dangerous, which is what he thought.

There needs to be a ratio of about 15:1 zinc to copper for the proper formation of SOD, and that's why you find it in multivitamins that way.

I've had a comprehensive metals urine test and copper was in the perfect range - as was zinc, so I am not worried about getting 2 mg in my multi, which also contains 30 mg of zinc.

A problem is that most people don't get these kinds of advanced tests to check their metal levels, and so, yes, we find people who develop health problems, like Alzheimer's happening, which could be prevented if more doctors were aware of this potential and ordered the metals test.

It's the same with cancer. Addressing cancer, nutritionally knowledgeable practitioners work to bring copper down to as low a level as possible because there are a dozen or so copper-based enzymes that increase angiogenesis.

Further, I have a LifeSource whole house water filter, which is supposed to be the best you get.

However, in the interest of prudence, I had a water test, and it said that none of the heavy metals were present in any significant quantities.

So, I am getting copper and zinc from food and from my multi and tests show no problems with either.

BTW: zinc is important for cognitive function, memory and such. So, we definitely want a proper balance of zinc and copper for healthy brain function, as well as zinc's other benefits, such as immune strength.

#26 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 23 September 2013 - 09:37 PM

You should take a look at these recent anti-copper threads: Here, here, and here. The gist of it is that copper deficiency is rare in the developed world, but with 80% of our homes plumbed with copper, and with copper in most multis, sometimes at excessive dosage, the real problem is copper overload. This is highly associated with Alzheimers. That's probably just the tip of the iceberg. I'd recommend that people don't supplement with copper without a proven deficiency.

Regarding that study finding a pro-oxidant effect with high dose C, first let me apologize for not realizing that it was from 1998! I thought that LA Times article must have just popped up on someone's newsfeed. The rebuttal from the Linus Pauling Institute was helpful- thanks for that, ta5. One thing concerns me though. The LPI is presumably pro-vitamin C, given their namesake. They mentioned a number of studies showing antioxidant effects from C, and a half dozen showing pro-oxidant effects. Rather than treat it as a vote where the majority wins, I'd like to know what circumstances lead to pro-oxidant effects, and whether or not they're significant.


I understand the potential problems with excess copper. However, if one takes a multi with zinc and they don't have enough copper to work with zinc to make SOD, there will be problems with SOD production.

I remember hearing a supplement manufacturer's researcher state the dangers of zinc above 25 mg, because of a study that showed that taking more than 25 mg of zinc cause decreased production of SOD. I asked the question, "Did they include copper in the study?"

Of course, the answer was no. So, unless one knew that zinc requires copper for SOD production they might think that zinc at 25 and above is dangerous, which is what he thought.

There needs to be a ratio of about 15:1 zinc to copper for the proper formation of SOD, and that's why you find it in multivitamins that way.

I've had a comprehensive metals urine test and copper was in the perfect range - as was zinc, so I am not worried about getting 2 mg in my multi, which also contains 30 mg of zinc.

A problem is that most people don't get these kinds of advanced tests to check their metal levels, and so, yes, we find people who develop health problems, like Alzheimer's happening, which could be prevented if more doctors were aware of this potential and ordered the metals test.


I wonder what that 15:1 ratio is based on. It's also commonly said to be 10:1, which makes me wonder how hard a number it really is. It's really difficult to have one-size-fits-all rules for micronutrients, because we all have different levels of dietary and environmental sources, and we have different absorption/storage/elimination genetics. The storage form of copper is in a protein called ceruloplasmin. To really get this right, you should know your ceruloplasmin level, but you'd also like to know the level of free copper. I don't know what you'd see in the urine, but my guess would be free copper. Free copper is the really bad version; you'd like that to be low. If you are in the middle of the range on a blood or urine test, that might just mean "typical", rather than optimal. Do you know if your copper levels are really where you want them to be?

A paper on copper and Alzheimers:

J Trace Elem Med Biol. 2012 Jun;26(2-3):89-92. doi: 10.1016/j.jtemb.2012.04.019. Epub 2012 Jun 4.
Copper toxicity in Alzheimer's disease: cognitive loss from ingestion of inorganic copper.
Brewer GJ.

The Department of Human Genetics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. brewergj@umich.edu

In this review I present the hypothesis that a toxic substance, inorganic copper, ingested from drinking water and vitamin/mineral supplements containing inorganic copper, is at least partially causal of the epidemic of Alzheimer's disease (AD) we are seeing in developed countries. I set the stage for this hypothesis by pointing out that the epidemic is a new disease phenomenon coinciding temporally with the use of copper plumbing in developed countries. The evidence is good that AD was nonexistent or rare in the 1800 s and early 1900 s, and the arguments that elderly people did not exist in those times, or that AD was simply attributed to senility, are refuted. The web of evidence tying ingestion of inorganic copper as a causal factor in AD is strong, and includes AD animal model data where trace amounts of inorganic copper in the drinking water markedly worsened AD, human studies where ingestion of copper supplements, along with a high fat diet, is associated with a marked loss of cognition, human studies showing a markedly higher mortality in elderly women ingesting copper supplements, as well as other data. It is likely that a high fat diet works in conjunction with ingestion of inorganic copper to increase the risk of AD. It is clear that some factor toxic to the brain is present in the environment in developed countries, but not undeveloped countries, and is a major risk factor for AD. I believe that that toxic factor is ingestion of inorganic copper.

PMID: 22673823


  • like x 2

#27 mikey

  • Guest
  • 987 posts
  • 171
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 24 September 2013 - 06:21 AM

You should take a look at these recent anti-copper threads: Here, here, and here. The gist of it is that copper deficiency is rare in the developed world, but with 80% of our homes plumbed with copper, and with copper in most multis, sometimes at excessive dosage, the real problem is copper overload. This is highly associated with Alzheimers. That's probably just the tip of the iceberg. I'd recommend that people don't supplement with copper without a proven deficiency.

Regarding that study finding a pro-oxidant effect with high dose C, first let me apologize for not realizing that it was from 1998! I thought that LA Times article must have just popped up on someone's newsfeed. The rebuttal from the Linus Pauling Institute was helpful- thanks for that, ta5. One thing concerns me though. The LPI is presumably pro-vitamin C, given their namesake. They mentioned a number of studies showing antioxidant effects from C, and a half dozen showing pro-oxidant effects. Rather than treat it as a vote where the majority wins, I'd like to know what circumstances lead to pro-oxidant effects, and whether or not they're significant.


I understand the potential problems with excess copper. However, if one takes a multi with zinc and they don't have enough copper to work with zinc to make SOD, there will be problems with SOD production.

I remember hearing a supplement manufacturer's researcher state the dangers of zinc above 25 mg, because of a study that showed that taking more than 25 mg of zinc cause decreased production of SOD. I asked the question, "Did they include copper in the study?"

Of course, the answer was no. So, unless one knew that zinc requires copper for SOD production they might think that zinc at 25 and above is dangerous, which is what he thought.

There needs to be a ratio of about 15:1 zinc to copper for the proper formation of SOD, and that's why you find it in multivitamins that way.

I've had a comprehensive metals urine test and copper was in the perfect range - as was zinc, so I am not worried about getting 2 mg in my multi, which also contains 30 mg of zinc.

A problem is that most people don't get these kinds of advanced tests to check their metal levels, and so, yes, we find people who develop health problems, like Alzheimer's happening, which could be prevented if more doctors were aware of this potential and ordered the metals test.


I wonder what that 15:1 ratio is based on. It's also commonly said to be 10:1, which makes me wonder how hard a number it really is. It's really difficult to have one-size-fits-all rules for micronutrients, because we all have different levels of dietary and environmental sources, and we have different absorption/storage/elimination genetics. The storage form of copper is in a protein called ceruloplasmin. To really get this right, you should know your ceruloplasmin level, but you'd also like to know the level of free copper. I don't know what you'd see in the urine, but my guess would be free copper. Free copper is the really bad version; you'd like that to be low. If you are in the middle of the range on a blood or urine test, that might just mean "typical", rather than optimal. Do you know if your copper levels are really where you want them to be?

A paper on copper and Alzheimers:

J Trace Elem Med Biol. 2012 Jun;26(2-3):89-92. doi: 10.1016/j.jtemb.2012.04.019. Epub 2012 Jun 4.
Copper toxicity in Alzheimer's disease: cognitive loss from ingestion of inorganic copper.
Brewer GJ.

The Department of Human Genetics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. brewergj@umich.edu

In this review I present the hypothesis that a toxic substance, inorganic copper, ingested from drinking water and vitamin/mineral supplements containing inorganic copper, is at least partially causal of the epidemic of Alzheimer's disease (AD) we are seeing in developed countries. I set the stage for this hypothesis by pointing out that the epidemic is a new disease phenomenon coinciding temporally with the use of copper plumbing in developed countries. The evidence is good that AD was nonexistent or rare in the 1800 s and early 1900 s, and the arguments that elderly people did not exist in those times, or that AD was simply attributed to senility, are refuted. The web of evidence tying ingestion of inorganic copper as a causal factor in AD is strong, and includes AD animal model data where trace amounts of inorganic copper in the drinking water markedly worsened AD, human studies where ingestion of copper supplements, along with a high fat diet, is associated with a marked loss of cognition, human studies showing a markedly higher mortality in elderly women ingesting copper supplements, as well as other data. It is likely that a high fat diet works in conjunction with ingestion of inorganic copper to increase the risk of AD. It is clear that some factor toxic to the brain is present in the environment in developed countries, but not undeveloped countries, and is a major risk factor for AD. I believe that that toxic factor is ingestion of inorganic copper.

PMID: 22673823


I remember that there is some equation related to the production of copper-zinc based SOD that created the ratio that is somewhere between 10 and 15 to 1.

My dearly departed biochemist father, who was also an exquisite mathematician, knew the details.

We need a nutritional biochemist to give us a concise answer, but I am certain that there is a mathematical relationship that should be preserved for optimal (balanced) healthy SOD production.
  • dislike x 1

#28 JBForrester

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 350 posts
  • 147
  • Location:Auckland, NZ

Posted 25 September 2013 - 07:37 AM

I have a couple more questions if you guys don't mind -

1) If I continue to take Ferrex and my iron saturation levels continue to rise, even just a little bit, can that effect my organs negatively? When I first started taking the iron, my skin was great but after a bit it seemed to be worst. I'm not sure if it was the iron or something else that I wasn't aware of. I just don't want to damage my organs, and especially my skin considering it's the largest organ.

2) I'm taking a raw powder supplement of vitamin C (Truly Natural Vitamin C), which I believe is extracted from a specific berry or fruit, supposedly providing optimum absorption. The only thing is that I've noticed my skin has gotten bad since taking it, and my stomach cannot handle it too well when I dissolve it in water and drink it either. Is there anything other than corn syrup and unnatural ingredients that I should be aware of?

I was drinking milk for about a week until 2 days ago, so I think that's something that caused some irritation to my face as well, as I usually avoid dairy.

#29 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 25 September 2013 - 10:50 AM

I don't see the Ferrex causing organ or skin damage unless you really overdo it. I'd try a capsule form of vitamin C, and take it after a meal. Vitamin C doesn't need any help getting absorbed.

#30 JBForrester

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 350 posts
  • 147
  • Location:Auckland, NZ

Posted 25 September 2013 - 11:05 AM

Thanks, Niner. So I guess I should just trust the doctor then in terms of the length of time I should be on it? I'll try the capsule form of VItamin C. Any specific brands you recommend?





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: ferritin, iron saturation, hair

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users