1 reply to this topic

[ironfistx]

A post in another thread said that b vitamins and coenzymated b vitamins should be taken in a quantity that is equal.  Does this make sense?  Aren't b vitamins converted into the other form in your body, so it shouldn't matter?  So then is it pointless to take a vitamin that is only one form, or only the other, when yo ushould be taking a form that has both?

[timar]

I don't think it matters that much, actually. "Activated b-vitamins" are hyped by the supplement industry in order to provide a selling point for more expensive supplements. Except for folate vs. folic acid, there is very little scientific evidence that coenzymated forms of B-vitamins are more potent than ordinary supplemental forms or have other benefits over them. One exception is pyridoxine-5-phosphate (P5P), which acts as an glycation inhibitor and thus may excert anti-diabetic and even general anti-aging effects, but unfortunately only at very high doses approaching the gram range, which pose a considerable risk of neurotoxicity.

 

Generally, the body is pretty good in utilizing a variety of different forms of micronutrients and metabolically converting them on demand. The only exeption is when you have some specific polymorphism or enzyme defect and one of the involved metabolic pathways doesn't work properly. In such a case, you might benefit from taking an "activated" form of a specific vitamin. People with a rather common variant of the MTHFR gene, for example, may benefit from taking methylated folate instead of folic acid. There is no such clear-cut evidence for other B-vitamins though, so if you suspect something odd, you have to find it out for yourself.

Edited by timar, 15 February 2015 - 07:40 PM.