46 replies to this topic

[scottl]

Rick,

Sorry for the delay in getting back to you.

Get....metagenics ultrabifidus/DF and ultradophilus/DF. Metagenics sells to the public under a differernt name but if you google those you'll find what the name is.

Oh and I'd also consider (depending on the scenario) digestive enzymes and you want similase....which is now available at rite aid to my amazement.

[ajnast4r]

Get....metagenics ultrabifidus/DF and ultradophilus/DF.  Metagenics sells to the public under a differernt name but if you google those you'll find what the name is.
.

its company is called Ethical nutrients, the product is intestinal care DF...

best value for the money as far as probiotics go IMO...

[scottl]

Thanks.

[exitscratch7]

"When I take my multivitamin, I take it with some milk or cheese or something, anything with fat. That way the fat-soluble vitamins get better or something... heh."

I've heard that eating milk chocolate (versus plain chocolate) eliminates free radical scavenging activity from the antioxidants in the chocolate. Would this be true of the antioxidants in a multi? I would expect it to be so.

[Pablo M]

I've heard that eating milk chocolate (versus plain chocolate) eliminates free radical scavenging activity from the antioxidants in the chocolate.  Would this be true of the antioxidants in a multi?  I would expect it to be so.

I'm sure about a multivitamin, but adding milk to tea will negate the antioxidant benefits.

[scottl]

I've heard that eating milk chocolate (versus plain chocolate) eliminates free radical scavenging activity from the antioxidants in the chocolate.  Would this be true of the antioxidants in a multi?  I would expect it to be so.

I'm sure about a multivitamin, but adding milk to tea will negate the antioxidant benefits.

Actually I hadn't thougt about it, but tea contains the same...don't remember if it is same kind (guess it would be family), or same antioxidant as chocolate and milk "neutralizes" the antioxidants in chocolate so it would in tea as well.

[icyT]

The body might be able to take pure aminos, who knows. All I know is that it's probably cheaper and better for thermic effect if you just take it as whole proteins...

We're so obsessed with speed. 'Maybe if I digest this food in a machine down to it's base components, my body can get it faster' instead of just EATING EARLIER.

[skuldugary]

I've heard that eating milk chocolate (versus plain chocolate) eliminates free radical scavenging activity from the antioxidants in the chocolate.  Would this be true of the antioxidants in a multi?  I would expect it to be so.

I'm sure about a multivitamin, but adding milk to tea will negate the antioxidant benefits.

food for thought (no pun intended )

http://www.ncbi.nlm....7&dopt=Abstract

A single dose of tea with or without milk increases plasma antioxidant activity in humans.

Leenen R, Roodenburg AJ, Tijburg LB, Wiseman SA.

Unilever Nutrition Centre, Unilever Research Vlaardingen, PO Box 114, 3130 AC Vlaardingen, The Netherlands.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of black and green tea consumption, with and without milk, on the plasma antioxidant activity in humans. DESIGN: In a complete cross-over design, 21 healthy volunteers (10 male, 11 female) received a single dose of black tea, green tea (2 g tea solids in 300 ml water) or water with or without milk. Blood samples were obtained at baseline and at several time points up to 2 h post-tea drinking. Plasma was analysed for total catechins and antioxidant activity, using the ferric reducing ability of plasma (FRAP) assay. RESULTS: Consumption of black tea resulted in a significant increase in plasma antioxidant activity reaching maximal levels at about 60 min. A larger increase was observed after consumption of green tea. As anticipated from the higher catechin concentration in green tea, the rise in plasma total catechins was significantly higher after consumption of green tea when compared to black tea. Addition of milk to black or green tea did not affect the observed increases in plasma antioxidant activity. CONCLUSIONS: Consumption of a single dose of black or green tea induces a significant rise in plasma antioxidant activity in vivo. Addition of milk to tea does not abolish this increase. Whether the observed increases in plasma antioxidant activity after a single dose of tea prevent in vivo oxidative damage remains to be established. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition (2000) 54, 87-92

[opales]

Not at all. I'm not a doctor or a biochemist, or any other kind of chemist, or especially a salesman. I'm a computer programmer. I'm new around here, so I ask a lot of questions. I stumbled on a thread about candidiasis recently and I thought problems related to candida sounded like some of my problems. The part about "doctors can't find anything wrong" sounded like a clue to suggest candidiasis. Now that I think about it, though, your statement sounds logical.

QUOTE  (opales)
I've understood that candida infection very visible (like oral or vaginal trush) and those other claims (like tiredness, IBD amd other stomach problems just to name a few) have been debunked many times over (those making those claims usually offer some "natural" solution to this problem "ignored by established medical authorities". BS in my view). UNQUOTE


So do you think Garden of Life Fungal Defense and Primal Defense are hogwash? It could save me a lot of money if that's true.

I think the science community at the time consider yeast syndrome to be quack.

here is a good primer
http://www.quackwatc...cs/candida.html

here is another
http://www.ncahf.org...-d/candida.html

you may also want to check the articles they refer to, many of which have been published in very prestigious medical journals (unlike the yeast syndrome promoting articles, you can find my rant about this issue here)

however, from the other side I find Life Extension Foundation somewhat reliable source and the presentation sounds at least somewhat rational:

http://www.lef.org/p...028.shtml#treat

Decision is yours, and if you want my opinion only, yes I think you are wasting your money.

BTW, I think more people here should read quackwatch. I think it fairly well presents the view of "contemporary medical establishment". Although even I don't agree with everything there (for example, I have a quite extenisve supplementation regime, although sometimes I do wonder if I am just wasting a ton of money. quackwatch has quite a critical view on these, on the other hand those articles tend be somewhat old, 5+ years usually at least), I would estimate them being right on the money on at least 90% of their subjects, but it could be more like 99%. Stephen Barrett from quackwatch is the anti-christ for the alternative health community:)

Having said earlier that I find LEF somewhat reliable, I sometimes do wonder about their integrity. I mean, they do have helluva expensive product line and everything so some money is being made. Also, I find it strange that they are very eager to report every study that supports some supplement extending lives but never any studies showing otherwise (and I beöieve they do exist. The mere statistical nature of these issues predicts that even if a real effect exist, some percent of the studies should produce null results). And also, as might be the case here, they sometimes seem oddly positive about dubious or unproven alternative practices.

[scottl]

BTW, I think more people here should read quackwatch.

They trash anything alternative. No need to read it, just assume anything not approved by mainstream will be trashed--save your time.

Not that there isn't lots of trash out there but (from their table of contents):

Glucosamine for Arthritis...welcome to 1990. Nevermind that there are double blind studies showing that adding MSM to glucosamine improves efficacy they are still stuck on gee does this stuff work.

The Dark Side of Linus Pauling's Legacy??? (on vit c)

[opales]

They trash anything alternative. No need to read it, just assume anything not approved by mainstream will be trashed--save your time.

True, but

a) they are right most of the time
b) they usually rationalize their views well. in general, it is more important to hear why something does not work rather than to hear that it just does not work. then you can make up your mind on your own stand in the issue. this is actually the main reason I encouraged people to study their site. in many issues they shoot down specific claims, I have found that very helpful when trying make decision whether to trust something or not. I am sometimes suprised that the same claims using same faulty argumentation made even today might have been shot down 20 years ago.
c) with all the misinformation out there, it is beginning to be hard to tell what is mainstream and what is not (just google aspartame or candidiasis). quackwatch is a good checkpoint in that sense. if you embark from the mainstream route, you know you have to be more careful than usual.

Not that there isn't lots of trash out there but (from their table of contents):

The Dark Side of Linus Pauling's Legacy??? (on vit c)

This is a good example of b). Even if I do not agree with them on this one (my C supplementation is MUCH higher than the RDA. although as I said earlier, sometimes I do wonder whether I am just pissing away my money [glasses] ), I found the story on the original Pauling vitamin C studies quite mind opening. As I said in the other thread (and as they say in the article), you actually still see references to the those studies with the exact claims made as thirty years ago [:o] .

[scottl]

Me: "They trash anything alternative. No need to read it, just assume anything not approved by mainstream will be trashed--save your time".


You: "True, but

a) they are right most of the time"

Which states your position rather clearly.

1. I can give you...reproducible instances that chiropractic/active release techique has saved "my rear end"....in fact a chiropracter/active release technique practitioner is really the first one someone should see for soft tissue injuries. Orthopods are basically useless unless you have torn something.

2. High dose vitamin c therapy (about 500 mg/hour stopping at bowel tolerance) dramatically reduces the duration of acute illnesses in well over 90% of everyone I've recommeneded it to (say 20 people), and myself...on probably 15 occasions. Likewise for a friend and the people he has recommended it for. It ain't subtle and one can feel the difference in...literally a few hours. The cases it does't work are usually those people who live on 3 hours sleep and don't eat right, and the once a season nasty bug that goes around and people stay ill for weeks.

3. Osteoarthritis: supplements....and there are now a bewildering array to chose from for osteoarthritis, should be the first line of therapy IMHO (well aside from mechanical considerations e.g. fixing patellar tracking problems if you have them). Again there are peer reviewed double blind studies showing the benefits of glucosamine as well as the added benefit of MSM. Really anyone with any clinical experience (or just hanging around boards) would be hard pressed not to know the benefits of supps for osteoarthritis.

I could go on, but doubt there is any point. I am on call and it has been a bad weekend, so I'm in a fowl mood, but I doubt anything I say is going to change your mind, and I know the benefits experienced by things I have taken/recommended.

You have the last word.

[scottl]

I think the science community at the time consider yeast syndrome to be quack.

Here is another example. This statement is:

A. True.

B. False and

C. an incomplete understanding.


Are there are number of patients running around who have an overgrowth of yeast in their body--hell yes. Given the overusage of antibiotics this should be no shock.

Is this number as large as the number of people who think they have the yeast syndrome, likely not.

Is yeast the real problem for the overwhelming number of these people--likely not. Most of these people have LARGE amounts of mental/emotional stress (physical too in some cases). By all means given them some flora (acidohpilus/bifiduse or whatever flora du jour you wish) and possibly some digestive enzymes (broad spectrum plant enzymes).

But other then that their primary problem i.e. the mental/emotional stress needs to be adressed. This is the way to fix their problem. Untill you do that lots of anti yeast drugs may or may not help to varying degrees, but you will not solve their problems.

[rfarris]

3. Osteoarthritis: supplements ... there are peer reviewed double blind studies showing the benefits of glucosamine as well as the added benefit of MSM...

I took glucosamine/chondroitin for several years and only felt minor help. About three months ago I switched products that also includes MSM and began feeling better within a couple of weeks. Good stuff. I think the reason that GS/CS didn't help me a lot is because I don't have the typical load-bearing wear that gives most people arthritis. There are quite a few other rheumatic inflammation problems (none of which I can think of right now), and I think that's the reason that my chiropractor told me "Glucosamine/chondroitin works for some folks and doesn't work for others..."

2. High dose vitamin c ... dramatically reduces the duration of acute illnesses in ... myself...on probably 15 occasions...

Holy moley, man! I'm so sad for you. I don't think I've had an acute illness more than a couple of times in my life! Why do you think you have such strong tendencies to have acute illnesses?

-- Rick

[opales]

You: "True, but

a) they are right most of the time"

Which states your position rather clearly.

Now you are misleading, because I also said that even I do not agree with everything on that site. But even on such cases views are usually well argumented and based on hard science (which I cannot say about the natural crackpots that have taken over internet), they just might not be up-to-date.

1. I can give you...reproducible instances that chiropractic/active release techique has saved "my rear end"....in fact a chiropracter/active release technique practitioner is really the first one someone should see for soft tissue injuries. Orthopods are basically useless unless you have torn something.

I don't think they so much critisize all chiropractors, but rather the ones that claim their therapies also affect other areas of health than just muscoskeletal system (sadly, most chiropractors do just this).

QUOTE (opales)


I think the science community at the time consider yeast syndrome to be quack.



Here is another example. This statement is:

A. True.

B. False and

C. an incomplete understanding.


Are there are number of patients running around who have an overgrowth of yeast in their body--hell yes. Given the overusage of antibiotics this should be no shock.

Well, then you are advocating something that is in contradiction with science community's view (implying that you think that top medical scientists in the world are ignorant). What are you basing your notion on?


quote from Stephen Barret in quackwatch:

I believe that practitioners who diagnose nonexistent "yeast problems" should have their licenses revoked.

I guess you are hoping that Stephen does not get more power over decisions on practicioner licenses [tung]

[ajnast4r]

Stephen Barret in quackwatch:

most of quackwatch is bullshit btw