All Articles

No Danger from Vitamin E and C

Niels Hertz

May 23, 2005

Many of the worlds reknown scientist state that vitamin E and C are safe to take, even in high dosages. At the same time, the theory that the two vitamins prevent chronic illnesses, is still very much alive.

A number of world-leading researchers in vitamin E and vitamin C have concluded that the two antioxidants are completely safe over a very wide dose range. Thus, they reject claims to the opposite which are expressed in particular to the public, and to a lesser degree to the scientific community.

The article draws attention to the hypothesis that antioxidants reduce the risk of Alzheimer’s, certain types of cancer, calcification of the coronary arteries of the heart, etc. – is still very viable. Although obvious deficiency diseases are rare in the Western world, low intake can accelerate more indicators of aging. This may at least be due in part to inadequate protection against free oxygen radicals.

………………………………………

By: Vitality Council

Reference:
Hathcock JN et al. Vitamins E and C are safe across a broad range of intakes. Am J Clin Nutr 2005;81:736-45.

www.ajcn.org
www.iom.dk

Antioxidants Prolong Life

Claus Hancke

May 17, 2005

An antioxidant enzyme that protects cellular energy production has been found to prolong the lifespan of mice by 20%. A world-renowned researcher thinks that this same method may also be used for humans.

Antioxidants prolong life. If you manipulate with the genes of mice to form extra much of the antioxidant enzyme catalase, the mice will live on average 20% longer.

At the same time they age more slowly, as seen by a lower tendency to cataracts as well as less age-related weakening of the heart muscle. Something similar can be achieved with human beings, though manipulation with human genes is not an option.

………………………………..

By: Vitality Council

References:
1. Science (DOI 10.1126/science.1106653).
2. Rudolph RE, Vaughan TL, Kristal AR, Blount PL, Levine DS, Galipeau PC, Prevo LJ, Sanchez CA, Rabinovitch PS, Reid BJ Serum selenium levels in relation to markers of neoplastic progression among persons with Barrett’s esophagus. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2003 May 21;95(10):750-7.

www.sciencemag.org
jncicancerspectrum.oupjournals.org
www.iom.dk

Carnitine, a Stimulant for Heart, Brain, and Muscles

Claus Hancke

May 9, 2005

Carnitine creates energy in aged cells. The message from a new scientific congress is that supplementation of carnitine seems to help against both heart disease, arteriosclerosis, and dementia.

Are your memory failing or are you loosing strength, then perhaps carnitine is the remedy for rescue

Carnitine is an – undeservedly – overlooked dietary supplement that is on its way into the ‘scientific warmth’. A clear signal is that the New York Academy of Sciences dedicate a whole volume of its famous scientific annals to carnitine alone.

Here you can read more than 197 pages from all 18 contributions given at a two-day conference on carnitine held by the academy in March 2004. The contributions are, among other things, about the importance of carnitine for the burning of fat, for the functioning of the muscles and the heart and about its promising role in the fight against a weakened memory.

………………………

By: Vitality Council

Reference:
Salvatore Alesci et al. (Eds.). Carnitine: The Science behind a Conditionally Essential Nutrient. Annals of The New York Academy of Sciences 2005, vol. 1033.

www.annalsnyas.org
www.iom.dk

Vitamin D Helps Against Lung Cancer

Claus Hancke

May 2, 2005

Vitamin D looks more and more like a sharp weapon against cancer. An American study points towards high Vitamin D status being a great advantage, if you have lung cancer.

The belief that vitamin D counteracts cancer is strongly growing. It is based, among other things, on the known normalizing effect of the vitamin on cells and tissues, but also that the frequency of, for example, breast, prostate and colon cancer is considerably higher in countries low in sun such as Denmark, where the sun low in the sky from September to May, so low that No vitamin D is formed in the skin. In addition, the Danish diet completely lacks vitamin D, except fatty fish.

By: Vitality Council

References:
1. American Association for Cancer Research. Press Release 18 April 2005.
2. Trump DL et al. Anti-tumor activity of calcitriol: pre-clinical and clinical studies. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol. 2004 May;89-90(1-5):519-26.
3. Nakagawa K et al. 22-oxa-1{alpha},25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 inhibits metastasis and angiogenesis in lung cancer. Carcinogenesis. 2005 Feb 17;[Epub ahead of print].

www.aacr.org
www.sciencedirect.com
carcin.oupjournals.org
www.iom.dk

Fish Oil Prevents Stroke

Claus Hancke

April 25, 2005

Many believe that fish oil protects against stroke, but French researchers have now discovered how this works. Fish oil helps the brain to better cope with a reduced blood supply.

Fish oil must be close to being the world’s best medicine. If you get fatty fish two to three times a week, you protect yourself against suddenly suffering cardiac arrest. The risk is halved. But also the risk of a blood clot in the brain – by far the most frequent cause of so-called cerebral hemorrhage – and thus suffering a stroke, decreases. According to the largest, but not final study, so far, it is reduced by 40%.

It is consistent with animal research. Mice that are artificially exposed to a blood clot in the brain get less extensive brain damage if they in advance are fed with fish oil. Now French scientists have proven a mechanism that might explain this phenomenon.

Scientists from France’s National Science Research Center, CNRS, are behind the discovery. They have shown that the protection of the brain cells is due to the effect of fish oil on the cell’s potassium channels.

…………………………

By: Vitality Council

References:
1. Heurteaux, C et al. TREK-1, a K(+) channel involved inneuroprotection and generaql anesthesia. EMBO J. 2004, E-pub 2004, June 03.
2. Lauritzen, I et al. Polyunsaturated fatty acids are potent neuroprotectors. EMBO J 2000;19:1784-93.
3. Ka He et al. Fish consumption and risk of stroke in men. JAMA 2002;288:3130-6.
4. Salachas, A., et al. Effects of low-dose fish oil concentrate on angina, exercise tolerance time, serum triglycerides, and platelet function. Angiology, Vol. 45, December 1994, pp. 1023-31.

embojournal.npgjournals.com
jama.ama-assn.org
www.springerlink.com
www.iom.dk

Folic Acid Lowers Blood Pressure and Prevents Blood Clots

Claus Hancke

April 19, 2005

While folic acid lowers blood pressure, the dose must be large enough to have this effect. Diet alone will not provide a significantly large enough dose, so it is essential to take folic acid as a supplement. The vitamin also simultaneously protects the heart and brain against blood clots.

It has long been documented that the B vitamin, folic acid, prevents the birth defect Spina bifida. For eight years, Canada has fortified all flour with folic acid and has thus prevented 80% of these sad cases. Enrichment is also required in the United States, but in Denmark, expectant mothers must manage on their own. It’s their own problem to find out to take a supplement – before they get pregnant!

By: Vitality Council

References:
1. Forman JP, Rimm EB, Stampfer MJ, Curhan GC. Folate intake and the risk of incident hypertension among US women. JAMA. 2005 Jan 19;293(3):320-9.
2. American Heart Association’s 44th annual Conference on Cardiovascular Disease Epidemiology and Prevention. carole.bullock@heart.org
3. Endres M, Ahmadi M, Kruman I, Biniszkiewicz D, Meisel A, Gertz K. Folate deficiency increases postischemic brain injury. Stroke. 2005 Feb;36(2):321-5. Epub 2004 Dec 29.
4. Taivani A et al. Folate and vitamin B6 intake and risk of acute myocardial infarct in Italy. Eur J Clin Nutr 2004;58:1266-72.
5. Al-Delaimy WK, Rexrode KM, Hu FB, Albert CM, Stampfer MJ, Willett WC, Manson JE. Folate intake and risk of stroke among women. Stroke. 2004 Jun;35(6):1259-63.
6. Casas JP et al. Homocysteine and stroke: Evidence on a causal link from mendelian randomisation. The Lancet 2005;365: 224-32.
7. Klerk M, Verhoef P, Clarke R, Blom HJ, Kok FJ, Schouten EG; MTHFR Studies Collaboration Group. MTHFR 677C– T polymorphism and risk of coronary heart disease: a meta-analysis. JAMA. 2002 Oct 23-30;288(16):2023-31.
8. S Schwammenthal et al. Homocysteine, B-vitamin supplementation, and stroke prevention. From observational to interventional trials. Lancet Neurol. 2004;3(8):493.

jama.ama-assn.org
www.nature.com
www.stroke.org
www.thelancet.com
www.iom.dk

Deficiency in B-vitamin Causes Dementia

Claus Hancke

April 18, 2005

According to one American study, folic acid weakens the memory of the elderly. According to another study, the opposite happens. Nearly all studies, however, indirectly indicate that folic acid prevents both arteriosclerosis and dementia.

It is a well-known fact that the B-vitamin folic acid prevents congenital neural tube defects. However, it can also lower the blood’s content of homocysteine; a biproduct in human metabolism that promotes atherosclerosis, among other things. Having an increased level of homocysteine is just as dangerous as cholesterol: Up to 40% of all individuals with premature atherosclerosis have increased blood levels of homocysteine.

The fact that homocysteine also damages the brain is indicated by more than 20 different studies. It has been found with almost unerring certainty that demented old people have more homocysteine in their blood than others and that the ones who score highest on memory tests are the ones with the least homocysteine in their blood. This is a clear argument for taking folic acid.

However, completely unexpectedly, a fly in the ointment has now appeared. A study at Rush University in Chicago has shown that the exact opposite might be the case. If you are elderly and you get more than the typical 0.4mg. of folic acid a day, your memory will decline more rapidly.

A total of 3,718 trial subjects over 65 years of age were followed for five to six years after having reported their eating habits. They were then mentally tested three times during the course of the 5 – 6 years. The results were the same whether they got folic acid from their diet or from dietary supplements: In the people taking folic acid, memory declined more rapidly than in the others.

Are these results the result of a coincidence? Anyhow, it does make you wonder that the 20% who got the most folic acid (0.7 mg. a day) did far better on the mental tests than the rest. Granted, their memory deteriorated more rapidly, but they obviously had a better memory to begin with. Why was that so, if folic acid is actually harmful?

In addition to this, doctors from the UCLA in February 2005 published results stating the exact opposite. Among 499 well-functioning 70 – 79 year-olds, most folic acid was found in the blood of the ones who had the best memory. And equally importantly: Seven years later, they were in better posession of all their faculties.

No explanation
What is true, then? If the truth lies in the Chicago study, it might be based on the co-operation between vitamin B12 and folic acid. Both vitamins reduce blood levels of homocysteine and the major task of both of them is to produce small, chemical units – which only contain a single carbon atom – for building other molecules.

Folic acid delivers its units to vitamin B12 which are then further delivered to – homocysteine. In this way, homocysteine is neutralized and is transformed into a harmless amino acid and the blood level of homocysteine will drop.

Whether you lack vitamin B12, folic acid, or both, the transport of the single-carbon units will be complicated. In all three cases, the result will be a specific type of anaemia (pernicious anaemia) which is characterized by the red blood cells being abnormally large.

However, the symptoms in vitamin B12 deficiency and folic acid deficiency are not quite similar. In folic acid deficiency, neuritis – i.e. nerve damage – will not occur. In vitamin B12 deficiency, it will. The anaemia in vitamin B12 deficiency can be removed by taking folic acid, but the neuritis cannot. Vitamin B12 has an affect on nervous tissue that folic acid cannot imitate.

In up to 30% of all elderly people, vitamin B12 deficiency can be demonstrated. Imagine large amounts of folic acid enhancing the B12 deficiency in the nervous system by blocking the small amounts of vitamin B12 with single-carbon compounds. This could correlate to another finding in the Chicago study: Memory declined by 25% less in the ones with the largest consumption of vitamin B12.

The leader of the study, Martha Clare Morris, believes that folic acid might mask the very common vitamin B12 deficiency in the elderly. This is more or less the same thing. In both cases, the consequence should be that the elderly get more vitamin B12 and not less folic acid which can have a protective effect in other areas.

This is the message – that is if you do not choose to believe that the new finding is a coincidence and that the truth is the exact opposite – which is actually also quite likely!

For the time being, however, Morris’ conclusion is simple: “We don’t know yet what is going on,” she says.

Up to every third elderly person may have demonstrable signs of mild vitamin B12 deficiency. If the results of the Chicago study are truthful, elderly persons possibly should not reduce their folic acid intake but rather focus on getting enough vitamin B12.

By: Vitality Council

References:
1. Morris MC et al. Dietary folate and vitamin B12 and cognitive decline among community-dwelling older persons. Arch Neurol 2005;62:641-5
2. Austin RC et al. Role of hyperhomocysteinemia in endothelial dysfunction and atherthrombotic disease. Cell Death and Differentiation 2004;11:S56-S64
3. Morris MS. Homocysteine and Alzheimers disease. Lancet Neurol 2003;2:425-8
4. Kado DM et al. Homocysteine versus the vitamins folate, B6, and B12 as predictors of cognitive function and decline in older high-functioning adults: Mac Arthur Studies of Successfull Aging. Am J Med 2005;118:161-7
5. Garcia A et al. Homocysteine and cognitive function in elderly people. CMAJ, Oct. 12, 2004; 171 (8).

archneur.ama-assn.org
www.nature.com/cdd/index.html
www.thelancet.com
www.sciencedirect.com
www.cmaj.ca
www.iom.dk

Depressed Due to Vitamin Deficiency?

Claus Hancke

April 11, 2005

Several reports show a connection between depression and Vitamin E deficiency. There is a similar relation between depression and lack of Vitamin C and selenium. So far this gives food for thought.

Could it be that lack of vitamin E plays a role in depression? Something in that direction according to a preliminary Australian survey.

By: Vitality Council

References:
1. Owen AJ et al. Low plasma vitamin E levels in major depression: Diet or disease? Eur J Clin Nutr 2005;59:304-6.
2. Tiemeier H et al. Vitamin E and depressive symptoms are not related. The Rotterdam Study. J Affect Disord 2002;72:79-83.
3. Maes M et al. Lower seriúm vitamin E concentration in major depression. Another marker of lowered antioxidant defense in that disease. J Affect Disord 2000;58:241-6.
4. Benton D et al. The impact of selenium supplementation on mood. Biol Psychiatry 1991;29:1092-8.

www.nature.com/ejcn/index.html
www.sciencedirect.com
www.iom.dk

ECJ Advocate General Says: The Food Supplement Directive Invalid under EU Law

Admin

April 5, 2005

The many millons of European food supplement users have a good reason to be happy today. After the health freedom alliance, The Alliance for Natural Health’s landmark challenge of the very contentious Food Supplement Directive (FSD) by the European Courts of Justice (ECJ), the ECJ Advocate General Geelhoed today has stated that the directive is invalid according to EU law.

This increases the chance for the many supplement users to maintain the possibility of taking supplements to take care of their health..

The resistance against the planned EU-directive has been growing for the last five years and the supplement users now see a possibility to win the case, which can be likened to the fight between David and Goliath.

The Advocate General in a statement released in Luxembourg today at 9:30 Continental time, concluded that:

-The Food Supplements Directive infringes the principle of proportionality – because
– basic principles of Community law, such as the requirements of legal protection, of legal certainty and of sound administration have not properly been taken into account.
– The Directive is therefore invalid under EU law.

The Advocate General’s pronouncement is not a ruling. That will come from the ECJ judges, later – in June. But typically, in the vast majority of cases, the Court Judgment follows the recommendations of the Advocate General with 80%.

If the Advocate General’s recommendations are adopted, in effect, the ban on (ca 270) vitamin and mineral forms not included on the EU’s ‘Positive list,’ due to come into effect on 1 August 2005, will be declared illegal to sell and impossible to buy. The opposition to the positive list concept of allowable nutrient forms finds it too narrow, too restrictive, and based on flawed science.

An example could also be that synthetically produced selenium could be allowed on the positive list, while the natural source found in e.g. Brazil nuts would not; synthetic forms of Vitamin E (often used in ‘adverse’ vitamin studies reported in the media) would be allowed, but the natural, most beneficial food forms would not.

Alternative practitioner Inge Lundberg-Hansen is happily welcoming the Advocate General statement, and says: “There is so much sickness around. We know that food supplements prevent and that they can save us many of the wide spread diseases such as asthma and allergies, and that people by the help of supplements can obtain more energy, a better health and mood, a better relationship to their family, work, and financial situation. We are many, who will be happy, if the ban of the Food Supplement Directive does not come into effect.”

Alternative practitioner and health shop assistant, Agathe Langhof, is of the opinion that the ban of the Food Supplement Directive will make people very angry, so she is also very happy to hear about today’s positive news. She says: “Much more people than the authorities are aware of are depending on their vitamins and minerals. Supplement users are no longer a minority, but rather amount to half of the population. And the Food Supplement Directive case has made the contrast between pharmaceutical medicine and food supplements more distinct, and they want to decide over their own health. But maybe we are not supposed to too healthy and old?”

The M.D. Claus Hancke, who is the chairman of the Vitality Council says: “The Advocate General’s recommendation is the first sign we see of a sound judgement in connection with the EU Supplement Directive and it is my heartfelt hope that the ECJ will follow the Advocate General’s recommendation.”

BY: Vitality Council / SOURCE: ANH PRESS RELEASE / 05-04-05

________________________________

For more information:
Alliance for Natural Health (ANH)

 

The Emperor’s New Clothes: HOPE-TOO

Claus Hancke

April 5, 2005

Reputable American researchers claim that even large amounts of natural Vitamin E do not benefit established atherosclerosis. But their study do not reveal it. The participants got almost no Vitamin E.

Perhaps somebody have heard about the praised American HOPE study from 2000. It was to reveal that natural Vitamin E would not make any difference for people with atherosclerosis. This was a disappointment, and with it the issue could then have been dismissed.

That is not how it went. The HOPE study, which lasted 4,5 years and included 9,000 participants was prolonged with 2,5 years. They wanted to be absolutely sure, they said. In the follow-up study called HOPE-TOO only 4,000 people participated. Some did not want to participate, others had died, and others only wanted to be examined, but did not want any medication.

Half of the participants took 400 units natural Vitamin E daily (alpha-tocopherol), while the rest took placebo. They certainly had serious atherosclerosis: Every other one had had a heart attack, just as many suffered from angina pectoris (atherosclerosis ), and more than every third had diabetes.

The HOPE study showed that Vitamin E did not cause more or less cancer, more or less heart attacks, strokes, deaths or anything else. HOPE-TOO showed the same result, though with a single addition: Those who took Vitamin E slightly more often had heart failure; that is to say a decreased functioning of the heart.

The difference was so small that it could very well have been coincidental, even though it was statistically significant. Nevertheless the authors took the opportunity to strongly warn against dietary supplements. But yet they might as well have taken the opportunity to recommend them. They found that Vitamin E protected against lung cancer!

This finding, which was also statistically significant, was rejected, as an “error.” This conclusion was preceded by a lengthy discussion, in which reference is made to studies with beta-carotene, which as we all know, is something completely different.

No clothes on
But there is a far more serious surprise, which totally overshadows this biased opinion: During the whole study the participants did not have any more Vitamin E in their blood than all other people, who do not take supplements. The average value was 17,6 μmol/l. The normal value is 12 – 42. Despite the Vitamin E they only just managed to get their minimal need covered.

Before the study the participants actually had even lower values, averaging 10 μmol/l. This fits well with the fact that they were seriously ill, overweight heart patients who were kept on a low fat diet. A low fat diet may lead to deficiency of vitamin E.

Here we may also find the explanation of the low blood values. Vitamin E can only be absorbed from the intestine when fat is present. If you eat non-fat foods you might as well not take Vitamin E, even when you take 20 – 40 times the recommended dosage.

One is reminded of the Emperor’s New Clothes. HOPE-TOO has no clothes on. It claims to examine the effects of mega doses of Vitamin E, but the participants are only seemingly getting it. Strangely enough nobody has pointed out this almost ridiculous mistake before. In particular one wonders, why the authors themselves have not seen this mistake. Could it be that they do not know the normal values of Vitamin E in the blood?

This is not completely out of the question although it sounds strange. There are many examples of superficiality in scientific research. You do not have to look any further than the official commentary in the same issue of JAMA, which published the HOPE-TOO study. Here doctor Greg Brown by and large agrees with the conclusion of the study. He was also in charge of a similar study from 2001, which was supposed to show if antioxidants prevent atherosclerosis in the coronary arteries. This study concluded that antioxidants did not prevent atherosclerosis, even though the figures showed in black and white that the antioxidants halved the growth of atherosclerosis in the coronary arteries, compared to placebo.

By: Vitality Council

References:
1. The HOPE and HOPE-TOO Trial Investigators. Effects of long-term vitamin E supplementation on cardiovascular events and cancer. JAMA 2005;293:1338-47.
2. B Greg Brown. Is there any hope for vitamin E? JAMA 2005;293:1387-90.
3. Greg Brown et al. Simvastatin and niacin, antioxidant vitamins, or the combination for the prevention of coronary disease. N Engl J Med 2001;345:1583-92.

jama.ama-assn.org
content.nejm.org
www.iom.dk