Should you cycle you vitamins and minerals??? Vitamin C info...

[MS]

A recently published article from the British Journal Of Nutrition (http://www.ingenta.com/isis/searchi...&index=1&WebLogicSession=PKuH8WeFnwMUTF8GDykk|-1816452410122585988/-1052814329/6/7051/7051/7052/7052/7051/-1)

concludes that "Taken together these results suggest that high-dose supplements might not be the most efficient way of increasing the body pool of vitamin C."

It seems that, like most other systems in our body, we respond to chronic high doses of vitamin C by reducing the number of intestinal transporters required to absorb the vitamin. I have no doubt that many other vitamins and minerals are susceptible to downregulation or changes in efficiency of absorption, utilization and excretion when taken chronically. Seems to me that our bodies are designed to be most efficient when all nutrients and hormones are 'cycled'.

Note that this research was done in vitro rather than looking at whole live humans, so may not be valid in the real world. But it makes ya wonder.....................

 

[SteelWeaver]

Mmm. Well, I was thinking of lowering my vitamin intake once I stop dieting and start trying to gain LBM again - only makes sense - more food going in = more nutrients of all types going in, less need for high levels of supplemental micronutrients. Nice to know it's somewhat scientifically backed.

 

[The_Monster]

Im lucky in these cases... Im self moderating!

I do something for a while, then I forget to or get tired of doing it and stop. So I cycle vitamins already! Hooray for me!

(unfortunatly I cycle my attention span too...)

 

[Artemis]

I have a vague memory that Guyton's Physiology text has a little blurb concerning vitamin C transporters. Seems that a dose of about 500 mg of Vit. C will saturate the transporters. Which wouldn't be surprising as this amount would come from what? About half a dozen fresh oranges eaten at once? Or a handful (or two...) of cranberries? Two mellons? We might expect our intestinal absorption characteristics for vit. and minerals to relate to the quantities and types of foods we expect to encounter if we are out by ourselves in the wilderness and occasionally encounter a nice healthy orange tree and have dessert under its shade? The important thing would probably be to get at least *some* of practically any potentially useful micronutrient on a chaotic basis. Vitamin C for dessert. Being water-soluable we'd expect to eat some again after day or two. (perhaps three...) Or maybe again at dinner. Chromium and omega-3's also with dinner. Selenium last week. Copper a few hours ago, and again tomorrow. Maybe. Or possibly zinc instead? Mostly in a chaotic fashion as opposed to cyclical pattern. Except for dietary regulars like calcium/magnesium etc. which we'd get in variable amounts rather often.

In any case, wouldn't it be misguided to dump in lots & lots of extra vit. C? Or any other vit. or mineral at one time? There is/was debate if megadosing of C during pregancy does/does not result in altered fetal programing such that a newborn will have dysregulation of these vitamin C transporters and later develop scurvy on RDA amounts of vit C. I haven't had a chance yet to speak with anyone who is a genuine (and unbiased...) authority on that matter yet. Likewise with the concerns of kidney stones etc. Even if Vit. C is (not) toxic in large doses, why bother? After our needs have been met, say at an average daily dose of about 200 mg C /day, there should be no signs of scorby. More C will have reduced marginal utility for any other beneficial purposes. Sure, there is the 'natural-antioxidant' theme. Or the inhibit-a-cold virus theme. There are synthetic 'antioxidants' and/or viral inhibitors that ultimately serve these intended purposes better? ie. more efficient to protect the arteries from oxidized cholesterol (say) with probucol rather than with megadose C? We would spend money more effectively by taking on the whole range of supplements on an occasional basis rather than by concentrating on a few staples? This also leaves room to spend money on effective stuff when we really need it. If as and when we need it. Like a day off.

 

[MS]

Oh heck it's good to see ya back on line Artemis. I've been preaching this for years to the deaf. People on chronic high protein, high AAS, high vitamins and minerals, same carbs day in day out, all wasting money and making their bodies much less efficient at just about everything except storing fat!

Chaotic is a good concept for how to eat and train and supplement. A balance between consistency and chaos seems sensible to me. I think this will never become popular though because most people just want to be told what to eat and when. Imagine drawing up a spreadsheet for a chaotic diet and supplement regime!

 

[MR. BMJ]

Along with the receptor saturation, it also comes down to whether or not your body is in need of the vitamin. If your body is in need of it, then it is capable of handling large amounts, but if it isn't in need then it will not take in these large amounts; therefore, more is not always better in the case with vitamins...an increase in intake can result in a decrease in absorption.

I do like the idea of low-high intake cycling like MS has mentioned.

BMJ

 

[jennie]

Basically is every one saying if your body needs a high amount it can handle it? Even if your body needs it (as with recovering from a serious illness, like pneumonia) should you rotate days in tkaing it or atleast amounts? I take it for allergic reactions. How much is the maximum a your body could handle?