The New York Times, a newspaper you either love or hate, typically has a fine line-up of reporters and writers but one in particular needs resign from her position and find another line of work that does not require the ability to do careful research and intelligence. Tara Parker-Pope, needs to switch from reporting to something that only requires manual labor. Her recent article, “News Keeps Getting Worse for Vitamins” is an embarassment and is just another example of an inability she has to find out what the word truth means.
If she had bothered to research the studies she cites instead of choking the nonsense down like an obese person at an all you can eat buffet, she would have seen that what was presented was biased and consisted of terribly constructed research. The quantities of vitamin C and E used in the cardiovascular and cancer study were ridiculously low. Go to my podcast site labinterpretation.podhoster.com and listen to episode 13 where I discuss the issues that should have made the studies Ms. Parker-Pope cites go unpublished.
One of the major problems I have with the study on Vitamin C was the insanely low dose used. They used 500 mg of C daily when all intelligent researchers and clinicians know that you need a minimum of 2 grams and with cancer, 10 grams daily to get the needed effect. It is similar to the nonsense from the Mayo Clinic when they tried to disprove Dr. Pauling and Dr. Cameron’s work on cancer. They used intravenous vitamin C and Mayo used oral C and yet they claimed it was the same (it is definitely not). This is blatant dishonesty and the media is supposed to be objective and uncover the truth, not chow down on anything the so-called experts say. Ms. Parker-Pope, find a new job.
Robert Crayhon, author of numerous books on nutrition like The Carnitine Miracle, has joined the blogging world with his new website – RobertCrayhon.com. Some of his posts will have a political bent but others will focus on issues of nutrition and health. His razor sharp mind and wit will provide the reader with lots of information with which to achieve the goal of optimal growth.
This is kind of a loaded question as I get arguments from some pretty learned people about this but if you look at the data, its pretty much a safe bet that magnesium bound to amino acids (chelates) is the best way to go. Thanks to my friend James Larsen, he made me add this to my blog as he sent me a study entitled “Magnesium bioavailability from magnesium citrate and magnesium oxide” by J. S. Lindberg, M. M. Zobitz, J. R. Poindexter and C. Y. Pak at the Center for Mineral Metabolism and Clinical Research, University of Texas, Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas 75235.
In this paper, and many others like it, it is pretty clear that using magnesium oxide as a supplement is just not as effective as magnesium citrate. There is some guy that trolls Yahoo forums trying to get everyone to buy magnesium chloride as some magical form, especially his topical one because he just knows its the best. Problem is, many people are elevated in total chloride loads in their bodies and we just don’t need to add anymore of that to our systems. To top it off, when asked for proof, he, as many other’s who tout that they have “it”, he resorts to some silly banter about how I’m out to get him and that his proof is on how great he and his family feel.
I’m not here to sell any products, I just want to present the facts. If you want a good form of magnesium, try magnesium citrate. It works, and its cost effective.