Ascorbic acid (vitamin C)

I am confused,
Is liposomal vitamin C more easily absorbed than sodium ascorbate or ascorbic acid. Is ascorbic acid to acidic on the body and sodium ascorbate better? There is so much contradicting information. Has anyone actually got a handle on it? I can't make head nor tail of it all.
Is it worth bothering to make liposomal vit c or not?
 
gottathink said:
I am confused,
Is liposomal vitamin C more easily absorbed than sodium ascorbate or ascorbic acid. Is ascorbic acid to acidic on the body and sodium ascorbate better? There is so much contradicting information. Has anyone actually got a handle on it? I can't make head nor tail of it all.
Is it worth bothering to make liposomal vit c or not?
Click to expand...

I’m still building up my own knowledge of Vitamin C, but as I presently understand it...

Each particle of liposomal vitamin C is coated in a tiny fat bubble which protects it during the normal digestion and body flushing processes, allowing more of it to stay in your system for a more complete uptake per dose. It also enters the cell differently, via “adsorbtion” (versus absorbtion), whereby the vitamin C is not dissolved in the blood medium, but rather is delivered to each cell as a particle inside the liposomal fat bubble. Because the fat bubble it is made from the same or similar material as the cell wall, like two soap bubbles merging, the payload is transfered directly.

I’ve read that the uptake in this manner is in the order of five times greater per dose than simply taking vitamin C crystals dissolved in the stomach or in a drink, and thus allows for the kind of quantities needed for the therapeutic values associated with an intravenous “mega-dose”.

However... because Liposomal Vitamin C is not dissolved in the blood, it does not immediately interact with free-floating pathogenic particles (like viruses) the way intravenously delivered vitamin C would, so it might be wise to take it along with a regular dissolved crystalline form.

All of the really astounding curative properties of Vitamin C I've read about seem to be achieved with intravenous delivery, but you'd really need a doctor for that. Equipping cells with a high availability of Vitamin C taken orally seems like the next best defense.
 
gottathink said:
I am confused,
Is liposomal vitamin C more easily absorbed than sodium ascorbate or ascorbic acid. Is ascorbic acid to acidic on the body and sodium ascorbate better? There is so much contradicting information. Has anyone actually got a handle on it? I can't make head nor tail of it all.
Is it worth bothering to make liposomal vit c or not?
Click to expand...

Do read:

Vitamin C - A cure for Ebola
http://www.sott.net/article/284126-Vitamin-C-A-cure-for-Ebola

It addresses precisely these questions. In my experience, it makes much sense and I always felt better on ascorbic acid. My body has resented the various 24 hour shifts I do per month. My hair was falling in big chunks. I started taking ascorbic acid and it stopped. I'm tolerating easily between 12 to 24 grams per day for one month now. Liposomal vitamin C never made the difference, although I would not hesitate to do it in case of emergencies to help me reach higher C levels on my body as the article says.

You need your stomach's acidity to digest fat and protein which will be raw material to make organs and hair. People with low stomach acidity are prone to infections, osteoporosis, cataracts and hair loss among other things.

Generally speaking, it is really a bad idea to interfere with your stomach's pH. All alkalinizing supplements must be taken AWAY from meals including magnesium. The acidity Vs alkaline thing is for the most part of the vegetarian myth. Our body has homeostatic mechanisms that keep its pH in range, at all times. More info:

The acid-alkaline myth
http://www.sott.net/article/263625-The-acid-alkaline-myth
 
Vitamin C - A cure for Ebola
http://www.sott.net/article/284126-Vitamin-C-A-cure-for-Ebola

There are some ideas in article that are confusing me when it comes to ascorbic acid powder versus liposomal sodium ascorbate in the context of acute infections like ebola.
Mineral ascorbates are salts and do not carry the same number of antioxidant electrons. Ascorbic acid has two electrons to donate while a salt typically has only one. With high doses, the "improved" forms are thus only about half as effective. This is consistent with reports that mineral forms are correspondingly ineffective in combating illness.
...
In a healthy person, higher blood levels (about 600 microM/L) can be achieved using liposomal vitamin C compared with standard ascorbic acid (about 250 microM/L). We were the first to demonstrate this fact experimentally.[vi] However, the two absorption methods are different and if both are used together the resultant plasma levels are additive (something like 600 + 250 = 850 microM/L). Since ascorbic acid is much cheaper than liposomal vitamin C, it is cost effective for a healthy person to start with ascorbic acid and top up with liposomes as required.

When a person becomes ill they can absorb massive doses of standard ascorbic acid, using the dynamic flow approach. So if you are sick, taking a gram of liposomal vitamin C instead of a gram of cheap ascorbic acid will provide little extra benefit. Both will be well absorbed , and the liposome contains sodium ascorbate which is less effective. Liposomes only provide added benefit once the sick person has approached bowel tolerance levels, using standard ascorbic acid.

Liposomal vitamin C is NOT more effective than IV for fighting acute infections. This suggestion is unscientific and unsupported by data. We prefer liposomes for chronic infections and cancer, but this does not extend to acute illness. There is also a lot of hype around the fact that liposomes can be absorbed directly into cells. Many liposomes are absorbed from the gut and pass into the liver, where they are stored and the vitamin C released. Liposomes may also float around in the bloodstream, lymph nodes, and so on, waiting to release their contents or be taken up by cells. But the cells that take up the liposomes are not necessarily those that are most in need of vitamin C. Moreover cells may suffer side effects; liposomes are basically nanotechnology and have additional theoretical issues.
Click to expand...

This article is basically saying take ascorbic acid powder for acute infections like ebola. But higher vitamin C blood levels are achieved with liposomal vitamin C. Also, for the brands I've settle on, the cost is the same between ascorbic acid powder versus sodium ascorbate powder, so that from a blood level perspective, sodium ascorbate powder made into liposomal vitamin C is more cost effective.

I don't understand how "Liposomes only provide added benefit once the sick person has approached bowel tolerance levels, using standard ascorbic acid." Even if sodium ascorbate only has half the electrons of ascorbic acid, half of 600 microM/L is still higher than 250 microM/L.

Also, I don't buy the statements "But the cells that take up the liposomes are not necessarily those that are most in need of vitamin C. Moreover cells may suffer side effects; liposomes are basically nanotechnology and have additional theoretical issues."

It seems to me that the author is anti-liposomal vitamin C and yet his article lacks the logical or factual support to be anti-liposomal vitamin C.
 
I forgot which author said that it is better to combine powdered ascorbic acid with liposomal (or even iv vit C), maybe due to the different electric properties, to maximise benefits.

If anyone has the source of this information I'd be really interested.
 
If vitamin c is sheltered from the intercellular fluids when in a liposome, does that mean the vitamin c is less likely to oxidize and dismantle viruses that are suspended in the fluid? To me that seems likely and counterproductive if the use for vitamin c is antiviral in purpose. What does everyone else think? What have your experiences been in terms of liposomes versus regular vitamin c in terms of fighting disease?
 
nicklebleu said:
I forgot which author said that it is better to combine powdered ascorbic acid with liposomal (or even iv vit C), maybe due to the different electric properties, to maximise benefits.

If anyone has the source of this information I'd be really interested.
Click to expand...

It's on SOTT: http://www.sott.net/article/284126-Vitamin-C-A-cure-for-Ebola

When a person becomes ill they can absorb massive doses of standard ascorbic acid, using the dynamic flow approach. So if you are sick, taking a gram of liposomal vitamin C instead of a gram of cheap ascorbic acid will provide little extra benefit. Both will be well absorbed , and the liposome contains sodium ascorbate which is less effective. Liposomes only provide added benefit once the sick person has approached bowel tolerance levels, using standard ascorbic acid.

Liposomal vitamin C is NOT more effective than IV for fighting acute infections. This suggestion is unscientific and unsupported by data. We prefer liposomes for chronic infections and cancer, but this does not extend to acute illness. There is also a lot of hype around the fact that liposomes can be absorbed directly into cells. Many liposomes are absorbed from the gut and pass into the liver, where they are stored and the vitamin C released. Liposomes may also float around in the bloodstream, lymph nodes, and so on, waiting to release their contents or be taken up by cells. But the cells that take up the liposomes are not necessarily those that are most in need of vitamin C. Moreover cells may suffer side effects; liposomes are basically nanotechnology and have additional theoretical issues.
Click to expand...
 
Why would it be that liposomal vitamin C in the absence of ascorbic acid would not provide benefit to a sick person? I've reached bowel tolerance levels with only liposomal vitamin C.
 
whitecoast said:
If vitamin c is sheltered from the intercellular fluids when in a liposome, does that mean the vitamin c is less likely to oxidize and dismantle viruses that are suspended in the fluid? To me that seems likely and counterproductive if the use for vitamin c is antiviral in purpose. What does everyone else think? What have your experiences been in terms of liposomes versus regular vitamin c in terms of fighting disease?
Click to expand...

A virus cannot really be affected pharmacologically when floating outside of the cell (as it hasn't a metabolism in itself), contrary to the immune system, which might intercept a virus.

Once the virus has made ingress into the cell and has inserted itself into the genome of the cell and then starts to hijack the cell for it's own replication, that's where various pharmacological approaches come into effect (incl. vit C).

So encapsulated vit C can be transported in higher doses into the cell (where it has its effect) than ordinary oral vit C. The only other alternative to reach consistently high levels in the blood (and consequently in the cells) would be via the intravenous route.
 
Hi, how big impact on supporting role of high vit C doses has diet? I know low-carb-high-fat diet is the only proper one, but how big "loss of vit C suplementing efficiency" might occur in ordinary diet?
 
Kosma said:
Hi, how big impact on supporting role of high vit C doses has diet? I know low-carb-high-fat diet is the only proper one, but how big "loss of vit C suplementing efficiency" might occur in ordinary diet?
Click to expand...
High doses of vitamin C are not for an ordinary diet.
 
Kosma said:
Hi, how big impact on supporting role of high vit C doses has diet? I know low-carb-high-fat diet is the only proper one, but how big "loss of vit C suplementing efficiency" might occur in ordinary diet?
Click to expand...

From this article: Vitamin C - A cure for Ebola

Sugar interferes with the uptake of vitamin C. If you are using vitamin C to combat a viral infection do not eat any sugar or carbohydrates (long chain sugars) or the vitamin C will not be absorbed properly. We stress that this means no sugar and no carbs, at all.
Click to expand...
 
Sugar interferes with the uptake of vitamin C. If you are using vitamin C to combat a viral infection do not eat any sugar or carbohydrates (long chain sugars) or the vitamin C will not be absorbed properly. We stress that this means no sugar and no carbs, at all.
Click to expand...
Yes I've read this too. I was just curious whether regular vit C supply might give any advantages on diet with some carbs.
hlat said:
Kosma said:
Hi, how big impact on supporting role of high vit C doses has diet? I know low-carb-high-fat diet is the only proper one, but how big "loss of vit C suplementing efficiency" might occur in ordinary diet?
Click to expand...
High doses of vitamin C are not for an ordinary diet.
Click to expand...
right, so in short: first go low carb and then think about vit C. Thats what I've wanted to be sure, thanks.
 
Just wanted to add in my observations on ascorbic acid. I have ascorbic acid and sodium ascorbic and have taken both as doses up to bowel tolerance using 2 servings a day. Luckily it's only been somewhere between 5 -6 grams a day for me, though I should get a digital weigh and get some accuracy titrating amounts for sickness in future. I will say the ascorbic acid does make my teeth feel weird and painfully sensitive at times. It was noted earlier in this thread (can't find the quote) that ascorbic acid is used in dentistry for etching. Considering this, I wondered how sodium ascorbate may react to enamel and found this article

Effect of 10% Sodium Ascorbate on Bleached Bovine Enamel Surface Morphology and Microhardnesshttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3018071/

Abstract

Sodium ascorbate has recently been suggested to compensate decreased bond strength of composite resin to bleached tooth surfaces. The aim of present study was to evaluate the effect of 10% sodium ascorbate on bleached bovine enamel morphology and microhardness considering the possibility of its effect on enamel surface characteristics. A total of 69 bovine enamel slabs were prepared and mounted in acrylic resin. Subsequent to polishing, they were randomly divided into 3 groups of 23 specimens each; 3 for Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) analysis and 20 for hardness test. In group 1 the specimens were immersed in distilled water as control group; in group 2 the specimens were bleached with 35% carbamide peroxide for 30 min a week for 3 consecutive weeks; and in group 3 the specimens were exposed to 10% sodium ascorbate for 30 min subsequent to bleaching similar to group 1. After 3 weeks Vickers hardness of the specimens was measured at 3 points with equal distances from each other under a force of 50 g. The mean of the hardness values of each specimen was calculated and data was analyzed by one-way ANOVA (P < 0.05). The highest and lowest microhardness values were observed in group 1 and group 2, respectively. However, there were no statistically significant differences in microhardness between the groups (P = 0.12). The use of 35% carbamide peroxide alone or with 10% sodium ascorbate does not affect bovine enamel hardness. SEM analysis showed a network of sodium ascorbate adsorbed to the bleached enamel surface.
Click to expand...

Even though sodium ascorbate adheres to the enamel surface, it doesn't seem to affect the strength of the teeth (Note: bovine teeth have similarity to human teeth and it's cited within the paper). I was worried that this would react the same with my teeth as the ascorbic acid was but that's not the case.

Furthermore, sodium ascorbate doesn't alter the pH of the stomach as much as ascorbic acid does. This advantage this prevents time released medicines/vitamins from dissolving to quickly in the stomach and reduces irritation of ulcers (if you have them). After reading the article Vitamin C - A cure for Ebola on Sott, I'm not so sure the following argument has weight:

Mineral ascorbates are salts and do not carry the same number of antioxidant electrons. Ascorbic acid has two electrons to donate while a salt typically has only one. With high doses, the "improved" forms are thus only about half as effective. This is consistent with reports that mineral forms are correspondingly ineffective in combating illness.
Click to expand...

The author doesn't cite sources for the claims of inefficiency of mineral ascorbates. I'm making an assumption much like the author here but your stomach acid, which is a strong acid, will dissolve weak acids (such as ascorbic acid) and salts (such as sodium ascorbate ) fairly well. Ultimately, you're left with vitamin C anions in your stomach, ready for uptake in your intestines.

Now the amount of ascorbic acid you'd have to take is likely less than the sodium ascorbate for equivalent doses, but given the side effects I've encountered with ascorbic acid, I choose to use the sodium ascorbate.
 
Not to divert this thread, yet I've a question that may or may not be able to be addressed. There is a young child of 10 who has presently been diagnosed with Glioma. Ive been reading about this from here _http://www.webmd.com/cancer/brain-cancer/malignant-gliomas and I'm not sure what type this little girl has. I know that there was sudden head pain, which seems to indicate there was a great deal of inflammation building. It is my understanding that pressure was released from her skull and morphine has been now given. I've also revisited this thread http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,23825.msg279229.html#msg279229 discussing Dr. Burzynski. The reason for posting it here was in remembering IV Vit C working (there was a video from England or Wales I think) on a man with Brain Cancer and there was much opposition; don't know if it was this type of cancer or if this line of IV Vit C is worth while following in this case.

Thanks in advance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom