Pytanie o wit B12, wapń....

W mojej ocenie - wyjście z tego błędnego koła jest właśnie takie: mniej żarcia, więcej supli.

a ja stoje na zasadzie zlotego srodka
1. akceptacje tego w jakich warunkach zyjemy i co spozywamy - ale wybor najmadrzejszy w ramach tego co sie da wybrac :D
2. suplementacje CELOWA i okresowa - tym co akurat potrzeba
w miare stala suplementacje tym co potrzeba - czyli witaminy i mineraly i omega 3
w dawkach odpowiednich do wypelniania punktu 1 ;D

wszystkiego sie NIE da kontrolowac w zyciu wiekszosci z nas przez caly czas

warto szukac zycia w zyciu

Panowie - jak się wczytać w Waszą argumentację, to wszyscy generalnie myślimy podobnie. Tyle tylko, że ja to maksymalnie uprościłem - do jednego zdania, aspirującego do miana "śmiałej definicji".

Faftag. Obecnie raczej zawęża się pojęcie "ksenoestrogenów" do produktów syntezy chemicznej o aktywności estrogennej, nie występujących naturalnie w przyrodzie, przedostających się do niej - w efekcie aktywności człowieka - jako zanieczyszczenia przemysłowe.
Zwierzętom podawano zwierzęce (normalne) estrogeny - a teraz podaje się fitoestrogeny.

Tyle tylko, że ja to maksymalnie uprościłem - do jednego zdania, aspirującego do miana "śmiałej definicji". - a ja się tego wyraznie odciąłem, bo podobieństw widzę niewiele.

Z Biniem natomiast co do zasady - myslimy podobnie. Z tym, że najprawdopodobniej inaczej postrzegamy problematykę takiego podejscia.

pozdrawiam

i idę do siebie

Zmieniony przez - faftaq w dniu 2009-12-29 01:01:49

Odciąłeś się werbalnie, ale nie semantycznie.

O suplementacji nie uciekniemy, niezależnie - jakie jest nasze zdanie na ten temat. Ja należę na przykład do grona sceptyków, wskazujących na zagrożenia wynikające z całkowitej komputeryzacji wszystkich sfer życia. I co... Mogę sobie pogadać... Komputery rządzą już prawie każdym i wszystkim.

matrix czeka - to najprostsza droga do realizacji snu o niesmiertelnosci - poki pradu starczy :)

jak mowilem ta dyskusja zatoczyla bledne kolo ;)

A ja dodam tyle od siebie, wierzyłbym w witaminy z pozywnia jakby one tam były i jakby te 100% zacelanego RDA sprawiało że będe zdrowy, a tak nie jest. Może komuś wystarcza np. 60 mg wit. C mi na pewno nie, a nie mam szans dostarczyć zimą min. 1 gram tej witaminy a podczas przeziębienia 3 gram które stotosuje (nie ukrywam że po lekaturze w tym dziale) bez suplementacji.

Sławku - złudzenie. Sądzę iż funkcjonalna odrębnośc poziomów przez Ciebie wymienionych jest poza zasięgiem moich retorycznych umięjetności. Z pewnością jednak byłoby to ciekawe zjawisko w merytorycznej dyskusji.

Komputery rządzą już prawie każdym i wszystkim - suplementy na szczęście jeszcze nie.

djfafa - nad brakiem wiary w istnienie witamin w pożywieniu moge sie co najwyżej pochylić. Studenci drugiego roku technologii zywienia oznaczają ilośc wit C (metodą Tillmansa) z produktów zywnosciowych w ramach cwiczeń i jakos nie zasłaniaja się jej brakiem.

Podobnie okreslanie ilosci b2 w żywnosci przy pomcy niektórych szczepów bakterii (Lactobacillus casei, Leuconostoc mesenteroides), rowniez nie jest jałową praktyką.

Elektroforeza kapilarna to kolejna metoda której uzywa się w celu oznaczania wartosci odżwyczych żywnosci i jej jakości zdrowotnej. Jesli uda mi się na uczelni zdobyc materiały - to przeslę Ci je mailem

Zmieniony przez - faftaq w dniu 2009-12-30 02:51:33

Co do samej wit C - to w specyficvznych wypadkach oczywiscie jej dodatkowa suplementacja jest zasadna. Nie zawyżałbym jednak dziennego zapotrzebowania do 1g, podobnie - nie uważam by była ona generalnie jakims lekiem na przeziebienie. Owszem są badania które wykazują, że w wypadku osob obciązonych silnym stresem, znacznym wysilkiem fizycznym, wplyw dodatkowych dawek tej witaminy przynosi terapeutyczny efekt, ale sa też liczne badania i obszerne oracowania na ich podstawie, które wykazują wyrazny brak wpływu w wypadku przecietnego Kowalskiego.

Pauling L (1971) The significance of the evidence about ascorbic acid and the common cold. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 68: 2678–2681

Douglas RM, Hemilä H, D'Souza R, Chalker EB, Treacy B (2004) Vitamin C for preventing and treating the common cold. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2004: CD000980.pub2

Anderson TW, Suranyi G, Beaton GH (1974) The effect on winter illness of large doses of vitamin C. Can Med Assoc J 111: 31–36

Ritzel G (1961) Kritische Beurteilung des Vitamins C als Prophylacticum und Therapeuticum der Erkältungskrankheiten. Helv Med Acta 28: 63–68

i warty lektury link, który po krótce wpisuje sie w ton moich wypowiedzi:

http://www.ltdk.helsinki.fi/users/hemila/ce_heterogeneity/


Zmieniony przez - faftaq w dniu 2009-12-30 03:04:28

O dawkach i właściwościach tej witaminy jest tu setki postów. Podawane było wielokrotne jakie dawki stosują w Ameryce i jakie cięzkie choroby nimi leczą. Podawane były dziesiątki badań.
Możesz wierzyć w dawki jakie chcesz, możesz spożywać zalecane RDA, to Twoja wyłączna sprawa.
ps. A powoływanie się na 50 letnie badania to chyba jakieś nieporozumienie.

Zmieniony przez - djfafa w dniu 2009-12-30 08:08:10

Zmieniony przez - djfafa w dniu 2009-12-30 08:13:20

Myślę, że nieporozumieniem była teza dotycząca braku obecnosci witamin w pożywieniu, a teraz jedynie próbujesz sobie cos skompensować. Celowo bądź z roztargnienia - nie zrozumiales mojej powyzszej wypowiedzi. Ja nie polemizuję z zasadnoscią podawania witaminy C w okreslonych wpadkach. Uwazam, że ani nie jest sensowne zawyżanie dawek do 1g generalnie, ani też - nie uwazam by wit C była uniwersalnym lekiem na przeziebienie. Zauważ też że niektóre kwestie do których się odniosłes - sam musiałes sobie wymyślić, ja ani slowem nie wspomnialem o RDA (60 - 70mg).

Jedynie nieliczne badania dostępne są w sieci w postaci pełnych tekstów (ogolnodostepne sa zazwyczaj abstracty), te na które się powołałem - są dostepne w całosci - wiec mozna zweryfikować między innymi ich trafność czy aktualność. Założyłem ze lektura może być ciekawa. Racja jednak - trzy z w/w są stare, aczkolwiek zwolennicy medycyny ortomolekularnej (i wysokich dawek wit C), najczęsciej bazują na badaniach sprzed kilkudziesięciu lat (np ponoc zatajonej publikacji z wyleczenia polio wit C przez dr med. Frederika Klennera w 1949).


Aktualnie srodowiska naukowe skłaniają się do indywidualnego podejscia w kwestii dodatkowej suplementacji wtaminą C czy innymi przeciwutlaniaczami. W kwestii badan - są i bardziej aktualne niż wczesniej przeze mnie wymienione badające przydatnosc wit c w rozmaitych wypadkach.

Vitamins C and E and Beta Carotene Supplementation and Cancer Risk: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Jennifer Lin, Nancy R. Cook, Christine Albert, Elaine Zaharris, J. Michael Gaziano, Martin Van Denburgh, Julie E. Buring, JoAnn E. Manson

Affiliations of authors: Division of Preventive Medicine, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA (JL, NRC, CA, EZ, JMG, MVD, ***, JAEM); Department of Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA (NRC, ***, JAEM); Cardiovascular Division (CA), Division of Aging (JMG), Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital; Department of Ambulatory Care and Prevention, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA (***)

Correspondence to: Jennifer Lin, PhD, Division of Preventive Medicine, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, 900 Commonwealth Ave East, Boston, MA 02215 (e-mail: [email protected]).

Background: Observational studies suggested that a diet high in fruits and vegetables, both of which are rich with antioxidants, may prevent cancer development. However, findings from randomized trials of the association between antioxidant use and cancer risk have been mostly negative.

Methods: From 8171 women who were randomly assigned in the Women's Antioxidant Cardiovascular Study, a double-blind, placebo-controlled 2 x 2 x 2 factorial trial of vitamin C (500 mg of ascorbic acid daily), natural-source vitamin E (600 IU of {alpha}-tocopherol every other day), and beta carotene (50 mg every other day), 7627 women who were free of cancer before random assignment were selected for this study. Diagnoses and deaths from cancer at a specific site were confirmed by use of hospital reports and the National Death Index. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to assess hazard ratios (represented as relative risks [RRs]) of common cancers associated with use of antioxidants, either individually or in combination. Subgroup analyses were conducted to determine if duration of use modified the association of supplement use with cancer risk. All statistical tests were two-sided.

Results: During an average 9.4 years of treatment, 624 women developed incident invasive cancer and 176 women died from cancer. There were no statistically significant effects of use of any antioxidant on total cancer incidence. Compared with the placebo group, the RRs were 1.11 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.95 to 1.30) in the vitamin C group, 0.93 (95% CI = 0.79 to 1.09) in the vitamin E group, and 1.00 (95% CI = 0.85 to 1.17) in the beta carotene group. Similarly, no effects of these antioxidants were observed on cancer mortality. Compared with the placebo group, the RRs were 1.28 (95% CI = 0.95 to 1.73) in the vitamin C group, 0.87 (95% CI = 0.65 to 1.17) in the vitamin E group, and 0.84 (95% CI = 0.62 to 1.13) in the beta carotene group. Duration and combined use of the three antioxidants also had no effect on cancer incidence and cancer death.

Conclusions: Supplementation with vitamin C, vitamin E, or beta carotene offers no overall benefits in the primary prevention of total cancer incidence or cancer mortality.

Journal of the National Cancer Institute Advance Access originally published online on December 30, 2008
JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2009 101(1):14-23; doi:10.1093/jnci/djn43
____________________________

Vitamin C for Preventing and Treating the Common Cold

Citation: Douglas RM, Hemilä H (2005) Vitamin C for Preventing and Treating the Common Cold. PLoS Med 2(6): e168. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0020168

Published: June 28, 2005

Copyright: © 2005 Douglas and Hemilä. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Robert M. Douglas is at the National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia. Harri Hemilä is at the Department of Public Health, University of Helsinki, Finland.

(...) We sought to discover whether vitamin C in doses of 200 mg or more daily reduces the incidence, duration, or severity of the common cold when used either as continuous prophylaxis or after the onset of cold symptoms. Criteria for inclusion were placebo-controlled trials to prevent or treat the common cold using oral doses of vitamin C of 200 mg/day or more. Literature from 1940 to 2004 was methodically screened.

(...)

The lack of effect of prophylactic vitamin C supplementation on the incidence of common cold in normal populations throws doubt on the utility of this wide practice. The clinical significance of the minor reduction in duration of common cold episodes experienced during prophylaxis is questionable, although the consistency of these findings points to a genuine biological effect.

In special circumstances, where people used prophylaxis prior to extreme physical exertion and/or exposure to significant cold stress, the collective evidence indicates that vitamin C supplementation may have a considerable beneficial effect; it was the results of one of these six trials, with schoolchildren in a skiing school, that particularly impressed Pauling. However, great caution should be exercised in generalizing from this finding, which is based mainly on marathon runners.

No benefits have been observed from therapeutic use of doses totalling 10 g that was divided for the first three days of illness. The equivocal findings of the large study, which used 8 g only on the day of onset of respiratory symptoms, are tantalising and deserve further assessment.

None of the therapeutic trials carried out so far has examined the effect of vitamin C on children, even though the prophylaxis trials have shown substantially greater effect on episode duration in children.

Study quality for the trials included in these three meta-analyses was variable, but sensitivity analysis, where we excluded studies from the analysis that were less adequately blinded or randomized, did not change the general conclusions of the Cochrane Review.

Future work on this topic should explore the value of high dose therapy—in particular, in children—and the mechanisms underlying the observed prophylaxis benefits in those exposed to substantial physical and/or cold stress.

_____________________________


Am J Clin Nutr. 2009 Aug;90(2):429-37. Epub 2009 Jun 2.
Effects of vitamins C and E and beta-carotene on the risk of type 2 diabetes in women at high risk of cardiovascular disease: a randomized controlled trial.

Song Y, Cook NR, Albert CM, Van Denburgh M, Manson JE.

Division of Preventive Medicine and Cardiology Division, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02215, USA. [email protected]

Comment in:

* Am J Clin Nutr. 2009 Aug;90(2):253-4.

BACKGROUND: Vitamin C, vitamin E, and beta-carotene are major antioxidants and as such may protect against the development of type 2 diabetes via reduction of oxidative stress. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the long-term effects of supplementation with vitamin C, vitamin E, and beta-carotene for primary prevention of type 2 diabetes. DESIGN: In the Women's Antioxidant Cardiovascular Study, a randomized trial that occurred between 1995 and 2005, 8171 female health professionals aged > or =40 y with either a history of cardiovascular disease (CVD) or > or =3 CVD risk factors were randomly assigned to receive vitamin C (ascorbic acid, 500 mg every day), vitamin E (RRR-alpha-tocopherol acetate, 600 IU every other day), beta-carotene (50 mg every other day), or their respective placebos. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 9.2 y, a total of 895 incident cases occurred among 6574 women who were free of diabetes at baseline. There was a trend toward a modest reduction in diabetes risk in women assigned to receive vitamin C compared with those assigned to receive placebo [relative risk (RR): 0.89; 95% CI: 0.78, 1.02; P = 0.09], whereas a trend for a slight elevation in diabetes risk was observed for vitamin E treatment (RR: 1.13; 95% CI: 0.99, 1.29; P = 0.07). However, neither of these effects reached statistical significance. No significant effect was observed for beta-carotene treatment (RR: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.85, 1.11; P = 0.68). CONCLUSION: Our randomized trial data showed no significant overall effects of vitamin C, vitamin E, and beta-carotene on risk of developing type 2 diabetes in women at high risk of CVD. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00000541.

PMID: 19491386 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


______________________________
Titre du document / Document title
Supplementation with vitamins C, E, β-carotene and selenium has no effect on anti-oxidant status and immune responses in allergic adults : a randomized controlled trial
Auteur(s) / Author(s)
DUNSTAN J. A. (1) ; BRECKLER L. (1) ; HALE J. (1) ; LEHMANN H. (1) ; FRANKLIN P. (1) ; LYONS G. (2) ; CHING S. Y. L. (3) ; MORI T. A. (4) ; BARDEN A. (4) ; PRESCOTT S. L. (1) ;
Affiliation(s) du ou des auteurs / Author(s) Affiliation(s)
(1) School of Paediatrics and Child Health, University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, AUSTRALIE
(2) School of Agriculture εt Wine, University of Adelaide -Waite Campus, Glen Osmond, SA, AUSTRALIE
(3) Biochemistry Department Clinical Pathology, Path West, Perth, Western Australia, WA, AUSTRALIE
(4) School of Medicine and Pharmacology, University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, AUSTRALIE
Résumé / Abstract
Background Anti-oxidants are of growing interest in early treatment and prevention of allergic diseases in early life, but the effects on allergen-specific immune responses need to be documented farther before intervention studies in infants are undertaken. The aim of this study in adults was to determine the effects of dietary anti-oxidants on allergen-specific immune responses in sensitized individuals. Methods In a randomized controlled trial, 54 allergic adults received an anti-oxidant supplement (n=36) comprising &#946;-carotene (9 mg/day), vitamin C (1500 mg/day), vitamin E (130 mg/day), zinc (45 mg/day), selenium (76 &#956;g/day) and garlic (150 mg/day) or a placebo (n = 18) for 4 weeks. Anti-oxidant capacity (AC), serum levels of vitamin C, vitamin E, p-carotene and selenium, peripheral blood responses, exhaled nitric oxide (eNO), as a marker of airway inflammation, and plasma F2 isoprostanes, as a measure of oxidative stress, were measured before and after supplementation. Results Anti-oxidant supplementation resulted in significant increases in serum levels of vitamin C, vitamin E, &#946;-carotene and selenium levels, compared with the placebo group (P < 0.001). There was no change in serum AC, plasma F2-isoprostanes, eNO or immune responses following supplementation with anti-oxidants compared with placebo. Conclusion Supplementation with anti-oxidants resulted in significantly increased levels of vitamin C, vitamin E, &#946;-carotene and selenium but no change in immune responses, serum AC or plasma F2-isoprostanes.
Revue / Journal Title
Clinical and experimental allergy ISSN 0954-7894
Source / Source
2007, vol. 37, no2, pp. 180-187 [8 page(s) (article)] (34 ref.)


__________________________


Effect of the Supplemental Use of Antioxidants Vitamin C, Vitamin E, and Coenzyme Q10 for the Prevention and Treatment of Cancer
Summary
Evidence Report/Technology Assessment: Number 75

Under its Evidence-based Practice Program, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) is developing scientific information for other agencies and organizations on which to base clinical guidelines, performance measures, and other quality improvement tools. Contractor institutions review all relevant scientific literature on assigned clinical care topics and produce evidence reports and technology assessments, conduct research on methodologies and the effectiveness of their implementation, and participate in technical assistance activities.



Overview / Methodology / Reporting the Evidence / Data Collection and Analysis / Findings / Future Research / Availability of Full Report

Authors: Coulter I, Hardy M, Shekelle P, Morton SC.

Overview

The objective of this report by the research team from the Southern California Evidence-based Practice Center (EPC) was to conduct a search of the published literature on the use of supplement forms of the antioxidants, vitamin C, vitamin E, and coenzyme Q10, for the treatment and prevention of cancer and, on the basis of that search, to evaluate the evidence for the efficacy of these antioxidants. A broad search revealed sufficient literature to support a detailed review of the use of two of these antioxidants for cancer.

Patients with cancer commonly try a variety of nontraditional treatments that fit the broad category known as Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM). However, evidence is lacking for the effectiveness of most CAM therapies for cancer. Among the CAM therapies publicized by the popular press for cancer treatment are several supplementary antioxidants:

* Vitamin C.
* Vitamin E.
* Coenzyme Q10.

It has long been argued that the adequacy of the vitamin supply to cells and tissues influences the development, progress, and outcome of cancers. A major challenge to the integrity and function of cells and tissues is thought to come from the uncontrolled formation of free radicals. Free radicals may, alone or in combination, attack cell membranes and DNA. The body has evolved antioxidant defenses to protect against free radical-induced damage. It is postulated that the antioxidant vitamins E and C and coenzyme Q10 are potentially involved in these antioxidant defenses and that some diseases might be prevented by increasing intake of antioxidants, either through increasing the dietary intake of antioxidant-rich foods or taking antioxidant supplements. However, it should be noted that while free radicals have been implicated in over 100 human diseases, this implication does not constitute proof of their role in disease formation or that preventing the formation or function of free radicals can prevent or cure disease.

Return to Contents
Methodology

A panel of technical experts representing diverse disciplines was used by the Southern California Evidence-based Practice Center to advise on the search and inclusion criteria. The technical experts represented diverse disciplines including:

* Acupuncture.
* Ayurvedic medicine.
* Chiropractic.
* Dentistry.
* General internal medicine.
* Gastroenterology.
* Rheumatology.
* Integrative medicine (the practice of combining alternative and conventional medicine).
* Neurophysiology.
* Pharmacology.
* Psychiatry.
* Psychoneuroimmunology.
* Psychology.
* Sociology.
* Botanical medicine.
* Traditional Chinese medicine.

The aim was to perform a meta-analysis whenever the literature was appropriate for such an analysis.
Search Strategy

Thirteen biomedical databases were searched through early 2002: Allied and Complementary Medicine, BIOSIS Previews&#174;, CAB HEALTH&#174;, CANCER LIT&#174;, Cochrane Library, Elsevier Biobase, EMBASE, MANTIS&#8482;, MEDLINE&#174;, SciSearch&#174; Cited Ref Sci 1974-1989, Social SciSearch&#174; 1972-2002, SciSearch&#174; Cited Ref Sci 1990-2002, and TGG Health & Wellness DB.

Limiting the output to human studies, the team searched using the terms coenzyme Q10, vitamin E, and vitamin C, and their many pharmacological synonyms; the condition of interest (cancer); and study design or article type (randomized controlled trials, clinical controlled trials, meta-analyses, and systematic reviews).
Selection Criteria

Trials were included in the synthesis of evidence if they focused on vitamins C or E or coenzyme Q10 as supplements for the treatment or prevention of cancer and if they presented the results of clinical trials on human subjects or were a meta-analysis or systematic review or if they provided descriptive or background information about antioxidants. Language of publication was not a barrier to inclusion.

Return to Contents
Reporting the Evidence

Searches of the literature yielded 1,337 articles, of which researchers were able to obtain 1,125. Based on a review by two physicians working independently, 432 articles were selected for screening, including clinical trials, meta-analyses, reviews, and reports that contained supplemental information. Twenty-two unique trials that met the inclusion criteria were included in the systematic review. Of these 22 trials, 19 included vitamin C, 14 included vitamin E, and none included coenzyme Q10 either for treatment or prevention of cancer.

After reviewing the available evidence, the EPC research team focused on the three primary clinical outcomes that were most relevant and reported most frequently in the trials:

* Death from cancer.
* New tumors.
* Effect on colonic polyps.

Return to Contents
Data Collection and Analysis

All selected titles, abstracts, and articles, in all languages, were reviewed independently by two physician reviewers who were fluent in the appropriate language, and all disagreements were resolved by consensus. Information was collected about patient demographics, disease state, intervention, study design, and outcomes. Sufficient numbers of homogeneous trials did not exist to permit a meta-analysis of the efficacy of vitamins C or E or coenzyme Q10 for the outcomes of death or new tumor development. A meta-analysis was possible only for assessing the effect on colonic polyps. Additional qualitative reviews were done for trials that could not be pooled and for studies with intermediate outcomes.

Return to Contents
Findings

Researchers identified 35 relevant articles corresponding to 37 studies. These 37 studies correspond to 22 unique trials, because many studies presented data on the same trial. The quality of the trials varied greatly as judged by the Jadad criteria.

The distribution of trials across the three selected outcomes was as follows:

* 20 studies reported mortality outcomes.
* 15 studies reported the effect on new tumor development.
* 8 studies reported the effect on colonic polyps.

From these studies, the researchers were able to include data from six trials for the death analysis; four trials for the tumors analysis; and four trials for the pooled polyps analysis. Only the studies on colonic polyps were homogeneous enough to perform a meta-analysis. Seven studies also reported on a variety of intermediate outcomes.

Based on their analyses, the researchers made the following observations:

* No evidence was found for assessing the efficacy of coenzyme Q10 for prevention or treatment of cancer.
* Three large trials assessed the potential of vitamin C and vitamin E in various combinations to prevent cancer when given to persons without cancer. No trial reported a statistically significant beneficial effect on death due to cancer, nor did any trial show benefit for prevention of new tumor development, except for one arm of the ATBC trial, which showed a decrease in the development of new prostate tumors.
* Seven trials assessed the use of vitamin C in patients with advanced cancer. No trial reported a statistically significant mortality benefit: Vitamin C did not decrease the risk of death from advanced cancer.
* Six trials assessed the effect of combinations of vitamin C and vitamin E with and without beta-carotene on the development of colonic polyps. No trial reported a statistically significant beneficial effect.
* A number of intermediate outcomes studies reported positive results.
* A single trial of vitamin E in combination with omega-3 fatty acids showed increased survival of patients severely ill with a variety of malignancies.
* In a single trial of patients with bladder cancer who were also treated with bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG) tuberculosis vaccine, Vitamin C was found to be beneficial in reducing the occurrence of new tumors.

This systematic review of the literature does not support the hypothesis that supplements of vitamins C or E or coenzyme Q10 generally help prevent or treat cancer. Isolated findings of benefit require confirmation.

Return to Contents
Future Research

Results of the literature synthesis show generally disappointing results for the efficacy of antioxidant supplementation to prevent or treat cancer. Because this finding is in contrast to observational studies reporting benefits, additional research is needed to understand why these two sources of evidence disagree. The positive findings from single clinical trials also need to be verified by further research.

Several factors should be considered when planning future research:

* Clinical trials should focus on populations not heretofore included&#8212;specifically, women with breast, cervical, and ovarian cancer&#8212;and study populations should be homogeneous with respect to condition and intervention.
* Additional research is needed to assess the benefit of antioxidant supplements for the secondary prevention of common cancers or for the modification of premalignant states. Based on the present analysis, the most promising antioxidants for future research are vitamins E and C. For coenzyme Q10, preliminary research is needed before a large clinical trial would be recommended.
* Finally, validated intermediate outcomes could be used as end points in future research, as they would provide a cost-effective method to gauge the efficacy of any planned clinical intervention.

Coulter I, Hardy M, Shekelle P, et al. Effect of the Supplemental Use of Antioxidants Vitamin C, Vitamin E, and the Coenzyme Q10 for the Prevention and Treatment of Cancer. Summary, Evidence Report/Technology Assessment: Number 75. AHRQ Publication Number 04-E002, October 2003. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. http://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/epcsums/aoxcansum.html


___________

Bo brak witamin i minerałów w współczesnym pożywieniu jest faktem a nie moim wymysłem. Nie potrafisz tego zrozumieć pisząc o badaniach w LO to twoja sprawa. Co chwilę słychać o "odkryciach" na ten temat, jak chcesz to wierz że jedząc marchewkę dostarczasz witaminy i minerały a nie pestycydy czy metale ciężkie. Wiara czyni cuda.

Do poczytania np.:
http://www.ra-infection-connection.com/Free_Articles/HowMuchVitC.htm

http://www.communicationagents.com/chris/2004/07/09/the_vitamin_c_fanatics_were_right_all_along.htm

Linki znalezione przez Mańka, jak Ci mało poproś to Ci znajdzie więcej.


Zmieniony przez - djfafa w dniu 2009-12-30 13:54:40