[Arne (OP)]

I've been using Dr. Robert Willix's Next Generation multi-vitamins. I'm having trouble finding a source for them. In my searching, I've found several reports (using the same source, apparently) that Usana Essentials are the best. Unfortunately, they seem to be a pyramid marketing scheme, and I do not want to sign up for that just to buy.

Other brands mentioned were Source Naturals Life Force, Kurana Corp. Maxxum 4, Twinlab Mega 6.

In any event, I'd like comments on a good complete multi-vitamin that would include all essential ingredients available on the internet , as I have trouble getting out.

I appreciate any help from the group members. Thank you..

Arne

[Donnah]

Hi Arne, welcome to the forum.  Usana Essentials are excellent vitamins (no, I don't sell them but I do use them).  I'm listed as a "preferred customer" and so my status is on hold until I call, give them my pc number and order what I want.  You should be able to do the same in the USA.  Try calling 1-866-872-6272.  Might not be the number you want, but they can direct you to the correct one.

[MachineGhost]

quote:Originally posted by Arne

I've been using Dr. Robert Willix's Next Generation multi-vitamins. I'm having trouble finding a source for them. In my searching, I've found several reports (using the same source, apparently) that Usana Essentials are the best. Unfortunately, they seem to be a pyramid marketing scheme, and I do not want to sign up for that just to buy.

Other brands mentioned were Source Naturals Life Force, Kurana Corp. Maxxum 4, Twinlab Mega 6.

In any event, I'd like comments on a good complete multi-vitamin that would include all essential ingredients available on the internet , as I have trouble getting out.

I appreciate any help from the group members. Thank you..

Arne

I would suggest sticking to food-derived sources of vitamins and minerals (as opposed to petroleum, waste and inorganic dirt) now that consumer awareness and technology has advanced enough to make it practical to provide concentrated amounts.  Bioavailability and efficacy is vastly more important than quantity.

Garden of Life's Living Multi series
Nature's Plus Dyno-Mins series
Albion's chelated minerals

Machine Ghost

[Ylide]

Why are synthetic sources of vitamins so frowned upon?  As long as they get the molecule correct in structure and stereochemistry, and there are no contaminants, what's the difference?

This message brought to you by The Council of People Who Are Sick of Seeing More People

[Jay M. Fredrickson]

Informed people shouldn't be against synthetic forms of nutrients because as you said, there isn't a difference.

So many people are stuck on the "well is it all natural?" question which often is the wrong way to go.

I go along with Donnah with the recommendation for Usana Health Sciences brand of nutritional supplements.

I don't sell them but I fully endorse the products and business plan.

[Donnah]

I think some people go the all natural route because of the micronutrients that are contained in natural substances.  But just because something is touted as all natural doesn't mean they haven't processed it in a way that is detrimental to the product or its assimilation.

[MachineGhost]

quote:Originally posted by cannabinoid

Why are synthetic sources of vitamins so frowned upon?  As long as they get the molecule correct in structure and stereochemistry, and there are no contaminants, what's the difference?

Synthetic molecules aren't bioidentical to natural molecules and the bioavailability is vastly inferior.  Depending on manufacturing techniques, an argument could also be made for the superior "life force" but that isn't considered widely scientifically-acceptable yet.

There is no doubt that synthetic vitamins can be better than no supplementation at all, but it is not necessarily the healthiest "food" to be ingesting.  Do you know of anyone personally living off petroleum coal tar for their meals?  Could anything else live off that?  There's more to LIFE than just being "correct in structure and stereochemistry"!

Machine Ghost

[Ylide]

I really didn't expect this thread to go philosophical.  []

My education is moving towards life sciences, but my background is in chemistry, so I have a hard time accepting that out of two chemically identical nutrients, one is better because is was squirted out of the cells of something that was alive recently.  

Anyway, eating vitamins derived from hydrocarbons found in petroleum is not the same thing as eating petroleum.  (But there are bacteria that love the stuff!)  Anyway, I don't believe an enzyme that's related to a specific nutrient cares where that nutrient came from, as long as it fits the shape of the protein.  I would suggest it having something to do with incorrect ratios of naturally occuring isotopes (kinetic isotope effect can have significant effects on reaction rates) before I would say the synthetic stuff doesn't have "life force".  But that's just me, I still have a lot to learn about biochemistry.



This message brought to you by The Council of People Who Are Sick of Seeing More People

[MachineGhost]

quote:Originally posted by cannabinoid
My education is moving towards life sciences, but my background is in chemistry, so I have a hard time accepting that out of two chemically identical nutrients, one is better because is was squirted out of the cells of something that was alive recently.  

Well, there is one objective way to observe the difference as far as I'm aware of.  Other than Kirilian photography to observe the "life force", you can beam polarized light into each of the two different molecules.  You'll be able to observe a significant difference in that the natural molecule bends the light ONLY to the right and the synthetic molecule bends the light to the right AND to the left.  This is why synthetic Vitamin E has half the potency of natural Vitamin E, or synthetic Beta-Carotene increases risk of cancer, or S-Alpha Lipoic Acid has less potency than R-Alpha Lipoic Acid, and so on.  You get what you pay (less) for!  :-)

Machine Ghost

[Dan7]

<original post edited to remove thinly-veiled shameless self-promotion more transparent than a tarts night dress>

Dear John Kuhnemund,

no spam thanks.


The naked scientists

[TabathaJo]

Right now I'm using Miracle 2000 as a multi-vitamin source, it's a liquid, so you can just mix it in with a protein shake or whatever else.  Tastes a little bitter, but I've felt a lot healthier since starting my routine.

Tabatha

[glycomom]

food matrix sups have been proven to be absorbed better by the body. We use a brand that is top of the line. The company does tons of research.

rene

[Ylide]

quote:Originally posted by MachineGhost



Well, there is one objective way to observe the difference as far as I'm aware of.  Other than Kirilian photography to observe the "life force", you can beam polarized light into each of the two different molecules.  You'll be able to observe a significant difference in that the natural molecule bends the light ONLY to the right and the synthetic molecule bends the light to the right AND to the left.  This is why synthetic Vitamin E has half the potency of natural Vitamin E, or synthetic Beta-Carotene increases risk of cancer, or S-Alpha Lipoic Acid has less potency than R-Alpha Lipoic Acid, and so on.  You get what you pay (less) for!  :-)

Machine Ghost

You're talking about the chirality of the biomolecules here, the ability to rotate plane-polarized light of a molecule.  Here's where you're incorrect:  the bioactive conformation of saccharides rotate plane-polarized light to the right, using the R designation.  (i.e. R-Glucose, and this is the anomeric carbon that is designated as such)  Amino acids, however, are the opposite, L-tryptophan, L-carnitine, etc are what we can integrate into our protein synthesis.  Wether or not a synthetic source will create one conformation or the other depends entirely upon the synthetic route used to get there.  Some organic reactions create a racemic mixture, that is a mixture that includes equal proportions of both stereoisomers.  Some will make exclusively stereospecific products.  Some are in between the two extremes.  Synthetic chemists take this into account when designing syntheses for drugs/supplements and they can be separated from each other anyway.  Besides, how many supplements are synthesized as opposed to simply extracted from biomass?  Very few.

This message brought to you by The Council of People Who Are Sick of Seeing More People

[Synergy]

Anyone tried Chyawanprash ?

[Bored chemist]

How close to advertising is this, and is it permitted on this site?
In any event, if the original poster back in 2003 has been devoid of vitamins since then, they are dead.

[Ruth]

But the minerals arent are they?! Ive been using a liquid supplement. Better absorbed and effective.