Vitamins: Natural vs. Synthetic

written by Marina Zacharias

The advertising boys blast out the "slogan" that ‘THE BODY DOES NOT KNOW THE DIFFERENCE" between a synthetic vitamin and the real thing, I sometimes wonder why these guys don’t get sued for practicing medicine without a brain!!

Common sense should tell you that when you take a "fraction" of something it is not the same as the whole substance. When the "fraction" by itself is obtained from an altogether different source than the original substance simply because "its the same thing" (translates into –cheaper to produce) I must admit that it does take a mighty good sales pitch to get the gullible people to buy it. But don’t try to tell me "the body" can’t tell the difference.

A prime example to consider is Ascorbic Acid. Let's be real clear on this. Ascorbic Acid is not Vitamin C. Ascorbic Acid is Ascorbic Acid which is a fraction of the biologically utilizable Vitamin C complex!!

There is a NATURAL ascorbic acid, which is derived from citrus fruits, ascerola cherries, rose hips, green peppers and other fruits and vegetables. However, most of the ascorbic acid (so-called Vitamin C) on the market is synthetically manufactured from corn sugar (glucose). Even though it is synthetically made, it is called natural and organic because corn sugar comes from corn (unless synthetic)—corn is found in nature, and of course anything containing carbon is "organic".

A fraction of a vitamin, whether natural or synthetic, is at best a drug—not a vitamin—and can only have a drug effect in the body—not a physiological or curative benefit. There are an abundance of studies demonstrating that megadoses of ascorbic acid can and do create serious problems in the body. Reports include: Collagen disease, rebound scurvy (which is a vitamin C deficiency disease), impaired mineral metabolism, imbalance of other vitamins like vitamin A and B, formation of some types of kidney stones, and diabetes mellitus.

The same principals apply to all synthetic forms of so called vitamins. It’s not as if this information is new. If you look at studies back around World War 11, you will find a great deal of controversy surrounding synthetics. This was of course before the high powered dollars were spent to "enrich" our food supply to make us all healthier.

For example, in 1940 a Scandanavian Veterinarian Journal detailed an experiment involving Silver Foxes. One group was fed all of the known synthetic B vitamins as part of their rations. The second group were given natural sources of B complex. Results? The first group did not grow; the quality of their fur deteriorated; and they died prematurely!!! All was normal with the second group.

The sad truth about synthetic "vitamins" is that they can be dangerous!! For example, there is a report on the test effects of vitamin D in 500 human pregnancy cases. All the women given synthetic D developed calcified and diseased kidneys while women given natural vitamin D had no observable changes in the kidneys.

Back in 1939 there was a report on an animal study done with vitamin B. A number of pigs were fed twice the "daily requirement" of synthetic B and a similar number of pigs were fed the same amount of natural B. Results? ALL of the first generation of off-spring from the pigs fed the synthetic vitamin were STERILE. None of the first generation off-spring were sterile from the parents fed natural vitamin B.

So what’s this all got to do with you? Consider this little gem of a "coincidence".

White bleached wheat flour has more than thirty known nutrients removed with four synthetically added back in. This "enrichment" of flour began in 1939 when by law, the FDA required the addition of a few synthetic factors. These are: thiamin (B1 ), riboflavin (B2 ), nicotinic acid (B3 ), and iron.

In 1929 the average sperm count for a young American male was 100 million sperm cells per milliliter of semen. By 1973 the count had dropped to 60 million/ml. In 1980 the average count was down to 20 million/ml. Today??

But synthetic vitamin B added to our "daily bread" couldn’t be to blame could it? Of course we all know that the good old pet food manufacturers don’t use synthetic vitamins, do they? Nobody has fertility problems with their male dogs, do they?

In the last decade, numerous, large scale, studies have confirmed that synthetic vitamins can and do present a clear cut danger, whereas the same vitamins from foods show no evidence of harm. For example, in late 1995 a direct link between synthetic vitamin A and birth defects was reported as the results of a four year study involving 22,748 pregnant women. The results of this study show a 240% increase in birth defects when the women took 10,000iu per day and a staggering 400% increase in risk from taking 20,000iu per day of synthetic vitamin A. The researchers were very careful to point out that the risk from actual foods containing natural vitamin A presented NO BIRTH DEFECTS!! No amount of naturally occurring vitamin A, even liver which contains as much as 30,000iu in three ounces, showed any evidence of contributing to birth defects.

Still think the body can’t tell the difference??

Next time somebody tries to convince you that you are "wasting your money" on the good stuff, just say no—I prefer to stay away from drugs!